• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Feel the intensity, not your equipment. Maximum image quality. Minimum weight. The new ZEISS SFL, up to 30% less weight than comparable competitors.

New ATC/ STC 17-40x56 Telescope (3 Viewers)

tenex

reality-based
That's Ted Floyd on the right, and (I now realize) in previous photos also. Well-known birders must have got early samples to try.

I'm sure it's lovely, but even I can't imagine using 30-40x handheld, with 1.4mm exit pupil. And if you're going to lug a tripod, why not have a 65mm?
 

wllmspd

Well-known member
I forgot to replace the tripod plate on my mm4 60mm recently and had to use it handheld, or supported on a hide window. At moderate magnifications it worked OK, I’ve ordered another plate so this is avoided again. I made up a foam rest so I could use an old 66mm scope without a tripod (though this was heavier and needed to be rested on something to be used).

Peter
 

Vespobuteo

Well-known member
That's Ted Floyd on the right, and (I now realize) in previous photos also. Well-known birders must have got early samples to try.

I'm sure it's lovely, but even I can't imagine using 30-40x handheld, with 1.4mm exit pupil. And if you're going to lug a tripod, why not have a 65mm?

I'm pondering if this could replace my 65mm scope...which I'm reluctant to bring a bit too often.

A smaller/shorter scope can be usable on a small ball head and monopod, or a smaller tripod.

Total weight might be 1.5 kg instead of 3-3.5 kg.

I rarely use 40x-50x on my scope, 25-30x 95% of the time.
 
Last edited:

John A Roberts

Well-known member
Australia
There is a long European tradition of using low to moderate power draw tube telescopes with various improvised rests
(so perhaps some application with the ATC and STC models?):

Draw Tubes.jpg


The first telescope introduced by Swarovski in 1967 was a draw tube model, and there are still two in the lineup! *
See some history and details (along with the credits for the images): CTC 30x75 question?

And Meopta also offers a single draw x75 model like the Swarovski CTC, but with interchangeable eyepieces,
see: Meopta Sports Optics - TGA 75

* the first solid body telescopes the AT and ST were not introduced until 1990.


There is also the Zeiss solid body Dialyt 18-45x65, see: Video review (english subtitles) of Zeiss Dialyt 18-45X65
So in concept, much more like the STC 17-40x56, but:
heavier at 1.195 kg (42 oz); longer at 395 mm (15 1/2 ins), and; wider at 78 mm (3 1/16 ins).

Dialyt 18-45x65.jpg


John


And an image from: https://lakelandarts.org.uk/lakeland-museum/
So a Brit Stick as opposed to a Finn Stick?

Bonus! .jpg
 
Last edited:

Moo

Member
What scope of this size, weight and quality would be better for the money?
None, assuming the quality is upto Swarovskis usual standard. But I personally don't believe that's a sufficient enough reason to charge nearly 2K? Its the same scenario as when Kowa bought out the 553, I was shocked a how poor the image was when I tried one at Bird Fair (and I love the image my 883 gives), even more so given the price. I've yet to see a 553 being used in the field.

Just my opinion and I do look forward to looking through one for curiosity.
 

Hermann

Well-known member
Is it possible that given the location of the tripod mount, helical focus, 56mm objective and zoom rather than fixed lens that there is some shared "genetics" with Hawke/Celeston/Bresser/Svbony 56mm scopes? Eyepiece and prism design looks different (as one may expect at 10x price) but I wonder if this may be swaro's first foray into outsourcing their kit to reduce the price?
No. After all, all scopes look similar to some extent: there's an eyepiece and an objective lens, and of course a focuser ...

Hermann
 

Hermann

Well-known member
A 15x56 slc would be my preference at this price and weight range.
But a 15x56 is just 15x magnification. Put the new Swaro on a tripod (or even a monopod) and you can use far higher magnifications. No "normal" binocular, not even the Zeiss 20x60S, can replace a scope. Even a small scope like the new Swaro.

Hermann
 

kimmik

Well-known member
United Kingdom
But a 15x56 is just 15x magnification. Put the new Swaro on a tripod (or even a monopod) and you can use far higher magnifications. No "normal" binocular, not even the Zeiss 20x60S, can replace a scope. Even a small scope like the new Swaro.

Hermann
True. in my experience, smaller exit pupil makes magnification less effective. Thats partly why people dislike bino doublers.

Double barrel 56mm is better than single barrel 56mm imo, even if single barrel can double the magnification.
 
Last edited:

Hermann

Well-known member
No need for tripod when looking at the marketing...

;)

Birds in flight without a fluid head will be challenge....
The marketing is pure BS, simple as that. You can't handhold a short 17-40x scope and expect to see a lot of detail. Even a 15x binocular - which is far easier to use handheld - is a challenge. The efficiency of a 15x binocular is well unter 60%, what do you expect it to be for a scope that's far more difficult to hold steady?

Hermann
 

Hermann

Well-known member
If it was a bit cheaper then they would have killed Kowa 553 sales. The field of view looks very nice, especially at the low end where it doesn’t get too narrow. Also stopping at 40x means things aren’t stretched too far and dim. Sure it’ll sell well for those who have the funds.
If the optics are up to scratch, it WILL kill the Kowa: Much better field of view, paricularly at low magnifications, excellent eye relief for spectacle wearers, armour.

And I suspect the prices will come down quite a bit after a few months.

Hermann
 

kimmik

Well-known member
United Kingdom
One thing I can’t understand, is why people hate zoom binoculars, but seem to love zoom monocular like this STC. My bushnell 7-15x zoom bino is pretty good optically through the range.

The zoom eyepiece clearly has added a lot of weight.
 

wllmspd

Well-known member
These will be easier to hold and use than 15x binoculars as you can hold them lower and closer to your body, so less fatigue and more stable. Agreed that fully handheld will not be too steady, but you can steady them against anything and the tripod need is mush reduced. The wider fiend at low powers will help. I did try a monopod with a small spotter I have, but there was still too much unconstrained motion for my liking. (A light tripod doesn’t take up that much extra room and enables you to share the view more easily). The special screw on plastic plate admits that their rotating ring design wasn’t ideal when resting against things and gripping in your hands…. Others put their focus knobs on the top probably for this reason. It’ll be interesting to see how this compares to the other small scope options that exist.

Peter
 

Brummie

Well-known member
You can use something at 15-20x mag handheld or resting on an improvised support, but to my mind, it doesn’t make sense to invest large amounts of money in the best optics to do that, as it won’t be stable enough to appreciate them.

If you want a lightweight set up, I would always go for some kind of tabletop tripod to use seated or on an elevated surface.

As for price, yes it’s high, but certainly not out of keeping for a Swaro product. With the Pound and Euro so weak, waiting until prices come down a little bit and then importing one from the UK or Eurozone to the US will probably take about 30% off the initial US sticker price.
 
Last edited:

DRodrigues

Well-known member
But a 15x56 is just 15x magnification. Put the new Swaro on a tripod (or even a monopod) and you can use far higher magnifications. No "normal" binocular, not even the Zeiss 20x60S, can replace a scope. Even a small scope like the new Swaro.

Hermann
My preference would be a BTC 56 binocular, even at 2kg and 4k euros, if having central focus and be a straight version!... ;)
However, would prefer a version with 10-24x!...:love:

If it's a mini X series, without modularity, it will be a winner!

Swaro is now producing scopes from 56 to 115mm aperture!(y)
 

William Lewis

Wishing birdwatching paid the bills.
United Kingdom
Compared with my ctc 30/75 the new stc is 200g lighter, 50mm shorter (when ctc is folded) and has a very similar field of view at 30x mag (ctc is 41m @1000)

I'd not be tempted to swap currently as the ctc gathers much more light so can be used in a greater range of lighting conditions and would be just as sharp in all likely hood due to its longer focal length, it's £700 cheaper at list price and although not fully waterproof I just wipe the extended tube dry before retracting it and haven't had any problems.

Stability wise I'd suggest a monopod when seated would be more than adequate for it, all scopes will need a tripod or resting on a horizontal or vertical surface when standing but this kind of negates the point of a small and light scope to a degree.

I'm not sure why they haven't put 2 strap lugs on top of the scope (I see the ones on the side for the eye piece guard etc) as with a light monopod attached it always seems to be the best way to carry this type of scope.

I think in general I prefer to have the weight in my binoculars as they are the things that get used most of the time and a lighter scope/tripod/monopod combo to keep the overall weight down so it may be something that's of interest in the future.

It will be interesting to see how it compares to its direct competitors, I'm sure it will sell very well, it certainly looks neat and avoids all the usual buying of eye pieces and large tripod drawbacks. By using the standard high quality swaro eye piece it seems like it will negate the compromises of a fixed zoom eye piece that the kowa 553 suffers from. This will appeal to a great deal of first scope buyers.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top