I usually bring something with me in a backpack: lunch, coffee, field manual, extra clothing,it all weighs up. The backpack goes on the hook
-
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.
New ATC/ STC 17-40x56 Telescope (4 Viewers)
- Thread starter John A Roberts
- Start date
As others have said, the point is not to carry a bag with you for that purpose, but to use a bag you’re carrying anyway. The other alternative is to have some kind of lightweight pocket that you can fill with rocks, etc.
The other thing is, I wouldn’t use a freely swinging bag. At least in high wind, that will cause the tripod to sway. I would use some kind of bungee cord or band to create tension between the tripod and a bag that’s touching the ground.
KaterinBortle9
Active member
Hi gastonbe, is your gitzo traveler 1545 the 1545T version with a hole to attach a strap at the leg hinges? If it is, you can try using that to hook and/or tie your bag, instead of getting the hook for the central column. An old pro recently taught me that tying/strapping your bag higher up around the leg hinges with the bag resting/secured on two legs is much better, especially during windy conditions, than lower down on the legs or dangling below the central column. Better vibration reduction and your bag won't swing. You can test it out before getting the gitzo hook.
That almost sounds like a Scopac approach: they attach around the top hinge and two legs (though to-&-below, not 'resting on')
That is what I use for my heavier setup,but doesn't feel like the ideal match for my 1545T + 50mm Opticron scope. Though maybe I should try it.
I like the light weight of the small setup, but am still looking for the matching carrying solution.
I think some hook can be bought to fix at the bottom of the center column. Not sure anymore. For the moment,I have just strapped a small thin cord around/above the end cap of the column. It seems to work...
William Lewis
Wishing birdwatching paid the bills.
I use an optech USA tripod strap (available worldwide I believe), works very well and would be even better if it had a small scope, ball head and some carbon legs rather than a chunky aluminium tripod and monarch 82 dangling off it!
It doesn't help weigh down the centre column but I'm sure a bag with one strap shortened to the appropriate length could be made to work for a long stint on a gusty sea watch.
Will
Thank you for the contributions on protecting this ATC. Maybe I’ll start with the microfiber towel solution. The case mentioned by rodney AB seems interesting.
Maybe I’ll move on to permanent protection afterwards. I’m a little concerned that the telescope will fall off the tripod one day.
Maybe I’ll move on to permanent protection afterwards. I’m a little concerned that the telescope will fall off the tripod one day.
amythebirder
Active member
Yes, I've been digiscoping with it (handheld phone & STC/tripod) with varying success/quality - mostly aiming for record shots though so these are good enough for me. Depends how close the birds are etc!
Enjoying using it and it works well for the birding I do. Sometimes wish I could still get 60x magnification to get a closer view but most of the time 40x is fine. Having a much lighter scope is great. Agree with others about it being handy for birding on foot or bicycle and public transport which is how I mostly travel. Not used it handheld much - most of the time it's made sense to have a tripod and holding it steady above about 17x is tricky.
Enjoying using it and it works well for the birding I do. Sometimes wish I could still get 60x magnification to get a closer view but most of the time 40x is fine. Having a much lighter scope is great. Agree with others about it being handy for birding on foot or bicycle and public transport which is how I mostly travel. Not used it handheld much - most of the time it's made sense to have a tripod and holding it steady above about 17x is tricky.
Hermann
Well-known member
Actually you don't even need a microfiber towel. You can use any old towel, works just fine. I remember several pro photographers who wrapped their camera bodies in old tea towels before putting them in their backpack. No problem at all.
If you drop it even a good stay-on case won't offer you perfect protection. Some protection, yes, but don't rely on it. It's much better to develop good field technique. BTW, the two most common reasons for dropping scopes are leg locks that aren't firmly locked, and QR plates that aren't screwed on tightly, closely followed by using flimsy tripods that may blow over even in a light breeze.
BTW, I once had a tripod topple over and fall into a lake. With the scope attached, of course. My fault, bad field technique. I only just managed to grab a tripod leg before everything disappeared ...
Got pretty wet though, in mid-winter. The scope also got wet, I had to partly dismantle it to dry it out. My mistake was simply that I didn't make sure the leg locks were firmly locked.Hermann
teelgul
Well-known member
Thanks for the feedback. The great 3.5 deg Fov at 17x , just 950 grams and angled view should be an advantage with the ATC, for viewing without a tripod... just a bean bag might do.
My other alternative the Meopta 15 x56, gives a 4 deg view and much heavier.
After trying the ATC,I previously posted that I considerered it to have limited use.Nevertheless,I bought one knowing that the true value of any 'scope needs to be field tested in real life situations.
As previously mentioned ,I have recently undergone lung surgery and as a result now have to carry oxygen. So,I was looking for something lighter.
For the 'normal' user, I still cannot see any worth buying the ATC in addition to a larger 'scope. Carrying a normal size/weight 'scope is not a problem for a reasonable strong person,particularly if using a scopac(or similar). I have to add that I'm a great lover of big 'scope's and already own Swar. ATX and BTX. I tried the 115 module (for static locations) but as good as it was,it was just too heavy for me.
First thing to say is the ATC requires a tripod. Swarovski's claim that it can be hand held is rubbish. Yes,I managed to hand hold it on 17x at close range but for anything else (that is higher mag. or extended use) it needs a pod. It then makes sense to have a light pod.
To that end I bought the Ulanzi F38 which is as light as they come , fully extends to my height (6'/1.83m) and is stable in most conditions..I also bought several of the 'add-ons' which allow the plate to be attached to brackets which I successfully used attached to the car roof rail and shelves.Having the ATC on the F38 in the back seat of the car made it easy for me to erect quickly when needed(extending just a couple of leg sections).The combined weight when carrying was not a problem and the distance travelled was more restricted by my condition.
I have recently used the ATC over several weeks watching birds of all sizes . At one point watching a robin on a rocky outcrop nearly a mile out to sea!!(just what it was doing there was a mystery!)
The ATC proved to be a useful addition to my bird/animal watching.
I couldn't comment on it's ability in extreme low light/bad weather conditions. By then ,it's now too much for me!!
As for the Ulanzi. This is not the place to review. However, much to like but there were issues.
As previously mentioned ,I have recently undergone lung surgery and as a result now have to carry oxygen. So,I was looking for something lighter.
For the 'normal' user, I still cannot see any worth buying the ATC in addition to a larger 'scope. Carrying a normal size/weight 'scope is not a problem for a reasonable strong person,particularly if using a scopac(or similar). I have to add that I'm a great lover of big 'scope's and already own Swar. ATX and BTX. I tried the 115 module (for static locations) but as good as it was,it was just too heavy for me.
First thing to say is the ATC requires a tripod. Swarovski's claim that it can be hand held is rubbish. Yes,I managed to hand hold it on 17x at close range but for anything else (that is higher mag. or extended use) it needs a pod. It then makes sense to have a light pod.
To that end I bought the Ulanzi F38 which is as light as they come , fully extends to my height (6'/1.83m) and is stable in most conditions..I also bought several of the 'add-ons' which allow the plate to be attached to brackets which I successfully used attached to the car roof rail and shelves.Having the ATC on the F38 in the back seat of the car made it easy for me to erect quickly when needed(extending just a couple of leg sections).The combined weight when carrying was not a problem and the distance travelled was more restricted by my condition.
I have recently used the ATC over several weeks watching birds of all sizes . At one point watching a robin on a rocky outcrop nearly a mile out to sea!!(just what it was doing there was a mystery!)
The ATC proved to be a useful addition to my bird/animal watching.
I couldn't comment on it's ability in extreme low light/bad weather conditions. By then ,it's now too much for me!!
As for the Ulanzi. This is not the place to review. However, much to like but there were issues.
ATC - First Impressions:
Two things struck me first about Swarovski's new ATC spotting scope:
First, how small the ATC is compared to the ATX85 (my wife's comment was "how cute!").
Second, that at no point do you feel like you're looking through a mini spotting scope.
The viewing behavior is just as good and just as relaxed as with my ATX - this is probably where using a similar eyepiece to the ATX pays off.
As a spectacle wearer, I really have sufficient eye relief and it is fun to scan the landscape with the large field of view of 62m and then zoom in closer on a bird.
The resolution and contrast are without fault and both the focus and magnification settings are very smooth.
After a few days of use, 25x has proven to be the "standard magnification". In my opinion this is the best compromise between magnification, brightness and contrast.
Beyond that, the image is OK up to about 35x, but after that, contrast and of course brightness do decrease markedly.
But mind you: if you use the ATC and the ATX85 side by side, the image of the ATX is always distinctly better at the same magnification. Here, a larger objective aperture pays off visibly.
Unfortunately, even the ATC cannot override the laws of physics.
All in all, the ATC's performance is better than I expected, and (after only a few days of use) I'm very happy with it.
Will my ATX85 now be collecting dust in the cupboard? I don't think so, since for e.g. watching waders and sea watching a higher magnification than the ATC provides is very useful.
However, it will be interesting to see how often I leave the ATX at home because the ATC with a Gitzo 1545 tripod are just so much lighter.
ANK
Two things struck me first about Swarovski's new ATC spotting scope:
First, how small the ATC is compared to the ATX85 (my wife's comment was "how cute!").
Second, that at no point do you feel like you're looking through a mini spotting scope.
The viewing behavior is just as good and just as relaxed as with my ATX - this is probably where using a similar eyepiece to the ATX pays off.
As a spectacle wearer, I really have sufficient eye relief and it is fun to scan the landscape with the large field of view of 62m and then zoom in closer on a bird.
The resolution and contrast are without fault and both the focus and magnification settings are very smooth.
After a few days of use, 25x has proven to be the "standard magnification". In my opinion this is the best compromise between magnification, brightness and contrast.
Beyond that, the image is OK up to about 35x, but after that, contrast and of course brightness do decrease markedly.
But mind you: if you use the ATC and the ATX85 side by side, the image of the ATX is always distinctly better at the same magnification. Here, a larger objective aperture pays off visibly.
Unfortunately, even the ATC cannot override the laws of physics.
All in all, the ATC's performance is better than I expected, and (after only a few days of use) I'm very happy with it.
Will my ATX85 now be collecting dust in the cupboard? I don't think so, since for e.g. watching waders and sea watching a higher magnification than the ATC provides is very useful.
However, it will be interesting to see how often I leave the ATX at home because the ATC with a Gitzo 1545 tripod are just so much lighter.
ANK
I have an ATC on order, for which I’ve also purchased the Gitzo 1545 tripod to go with it. Curious to know which tripod head you’ve gone for?
The ATC is a possible replacement for my ATX 65 objective module, which I’ll sell if happy with the ATC. The main downside I can see of the ATC compared with the 65 is losing the not insignificant extra 20x mag of the 65, but the portability of the ATC/Gitzo combination should hopefully trump this…
I'm also rethinking my larger scope setup, again with the main aim of reducing the overall weight of the gear I’m lugging around. With this in mind I’m contemplating downsizing from the ATX 95 to the 85. Don’t think I’ll miss the extra 10x mag of the 95 and suspect I’ll appreciate the lower starting mag of the 85…
Cheers,
Bill
Don’t want to contribute to thread drift here, but after downsizing from 95mm to 85mm the main difference between the two that was most noticeable was the difference in size and weight. The 85 was so less cumbersome. But most of the time the big scope stays home while the ATC or Opticron MM4 are with me.
For the ATC I use the Fluid Head MVH400AH from Manfrotto
This combination works quite well, but also has some limitations:
Pros:
- Small and lightweight, "Made in Italy".
- The folding function of the Gitzo 1545 is kept
- Inexpensive (last year I paid 50 EUR).
Cons:
- The mechanics feel a bit "cheap", the tilting movements are sometimes a bit scratchy
- At higher magnifications you quickly notice vibrations
- The plate (501PL) is quite big (90mm/80g) for such a small scope
The included handle is way too big, so I sawed off the rubberized end.
This saves another 40g and brings the weight to about 340g (without plate).
ANK
Last edited:
Have you tried a Nikon ED50 ?
Hello everyone,
I'm also going to write a review.
First of all, I have to say that I read all the posts on this subject (twice, in fact!) before making the purchase, and I also asked questions on this forum about possible alternatives to this ATC. Thank you again for your answers.
Despite taking the time to think about it, it didn't turn out as planned!
What I'm about to say has already been said. This telescope offers excellent image quality. There's no criticism there, I've found pleasure in the occasions when I've been able to observe through an ATX of birdwatching friends (85 or 95). The image is fine, details are present with good contrast.
But with this image quality, you want to magnify more to get more detail. It's so beautiful! I found that x40 was too limited, and it was almost frustrating not to go further. So I thought it would take some time to adapt, you have to accept that there's a limit.
I had chosen the ATC for observation when walking. But I immediately realised that I didn't want to put the spotting scope in my rucksack, plus my foot. It wasn't a problem of weight. No, I realised that this extra object was changing the way I walked. It was taking up space, both in my bag and in my mind. I felt like I was losing the pleasure of walking lightly with a pair of binoculars and a small bridge to identify or document birds. The 'connection' with nature and landscapes was no longer the same.
As I no longer wanted to use the ATC when walking, my choice came into question, also because the x40 was a bit tight.
I have stabilised binoculars (10x30), which are not of course equivalent. But I prefer all the advantages of binoculars up to x20-25 over ATC. After that, ATC is useful, but this is also the area where luminosity decreases (smaller exit pupil).
For these reasons, I didn't keep the ATC. It's a long-term purchase, and I don't want to have any regrets.
However, I thought it would be OK. There are reports here of people saying that they no longer take their big ATX models but this ATC model. However, one person also wrote that it doesn't replace a bigger model.
So I'm thinking about a 65mm model with a 25-50 zoom. I do a lot of birdwatching by bike, and I think the 25-50x 65 models are almost as easy to carry around in a basket on the bike.
The ATC is already very expensive, so I think it would be better for me to spend a bit more money and get a 25-50, hopefully with just as good quality (I'll ask you for advice!).
I can say again that this latest Swarovski is an excellent telescope, and a pretty one too. It's just that it's probably not the best choice for me and my use. Perhaps trying a 25-50 will make me regret this little ATC ?! Stay tuned!
(With the help of an online translator)
I'm also going to write a review.
First of all, I have to say that I read all the posts on this subject (twice, in fact!) before making the purchase, and I also asked questions on this forum about possible alternatives to this ATC. Thank you again for your answers.
Despite taking the time to think about it, it didn't turn out as planned!
What I'm about to say has already been said. This telescope offers excellent image quality. There's no criticism there, I've found pleasure in the occasions when I've been able to observe through an ATX of birdwatching friends (85 or 95). The image is fine, details are present with good contrast.
But with this image quality, you want to magnify more to get more detail. It's so beautiful! I found that x40 was too limited, and it was almost frustrating not to go further. So I thought it would take some time to adapt, you have to accept that there's a limit.
I had chosen the ATC for observation when walking. But I immediately realised that I didn't want to put the spotting scope in my rucksack, plus my foot. It wasn't a problem of weight. No, I realised that this extra object was changing the way I walked. It was taking up space, both in my bag and in my mind. I felt like I was losing the pleasure of walking lightly with a pair of binoculars and a small bridge to identify or document birds. The 'connection' with nature and landscapes was no longer the same.
As I no longer wanted to use the ATC when walking, my choice came into question, also because the x40 was a bit tight.
I have stabilised binoculars (10x30), which are not of course equivalent. But I prefer all the advantages of binoculars up to x20-25 over ATC. After that, ATC is useful, but this is also the area where luminosity decreases (smaller exit pupil).
For these reasons, I didn't keep the ATC. It's a long-term purchase, and I don't want to have any regrets.
However, I thought it would be OK. There are reports here of people saying that they no longer take their big ATX models but this ATC model. However, one person also wrote that it doesn't replace a bigger model.
So I'm thinking about a 65mm model with a 25-50 zoom. I do a lot of birdwatching by bike, and I think the 25-50x 65 models are almost as easy to carry around in a basket on the bike.
The ATC is already very expensive, so I think it would be better for me to spend a bit more money and get a 25-50, hopefully with just as good quality (I'll ask you for advice!).
I can say again that this latest Swarovski is an excellent telescope, and a pretty one too. It's just that it's probably not the best choice for me and my use. Perhaps trying a 25-50 will make me regret this little ATC ?! Stay tuned!
(With the help of an online translator)
