jklee@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (James Kin Wah Lee) (08/11/89)
Well, the time has come for me to take the plunge. After years of birding with only 7X binoculars, I have decided that I want (need) a scope. My problem is that I really don't know a heck of a lot about them, especially ones for birding. If some of you kind souls who know about these things would care to share your thoughts, I would be more than happy to summarize. Although there has been some discussion about binos a while ago, (or was that in rec.backcountry?), I haven't seen anything on scopes in the recent past. Here are my questions: (1) What is a good magnification for birding? I guess the scope will be used mostly for shorebirds and waterfowl. (2) Related to (1), what is a good objective size? For instance, with binoculars they are usually described as e.g. 7 x 35, where 7 is the magnification (power) and 35 is the size in millimetres of the objective lens. Clearly, the larger the objective the brighter, but this is offset by added cost and weight. (3) Would a zoom be more handy than a fixed telephoto? Are there advantages or disadvantages with either? (4) There are many types of scopes which can be broadly subdivided into two kinds (I think): refractors and reflectors. Refractors are your classic Bushnell-type scopes that are long and composed of prisms. Reflectors (i.e. Newtonian-type) are usually shorter and stubbier, because the light path is reflected between parabolic mirrors. Is there a preference?? I seem to recall that reflectors are commonly used as astronomy scopes, but cause out-of-focus sources of light to be imaged as "fuzzy doughnuts". (5) Are interchangeable eyepieces (of different magnification) a good idea, or is there little choice in the matter? I suppose this is somewhat precluded by whether I get a zoom or not. On a related issue, can a 35mm camera (Nikon) be attached to the scope via an adapter so that the scope may be used as a telephoto? (4) What are some recommended brand names and model types? I've heard about companies like Bushnell and Bausch and Lomb, but I am not familiar with any particular models that they make. I need a scope that is fairly rugged and can take the pressures of birding in less-than-ideal conditions (i.e. cold and wet). (5) How about cost? I am willing to spend up to about $500 for a GOOD scope. Maybe a little more. I am willing to pay for quality, although a $6000 Leitz optical masterpiece is a bit out of my range :-). (6) Where can I purchase scopes? Other than local camera shops, is there a reliable mail-order place that offers a good selection? Are there any places in New York City that anyone knows about? (7) And finally, with every scope comes the need for a tripod and a head. Are there any preferences? Are video heads better than say, ball-and-socket heads? Thanks for all of your help. I'm also heavily into photography, so please feel free to discuss any technical details in depth. Remember that you don't need to be an expert; I would just like to hear your opinions! JIM -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Jim Lee (jklee@phoenix.Princeton.EDU) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dept. of Geol. & Geophys. Sci. * THERE ARE STRANGE THINGS DONE * Princeton University * IN THE MIDNIGHT SUN ..... * Princeton, NJ 08544 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --------------------------------------------------------------------------
shun@cbnewsh.ATT.COM (shun.cheung) (08/11/89)
In article <9893@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> jklee@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (James Kin Wah Lee) writes: > >(1) What is a good magnification for birding? I guess the scope >will be used mostly for shorebirds and waterfowl. My wife and I have a Nikon Fieldscope (non ED, see below) and have been quite happy with it. The eyepiece is changable; the standard one is 20X. That seems to be a good starting point for bird watching, but larger magnification may be necessary for small shorebirds. >(3) Would a zoom be more handy than a fixed telephoto? Are there >advantages or disadvantages with either? We used another birder's zoom once. It apparantly is an inexpensive model and has serious chromatic abbaration. >(5) Are interchangeable eyepieces (of different magnification) a >good idea, or is there little choice in the matter? I suppose this is We are thinking about getting a 40X eyepiece for watching smaller birds. Anyone has experience with this? We also have been considering "upgrading" the scope by trading it in for a Nikon Fieldscope ED. Is there significant quality difference between the ED and non-ED scopes? -- Shun Cheung, AT&T Bell Laboratories, Middletown, New Jersey electronic: shun@hou2d.att.com or ... att!hou2d!shun voice: (201) 615-5135
news@ism780c.isc.com (News system) (08/12/89)
In article <9893@phoenix.Princeton.EDU> jklee@phoenix.Princeton.EDU (James Kin Wah Lee) writes:
Jim asked about scopes, I thought there might be enough intrest by the
readers, so I am posting my response to the net.
I have a Celestron C90. This is a reflector with 90mm objective. It produces
a much sharper and brighter image than any of the refractors that I have
tried. I have been using it for about 9 years and have had no trouble with
it. However, I have never used it in the rain so I cannot comment about how
it would stand up to moisture. (It doesn't rain in So. California. :-) MY
scope came with an 18mm eye piece, barrow lens, and an eye piece extender.
In various combinations, you get from 55x to something like 200x. For
birding I use 55x. It is a real thrill to be able to see the pupil of a
bird's eye at a distance of 50 yards.
I have a Slik camera tripod (don't recall the model) that has been quite
servicable. I fastened a camara strap to the tripod to form a sling. I
sling it over my shoulder like a Sam Browne belt. This makes it easy to tote
the scope while on a several hour outing.
I believe the scope currently sell for around $380. Plus another $80 or so
for a tripod. They are advertized in astronomy magazines and are available
through mail order. I was able to buy mine at one of the larger camera
stores here in Los Angeles.
As to photography, adaptors are available for most every camera. As a lens
it is 1000mm with a fixed f11 aperture. At f11, focusing is very difficult
unless your camera has a special view screen made for the purpose. Also a
rigid tripod is a must. I have tried photography with meger results.
However, I have seen photographic work done by others that is very good.
The only scope that I have tried that is better than mine is a Questar, and I
believe that its price is in the $2000 range. Also the Questar is heaver,
making toting more work. I recomend that you try the Celestron for your self
if all possible. I am extreemly happy with mine.
Marv Rubinstein