re: Questar
Don't judge a Questar by the quality of a Celestron. Also, eyepieces vary
significantly in quality. There are several options for excellent quality
eyepieces (good eye relief, etc) which can yield magnifications of 50x or
more on a C-90 or Questar 3.5.

Steve Preston
Bellevue, WA
mailto:stevepr at acm.org


> -----Original Message-----
> From: TWEETERS-owner at u.washington.edu
> [mailto:TWEETERS-owner at u.washington.edu]On Behalf Of Toni Hawryluk
> Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 4:02 PM
> To: TWEETERS at u.washington.edu
> Subject: Re: Scope opinions (quite long)
>
>
> If this is not archived for those who will want to "see up close"
> in the future - somebody is missing a bet .... Thanks, Michelle !
>
>
> >Hi, Tweeters,
> >
> >My word, but I touched a nerve. I had a small mountain of responses to my
> >request for your opinions on spotting scopes. Several people asked me to
> >forward the results of my data collection, and I will try..but if I get
> your
> >address wrong, please forgive me. This is why I'm also putting it on
> >Tweeters. I'd like to thank all of you for your advice,
> comments, opinions
> >and help.
> >
> >Now then. Since my day job is data collection (no, no, no....I'm not the
> bozo
> >who calls you at dinner time and wants to know your opinion....I collect
> >maintenance and operation data on M1A1 Abrams tanks.) I figured
> I'd tackle
> it
> >like I do at work. I tallied up all the folks who wrote me with opinions
> and
> >experiences.
> >I also recieved several websites to look through. I'll put them
> at the end
> of
> >this report.
> >I'm certain I"ll get some more responses, but I'd like to get
> this done and
> >over with!!
> >
> >I received 18 actual brand name preferences, although I recieved
> a larger
> >number of responses with general information and help.
> >I did NOT request information on specific brands, so the data aren't
> tainted
> >by that. I did not count scopes that were bought ten or twenty years ago
> >(i.e. Discoverer).
> >
> >The last category covered ''second level" scopes, in the lower price
> ranges,
> >($500 to $800) and are labeled as "Others". I discounted these
> because, as
> so
> >many of you pointed out, you get what you pay for. Over and over again I
> was
> >advised to stretch that budget and spend the money, because it's worth it
> in
> >the long run.
> >I am fully prepared to eat peanut butter sandwiches for a couple
> months in
> >order to afford a high dollar scope. (my husband may not think
> this is such
> a
> >hot idea, but he offered to buy it for me...and I didn't give
> him a chance
> to
> >change his mind!)
> >
> >I also did not count data such as "So-and-so has Brand X and his birding
> >partner has brand Z." There were comments about other brands that I will
> >cover but did not count.
> >
> >Of those 18, this is the breakdown:
> >
> >Swavroski (80 series): 6
> >Leica Televid 77: 5
> >Nikon, all types: 2
> >Kowa: 1
> >Pentax: 1
> >Others: 3
> >
> >Comments:
> >
> >Swavroski: "...heavy, need a good, sturdy tripod" "Only Celestron is
> better"
> >"...heavy tripod, but it's motionless in the wind" "...angled eyepiece is
> >easier to use, especially if many people of varying heights are looking
> >through the scope. It's also less prone to damage if the scope should be
> >knocked over." "...usable throughout its range. Any
> deterioration in image
> is
> >due solely to heat wave magnification. Zoom eyepiece has a wierd
> >characteristic of presenting a smaller diameter image as you
> zoom from 20x
> to
> >about 40x, but then enlarges again. The 80 mm objective lens makes a huge
> >difference in light gathering capability." "...outperformed my Kowa,
> >particularly under low light conditions. I attribute most of this to the
> zoom
> >eyepiece which consistently delivers a brighter, sharper image at all
> >powers." "(I'm) extremely happy with its performance. However, the total
> >weight of this setup is right at 12 pounds, and one doesn't have
> to schlep
> >very far before one starts to wish for a llama or a sherpa to bear it
> around
> >for one."
> >
> >Leica: "...make sure you get zoom lenses with top-quality glass"
> "...scope
> >rotates on its longitudinal axis while remaining on target....(I
> also like)
> >the snap up and down eyecups." ""...after eye surgery....I chose
> the Leica
> >after spending over an hour comparing it side by side with Swavroski and
> >Kowa. I have never regretted it.""
> >"...my dream scope."
> >
> >Nikon: "more affordable, but I wish it had a larger exit pupil
> and longer
> >eye relief, as I wear glasses."
> >
> >Kowa: "I love it." ""...the 82mm, non-florite (sic), 20-60
> zoom...gave me
> >less eyestrain, especially with the angled eyepiece. I have a good tripod
> >with a video head... it's (the scope) armored and nitrogen filled, water
> >proof and shock proof. Its wide aperture lets in lots of light.
> I couldn't
> >see a difference between it and the Leica. I think the Kowa is the better
> >scope.""
> >
> >Pentax: I had only one voice for Pentax, but the fan is absolutely
> ecstatic
> >about his, and I admit, it seems to have a lot going for it. He has the
> W36X
> >and the 72 mm eyepiece, and he says "the eyepiece looks like you
> could fall
> >into the view!"
> >
> >No votes, but comments:
> >
> >>From the homework I've been doing, it seems Questar is to scopes what
> Rolls
> >Royce is to cars, but one person said "...the Questar had a
> crisp view, but
> >the tripod was shaky."
> >I may be wrong, but I think I read somewhere that Celestron is a
> subsidiary
> >of Questar. One person looked through a CelestronC90 and had this to say:
> >"...not thrilled with the view....fixed length eyepiece did not
> have great
> >eye relief." "one had to be precisely aligned to see" through the scope."
> >
> >I also received many websites to check out. Here they are, and I
> apologize
> if
> >I get the address wrong...
> >www.birdingpal.com
> >www.betterviewdesired.com
> >www.njaudubon.org
> >www.buytelescopes.com
> >www.cameraworld.com (this one is in Oregon, (no tax) and you get a 5%
> >discount as a first time buyer, it says...)
> >American Birding Association...I think that is www.aba.org, but I haven't
> >done the searching yet,
> >and
> >Cape May Observatory, ditto.
> >I also went to www.cabelas.com. I haven't had the time to check
> it out, but
> >there seems to be a discrepancy in their web price and their
> catalog price.
> I
> >bought my Zeiss binos from them.
> >
> >Thank you, every one of you, who sent comments, advice and
> opinions to me.
> I
> >hope this helps those of you who asked me to share my findings with them.
> >
> >Michelle
> >MBlanchrd at aol.com
> >Oly, WA
> >
> >
>
>
>