I can't find it anymore on Orion's site. I got it in 2000 -- it's a 500mm (focal length) f/5.6 reflector spotting scope with a Canon adapter so I can put it on my camera. I didn't mention it anywhere because I got it before I used LJ.
I don't remember how much it cost -- I think it was round $400. It's not fantastic, but it was by far the cheapest way to get a long telephoto to play with.
As far as I can tell, the "Kowa TSN-660 Series Spotting Scopes" seem to have replaced mine in their product line up. It appears to be nicer than the one I have, but I haven't read reviews or anything.
At the time I did my research (in 2000, probably wildly out of date), the scope I got seemed to be the most cost effective way to get a long telephoto to play with. I underestimated how limiting the focus control would be -- I thought it'd be more like manually focusing a regular lens but it's much slower and more awkward than that. If I ever buy another spotting scope, it'll be after I tried it on my camera (in the store, at least) to see how hard it'd be to focus.
Optically, the scope I have is not super -- it's more satisfying to look through to see the birds than a shorter lens but I suspect I'd have higher quality photographs by cropping a shot from the 70-300mm lens.
I was unthrilled by how photos from it came out. They're kind of flat and usually not in focus (the latter not really its fault except because of usability).
I enjoy looking through it and seeing the birds, and as long as I'm going to do that I may as well put the camera on it instead of the eyepiece. As a tool for taking photographs it's not so useful -- I'd get higher quality shots by cropping photos from a (shorter) real camera lens.
The optical quality on a small reflector is not comparable to a "real" lens (which is fair, they're much lighter, smaller, and cheaper). The real problem is how awkward it is compared to shooting with a regular lens.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Scope
Date: 2006-03-27 01:52 pm (UTC)Re: Scope
Date: 2006-03-27 06:15 pm (UTC)I don't remember how much it cost -- I think it was round $400. It's not fantastic, but it was by far the cheapest way to get a long telephoto to play with.
As far as I can tell, the "Kowa TSN-660 Series Spotting Scopes" seem to have replaced mine in their product line up. It appears to be nicer than the one I have, but I haven't read reviews or anything.
http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=7229&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=4&iSubCat=11&iProductID=7229
At the time I did my research (in 2000, probably wildly out of date), the scope I got seemed to be the most cost effective way to get a long telephoto to play with. I underestimated how limiting the focus control would be -- I thought it'd be more like manually focusing a regular lens but it's much slower and more awkward than that. If I ever buy another spotting scope, it'll be after I tried it on my camera (in the store, at least) to see how hard it'd be to focus.
Optically, the scope I have is not super -- it's more satisfying to look through to see the birds than a shorter lens but I suspect I'd have higher quality photographs by cropping a shot from the 70-300mm lens.
Re: Scope
Date: 2006-03-27 06:28 pm (UTC)I was unthrilled by how photos from it came out. They're kind of flat and usually not in focus (the latter not really its fault except because of usability).
I enjoy looking through it and seeing the birds, and as long as I'm going to do that I may as well put the camera on it instead of the eyepiece. As a tool for taking photographs it's not so useful -- I'd get higher quality shots by cropping photos from a (shorter) real camera lens.
The optical quality on a small reflector is not comparable to a "real" lens (which is fair, they're much lighter, smaller, and cheaper). The real problem is how awkward it is compared to shooting with a regular lens.