Travel Scope

[Din]

Hi

About to go on holiday to Kenya. I'm looking for a reasonably cheap scope to take with me. I've read about the Celestron 21035 Travel Scope which is a 70 mm refractor. The other option is the SW Mak 90. I would like to use it for the wildlife and celestial obs. I already have a 45 degree image corrector and usual 1.25" ep's for my main scope. I also have a suitable camera tripod for the Mak. The Celestron comes with a tripod and rucksack.

At £50 for the celestron and £120 for the Mak, there seems to be a big difference given the Mak does not have a tripod or carry case.

Any comments on these two, or anything else on the market?

Cheers

Ed

[jabberwocky]

I use an ST 102 on a camera tripod for a travel scope, pretty light and compact. If you already have a camera tripod this could be a low cost option mount wise.

where in Kenya are you going? I went there in 2009 and loved it.

[rowan46]

The mak will give the better image for both wildlife and astro but it will have a much narrower fov

[NGC 1502]

The mak will give the better image for both wildlife and astro but it will have a much narrower fov

Good point.

I've seen and used the Celestron travel scope. Don't want to put it down but, optically its not that great, if you are ok with low power & wide field then that's what it does best, but above about 50x, the Mak will walk all over it. The tripod that comes with the Celestron is very lightweight indeed.

I could live with the Celestron with a couple eyepieces to give as low a power as you can get, and another for about 40-50x, and if you have a better tripod. Loads of stuff to see that could be fun with that set up, ultra portable too.

Regards, Ed,

[naxos10]

You could look at the Celestron small spotting scopes like the Ultima 65 or the Mini Mak 70 which are around £85 - £100, or even the C90 mak at around £150.

BR

Alan

[E621Keith]

Since you will be using your scope on wildlife, I second the Ultima 65 or 80 as well.

The Ultima is waterproofed and more rugged than the astro scope. While I don't expect you to drop your scope in a puddle, but dust can be a issue when you are in the field. A sealed tube is going to be better than a unsealed tube, because the last thing you want to see is a layer of dust building up in the inside of your scope.

http://www.firstligh...ing-scopes.html

[Stu]

What about an ST80 on a decent photo tripod? The main benefit of going to a very dark site is the deep sky stuff which generally doesn't need high mag so you should be fine with this. A mak would be more limited I feel.

I took my WO66 to Tanzania and had fabulous views through it.

Stu

[Din]

Thanks for the responses.

I'll have a look at the Ultima as well. It seems to be the answer given the dusty conditions I expect to encounter.

Looks like it can also be used with a DSLR which could come in handy. The ST80 looks nice. Not too big for hand luggage.

Thanks again.

Ed

[rowan46]

The birders here will probably put me right but ca really ruins the view for me on wildlife. it can be hard enough to spot wildlife in their habitat without all the false colours. if you are not spending a lot on a spotting scope you are better off with a mak than a cheap spotter. If you were getting the ultima 80ed-f I would go for it. but as you are not spending that sort of money I would suggest the makhttp://www.firstlightoptics.com/celestron-spotting-scopes/celestron-c90-mak.html

or a good pair of bins for around the same price