Celestron C65

jnclement · Joined: 25 Jan 2006 Posts: 4

I bought one of these, and couldn't be more disappointed in it as a spotting scope. You can barely see .30 holes at 100 yards, and if you turn up the power, it won't really focus. What would I have bought that would have worked, for under $150? Andif a roof prism has more resolution, how do you tell it from a porro prism in a spotting scope? Thanks.

opticsplanet.com · Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 2:32 pm Post subject:

Hi

I understand. These are inexpensive Maksutov design spotting scopes, not roof prism spotting scopes, made in China. Performance-wise, they are about what you would get for that price. The fact that they offer 90x is academic, since image quality at such magnifications is marginal.

If you must go with a Maksutov style scope, the LOMO 60, when equipped with a decent eyepiece such as the one supplied in the LOMO 60LER version, http://www.opticsplanet.net/as60lersp.html offers a useable 47x. It will do a better job at 100 yards. In addition, the LOMO is all metal and it offers the advantage of using interchangeable, 1.25" telescope eyepieces. It's about the only Mak style scope at this price with enough quality for your application.

Roof prism spotting scopes have a straight tube - no humps - as in the excellent Bushnell Elite, http://www.opticsplanet.net/bushnell-15-45x60mm-elite-spotting-scope-781548p.html In order for a roof prism spotting scope to approach the same image quality as a porro prism scope, it must be phase-corrected (PC) as in the Elite. Inexpensive roof prism spotting scopes without PC are mediocre optically. Not recommended.

A porro prism spotting scope has the traditional hump shaped body such as the superb Kowa, http://www.opticsplanet.net/kowa-66-high-performace-spotting-scopes.html Nearly all premium grade spotting scopes use this design because of its optical efficiency. If you are looking for a good buy in this type of scope, try the Bushnell Trophy 20-60x65, http://www.opticsplanet.net/bushnell-20-60x65-trophy.html It will handle all your shooting needs out to about 200 yards under the right conditions.
_________________
----------------------
Your personal optics expert
Joanie (Jne) K
http://www.OpticsPlanet.com
Phone: (888) 263-0356
Fax: (847) 574-6820

jnclement · Joined: 25 Jan 2006 Posts: 4

I can't exchange the Celestron for the Lomo, can I? And what about the Lomo with the zoom? Too much power, not enough light?

opticsplanet.com · Posted: Wed Jan 25, 2006 5:10 pm Post subject:

Hi

Yes, we have a 30 day return policy, so no problem if a recent order. Contact our customer service deaprtment to arrange an exchange.

The zoom on the LOMO is too much for that small a scope. Stay with a fixed power eyepiece.
_________________
----------------------
Your personal optics expert
Joanie (Jne) K
http://www.OpticsPlanet.com
Phone: (888) 263-0356
Fax: (847) 574-6820

jnclement · Joined: 25 Jan 2006 Posts: 4

Is there anything that would work in the same price range that isn't a Maksutov?

opticsplanet.com · Posted: Fri Jan 27, 2006 9:25 am Post subject:

Hi

Pretty tough to recommend any spotting scope under $100 for any application. You'll need to move into the $100-150 range to get anything even useable and even at that price point you won't get a lot of performance. When magnification goes up, so do the demands on the optics and this is reflected in the price you have to pay to get it. You can get some pretty reasonable binoculars for $100-150, but for a higher magnification instrument like a spotting scope, even $100-150 doesn't buy much. Forget the $50 stuff. No bargains here.
_________________
----------------------
Your personal optics expert
Joanie (Jne) K
http://www.OpticsPlanet.com
Phone: (888) 263-0356
Fax: (847) 574-6820

Jimbo · Guest

jnclement, Jonie is absolutely correct about a spotting scope for that price. If you want something useable at that price, try these here http://www.opticsplanet.net/oberwerk-20x60.html I have several oberwerk products and, for the price, the are great. Since they are 20x they are going to be VERY hard to hand hold steady, infact if you are trying to see bullet holes at distances they are going to be pratically worthless, so they are going to need a tripod. Take a look at the bushnell tripods on this site, they are pretty decent and affordable too. You may be saying to yourself that you need more than 20x, but on your budget, it's not going to happen in the way of a spotting scope. Sorry Sad

jnclement · Joined: 25 Jan 2006 Posts: 4

I think I'm just going to break down and buy either a Konus 20-60X80, or an Alpen

AstroBoy · Guest

Also, the little tripod inlcuded with the C65 is not very stable due to the spring-loaded "slow motion" controls. If you are using that tripod, you might want to try the C65 with a real tripod before you send it back just to see.

DragonBreath2U · Guest

If my name was Celestron, I'd be embarrassed to have it on this scope. I bought my kid a toy last Christmas that focused better than this. I am sending it back. I have lost a lot of faith in this company due to this purchase. I am still amazed they put their name on this one.

opticsplanet.com · Posted: Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:09 am Post subject:

Hi

I understand your disappointment, but to expect any kind of useable 30x to 90x spotting scope for $60 is unrealisitc. Wish I could honestly say there was a good zoom spotting scope out there for $60, but there isn't. Price, not brand, is still the best indicator of quality, especially on a high magnification instrument like a spotting scope. These days $60 will barely buy you a case for a quality spotting scope.
_________________
----------------------
Your personal optics expert
Joanie (Jne) K
http://www.OpticsPlanet.com
Phone: (888) 263-0356
Fax: (847) 574-6820

BobY · Guest

I certainly won't leap to their defense, but for the price, they are decent little scopes for beginning astronomy (moon, closer planets) on a very low budget, compared to the junk refractors in toy and discount stores for about the same price. They are smaller and lighter and come with a carrying case which makes them much more likely to be used than a bigger, clunkier scope with the same or worse image quality.

Maks aren't really meant to be spotting scopes, but I think they were trying to broaden their market by pretending they were good as spotting scopes since they have a correct image. It's hard to market them as just astronomy scopes because of their limited capabilties.

Warship NWS · Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 13

I had the C65 MAK before, sent it back, the optic quality was crap at ANY magnification. Complete waste of money. Celestron should have never put its name on the side of it, even the tech support guy I talked to at Celestron wasnt very enthusiastic about it. Now Celestron does make other good optical equipment so dont let one failure let you down about them entirely.

I have a RedHead (Bass Pro Shop brand) 60mm 20-60x straight scope and a LOMO 60mm Astele Muskatov spotter scope.. both are FAR superior to the C65. I wont however agree that higher power magnification on a 60mm scope is unusable. The LOMO does an excellent job even for astronomy use for a scope of its size. Its not meant to match the capabilities of a 3"-4.5" refractor or reflector but it does a pretty good job even at 100-150x. I just used mine last night to watch Jupiter and Saturn with good clarity. Using fixed 1.25" eyepieces in it though does give a slightly better viewing area and clarity but the zoom eyepiece that comes with it is still not bad at all. I also use it during daylight terestial viewing and I can clearly read the address numbers on our street corner sign that is around 8 houses away using my 20mm fixed eyepiece (58x). I also use them to make out the detailed features of aircraft flying at 20-30,000 feet high! Wink

Note, the RH 60mm spotter scope was only $70. OW does not carry this brand but comparable designs would be the Bushnell or Tasco models of the same power and size and both are around $70.

DragonBreath2U · Guest

I have to respond to this,

[quote="opticsplanet.com"]
I understand your disappointment, but to expect any kind of useable 30x to 90x spotting scope for $60 is unrealisitc.
..............

Then WHY do you sell it?

This should be advertised as, "A great scope for a blind person."

Seriously, this should not be on the market, or it should come with a disappointment warning. It is a rip off when anyone buys something in good faith & then has to pay to return it & be charged a restocking fee on top of that!

opticsplanet.com · Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 3:23 pm Post subject:

Hi

As a retailer, it is not that cut and dried. We sell the C65 because it is part of our agreement with Celestron and as long as you get one that is not defective, the scope is functional. There have been quality control issues, but Celestron is addressing these.

No, I don't recommend the C65 for serious use and there are bettwer scopes out there for slightly more money, but some people find that it suits their needs. They pay $60 for a scope and realize they are not getting a high quality instrument, regardless of the name. For a very occassional or casual user, or for a youngster, the C65 is adequate.

For those who get a defective scope, the C65 is covered by our 30 day return policy and by Celestron's excellent lifetime warranty. For those expecting more from a $60 scope, we have done our best to work with them on an exchange for something that better suits their needs. As always, though, keep expectations in line with price and you will not be disappointed.
_________________
----------------------
Your personal optics expert
Joanie (Jne) K
http://www.OpticsPlanet.com
Phone: (888) 263-0356
Fax: (847) 574-6820

BobY · Guest

I would reiterate that the C65 is just as good, if not better, than the scopes in discount stores I looked at, and it's smaller and lighter.

*I have no complaints with it* It does just what I expected and we've had hours of fun looking at the moon. It's a $60 scope which includes a tripod and carrying case for that price--for cryin' out loud!--what do you expect? The carrying case alone for most scopes costs more than that.

It could be sharper, it could be brighter, it could have interchangeable eyepieces and all these things would make it more expensive and I wouldn't have bought it. As soon as you cross the $100 threshold, you're in a different world and you might as well spend even more to get something really good.

I'm not sure the Yugo comparison is fair, as the Yugo was not only cheap and mediocre, it was very unreliable. We haven't had a problem with our C65 in all kinds of weather (and it doesn't fog up).

It's not Celestron's fault if you have a wildly unrealistic idea of how a sub $100 scope should perform...

DragonBreath2U · Guest

The celestron C65 is a piece of TRASH PERIOD!!!!!!!

Guest · Posted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 11:20 pm Post subject:

Celestron makes some damn good equipment but the C65 is not even worth its $60 price tag. When my $70 straight spotter scope by RedHead, 20-60x 60mm, (not even a fancy name brand) is at *least* 2-5x as sharp that says something. The C65 was so bad I could not even read a street sign with it at the end of the street, I could easily do so with my Redhead. No I would not expect it to be in the same class as the LOMO 60mm but heck even their $35 10-30x 50mm binoculars make them look like a joke in terms of image quality, so why pay $60? The Bushnells or Tascos for the same exact price on OPs website I would wager would be at least 2x better quality.

To me it just seems Celestron oopsed with the C65 and they might have a few properly constructed units floating around but I think with all the negative reviews I have read over regarding the unit it does seem there was a serious QA problem that didnt get resolved before distribution. Mistakes happen.

I dont agree with all comments made about "zoom" equipment posted here but I will surely not defend a substandard C65 when I have nothing to defend it with, except for the tripod which was not bad.

Thanks.

Warship NWS · Joined: 16 Feb 2006 Posts: 13

To DragonBreath2U,

I agree with OP on their reply. Its not a simple matter of "sell this or dont sell that" in every business model due to various distribution agreements with manufactureres. However, you have to be fair to them.. they run a forum where they give as straight answers as they can and where you can find responses from other customers. OP also have a toll free phone and email service to ask questions and customers should always do their homework FIRST before they buy. Example, I have seen customers do more reading on buying a DVD movie then an expensive computer or other expensive item online. They also do not give any hassles about returns. I have returned for exchange or refund several items now due to the equipment not fitting my requirements, defects, etc.. and not given any problems at anytime. Now granted when it comes to optical equipment you wont be completely certain of the item fitting your needs until it arrives but at least you can return it for exchange or refund rather then be stuck with it for a complete loss of your funds.

OP has to walk a fine line here as they dont want to piss off customers but at the same time they dont want to lose their contacts with suppliers and manufacturers but to date, and I have asked A LOT of questions of them, they have yet to give me answers that I felt were completely off base nor have they tried to snow me over with unprofessional sales tactics. I have been quite happy with their service and Im also glad that they run forums where customers can help each other and get a wide range of thoughts and opinions. Being that this is not a cheap hobby we are all rather picky and opinionated about our optical equipment.. its our money.

This is just the opinion of a customer that has had good customer service from OpticsPlanet.

PS.. the "guest" reply posted prior to this post was also mine.. I just forgot to log in before posting.

Thanks.

opticsplanet.com · Posted: Mon Mar 06, 2006 10:43 am Post subject:

I have deleted a post from Dragonbreath for a personal attack. The response given by Warship NWS was polite and and well within the rules of this forum, but since it also contained the original post, it too was deleted. Thank-you for control, Warship NWS.

To all our visitors and regulars on this forum: Optics is sometimes a hot topic - disagreements are to be expected. If you disgree with someone's view, though, please give product-related reasons for your disagreement. Simply telling someone they or their opion "Sucks" or that they are "Crazy" is inapprpriate
_________________
----------------------
Your personal optics expert
Joanie (Jne) K
http://www.OpticsPlanet.com
Phone: (888) 263-0356
Fax: (847) 574-6820