Regal M2 65ED Spotting Scope with ED Glass – Clear Wildlife Views | Compact ED Optics, Easy to Pack, Birding & Travel Companion, Crisp Natural Color, Lightweight Design

I had both of these spotting scopes side by side for comparison. My results are as follows.Design: I'll state the obvious first since you can see most of this from photos of the two spotting scopes. Both scopes have a kind of rubber like exterior with the Vortex being a little "tacky" feeling and the Celestron being a little smooth. Both have rotating rings and a foot for attachment to a tripod. The Celestron fit my tripod adapter, the Vortex did not. Different sizes so beware. Objective cover for the Vortex is soft rubber push on, the Celestron has a solid plastic two clip cover like on most SLR lenses. The eyepiece cover for the Vortex covers the eye cup and the Celestron covers the entire eyepiece down to the scope body and is made of metal and is screwed on to the scope body. Both have sliding sun shades. Biggest difference externally is the picatinny rail on the Vortex. Celestron does not have one. The rail is for mounting a very small "scope" for finding object quickly. Really nice idea. The "slow" and "fast" focusing is on the top right on the Celestron and directly on top on the Vortex. I liked the Vortex on top, my son liked the Celestron focus. So, each to his own. Both have rotating eye cups.Optics: Well, they were virtually tied in quality of optics as far as I can tell. Note that the Vortex costs about 150 more than the Celestron. One difference in operation of the scope was the eyecup and eye relief. When you put your eye up to the Vortex and touch the eyecup edge with your nose for example you see a darkening around the edge of the image. If you pull your eye away from the eyecup it will fill and be ok. The Celestron view is perfect the minute you put your eye to the eyepiece. I noticed I had to search around a little to find the best view with the Vortex, but the Celestron was much more forgiving of having my eye out of direct line or at the right distance. Image acquisition was much faster with the Celestron. Eye glass wearers would not have an issue with either of them. Incidentally the Celestron advertises the use of a groove in the sun shade to help find an object faster. It is totally useless in the 65 mm scope. You can't find any place to look down the groove, the body of the scope is in the way. Maybe you can in their larger objective lens scopes. Also, the Vortex zoom is 15-45 and the Celestron is 16-48. No real world practical difference.Conclusion: I ended up keeping the Celstron 65. There were things I liked about them both but what did it for me was the image acquisition speed in the Celestron and forgiveness of eye placement. Eye piece cover was also nicer, more secure on the Celestron. As I mentioned, they were pretty much identical as far as image quality. The focus and zoom operation seemed to be just a bit nicer quality on the Celestron also. I liked the picatinny rail on the Vortex. A nice design. I may try to put one on the Celestron.By the way, it would be nice if the mounting ring shoe was reversed on the Celeston scope since most of the scope weight is behind the mount. My guess is that the 80 and 100 mm scopes balance pretty well with the shoe mounted this way, but the 65 is shorter and lighter on the front end making it balance differently. It is back end heavy. I contacted Celestron a few days ago about reversing the ring and they said it was not possible.

This 65mm scope is good value for the money. I got this mainly so I could have an angled scope when I take groups birding. My straight scope needs too much adjusting with a group.It has ED glass which is a good start. The zoom eye piece is good to 30-35X. I have a Pentax ED scope that does better at 45x. Since they can both use a 1.25 inch astronomy eye piece, I put a Vixen zoom on them, and the Pentax was quite similar in view at 45x to the Celestron. With the Celestron eye piece, the view was breaking up a bit at 45x.(I put the Celestron eye piece on my Pentax as well and it was good to 30x).Look for the Vixen eye piece here, it runs about 200 dollars. I bought one so I have it on both scopes now. Also, the Celestron is rear heavy, so it tips back on the tripod. With the Vixen eye piece it does less of that,

The scope itself is great but the Standard 1.25" Eyepiece that was supposed to be included, as stated in the description of the production, in addition to the zoom objective was NOT actually included. Even after an attempt to address this with Amazon, the standard eyepiece was not ever sent.

First, I would like to highlight the quality of the image delivered by the ED lenses. I did an image comparison with a Celestron Skymaster 15x70 binocular and the image is much sharper and the colors are much more natural. No chromatic aberration can be perceived, and the focus is very precise. Definitely it is worth the money if you are pursuing image quality.The telescope is highly portable, fits in your backpack, and can be deployed very quickly. For astronomical use, by using separate 1.25" eyepieces the 65 ED can give you a very bright image with a 40mm eyepiece (10X, 6.8 mm exit pupil), or high power with a 4mm eyepiece (96X). 96X is the maximum usable magnification in this case. As others have said, the telescope is tail heavy, so by using astronomical eyepieces the center of gravity is somewhat restored (The included eyepiece weighs 300 g). High magnification will require a good tripod. At the lower powers the telescope can be aimed easily by using the sight rotated 90° and aiming through the side.The included eyepiece will show you the discs of the planets and the rings of Saturn. Definitely for planet detail more magnification will be needed, using additional eyepieces.The main drivers for my selection were high image quality, quick deployment and portability. I live in Bogota, Colombia where cloud cover can change very quickly, so maximizing viewing opportunities is a must!

Scope itself is fine but the case it came in had the zippers fail within 3 months (of very infrequent use, I might add).

For the price, this is fantastic. Seems like the built isn't as solid as high end brands, but I haven't had any problems with it. The glass is vastly better than other similarly priced scopes.

I received the scope today and immediately set it up. I liked that the eyepiece had a really nice eyepiece cover made out of a solid metal. Probably brass or something. I then put on a tripod and started focusing on objects in the distance. I used the sighting line on the lens shade to help site in. I found this easier than other spotting scopes I have used. Others have a tiny sighting scope that just seems to make the scope bulkier. I have a Nikon spotting scope and the spotter is plastic. Once I felt I was lined up I was able to use the course focus adjustment to focus on the objects. Once this was set the fine adjustment really brought in the object crisp and clear. The focus adjustments were easy to use, smooth and fast to set. I used various objects at variable distances. Very smooth to adjust the focus and found it was easy to set by feel of my hand.The eyepiece is a 16x to 48x magnification. I set the eyecup up since I do not wear glasses. Felt very comfortable. I started at 16x on objects and found it easy to zoom in and out by rotating the eyepiece. As mentioned adjusting the focus was easy to do with my hand while looking through the eye piece.The tripod mount allows rotation of the scope. Real easy to do, slight turn of the knob and the tripod ring rotates. As the ring rotates it clicks into different positions. I rotated it a full 360 degrees as the manual states. At the same time I adjusted the eye piece fairly easy by loosening the lock ring on the eye piece. Nice to be able to do this. I like to go to the gun range and shoot prone. I can see how the versatile positioning will work with the proper mount.The tripod mount is great because it has 4 holes to mount with. This allows to mount the scope balance. My Nikon has one hole so however the scope mounts is how it mounts. The Celestron mount is much better.After I setup the scope and practiced I disassembled and put in the carry bag that it came with. I drove out to the rifle range. I put some lead down range about 200 yards and was able to see my target crystal clear. I used 3 different rifles. .308 easily seen and clear, .223 clear and crisp, and .17 HMR no issues seeing how I did. I used standard silhouette targets, non color change.Highly recommended.

Unable to clearly focus beyond minimum maginification. I tested by taping a dollar bill at 100 ft. Unable to read the serial number. My cheapo Bushnell was crystal clear at 60x. I expected better because my CELESTRON GRANITE binoculars are sharp and clear.

il 65mm è un piccolo spotting scope di qualità eccellente. Offre una visione chiara e nitida a 16x - 24x gradualmente attenuando man mano che lo zoom aumenta (che è normale per un oculare zoom) fino a un massimo di 48x. Anche a 48x questo produce ancora un'ottima immagine. Ho acquistato questo telescopio in quanto è abbastanza compatto e leggero rispetto alla versione da 80 .se avete intenzione di digiscope ho trovato che funziona meglio usando un adattatore per digiscoping per tenere la fotocamera contro l'oculare.Ho provato la versione da 80mm e c'è stato solo un leggero miglioramento delle prestazioni che avresti notato a lungo raggio

Cumplió con mis expectativas.

Great optics, solid feel, everything works smoothly.

Molette de réglages très dure pour la maniabilité. Avec tâches sur les lentilles ?Principal reproche appareil de retour non précisé dans la vente initiale ,emballage de retour visiblement pas de contrôle par le vendeur .

MoinDer wesentliche Kaufanreiz war der Preis im Warehouse. Die Beschreibung war richtig, aber es war nur die Umverpackung sichtbar beschädigt. Der bedruckte Karton war unbeschädigt und der Inhalt offensichtlich noch originalverpackt.Das Spektiv (M2 65ED) selbst ist einwandfrei. Alle sichtbaren optischen Flächen sind sehr gut. Fokussierung leichtgängig aber nicht zu leichtgängig. Okular sitzt fest und zeigt mir keine Schwächen (CA, Abschattungen, Randunschärfe). Allerdings fehlt mir der direkte Vergleich mit Oberklassespektiven.Eine Systemkamera oder DSLR-Kamera kann nach dem Lösen der Augenmuschel über ein Adapterring auf T2-Adapter angeschlossen werden.Wie bei allen Spektiven ist ein Stativ Pflicht. Ich werde die Möglichkeit nutzen, ein astronomisches Okular (1,25'') anzuschließen, darin noch einen Filter einschrauben und dann auf Kometensuche gehen.Die beiliegende Bereitschaftstasche ist gewöhnungsbedürftig, bietet aber eine gewissen Schutz gegen die Elemente und beim Transport im Auto. Der Okularschutz ist ein Metallzylinder, der verschraubt wird und nicht wie sonst schon gern mal üblich, eine Kunststoffkappe. Leider kann man diesen Schutz nicht ganz so leicht in die Tasche stecken.....Insgesamt bin ich sehr zufrieden!Nachtrag 21.07.20Auf den Einschraubfilter vor dem Tauschokkular muss aus Platzgründen verzichtet werden. Neowise C/2020 F3 hab ich aber auch ohne gut sehen können, inkl. Schweif.