Anyone useing Esprit 80 or 100mm APOs?

gregbradley · #1 22-03-2019, 04:25 PM

These seem to get excellent reviews.

Only shortcoming I see for them is it seems maximum corrected circle is only for a full frame camera and a 16803 chip would be too large.

Anyone care to give their review on these scopes?

Greg.

Marke (Mark) · #2 22-03-2019, 04:36 PM

I have the 80mm Greg its an excellent scope very well built and microtouch do a motor for the focuser as well . Comes with everything including a dedicated flattenter.

gregbradley · #3 22-03-2019, 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marke

I have the 80mm Greg its an excellent scope very well built and microtouch do a motor for the focuser as well . Comes with everything including a dedicated flattenter.

How does it in imaging? I saw one example image from a larger Esprit with halos around brighter stars. I've seen this now in a few of these types of refractors. Do you get halos around brighter stars? It would be reflections off the flattener and the CCD/CMOS sensor. Possibly an issue with the filters rather than the scope.

Greg.

that_guy (Tony) · #4 22-03-2019, 05:29 PM

I think the halos would be more from internal reflections from the camera sensor more than the scope itself. I've had no issues with mine.

gregbradley · #5 22-03-2019, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marke

I have the 80mm Greg its an excellent scope very well built and microtouch do a motor for the focuser as well . Comes with everything including a dedicated flattenter.

Quote:

Originally Posted by that_guy

I think the halos would be more from internal reflections from the camera sensor more than the scope itself. I've had no issues with mine.

Yes I think you are right. I just looked at some more sample images on Astrobin and they don't show halos.

Greg.

Marke (Mark) · #6 22-03-2019, 06:17 PM

Yes I get them sometimes but as it depended on the filter I blame them not the scope . Really dont think there is an disputing the optics for the money.

casstony · #7 22-03-2019, 06:31 PM

The 80 I had was a nice scope but you need to go to the 100 for full frame. The early esprits had issues with pac man star halos but that was fixed by 2014/15.

They are a heavy scope for their size.

kosborn (Kevin) · #8 22-03-2019, 07:08 PM

After a lot of research I bought an Esprit 100ED 12 months ago as my introduction to astrophotography. It was easy to use as a beginner (particularly as it came with a field flattener and everything needed to connect to a Canon DSLR). I've learned a lot since then and don't feel like a beginner anymore but it still doesn't disappoint and I'm sure it won't disappoint 5 years from now. I upgraded from from a Canon DSLR to an ASI1600mm. I do get halos (particularly with narrowband) but that's down to the camera/filters, not the OTA (this as an example). I can strongly recommend an Esprit.

Kevin

Camelopardalis (Dunk) · #9 22-03-2019, 10:12 PM

Greg, I’ve been imaging with an Esprit 100ED for 3 years. Initially with a Canon 1100D and 6D, and also with ZWO ASI1600MM-Cool and ASI178MM-Cool.

For examples, search the Deep Sky imaging forum for my posts with this gear.

From a reducer point of view, the Riccardi 0.75x is reported to work well.

Ukastronomer (Jeremy) · #10 23-03-2019, 12:25 AM

I have the 120 and would not change it

http://www.opticalvision.co.uk/documents/162.pdf

https://astrobackyard.com/sky-watche...it-100-review/

They are rated as good and better than much more expensive scopes

Only the UK has to PAY for a field Flattener you get it free

Slawomir (Suavi) · #11 23-03-2019, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregbradley

These seem to get excellent reviews.

Only shortcoming I see for them is it seems maximum corrected circle is only for a full frame camera and a 16803 chip would be too large.

I have no experience with Esprits, but I would also account for a potential cost of replacing stock focuser, if I was after trouble free reliable and precise focusing with a heavy FW+OAG+camera, to get the most of the optics.

gregbradley · #12 23-03-2019, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kosborn

After a lot of research I bought an Esprit 100ED 12 months ago as my introduction to astrophotography. It was easy to use as a beginner (particularly as it came with a field flattener and everything needed to connect to a Canon DSLR). I've learned a lot since then and don't feel like a beginner anymore but it still doesn't disappoint and I'm sure it won't disappoint 5 years from now. I upgraded from from a Canon DSLR to an ASI1600mm. I do get halos (particularly with narrowband) but that's down to the camera/filters, not the OTA (this as an example). I can strongly recommend an Esprit.

Kevin

Hi Kevin,

Overall quite good but there is significant coma in the corners. This was with the flattener? It should have corrected that. Perhaps the spacing is off but I thought they sold these scopes with the flattener fitted for the right spacing?

Also your sensor is very small so it would be way worse with a full frame camera.

Greg.

gregbradley · #13 23-03-2019, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slawomir

I have no experience with Esprits, but I would also account for a potential cost of replacing stock focuser, if I was after trouble free reliable and precise focusing with a heavy FW+OAG+camera, to get the most of the optics.

Hi Suavi,

I agree. I had a beautiful TEC110 F5.6 oiled fluourite triplet that I now regret selling. But its focuser was one of the first TEC engineered focusers and it was too light weight and I should have swapped it out for a Feathertouch. But if I screwed everything down tight and supported the end of the scope on the focuser side I got round stars in the corners with the 16803 using the TEC flatteners (TEC flatteners are like Tak - they work).

Greg.

gregbradley · #14 23-03-2019, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ukastronomer

I have the 120 and would not change it

http://www.opticalvision.co.uk/documents/162.pdf

https://astrobackyard.com/sky-watche...it-100-review/

They are rated as good and better than much more expensive scopes

Only the UK has to PAY for a field Flattener you get it free

Thanks Jeremy it does seem to be quite good. I do see some dark bars in bright stars which the FSQ106N was famous for and upset some people.

Roland Christen said it was vignetting. It occurs in some optics.

Do you see that in your images?

Greg.

kosborn (Kevin) · #15 23-03-2019, 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Hi Kevin,

Overall quite good but there is significant coma in the corners. This was with the flattener? It should have corrected that. Perhaps the spacing is off but I thought they sold these scopes with the flattener fitted for the right spacing?

Also your sensor is very small so it would be way worse with a full frame camera.

Greg.

Correct, the spacing is off. Out of the box, spacing is perfect for a Canon DSLR. With the ASI1600 I am out by about 1.5mm but because of the small sensor I haven't got around to correcting it.

gregbradley · #16 23-03-2019, 09:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ukastronomer

I have the 120 and would not change it

http://www.opticalvision.co.uk/documents/162.pdf

https://astrobackyard.com/sky-watche...it-100-review/

They are rated as good and better than much more expensive scopes

Only the UK has to PAY for a field Flattener you get it free

Quote:

Originally Posted by kosborn

Correct, the spacing is off. Out of the box, spacing is perfect for a Canon DSLR. With the ASI1600 I am out by about 1.5mm but because of the small sensor I haven't got around to correcting it.

I see. Gee 1.5mm is touchy spacing quite often these have a margin of +/- 5 or 6mm. But I suppose its quite fast so that would make it more sensitive.

Greg.

Ukastronomer (Jeremy) · #17 24-03-2019, 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregbradley

Thanks Jeremy it does seem to be quite good. I do see some dark bars in bright stars which the FSQ106N was famous for and upset some people.

Roland Christen said it was vignetting. It occurs in some optics.

Do you see that in your images?

Greg.

I don't see any visual problems with my scope, but then again I don't "look" for them, and mainly use my scope for Lunar