Lewis , was imagining mentioned once in this thread until you . Now ?
Brian
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewisM
I’ll be honest - when it comes to imaging, yes I am very particular (might say snobby) and even though I cannot even begin to bring out the best in the scope, knowing it’s me that is the limitation and not the optics is reassuring.
For visual, I love using achromats, especially Vixen 80Ms and Unitrons ( all the SW achromats I had have been very underperforming unfortunately - bad samples). One of my favourite visual scopes I have ever had was the Vixen FL102S semi-apo. Absolutely wonderful. A Tak FC60 f9 (not FS60) I had was also a favorite.
For lunar viewing, I could care less if there is a blue or yellow fringe on the limb - I’m looking at the surface for pities sake not the damned sky . Doesn’t distract me one zot.
Too many seem to be continually assessing and analyzing rather than actually using and observing.
Jeeze , Refractor shootout ? these are my photos , expect the same from the 2 refractors ! .
Brian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by N1
Sounds fantastic. Can we expect a link to a veritable test/shootout/comparo where one of these instruments beats an appropriately sized Mewlon by a margin sufficiently big for the latter to be called a toy?
I don't always agree with Mental-Alex but I do today, might be time to put the egos back in their cages and drift back onto the topic
I also like long achromats, I previously had a 6" F10 iStar and now have a nice 3.25" F15 that, given a modern eyepiece like a Tak LE, is a wonderful lunar scope.... I look forward to how these two scopes actually fare....
This is exactly why I mentioned 20 inch plus Dob's , .
Beian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by N1
Sounds fantastic. Can we expect a link to a veritable test/shootout/comparo where one of these instruments beats an appropriately sized Mewlon by a margin sufficiently big for the latter to be called a toy?
Yes , like these two 60mm's with 15 years between them , both beautiful .
There is really nothing between these 2 scopes . Refractor shootout , I have owned these 2 as well with notes and do you think I will do a thread titled
' 60mm shootout , ' FPL51 triplet vrs 60mm Fl doublet ' peel your ear's back ,,, after the 102 f10 vs 110mm f6 .. .
Brian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjoe
Even trying combos always surprises me. A SW 72ed with Tak diagonal and Toe 3.3mm and Vixen barlow easily split Eta Orionis 1.7"..very close to its Dawes(CHECK IT OUT)..in average seeing
only 10mins after set up.
I wait 20 mins longer for the 130mm Triplet CPC9,or 150 Mak..So CONVENIENCE TOO comes into it..lovely FAT AIRY disks in these small refractors..something I enjoy seeing..though I know the others will pull ahead later on!
At the end of the day its what YOU ENJOY!
PS: NOT into brands only PERFORMANCE!
bigjoe.
Yes please looking like a 102mmf10 achro vRs a 110mm f6 APO shootout ??
Brian QUOTE=N1;1407685]Sounds fantastic. Can we expect a link to a veritable test/shootout/comparo where one of these instruments beats an appropriately sized Mewlon by a margin sufficiently big for the latter to be called a toy?[/QUOTE]
Let's get back to the actual performance of the scopes. I had an early model Sinta 102mm, F9.8. At the time, I was impressed with its performance. I was only troubled by CA when viewing the Moon, Venus, Jupiter, Mars and any star of Mag 2 or brighter. It did however perform beautifully on Saturn. I suspect that there was a bias in the lens to favourably process yellow light.
The lens was not particularly of a high quality as it only beautifully handled magnification to just above 100x, before the image prematurely began to break down.
This was almost 20 years ago and even though they may have improved over time, I had a better than average scope for that era. I was President of a local Astronomy Group at the time and had several people contact me about problems with their same-Sinta scope. The problems ranged from CA that was far more oblivious, blurred images and a sky-background that was grey rather than black. All were comparatively tested side by side in comparison to my scope. I recommended that they be sent back for swapping, to which one person replied that he had already done so and the new scope was no better.
Three years later I brought a far more expensive, ED Vixen 102mm, F6.5. The Vixen was a far better performer and more compact, so I sold the Sinta.
I think it is fair to say that achromatic refractors are a pretty incredible offering for the price they can be obtained. To the untrained or oblivious eye, I imagine the CA on certain objects likely goes largely unnoticed, or at least is looked straight past.
Like many “hobbies”, there is what is considered beginner equipment for what most consider very reasonable prices and then, as one progresses, they begin to look toward higher priced, “better performing” equipment. Often there is a law of diminishing return at play, possibly greater in astronomy than in almost any other hobby. I think this says as much by way of praise for the lower cost achro’s as it does the much higher cost apo’s, however, most of the praise and attention more often goes to the apo for its often marginal performance improvement. When one is prepared to spend the difference, it is in search of this often small percentage improvement. To the keen observer seeking the best views they can both find and afford, a few percent better is seen as more than marginal. The reality is, there are often so many factors working against a perfect view, that many amateur astronomers get to a stage where they want to be sure it isn’t their equipment letting their view down.
All of my refractors are apochromatic, however, I have the highest respect for how close a quality achromat can get for a mere fraction of the cost.
Yes , like these two 60mm's with 15 years between them , both beautiful .
There is really nothing between these 2 scopes . Refractor shootout , I have owned these 2 as well with notes and do you think I will do a thread titled
' 60mm shootout , ' FPL51 triplet vrs 60mm Fl doublet ' peel your ear's back ,,, after the 102 f10 vs 110mm f6 .. .
Brian.
Brian ..they're
Lovely and CAPABLE!
Such convenience..ready to use at a moments notice!
I think I'll go with the ED, but would not be surprised if it's in fact the achromat. Of the 2 pics posted by Brian earlier, the former (#40) looks like the achro, but I know how the EP and camera optics can affect an image captured afocally. Keep us posted Brian
Thanks for the positive remarks , bodes well for us peasants , Thanks .
Brian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by N1
I think I'll go with the ED, but would not be surprised if it's in fact the achromat. Of the 2 pics posted by Brian earlier, the former (#40) looks like the achro, but I know how the EP and camera optics can affect an image captured afocally. Keep us posted Brian
awesome and a big thank you Joe , , both scopes ain't no Takahashi's but I have owned Tak's from 60mm's to 200mm's over the years
and yes they are very , very good , but 3 -4 x better than a good average telescope as the price suggests ? No they aint .
Brian.
NO !C
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigjoe
Brian ..they're
Lovely and CAPABLE!
Such convenience..ready to use at a moments notice!
bigjoe
Last edited by brian nordstrom; 17-12-2018 at 02:24 AM.
Yes , I had the hot's for one of those Vixen 102mm f 6.5's for years but sadly as a poor apprentice it was a dream until now , thanks for the memory trip my friend .
I like you started with an awesome 102mm achro as a real refractor ( after a sweet 1971 60mm f15 Meade refractor on EQ2 that started it all that I still own ) as well that I still own and enjoy , .
Brian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tropo-Bob
Let's get back to the actual performance of the scopes. I had an early model Sinta 102mm, F9.8. At the time, I was impressed with its performance. I was only troubled by CA when viewing the Moon, Venus, Jupiter, Mars and any star of Mag 2 or brighter. It did however perform beautifully on Saturn. I suspect that there was a bias in the lens to favourably process yellow light.
The lens was not particularly of a high quality as it only beautifully handled magnification to just above 100x, before the image prematurely began to break down.
This was almost 20 years ago and even though they may have improved over time, I had a better than average scope for that era. I was President of a local Astronomy Group at the time and had several people contact me about problems with their same-Sinta scope. The problems ranged from CA that was far more oblivious, blurred images and a sky-background that was grey rather than black. All were comparatively tested side by side in comparison to my scope. I recommended that they be sent back for swapping, to which one person replied that he had already done so and the new scope was no better.
Three years later I brought a far more expensive, ED Vixen 102mm, F6.5. The Vixen was a far better performer and more compact, so I sold the Sinta.
Lewis , was imagining mentioned once in this thread until you . Now ? 
. Doesn’t distract me one zot.
806x Takahashi M210 , hand held cell phone .
History my friend ! 
Simple remark ,,, Thanks .
.
Last nights Luna grazing occultation egressing seen here in Perth , anyone want to hazzard a guess as to what scope took this shot ? 102 vrs 110.
