#1  
Old 20-11-2017, 04:40 PM
Hans Tucker (Hans)
Registered User

Hans Tucker is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,449
Ap130gtx

Anyone own a AP 130GTX? What has been your experiences, pro's and con's.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 20-11-2017, 04:52 PM
Wavytone
Registered User

Wavytone is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Killara, Sydney
Posts: 4,147
Depends whether you want to do AP or visual.

I have had a look through one ... side-by-side it was optically indistinguishable from the TS 130mm f/7 triplet APO I had at the time. The only real difference was the rather more lavish hardware - focusser and rings. Whether that’s really worth another $7k is up to you. There’s nothing magical about these scopes - they are very well built but they don’t break the laws of physics when it comes to resolution, nor are they comparable to a Questar 7 which could be had for not much more.

I also had the chance to look through an Intes 150mm mak-newtonian on the same night. IMHO the Intes was the better scope visually.

For medium and high power visual observing a larger SCT or Mak is better, frankly.

Last edited by Wavytone; 20-11-2017 at 08:18 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 20-11-2017, 04:55 PM
Slawomir's Avatar
Slawomir (Suavi)
Registered User

Slawomir is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: North Queensland
Posts: 3,240
I don’t own one and probably never will, but from what one can read on the net, it is about as good as a 130mm f/6.3 triplet can be in terms of optics (in particular for imaging) and mechanics. Cons? Price and a very long wait to get a brand new one.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 20-11-2017, 06:06 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
An AP130GTX would be totally awesome. It has the quad corrector available and it would probably match a Tak FSQ130 for imaging and perhaps surpass it in terms of no problems with focuser sag etc and considerably cheaper.

I have had 2 AP scopes and they are the top of the game. Tak is very good, AP is arguably better but probably splitting hairs. Where AP tends to be better is the engineering is more heavy duty and things like focusers never sag under load etc.

For visual, 130mm may be a tad small for bright views so yeah a compound scope may be better but for AP it would be at the top of its class almost for sure.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 20-11-2017, 07:34 PM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 8,090
I have one and the quad corrector.

It's been relegated to being my solar telescope....a very undeserving role....as it is a sublime piece of glass.

Every AP scope I have owned has run out of light
when pushed to extreme magnifications, as opposed to lesser instruments which invariably show aberrations in one form or another.

Telescopes are not just optical beasts either.

Unless the mechanicals keep things where they need to be, the image can be very average. AP have few rivals there.

I they are indeed magical IMHO.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 20-11-2017, 08:51 PM
niharika
Registered User

niharika is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: melbourne
Posts: 216
Sounds like someone’s name came up on the waiting list😎
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 20-11-2017, 09:06 PM
Wavytone
Registered User

Wavytone is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Killara, Sydney
Posts: 4,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
I have one and the quad corrector.
Every AP scope I have owned has run out of light
when pushed to extreme magnifications, as opposed to lesser instruments which invariably show aberrations in one form or another.
Peter I agree they’re very very good - but they’re not alone. Frankly these run out of puff at 260X (X2 per mm of aperture). But you can’t beat the physics of limited aperture vs diffraction.

The snag is, would you drop north of $10k on a 130mm scope vs other choices at that price ? My 9” Santel cost half as much as these scopes and it likewise runs out of light before you see any aberrations. And it totally slays these small refractors - 440X is fine if seeing permits.

Likewise anyone with a Questar 7 would not sniff at this, nor the buyer of the SW 180 mak I sold recently.

Similar a well made Dob with a good mirror - say a Zambito or Royce - is a far better instrument.

Aperture and long focal length rule if you want serious magnification. There’s nothing better than a really long FL reflector or cat with small obstruction. Zero, if you are prepared for a schiefspiegler at f/23.

Last edited by Wavytone; 20-11-2017 at 09:17 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 20-11-2017, 10:57 PM
Peter Ward's Avatar
Peter Ward
Galaxy hitchhiking guide

Peter Ward is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: The Shire
Posts: 8,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wavytone View Post
..............

Likewise anyone with a Questar 7 would not sniff at this...........
Have to say I was singularly unimpressed by the Questar 7. Nicely made, but the bugger would never thermally stabilise...

As for the price of an AP...it matters not to me....as well looked after I can get what I paid and then some should I ever want to sell it.

Sure for visual use, there are plenty of options. But if you want a fully corrected field with a 16803 sensor, and a focuser than doesn't behave like a lump of play-dough, choices rapidly narrow.

If time/weather permits, I'll see if I can grab some 130GTX + Quad compressor and Taka FSQ106 test images , and put then up on a web page...it should make interesting reading.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 21-11-2017, 01:28 AM
Googaliser's Avatar
Googaliser (Marc)
Permanent Beginner...

Googaliser is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Perth, WA
Posts: 17
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
Have to say I was singularly unimpressed by the Questar 7. Nicely made, but the bugger would never thermally stabilise...

As for the price of an AP...it matters not to me....as well looked after I can get what I paid and then some should I ever want to sell it.

Sure for visual use, there are plenty of options. But if you want a fully corrected field with a 16803 sensor, and a focuser than doesn't behave like a lump of play-dough, choices rapidly narrow.

If time/weather permits, I'll see if I can grab some 130GTX + Quad compressor and Taka FSQ106 test images , and put then up on a web page...it should make interesting reading.
I for one would love to see that comparison, Peter
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 21-11-2017, 09:40 AM
alocky's Avatar
alocky (Andrew lockwood)
PI popular people's front

alocky is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: perth australia
Posts: 1,291
Quote:
Originally Posted by Googaliser View Post
I for one would love to see that comparison, Peter
I wouldn't. I have an fsq and I can honestly say I'm unlikely to buy a 130mm AP. So I'd rather live in ignorance! But I think the earlier suggestion was this scope is comparable to the 130mm FSQ, and I can't recall ever seeing an image taken with one of those.
I do agree that the FSQ focuser arrangement leaves something to be desired. With the D810a on the back I see some tilt, but when I add the reducer and all the fittings are threaded, there is no tilt at all (yes I know it's shorter fl). I suspect the culprit is actually the 2" camera adapter, though.
Cheers
Andrew.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 21-11-2017, 07:28 PM
Hans Tucker (Hans)
Registered User

Hans Tucker is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2,449
Quote:
Originally Posted by niharika View Post
Sounds like someone’s name came up on the waiting list😎
Nope...but know someone whom has been notified. I'm culling the heard at the moment.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 25-11-2017, 09:05 PM
happycamper
Registered User

happycamper is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 37
I've got one.

Pros: It's one of the best 130mm scopes you'll ever look through.

My thoughts and experiences? Everything just works - beautifully. Every detail of its mechanics and figure is superlative - and you do pay for that. it's pretty breathtaking at 317mag (XO 2.58), but only if the atmosphere is up to it - and that's not often at all. People always seem to forget that on the forums. Had a view of Uranus with the XO the other night that was either better or indistinguishable from all of the larger scopes that i looked through that night (up to 10" mirrors). Same night, an old and very respected observer came by and had a look at 47-Tuc through it commenting that it was possibly the best view of it he had ever seen. An imager (whose mount costs more than my OTA, if you want to talk about money!) had a look at a few globs with me and commented along the lines of "S**T...the detail all the way to edge". The reason I'm quoting others is that everyone has a bias towards their own instrument and, hey, i wouldn't believe my own press if i read it either! But in nearly 20 years of astronomy i've never had so many positive comments about the view through a scope. And i have to concur with them.

Cons: Everyone wants to look through it (not really a con - but a real pleasure actually).

If you're up for one, and money isn't an issue for you, then go for it. You'll never really have to wonder again if your scope is the problem.

It's the scope that brought me back to astronomy, which makes it a very powerful one indeed. Don't listen to the AP130GTX haters on this forum (their science is dubious). Buy it despite them.

cheers
HC

Last edited by happycamper; 27-11-2017 at 11:28 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 27-11-2017, 11:01 AM
LewisM's Avatar
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,388
I have owned one AP scope, and I must say, it has a certain "feel" that is hard to describe. I absolutely loved it (well, OK, the 1990 focuser really could have been upgraded to the FT new version).

The image it puts up is distinctly "different" to other scopes I have owned (you all know how many that is now!!!) - a pure clrity, totally devoid of ANY artifacts, and incredibly immersive - and mine was a 1990 doublet!

Whilst I adore the Takahashis, and perhaps the Taks have SLIGHTLY better contrast, the distinction between them is simply...hard to describe! The AP made objects somehow look VERY 3 dimensional and deep, compared to the Tak's ALMOST 3D feel. The Tak's are clinically correct, the AP's to me give a more aesthetic view, whilst also being unbelieveably sharp.

I'd buy that AP back in a heart beat.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 27-11-2017, 12:43 PM
Tropo-Bob (Bob)
Registered User

Tropo-Bob is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Cairns
Posts: 1,584
Quote:
Originally Posted by LewisM View Post

...I'd buy that AP back in a heart beat.
You sold it ???

Seems like U just brought it!
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 27-11-2017, 03:36 PM
LewisM's Avatar
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tropo-Bob View Post
You sold it ???

Seems like U just brought it!
I had it a few months. I deeply regret moving it on, but I needed the funds to finance something Takahashi HA HA
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 27-11-2017, 06:32 PM
Wavytone
Registered User

Wavytone is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Killara, Sydney
Posts: 4,147
Unfortunately these things happen - Lewis is not alone in assembling a nice kit only to find a “dream scope” becomes available which can result in a total rethink of your gear.

In my case I’d seen images from this scope but knowing production ceased many years ago I never dreamt I could own one. But I do, now
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 29-11-2017, 12:55 PM
happycamper
Registered User

happycamper is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Australia
Posts: 37
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slawomir View Post
I don’t own one and probably never will, but from what one can read on the net, it is about as good as a 130mm f/6.3 triplet can be in terms of optics (in particular for imaging) and mechanics. Cons? Price and a very long wait to get a brand new one.
Dang, you're right about the wait list! Did you know that every now and then I see one brand-new in a European vendor's store. One that comes to mind recently is a dealer called www.skypoint.it - I checked with George at AP because i thought it might be a scam... He confirmed that AP sometimes sends OTAs to select premium dealers in the EU (do they still do that with Company Seven as well? - not sure). You'll pay a (Euro) premium, but it can short circuit the wait time to zero.

cheers!
HC
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 29-11-2017, 03:53 PM
Slawomir's Avatar
Slawomir (Suavi)
Registered User

Slawomir is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: North Queensland
Posts: 3,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by happycamper View Post
Dang, you're right about the wait list! Did you know that every now and then I see one brand-new in a European vendor's store. One that comes to mind recently is a dealer called www.skypoint.it - I checked with George at AP because i thought it might be a scam... He confirmed that AP sometimes sends OTAs to select premium dealers in the EU (do they still do that with Company Seven as well? - not sure). You'll pay a (Euro) premium, but it can short circuit the wait time to zero.

cheers!
HC
I wasn't aware of this, thank you for sharing. However, it seems that this company adds about US$4k to what AP charges for the telescope = probably nearly AUD17k landed in Australia for a 130mm triplet...for a bare OTA without rings, flattener etc...an opportunity for true enthusiasts only for sure!

EDIT: Just checked T&C; these prices include VAT, so landing price in AU would be somehow less

Last edited by Slawomir; 29-11-2017 at 05:00 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 29-11-2017, 08:55 PM
The Mekon's Avatar
The Mekon (John Briggs)
Registered User

The Mekon is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bowral NSW
Posts: 826
Quote:
Originally Posted by happycamper View Post
I've got one.

Pros: It's one of the best 130mm scopes you'll ever look through.

HC
Agreed, but these days there are a number of other makes that are AP's equal. 25 years ago, when I took delivery of one of the first 130EDTs there was no 5" refractor that could match it - most 6" & 8" scopes could not compete. The only scopes that were comparable were Vixen 102 fluorites and they behaved like a smaller version. Taks were never seen back then.
Nowadays, as Roland Christen himself states - you don't have to wait.
The TOA 130s are just as good. I reckon my CFF 132 is just as good - and it comes with a 3.5" Feathertouch. APMs and TECs are also in the same league.
Also have to second Peter Ward's comment on Questar 7" - not impressed when I observed through Max Gardner's scope at Wiruna many years ago. My AP 130EDT gave better views.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 29-11-2017, 09:43 PM
LewisM's Avatar
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,388
I've looked through TOA130's, TOA150's, CFF140's and some Chinese similar sized triplets.

My pick of the lot - the TOA130. Just spot on in every respect.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 10:09 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement