The 100 shows great promise. I've just got back from AstroFest so once I get around to looking at some of my data we'll see how good it is
The dew shield is HUGE...all the times I've used it so far it has not dewed over once. My Zenithstar that I was using as a guide scope was not so lucky
But hey, what are these issues with the 100? It'd be useful to check mine for these...
I didn't know specifically what the issues were, I just saw vague mention of them having "issues" when I was looking for info on the 120. I just did a quick search and found a post on CN where the Skywatcher rep said that they pulled the original 100 due to collimation issues; apparently that one is no longer available and there's no known issues with the 100's currently shipping.
Always worth doing your own research before buying though, things change, more info becomes available etc.
Yeah I had seen that one, apparently there were two versions of the 100, the f/5 version with integrated flattener and the f/5.5 for which the screw on flattener is supplied (here in Australia).
There's a chap who posts on CN who owns a 100 and a Tak FSQ106 and images with both
Sorry Rob, but it is a little bit humorous, I was wondering what you
imagined when alongside Dunk.
raymo
Bloody spell checkers. That's a secret Raymo, I cannot tell you. I do remember getting cranky because his Esprit 100 was performing ( imaging ) so well.
Houghy's photo could open up a caption contest... lots an idle mind could conjure up with hat image...
The original Esprit series were indeed pulled due to collimation issues with the quadruplet version. They could not correct it so instead redesigned it as a triplet with a separate flattener. You will also read a few reviews of extreme frustration over flattener spacing - Skywatcher's figures are apparently wrong - so you will need to experiment. This seems more prevalent with the 80 than the 100 and up.
The guy on CN doesn't own the FSQ - he borrws various other brands of scopes and does image comparisons of the SW against them - so far he's done the FSQ and an AP150 and I think there was a 120 from TEC of AP in there too.
The Esprit series is stacking up well. Very, VERY slight halation but otherwise pretty darned good!
Houghy's photo could open up a caption contest... lots an idle mind could conjure up with hat image...
The original Esprit series were indeed pulled due to collimation issues with the quadruplet version. They could not correct it so instead redesigned it as a triplet with a separate flattener. You will also read a few reviews of extreme frustration over flattener spacing - Skywatcher's figures are apparently wrong - so you will need to experiment. This seems more prevalent with the 80 than the 100 and up.
The guy on CN doesn't own the FSQ - he borrws various other brands of scopes and does image comparisons of the SW against them - so far he's done the FSQ and an AP150 and I think there was a 120 from TEC of AP in there too.
The Esprit series is stacking up well. Very, VERY slight halation but otherwise pretty darned good!
Get over it Lewis and stop this nonsense. I don 't understand what your angle is with all your negative nonsense about the Esprits. Lets see you produce some better images than the Esprit 100.
Negative??? What part of "The Esprit series is stacking up well" and "pretty darned good!" is negative???
Yes, the initial batch were flawed, but that was resolved. Then there is an issue with the correct flattener spacing - with the 80 mostly - as SW's figure is apparently wrong. So you need to experiment - happens with many scopes.
If people would rather stick their head in the sand re ANY small niggles with scopes, then so be it.
Heck, the FSQ in the thread Dunk is referring to has a diffraction disturbance in the image (an intrusion somewhere) very similar to the same issue some Esprit 80's and 100's showed (depending on batch).
Would you have rather NOT read about Lee's issue with the focuser and other niggles?
The original Esprit series were indeed pulled due to collimation issues with the quadruplet version. They could not correct it so instead redesigned it as a triplet with a separate flattener. You will also read a few reviews of extreme frustration over flattener spacing - Skywatcher's figures are apparently wrong - so you will need to experiment. This seems more prevalent with the 80 than the 100 and up.
The guy on CN doesn't own the FSQ - he borrws various other brands of scopes and does image comparisons of the SW against them - so far he's done the FSQ and an AP150 and I think there was a 120 from TEC of AP in there too.
The Esprit series is stacking up well. Very, VERY slight halation but otherwise pretty darned good!
According to the chap I spoke to at Skywatcher (take that for what it is!), there were originally 2 versions of the 100, the 3-element f/5.5 which is for sale and that I bought and a 5-element f/5 that didn't work, so they pulled it.
The back focus from the flattener varies by model and isn't particularly generous on the smaller models, but I get sharp stars corner to corner with my crop sensor and that's all that matters to me. If anyone wants to come play with it and their full frame DSLR then they're welcome to get in touch with me, I'd be keen to see how it fares. That might also highlight any spacing issues.
I'm not sure what to expect with regards to halation. I was interested in a triplet because I've suffered blue halos with my WO doublet (unsurprisingly) and even some other triplets I've seen. Any examples of clean and halated images would be great, so I know what I'm looking for. But this isn't my thread
IMO my judgement when I was looking for a new scope was that the Esprit are fairly new and most of the issues could be put down to a bumpy start, but it's always better going in eyes wide open. Obviously, TV, Tak, whoever have a head start, but who's to say they always get it perfect first time? The measure of a brand is how they stand by their product over time and how they handle any support issues.
Kevin Legore of SW USA did once fully describe the collimation issue with the early batch (now all pulled). The spacer ring interference in the optical path is the reason why SW USA now fully test each Esprit before sending them to customers. It is uncertain if all the newer model have the one piece continuous spacer or not ex factory. They should be.
Regarding halation, it is VERY subtle. When the say SW vs AP images are compared, the Esprits show a very minor degree of halation. Very acceptable amount in fact. All Esprit images are also warmer toned.
All in all an excellent telescope series. I almost bought an Esprit 120 but went for an FSQ instead.
Regarding halation, it is VERY subtle. When the say SW vs AP images are compared, the Esprits show a very minor degree of halation. Very acceptable amount in fact.
Thanks Lewis! Do you have an image from your Tak you could post so I can see how it should look?
Actually, not really, since I did not nail focus on ANY of the images I took recently (still waiting on my Sharpsky system, so manually focussing for now - at f/5, the CFZ is SO minute it is rather difficult!). Note my CCD is not orthogonal either - need to adjust the bottom right corner.
BUT, here is a slightly OOF shot of NGC6188 with the FSQ-106ED...
I think you made a good decision to purchase the Esprit 120. I have imagined alongside Dunk with his Esprit 100 and it is very , very impressive.
You made some comments about the need to refocus. This is common to all the upmarket brands and you will need to motorise the focuser.
I have an Esprit 150 on order and hopefully it will turn up this week.
Cheers
Rob
Cheers Rob :-) That 150 is going to be a beast, congrats!
I'm still not sold on the refocus thing yet. I'll do another run, this time without screwing up my guiding, and see how it goes. I've never had to do it on another scope, and yes, I've monitored FWHM over runs.
Actually, not really, since I did not nail focus on ANY of the images I took recently (still waiting on my Sharpsky system, so manually focussing for now - at f/5, the CFZ is SO minute it is rather difficult!). Note my CCD is not orthogonal either - need to adjust the bottom right corner.
BUT, here is a slightly OOF shot of NGC6188 with the FSQ-106ED...
Interesting, thanks. Is that a single, unprocessed image?
Btw, focusing at f/5.5 with a a Bahtinov mask is a breeze, but irritating to do it with any frequency, it interrupts photon collection! What's this Sharp sky system?
