Vixen 140 Refractor

[Tropo-Bob (Bob)]

I am just musing about what may be a larger aperture refractor worth buying. I see that Vixen's largest refractor is the 140 NA SS, which replaces the 140 NA SSf. I cannot tell from the literature what the difference is. Can anybody throw some light on this?

[FlashDrive (Poppy)]

Originally Posted by Tropo-Bob

I am just musing about what may be a larger aperture refractor worth buying. I see that Vixen's largest refractor is the 140 NA SS, which replaces the 140 NA SSf. I cannot tell from the literature what the difference is. Can anybody throw some light on this?

Bob ....the ' f ' on the end of SSf means part of the Scope was made in China.

The New NA140SS is ' wholey ' made in Japan.

The new NA140SS is an outstanding ' wide field ' instrument.

Col....

[FlashDrive (Poppy)]

It's a great Scope.....

http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/s...postcount=1105

Col....

[Tropo-Bob (Bob)]

Thanks Col.

[Don Pensack]

It's a 4-element Petzval design, similar to, but larger than, the TeleVue NP101 and NP127.

[Profiler (Profiler)]

Originally Posted by Tropo-Bob

I am just musing about what may be a larger aperture refractor worth buying. I see that Vixen's largest refractor is the 140 NA SS, which replaces the 140 NA SSf. I cannot tell from the literature what the difference is. Can anybody throw some light on this?

Hi Bob

Col's correct it is a great widefield refractor - however it is not without limitations. It is important to keep in mind that it is not an APO but uses a petzval design with good quality achro glass. I have had two - the very original design which were entirely hand made in Japan (in green) and thereafter the remake which was made in China but QC'd in Japan. The current versions are now assembled in Japan and QC'd there as well as a 4 element design is a tricky affair to get right.

In terms of bang for your buck to get a widefield refractor and thus plenty of refractor glass there is no question they are a great buy. Therefore, the question is why did I buy and sell it twice. There are lots and lots of pro's and con's but in a nutshell a good second hand Televue NP101 could do everything that the NA140 could and more (especially with planetary observing) and was half the size.

Having said all of this - the NA140 is very unique telescope (4 element achro) and it is really a telescope you need to try out yourself to decide whether it is to your taste or not. It is really something of an enigma that I know quite a few people who have had one and everyone tends to agree that it is a very nice telescope. Having said this however - no one seems to hold on to them.

[Tinderboxsky (Steve)]

My experience using both a quality 103mm APO and an NA140SS in rural dark skies is quite different. The 140 collects twice the light of the 103 and this delivers unquestionable far superior images and detail across all deep sky objects. The 140 is unquestionably my first choice for all double star, globular and open clusters, nebula, planetary nebula and galaxies etc observing at all magnifications and exit pupil sizes.
Looking through my observing logs, my best views of Saturn and it's six accessible moons have been through the 140. Views of Jupiter are on a par but the comparisons between observations in my logs seem to be more dependent on the seeing conditions. But again my first choice is the 140 as it resolves the moons as small disks. Jupiter shows a small faint blue fringe close to the limb but it is not obtrusive and I have never seen any sign of this bleeding onto the plante's disc.
The images of the moon through the 140 have a very faint blue wash across them. This does not affect image sharpness at low magnification up to about 70X. Again the greater aperture yields more detail at these magnifications. However, at high magnifications there is a definite loss of sharpness in the image. A Baadar Fringe Killer filter cleans up the image sufficiently to rate it as satisfactory. The faint yellow cast produced disappears from view after a few minutes observing. Having said this, the 103 produces a far superior image at medium to high magnifications and is my preferred scope for all Luna observing.
Another thing going for the 140 is it's relatively compact size and lower than expected overall weight. It is very manageable.
I don't see any evidence that the turnover in these scopes is any different to the average across all good quality scopes.
Hope this hands on experience helps.

Cheers

Steve.

[Tinderboxsky (Steve)]

My experience using both a quality 103mm APO and an NA140SS in rural dark skies is quite different. The 140 collects twice the light of the 103 and this delivers unquestionable far superior images and detail across all deep sky objects. The 140 is unquestionably my first choice for all double star, globular and open clusters, nebula, planetary nebula and galaxies etc observing at all magnifications and exit pupil sizes.
Looking through my observing logs, my best views of Saturn and it's six accessible moons have been through the 140. Views of Jupiter are on a par but the comparisons between observations in my logs seem to be more dependent on the seeing conditions. But again my first choice is the 140 as it resolves the moons as small disks. Jupiter shows a small faint blue fringe close to the limb but it is not obtrusive and I have never seen any sign of this bleeding onto the plante's disc.
The images of the moon through the 140 have a very faint blue wash across them. This does not affect image sharpness at low magnification up to about 70X. Again the greater aperture yields more detail at these magnifications. However, at high magnifications there is a definite loss of sharpness in the image. A Baadar Fringe Killer filter cleans up the image sufficiently to rate it as satisfactory. The faint yellow cast produced disappears from view after a few minutes observing. Having said this, the 103 produces a far superior image at medium to high magnifications and is my preferred scope for all Luna observing.
Another thing going for the 140 is it's relatively compact size and lower than expected overall weight. It is very manageable.
I don't see any evidence that the turnover in these scopes is any different to the average across all good quality scopes.
Hope this hands on experience helps.

Cheers

Steve.

[Profiler (Profiler)]

Yes - sounds good but as you qualify right at the beginning - the key point is these observations are under rural dark skies.

[PlanetMan]

I have had a Vixen 103 and the NP101 and both are very nice scopes but the Televue was much better

[brian nordstrom (As avatar)]

these would be the only scope I would consider selling my iStar for , I quite like them .
Brian.

[Tropo-Bob (Bob)]

Thank you all for your replies. I am very tempted. Its seems to me to me about the largest aperture in a refractor that I can buy that is decent in both quality and in weight, as well as $s. (Nobody please mention the Skywatcher 6"- I obtained a 120mm F8 in a swap about 10 years ago and the image clarity was very disappointing; I sold it for almost nothing, so please don't go there).

Originally Posted by Tinderboxsky

The 140 is unquestionably my first choice for all double star, globular and open clusters, nebula, planetary nebula and galaxies etc observing at all magnifications and exit pupil sizes.

Thanks Steve, this has helped. I was surprised to see double stars mentioned here. My thinking was that the extra size of the 140mm lens may better display contrasting colours in double stars, but not generally an instrument to be used for most doubles.

I have moved away from the big reflectors, but strangely, this is the thing that I miss most about them. The really do show colourful doubles very well.

[Tinderboxsky (Steve)]

Hello Bob,
Yes, the extra aperture certainly contributes to excellent colour rendition but it also delivers better resolution for difficult and close double stars, particularly where there is a marked difference in magnitudes. I am continually surprised at the sharpness of the optics and the pinpoint star images it produces.
Your conclusions are similar to mine when I was considering acquiring my NA140. Namely it represents excellent value - decent aperture, sharp quality optics, quality build wrapped up in an easily managed size and weight.
Having said that, I am wondering what real increase in observing reach you will achieve given you already have an ED115 and an ED128. My guess, for what it is worth, is that you may not notice much improvement in observing reach for the outlay. Or perhaps you will if your ED128. is not a strong performer. In my case, I was expanding my aperture from 103 to 140mm.

Cheers

Steve.

[Tropo-Bob (Bob)]

First light tonight for my new Vixen NA 140SS Refractor.

I have been trying it out on my Skywatcher HD-AZ dual mount, and partly balance that by mounting a Williams Optics 70mm scope on the other side. I balanced and aligned these during the daylight so heres hoping for no issues tonight. The WO scope will be like a giant finder.

In theory, my choice of eyepiece for the Vixen is my Ethos eyepiece. The 13mm EP gives aprox 62x with a 1.6degree actual field of view. I will give a warts and all account of how that works out in practice!

Pity about tonight full Moon though...

[gaa_ian (Ian)]

Hi Bob
I will be interested to see how that goes. I have now added Viden to the scopes I stock. It is certainly clear in cairns tonight !

[Tropo-Bob (Bob)]

Originally Posted by gaa_ian

Hi Bob
I will be interested to see how that goes. I have now added Vixen to the scopes I stock. It is certainly clear in cairns tonight !

Wow- I look forward to seeing some Vixens in your shop.

I was very pleased with my new Vixen Scope.

The 13mm Ethos EP (62x) proved to be a highly effective combination with the NA140SS.


In this cruise mode, deep sky objects looked faded under the Full Moon, however double stars showed well. I could see all three components of Beta Monoceros, all four stars of Sigma Orions and easily split Rigel. I also enjoyed seeing in one view all the major stars in the Pleiades and the bright cluster NGC2516 looked a treat.


Stars did not look as crisp as in my other high quality refractors, but still looked sharper than those I have seen through most reflectors. (A Tak 160 that I once used being the notable exception).


CA was noticable on Mag 2 stars but completely within acceptable limits, even on Rigel. CA become unacceptable at higher powers- Sirius looked a mess at 133x and though Jupiter looked interesting at 100x, it had annoying CA. (I tried a CA filter and still did not like it as it had a strong yellow tint and still had some purple showing).


I am looking forward to using this scope on a Moonless night. To cruise at 62x with a 2.3 exit pupil with a 1.6 degree field of view with quality images is indeed something I am eagerly awaiting.

[FlashDrive (Poppy)]

Bob .... good to see you had a night out with your NA140 ...a bright moon certainly doesn't help the viewing experience.

I never used ' high mag ' eyepieces with my NA140 .... I stayed above 22mm right up to 50mm for gorgeous Wide Field Views... it never disappointed me .

I mostly used Denkmeier Bino's ( Scope was on a T-Rex Tripod ) ... on the NA140... Using two eyes to view with the NA140 is really a treat.

Wait till you get a ' moonless ' night .... the ' WOW' factor will jump 100 fold.

Enjoy you time at the eyepiece ...

Col...

[Tropo-Bob (Bob)]

Originally Posted by FlashDrive

I never used ' high mag ' eyepieces with my NA140 .... I stayed above 22mm right up to 50mm for gorgeous Wide Field Views... it never disappointed me .

I mostly used Denkmeier Bino's ( Scope was on a T-Rex Tripod ) ... on the NA140... Using two eyes to view with the NA140 is really a treat.

Col...

Col it is interesting to see how people can use the same scope in completely different ways (and still think the scope is great).

It certainly shows the value of forums like this and more generally, star parties.

Looks like I had one lucky night of viewing followed by clouds ever since, and rain is predicted here for the next 7 days.

[gaa_ian (Ian)]

Originally Posted by Tropo-Bob

Wow- I look forward to seeing some Vixens in your shop.

I was very pleased with my new Vixen Scope.

The 13mm Ethos EP (62x) proved to be a highly effective combination with the NA140SS.


In this cruise mode, deep sky objects looked faded under the Full Moon, however double stars showed well. I could see all three components of Beta Monoceros, all four stars of Sigma Orions and easily split Rigel. I also enjoyed seeing in one view all the major stars in the Pleiades and the bright cluster NGC2516 looked a treat.


Stars did not look as crisp as in my other high quality refractors, but still looked sharper than those I have seen through most reflectors. (A Tak 160 that I once used being the notable exception).


CA was noticable on Mag 2 stars but completely within acceptable limits, even on Rigel. CA become unacceptable at higher powers- Sirius looked a mess at 133x and though Jupiter looked interesting at 100x, it had annoying CA. (I tried a CA filter and still did not like it as it had a strong yellow tint and still had some purple showing).


I am looking forward to using this scope on a Moonless night. To cruise at 62x with a 2.3 exit pupil with a 1.6 degree field of view with quality images is indeed something I am eagerly awaiting.

Drop in to the shop with your Vixen some time, I would love to see it and compare to the Kson ED102. If we get a weather break we may do an observing night at Lake Placid in Feb !

[Tropo-Bob (Bob)]

Originally Posted by gaa_ian

Drop in to the shop with your Vixen some time, I would love to see it and compare to the Kson ED102. If we get a weather break we may do an observing night at Lake Placid in Feb !

Ian, the new Vixen is a photon gobbler, but is slightly messy in its operation (has some false colour, and does not cope well with high magnifications- although yet to be fully evaluated, as I have only been able to use it on the first night.)

In comparison, the Kson ED102 is a more well-rounded instrument. I have a Vixen ED102SS, (F6.5) which would be a better comparison. Its great as a portable instrument, which performs well on any task.

However, why have just one when U can have them all.