Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Equipment Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #21  
Old 04-06-2018, 09:54 AM
FlashDrive's Avatar
FlashDrive (Poppy)
Senior Citizen

FlashDrive is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Bribie Island
Posts: 5,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by troypiggo View Post
Seen the AP 130 Starfire in classifieds?
I have ....droool
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-06-2018, 10:16 AM
SkyWatch (Dean)
Registered User

SkyWatch is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlashDrive View Post
I have ....droool
There must be a lot of drool around this morning (and even on my pillow last night...)!

- unfortunately that's all it will ever be: the Finance Dept is not even remotely interested; in fact incredulous laughter was the only sound from that direction...

Regarding Greg's query: I am not sure what you are looking for Greg: visual or photographic? You don't need a big scope for photographic though.
You say the FS 102 was way too dim for a visual scope, and the FSQ106 not satisfying visually. I have the TSA 102 and love it (although the 120 would be nice...)- so I would think you should be looking for at least 130-150mm. The new Skywatcher 150ED should be a very nice visual scope, but I am guessing not so hot as an imager.

If you want guaranteed high end for visual and have a heavy wallet, I would be looking at the AP130 in the classies, a TEK 140, a Stellarvue 130T or 150T (although that is a BIG jump in price from the 130), or a Tak TOA 130 or 150. All the big boys will need appropriate big and heavy mounts of course!

Stellarvue have a "refurbished" carbon fibre 130T for sale at the moment for a nice price: http://www.stellarvue.com/stellarvue...tor-telescope/

Happy hunting!

- Dean

Last edited by SkyWatch; 04-06-2018 at 11:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-06-2018, 02:18 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward View Post
Soo...can I interest you in an AP130 with FFC and FFR? ....just kidding
Teaser!

Quote:
Originally Posted by troypiggo View Post
Seen the AP 130 Starfire in classifieds?

A beautiful scope that would last a lifetime.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlashDrive View Post
I have ....droool
Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyWatch View Post
There must be a lot of drool around this morning (and even on my pillow last night...)!

- unfortunately that's all it will ever be: the Finance Dept is not even remotely interested; in fact incredulous laughter was the only sound from that direction...

Regarding Greg's query: I am not sure what you are looking for Greg: visual or photographic? You don't need a big scope for photographic though.
You say the FS 102 was way too dim for a visual scope, and the FSQ106 not satisfying visually. I have the TSA 102 and love it (although the 120 would be nice...)- so I would think you should be looking for at least 130-150mm. The new Skywatcher 150ED should be a very nice visual scope, but I am guessing not so hot as an imager.

If you want guaranteed high end for visual and have a heavy wallet, I would be looking at the AP130 in the classies, a TEK 140, a Stellarvue 130T or 150T (although that is a BIG jump in price from the 130), or a Tak TOA 130 or 150. All the big boys will need appropriate big and heavy mounts of course!

Stellarvue have a "refurbished" carbon fibre 130T for sale at the moment for a nice price: http://www.stellarvue.com/stellarvue...tor-telescope/

Happy hunting!

- Dean
Thanks for the suggestions. Idon't "need" another scope but sometimes it would be nice to do some visual and maybe even some full frame DSLR type imaging on a nice little 4 inch widefield APO astrograph that could also do double duty as a nice widefield visual. A C11 is lovely but galaxies even at 11 inch aperture are still mostly a white patch and not particularly entertaining. A lovely widefield starry vista though can be mesmerising.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-06-2018, 02:46 PM
FlashDrive's Avatar
FlashDrive (Poppy)
Senior Citizen

FlashDrive is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Bribie Island
Posts: 5,056
Sounds like you need a nice 4"inch ( 110mm ) WO ZenithStar with TMB Optics ...

LZOS were Zeiss subcontractors, and are renown for the TMB lens line. Nothing wrong with them.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-06-2018, 04:13 PM
SkyWatch (Dean)
Registered User

SkyWatch is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley View Post
Thanks for the suggestions. Idon't "need" another scope but sometimes it would be nice to do some visual and maybe even some full frame DSLR type imaging on a nice little 4 inch widefield APO astrograph that could also do double duty as a nice widefield visual. A C11 is lovely but galaxies even at 11 inch aperture are still mostly a white patch and not particularly entertaining. A lovely widefield starry vista though can be mesmerising.

Greg.
I suspect none of us "need" another scope...
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-06-2018, 04:16 PM
SkyWatch (Dean)
Registered User

SkyWatch is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 400
Speaking of Williams, what about: https://williamoptics.com/products/all-new-2018-gt153
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-06-2018, 04:52 PM
casstony
Registered User

casstony is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Warragul, Vic
Posts: 4,493
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley View Post
but sometimes it would be nice to do some visual and maybe even some full frame DSLR type imaging on a nice little 4 inch widefield APO astrograph that could also do double duty as a nice widefield visual.
Greg.

You're describing an NP101is pretty well there - more of an all rounder and less of an imaging specialist than the FSQ. Also much lighter in weight.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-06-2018, 04:53 PM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlashDrive View Post
Sounds like you need a nice 4"inch ( 110mm ) WO ZenithStar with TMB Optics ...



LZOS were Zeiss subcontractors, and are renown for the TMB lens line. Nothing wrong with them.
Do they still make those? I don't see them for sale on their site.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyWatch View Post
I suspect none of us "need" another scope...
True.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SkyWatch View Post
Looks like a nice scope. Too large for my intended use though.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-06-2018, 06:20 PM
Slawomir's Avatar
Slawomir (Suavi)
Registered User

Slawomir is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: North Queensland
Posts: 3,240
I agree with Tony, TV101is looks like a nice choice.

I would also look at APM 107mm http://apm-telescopes-englisch.shopg.../item/33333037 and CFF 105mm or 92mm.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 05-06-2018, 08:06 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slawomir View Post
I agree with Tony, TV101is looks like a nice choice.

I would also look at APM 107mm http://apm-telescopes-englisch.shopg.../item/33333037 and CFF 105mm or 92mm.
The APM 105 sounds good but appears overpriced. APO 102-107mm air spaced triplets are plentiful on the market these days and Stellarvue has them >.95 strehl for a lot less.

APO triplets used to be a rare thing now they seem plentiful. I imagine quality could possibly vary so getting one of these from a reputable telescope maker that provides an interferometric test report would ease that concern.

The other weak spot would be focusers. Stellarvue probably has a good focuser and they also offer a 3 inch Feathertouch upgrade which probably would be a smart move. In my experience you need at least a 3 inch focuser to use a full frame or larger sensor.

Has anyone any experience with carbon fibre APO scopes? I know Roland Christen of AP is against them due to internal air currents but I see a few makers using them - Stellarvue and Officina Stellare.

I think I would stick to an aluminium tube unless there are some nice advantages to carbon fibre. The main advantage appears to be its lighter and looks good.

The more you look into this area of telescopes the more the FSQ106 seems the standout for imaging at least. Most seem to have a smallish corrected circle.

Greg

Last edited by gregbradley; 05-06-2018 at 08:23 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 05-06-2018, 08:17 AM
glend (Glen)
Registered User

glend is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lake Macquarie
Posts: 7,033
Greg i believe carbon tubes for refractors is just a design fad and not justified. It also makes heating an objective, to prevent condensation, more difficult.
I agree there are many excellent choices in your size range and going for the best published specs, rather than buying for a name, makes sense. Most APOs in that size range have pretty good imaging circles with flattened or reducer/corrector. I consider corrector mandatory as they increase speed. If your worries about lost of some focal length with a corrector, just buy the next size up imho.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-06-2018, 08:28 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slawomir View Post
I agree with Tony, TV101is looks like a nice choice.

I would also look at APM 107mm http://apm-telescopes-englisch.shopg.../item/33333037 and CFF 105mm or 92mm.
Quote:
Originally Posted by glend View Post
Greg i believe carbon tubes for refractors is just a design fad and not justified. It also makes heating an objective, to prevent condensation, more difficult.
I agree there are many excellent choices in your size range and going for the best published specs, rather than buying for a name, makes sense. Most APOs in that size range have pretty good imaging circles with flattened or reducer/corrector. I consider corrector mandatory as they increase speed. If your worries about lost of some focal length with a corrector, just buy the next size up imho.
Thanks Glen.

I agree it seems more of a marketing thing. Stellarvue to be honest though are quite clear on their site that aluminium tubes have several advantages over carbon fibre.

Having a good flattener or reducer is another important consideration although these days you can get a nice Riccardi reducer for about $550.

Looking at the Stellarvue site this seems pretty hard to beat in an aluminium tube (nice pearl type paint job as well):

http://www.stellarvue.com/stellarvue...tor-telescope/

Guaranteed better than .95 strehl. Boy scopes have come a long way over the years. That was only Takahashi, AP, TEC and some APMs before.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-06-2018, 02:21 PM
Geoff45's Avatar
Geoff45 (Geoff)
PI rules

Geoff45 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,631
I believe that the 101is can handle a 16803 as long as a field flattener is used. I bought all the requisite gear from Bintel a while back, but haven't had a chance to set it up. I did use the 101is with my qsi 540 for a while before getting my PlaneWave. It gave pretty good images.
https://www.astrobin.com/full/54280/0/
I also used a William Optics ZS110 for a long while, but even with the 15mm x 15mm QSI chip, there was still noticiable field curvature.
Geoff
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-06-2018, 05:22 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 gregbradley View Post

Guaranteed better than .95 strehl. Boy scopes have come a long way over the years. That was only Takahashi, AP, TEC and some APMs before.

Greg.
From what Ive read some manufacturers provide Strehl for 95% of the lens omitting the outer part as it usually has more significant irregularities. Including the outer 5% (by diameter) would lower the quoted Strehl.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-06-2018, 08:52 PM
Wavytone
Registered User

Wavytone is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Killara, Sydney
Posts: 4,147
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley View Post
Guaranteed better than .95 strehl.
The triplet APO's 100-130 mm seems to be a sweet spot for sure, and at a stretch to 140, maybe 150mm great... but... beyond that they're impossible in terms of size, weight, the mounting required and sheer cost.

OTOH no such thing as a 9" refractor that is reasonably portable in a small car. But a 9" mak does (or dob or SCT), and this one is 0.965 strehl, for a fraction of the price of an equivalent refractor.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 10-06-2018, 09:26 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
What about the Teleskop Services Photoline 115 F6.96. They also have a range of flatteners and reducers. Not sure if the backfocus of the flattener is enough though at about 55mm.

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop...user-1-11.html

Astrotech from Astronomics sells the same scope with their brand on it. It seems a lot of scope for the money.

Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 10-06-2018, 10:25 AM
glend (Glen)
Registered User

glend is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lake Macquarie
Posts: 7,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley View Post
What about the Teleskop Services Photoline 115 F6.96. They also have a range of flatteners and reducers. Not sure if the backfocus of the flattener is enough though at about 55mm.

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop...user-1-11.html

Astrotech from Astronomics sells the same scope with their brand on it. It seems a lot of scope for the money.

Greg.
I have that scope Greg, and it is great, even at the old price, and a steal at the current price. I run the Photoline 3" 0,79x reducer corrector, which also works on my TS80. With the reducer it's an f5.53. Backspacing with that 3" Photoline Reducer Corrector varies slightly depending on the focal length of the scope yourbputying it on, but yes on the115mm it is 55mm (+-2mm). My Nikon D5300 suits that Photoline Reducer perfectly on the 115mm but I have to add a little spacing to the 80MM. I mainly use my ASI1600MM-C on that 115mm and it does need some spacing, about 32mm behind the reducer. I also run the 2.5" flattened at f6,96 on that scope but I prefer it at f5.53 for the speed.
No vignetting, easily handles the APS-C sensor of the D5300. You need a M68 to M63 adaptor to put the 3" Photoline on the 2.5" focuser but it all fits just fine (and that adaptor does not affect spacing). That 2.5" R&P focuser is strong, it holds my heavy cooled Canon 450D with no problems, it also rotates.
Best buy right now I think. I might have to look at what else they have reduced.

Last edited by glend; 10-06-2018 at 10:36 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 10-06-2018, 12:10 PM
clive milne
Registered User

clive milne is offline
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Freo WA
Posts: 1,443
Greg,
If it were me, I would default to an FSQ (is there anything better for imaging?) and spring for a dedicated visual instrument to go with it.

What about a pair of TS photoline 125mm FPL53/Lanthanum OTA's turned in to a pair of binoculars, using something like these:
http://binotechno.com/product_en.html
I'd mount these on an Alt Az mount for simplicity.


The photolines run at around $2k AUS per OTA.

Or, if you wanted to DIY, These might be interesting:
https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop...--in-cell.html

A pair of 6" ED bino's would be one hell of an instrument.

~2c
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 12-06-2018, 07:45 AM
gregbradley's Avatar
gregbradley
Registered User

gregbradley is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 17,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by glend View Post
I have that scope Greg, and it is great, even at the old price, and a steal at the current price. I run the Photoline 3" 0,79x reducer corrector, which also works on my TS80. With the reducer it's an f5.53. Backspacing with that 3" Photoline Reducer Corrector varies slightly depending on the focal length of the scope yourbputying it on, but yes on the115mm it is 55mm (+-2mm). My Nikon D5300 suits that Photoline Reducer perfectly on the 115mm but I have to add a little spacing to the 80MM. I mainly use my ASI1600MM-C on that 115mm and it does need some spacing, about 32mm behind the reducer. I also run the 2.5" flattened at f6,96 on that scope but I prefer it at f5.53 for the speed.
No vignetting, easily handles the APS-C sensor of the D5300. You need a M68 to M63 adaptor to put the 3" Photoline on the 2.5" focuser but it all fits just fine (and that adaptor does not affect spacing). That 2.5" R&P focuser is strong, it holds my heavy cooled Canon 450D with no problems, it also rotates.
Best buy right now I think. I might have to look at what else they have reduced.
Thanks Glen. That is good to hear. It does seem like a standout bargain.


Greg.

Quote:
Originally Posted by clive milne View Post
Greg,
If it were me, I would default to an FSQ (is there anything better for imaging?) and spring for a dedicated visual instrument to go with it.

What about a pair of TS photoline 125mm FPL53/Lanthanum OTA's turned in to a pair of binoculars, using something like these:
http://binotechno.com/product_en.html
I'd mount these on an Alt Az mount for simplicity.


The photolines run at around $2k AUS per OTA.

Or, if you wanted to DIY, These might be interesting:
https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop...--in-cell.html

A pair of 6" ED bino's would be one hell of an instrument.

~2c
A huge APO bino would be amazing. All imaging roads seem to lead to an FSQ but I have had 2 already. My last wide scope was the TEC110 F5.6 which I would rate as slightly better than an FSQ106ED as fluorite tops FPL53 in my opinion. But its focuser was a bit on the weak side whereas FSQ focuser is usually good (but not always, lots of posts complaining about it). Have they finally handled it with FSQ106EDiv? Who knows.
They said it was handled with FSQ 2, and 3 as well.


FSQ106ED is a fabulous instrument in many ways but I think its weakness is its colour transmission. Its seemed to lose the vibrancy of the FSQ106N but improved the optical performance in other ways.


Greg.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 12-06-2018, 11:36 AM
LewisM's Avatar
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,388
Re the 106ED (and the 85ED), I found that the colour DOES need more bosting than the N fluorites, but in PI it's a simple job.

Optically, the blue halation endemic in the N is practically gone, and I also feel the red/orange vibrancy is better. Sharpness of the ED's seems quite a lot better, as is the ability to use the reducer etc, making it an f/3 beast (you cannot use the reducer on the N).

Only thing I really dislike of the ED over the N is the weight/heft and the OTA size - they should have kept it at 114, but I am sure they had some specific reason (baffling, throttling/vignette or somesuch)
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 03:27 PM.

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