Trying to decide on APO refractor

[stanlite]

Hi everyone,

Well Astrofest has done it again and i am now looking to go into the world of APO refractors.

My budget is roughly $3.5k to $4k and given my imager (QHY9) I am probably looking at getting a 100 to 110 mm scope.

Now this is a crowded field in the refractor market and my knowledge of Refractors is not the greatest.

the models that have perked my interest so far are as follows,

Stellavue SVR102-T
APM 107-700
William Optics A 102FTL

All these scopes are within my budget (ablit two would have to be imported as i can't find Australian suppliers). I was wondering what peoples opinions of them where (atm i am leaning towards the SVR102). Also if people have any other OTA suggestions.

[Larryp]

I have had 2 Stellarvue refractors and can't speak highly enough of them.
I have no experience of the other 2
You could also consider a Takahashi FC100DC or DF-They are also in your price range. I have an FC100DF on order, but of course cannot tell you anything about it at the moment.

[jjjnettie]

If you are open to buying second hand, why not add a Tak into the mix?

[el_draco]

I have WO 90 and 132 refractors. Build is beutiful and performance is amazing. Again, second hand, you can get the 132mm in your budget.

[brian nordstrom]

:) Take a look at Astronomy Alive's sweet 115mm Sky Rover triplet at 3k .
A friend has one here in Perth and its an impressive APO no matter what way I looked at it and thru it , a true Fluorite triplet at f6.9.
Their link is on the right side of this page .

Brian.

[Logieberra]

The smaller pixels of your Kodak chip would go nicely with an FSQ (85 or 106).

[blink138]

i have just picked up the apm 107 / 700................ alas thanks to perth weather it remains, in my hands anyhow, a photonic virgin!
i would go so far as to say it is "virgin" on the ridiculous ha ha!
however it is a beautifully made hefty beast and the coatings are fabulous
pat

[Bart]

Tak, Stellarvue, Astro Physics, top name stuff, don't waste your money on crap.

It's in colour correction and image processing that you will notice the difference.

And yes, I have been there and done that, Tak all the way for me. :P

[Peter Ward]

The five element WO GT102 is very hard to beat for the money.

If money is no object, AP (lots of luck) or Taka (lots of bucks )

[astro744]

There is a nice Tele Vue NP101 in the classifieds under your budget.

[LewisM]

Well, being a refractor nut, I would stick to a few brands.

Tak - goes without saying. Just bought 2 myself. Only downside is the cost of accessories, and the bewildering number of them required (hence I get them all custom made, so that ONE adapter takes over the role of 4 Tak joined together ones)

Vixen - IF you can find an old Vixen fluorite, you will have an instrument as good as Tak (seeing the SAME company that made Tak's objectives also made Vixen's back then). The newer ED ones are fine as well, so long as Japanese made - the Chinese ones are merely rebadged Synta products

AP - nice, really nice, but rocking horse poo to find in the wild. Expensive, but worth it.

Stellarvue - a LOT of bang for the buck! Finally they have gone back to R&P focusers now the crazy Crayford fad is slowly waning, and the results are worth it. Their handmade scopes are WAY up there with the top 4 brands. Their Chinese/Taiwanese optic versions are damned good too.

Televue - well, I find them odd. Good optics, ugly as mud (weird retro-60's look about them to me), can have issues with internal flocking. Some say the optics are mostly made by Vixen - I am sure someone knows for sure.

Skywatcher - good, to a point. Their focusers are garbage. Their newer Esprit series - copies of Takahashi - are reporting in well. The ED80 and ED100 are good performers, especially if you change out the focuser and can live with the gawdy bling paint.

Saxon is just Synta/SW. Not much, if any difference.

William Optics - really not bad optics, but some interferometry could suggest issues with some of them. The focuser tends to slip (well, the older ones did) and the focuser rotator seems to occasionally need adjustment as it loses orthogonality - apparently a simple tweak. Surprisingly heavy for their size. A nice package usually - Hugh's fluorite in the trader is a bargain!

Officina Stellare - tough one. VERY over priced but nice optics (Russian made). Debate abounds as to the merit, or more the detriment of carbon fibre tubes on refractors, so take that how you like. I used a Viper once - nice, but no better than a good TV or Tak. Sexy looking, but beauty is as beauty does...

APM - Russian optics as well, and USUALLY well made, though there was a run of flawed tubes sent out, with gaps in the baffles etc. Expensive, but those LZOS elements are "sublime" (to paraphrase someone)

TMB - great, if you can get one, or afford one.

I just bought a Tak FSQ85 Baby-Q - eagerly awaiting it's arrival. Smallish aperture, that makes up for it with jaw-dropping sharpness and contrast, and small/light enough not to need a large mount to push it.

[pluto]

I can only speak from my limited experience but my Tak TSA120 was within your budget second hand (just, and I was very lucky!) and, at f7.5, I find it an excellent match with my STT8300 - same sensor as QHY9.

[gregbradley]

I would also stick to a triplet over a doublet even if the doublet has a fluorite element for imaging. Doublets don't have the correction a good triplet gets.

You should be able to get a Tak 2nd hand for that upper end of your budget.

The FSQ106 (N and ED) is of course the most popular widefield instrument around and for good reason. FSQ106N is cheaper usually but I think they are getting a name for themselves as fluorite - is well - fluorite.

Greg.

[pluto]

Look what Kunama just listed in the classifieds:
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=124092
:eyepop:

[PlanetMan]

Within your budget you can also buy a Takahashi TSA-102

[jjjnettie]

I was just going to post that. :D
Go Grady!!!!

[Kunama]

....... can deliver to Brisbane in late September but would need to be paid for now........ going to Sunny Coast in 8 weeks time.;)

[LewisM]

Oh, you are bringing it here Matt? My birthday present?

An absolute steal... and Matt looks after his stuff impeccably - I have bought/traded a LOT with Matt.

If I hadn't just bought the FSQ85 and FC-100... I don't have a mount hefty enough anyway :D (my poor justification, albeit true)

[Hans Tucker]

So no one is going to mention or recommend TEC in this thread. Possibly the TEC110 or TEC140.

I had a look on the TEC website and noted they have listed a APO250VT f/8.2 for $49,000. Yes, I know it's above you $$$ limit....I just thought I would mention it for interested parties.

[LewisM]

Oh yeah, TEC :) VERY good too :D Just, e x p e n s i v e

[stanlite]

I had considered the TAK's they are very pretty. I am really trying for a triplet though much as the TS128 looks great its still only a doublet isn't it?.

Also I don't quite have the money just yet lol.

[Allan]

Yes TEC and AP are at the top of the tree for high quality hand made APO's. If I was spending that money on an OTA for imaging I would look at the Tak triplets. Hugh's images using the TSA120 are awesome. The FS and FC scopes are very nice for visual, but not at the TSA level that suits imaging. You could consider an FSQ106 or NP101is if max wide field is your thing.

[Hans Tucker]

Whilst not in your aperture range AEC has a FSQ-85 advertised under it's customer listing. Not sure what price is being asked. AEC seems to be having a dummy spit regarding listing prices so it may pay to ring Claude if interested but be warned (not in a bad way) he likes to talk.

[netwolf]

Recnetly saw that Tan14 is selling TAK's and the prices look good. Does the Free Trade Agreement have any impact on TAK prices in Aus?

http://www.tan14.com/Tak.htm

[PlanetMan]

No - but Astro gear is in a free tariff category anyhow. What this means is that other than the cost of the item, shipping and custom processing fee (roughly $48) all that has to be paid is an extra 10% for GST.

[LewisM]

AEC WANTED $3250 for the ex-demo FSQ85 (I believe it has since sold, but you can ask). That's BARE OTA, no visual adapters, no clamshell, no finder.

I passed and grabbed Steve's FSQ85 on the trader at the SAME price, but WITH 7x50 finder, clamshell, offset plate and complete visual back.

[astro744]

This begs the question; what makes a telescope aesthetically pleasing?

I personally like the looks of the NP-101 and NP-127 but not so much the NP-101is or NP-127is even though the 'is' versions have many more features more suited for astrophotography but can be used for visual. (I am mainly visual and for that I don't even need a fine focuser as the telescopes I use snap to focus nicely for me).

On the other hand I find the Takahashi very clinical in appearance always reminding me of a piece of equipment used in a medical imaging facility. I think it's the colour scheme that is somewhat unaesthetic. I cannot comment on the optics as I have never looked through a Tak but I'm sure they are superb based on comments by other users.

One of my personal favourite (no longer commercially available) telescope is 6" f12 Super Planetary by Astro-Physics. There's just something about a long refractor mounted on a high mount. I didn't own one but got to use one on many occasions. After saying that though, I really like the looks of the 130mm f6.3 'Gran Turismo' by Astro-Physics as it is much more practical but also 'good looking'.

Aeshetics is a complex thing; What is beautiful to one person is ugly to another. Form and function both make for good design though and one could argue that as long as the images are exquisite, it doesn't really matter what the telescope looks like.

[LewisM]

Agreed.

You must admit though, has Celestron made an aesthetically pleasing product for the past 25 years? Always got totally useless, bulging curves, festooned with plastic and then bedecked in "Hey, look at me" orange. :)

I find the Tak green very appealing oddly- for the very reason you mention - they look like professional, clinical instruments (some of the SEM's I work with are a similar tone). Their older Neutral Grey colour for their castings was a bit weird. Vixen's old hammertone green I love, though the newer all white is just like a snowball. WO's varied anodising is either good or bad, depending on which colour they use (the gold is a put off for me, but the red is fine)

None of it impacts on the optical quality, but it does have a bearing on how we perceive our scope. Some couldn't care less about the looks, and their scopes usually show it too (rust, dirt, scratches...) :)

[Tinderboxsky]

Another scope to consider would be the Vixen AX103S Super Apochromat available locally through MyAstroShop.

Steve.

[Amaranthus]

I love garish Celestron orange - it is the natural camouflage for a C8!!

[Hans Tucker]

IMO no refractor is more aesthetically pleasing than Tim Wetherell's own, but now sold, 200mm APO refractor. Optics by TEC...tube custom built by Tim.

http://www.wetherellart.co.uk/sculpture_greatwetherellrefractor.h tml

[pluto]

:eyepop:

That's absolutely stunning!

[jamespierce]

TAK TSA 102 and 120 (120 second hand) would be a great option.

A FS128 is a great scope, though it needs a much more serious mount than the previous two.

The FC100 is a little sleeper, very light, very good images, very fast to cool because of the lack of glass !

[Hans Tucker]

I should add that IMO the second best aesthetically pleasing refractor is my APOMAX 5" f/12 :D

[jamespierce]

Note the FS128 in the classifieds.. with a few nice extras. (no association)

[SkyWatch]

I vote for the Tak TSA 102: lovely scope. I have used the TEC 140, and it wasn't quite there in comparison.
I had an interesting discussion with the people at Williams a couple of years back when I asked if they could guarantee their FLT110 would reach 50x per inch for planetary viewing on a good night. They just said "It will give lovely sharp images." When I said I was considering the Tak, the guy said "We can't beat that."
Guess what I bought?
Oh, and if you want pretty, check out: http://www.moonrakertelescopes.co.uk/custom-builds.html

Happy shopping!

- Dean

PS: If money is no object there is always this one:
http://www.marketplace.skyandtelescope.com/classified/12-f122-dg-refractor-plus-companion-telescopes-on-unique-custom-made-byers-series-iii-mounting-listing-314.aspx
(They dropped the price by $200,000 a while back...) ;)

[The Mekon]

Grady,

Perking your interest back to the original list, why not the APM 107 f6.5. I believe that the Astro-tech 106 is the same lens and they can be had for around $1500. Though I do not do photography, I have been very impressed with my AT106, it compares favourably with my Astro-Physics 130EDT. The field is not as flat, but a flattener can rectify this.

[PeterHA]

I have one of the new FC-100 scopes since about one year. I only do visual but I and an experienced friend of mine cannot fault this scope, we did Sirius companion with it.
Depending on the object it takes up to 250x easily.
Well in you price range, very fast cool down and due to low weight easy on the mounts.
I would prefer the photographic version which came out this year it as a bigger focuser (like ex Sky90).

[Allan]

That's an interesting observation Dean. The TEC 140 should blow the TSA 102 away. Double the surface area. Oil versus air spaced triplets, both are optically very good. The TEC has a better focuser and that nice hand crafted build quality.

[N1]

Beware of the hidden cost - diag, EPs and observer will need replaced regularly due to severe photon erosion. :P

[CJ]

+1

[LewisM]

After browsing images on many sites over the years (Astrobin etc) and a Google image search, my eyes cannot differentiate between a well corrected doublet image and a triplet or quadruplet image.

Note I said WELL CORRECTED - like FC-100, FS-102, FL102S etc (my M78 image was done with my FL102s doublet fluorite). I have pushed the FL102S visually to theoretical limits and was hard pressed to see even a trace of false colour, and I am VERY CA sensitive. It also responds superbly to imaging. A cheaper, not well corrected doublet is just asking for imaging woes.

A triplet is generally made from the start as well corrected anyway (the entire raison d'etre!), so it's academic :)

Personally, I own 2 doublets (both fluorite) and one quadruplet (double ED) - all have their individual imaging roles.

[Octane]

FSQ-106N.

You will be happy.

H

[stanlite]

And broke lol... A little outside my price range i think.

[Den]

Call Bintel and see if it suits your needs.

$4000

http://www.bintel.com.au/Telescopes/Refractor/Orion-EON-130mm-ED-Triplet/1861/productview.aspx

[stanlite]

just to update everyone about what i decided.

I went with a 102mm APO which i received on Thursday. I also managed to fit in my price range a moonlight 2.5 CFL focuser (in SHMBO approved purple), a 2.5" TS flat for field flatness, a mount hub pro, and various screw attachments so the CCD screws directly into the focuser. All for under $3.5K.

Haven't had a test yet due to obligatory cloud and monsoonal rains.

Will keep you all araised about performance if you like.

also here are some photos

168521

168522

168523

[Allan]

Nice one Grady. That purple Moonlite looks very sweet.