Nikon Refractor

[Weird1]

Anybody got a lazy $13K sitting around doing nothing, then check this little beauty out http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/NIKON-100-mm-f-1200-mm-ED-Apochromatic-lens-Refractor-Telescopic-/131979290863 :eyepop:

Cheers Keith

[el_draco]

Strikes me as "brand name" fame. I doubt you'd see much difference in performance with a decent W.O. or Tak. Its 100mm F12... and its second hand! You can a 150mm Tak for a few grand more, or a sizeable reflector for a bucket less... I wouldn't chuck my duckets at it for half the price me thinks...

[JA]

Or Canon 5200mm ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRq18WpQZC0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRq18WpQZC0

Best
JA

[Astromelb]

Dear IIS team,
Very rare, very very good Nikon ED Glass optics - when Nikon actually IMHO made better optics than even Canon - but these days Canon make better optics, as attested to by Takahashi's telescopes which have always used Canon glass :)
Expensive yes, rare ? Very much so.
Collectors in Europe and the US would find this quite attractive, the price is somewhat high but this reflects the rarity of this offer.
Clear skies.

[UniPol]

I think the vendor is underselling this scope. Afterall, this an ultra rare scope with an exotic glass ultra rare objective. The shipping cost is ultra cheap and you can even make Markus an offer!

[LewisM]

Collectible, maybe, but it's no better than a Tak TSA-102 optically (in fact, I'd wager a TSA-102 betters it optically).

Overpriced? Subjective, but I'd say yes.

Do I want it? No. Not even if I had that disposable cash - much better options out there.

Like Derek Wong points out about his Zeiss 150 - great scope, but equally comparable to the Tak 150's and the AP's.

[The Mekon]

I think that anyone who bets that classic telescopes are going to appreciate like old Ferraris GTOs, Aston DB5s or D type Jags is going to be disappointed. If I had the money I would not hesitate to buy any of the former - but the Nikon? No way. I am a big Nikon Fan - have four of their binoculars but would not consider this unless it was around the $2K - 3K mark.
Much better to get a new Tak or wait for an AP. Heck, I may not even wait as I am considering a 140 CFF this year!

[LewisM]

There is always someone with more money than common sense who thinks high dollar = perfection. Sometimes it is true, many times false values are attributed to "classics". A classic telescope still does the same thing a $50 Aldi scope does...a Nikon/Zeiss/Tak/AP can't change the laws of physics or alter seeing.

I spoke to 3 US collectors once when I was seriously considering importing a Nikon from Japan. They told me that the optics were good, but not as good as the hype/hyperbole would suggest. "Merely" Tak good and nothing better.

Heck, that Nikon is not even a fluorite :) :P (yeah, my fluorite obsession jokes...)

[dannat]

ridiculous price though

[JA]

It's a collectible, state of the art perhaps in its day. Would you own and use it today for its performance?

Would you own (if you could) a ($30,000,00) 1961 Ferrari 250 California or would the better performing $500-800,000 Ferrari motors of today be good enough. Heck why not a current model Nissan GTR Prob <$200,000, 2.7sec, 0-100km/h etc.... or a Subaru WRX

Sometimes it's not about the performance, BTW I'm not saying that it is not stellar, but rather the experience

Best
JA

[Atmos]

If it is rare and collectable, big price tags follow irrespective of actual quality. Is it good? Undoubtedly so! Better than the TSA-102? They may very well be exactly the same, better, worse? Doesn't matter though, the people that would buy this are collectors and may only ever look through it once or twice to check its optical quality.

People will drop $5,000 on ONE rare Pokemon card. Collectors items are collectors items. Consider those who'll spend $10,000,000 on a vase.

[JA]

Good point ..... but i'm not sure they'd even do that. It would de-value like a star wars figurine out of its box :D

Best
JA

[Kunama]

I am thinking of getting this for the study ...... make a nice conversation piece.... I know guys who smoke that amount of money in a year, that scope will last much longer....

[Wavytone]

That Nikon is fugly. Green hammertone enamel on rather crude alloy castings ? No thanks.

If I was going to spend that kind of $$$ for an ornament in the study I'd sooner have a real masterpiece of craftsmanship such as an 1880 Thomas Cooke brass refractor with a clockwork mount made of yellow phosphor bronze... a truly beautiful thing. Or a Questar 3.5".