Which ED refractor?

[DJDD]

Hello all!

Over dinner tonight a friend asked for my opinion on a range of refractors for imaging. Of course, I have no experience in imaging so said I would post to the forum for advice.

So, the telescopes he was looking at are:

80mm range:
Skywatcher ED80 Pro
SKywatcher Equinox ED80
Vixen ED80Sf
Vixen ED81SWT
StellarVue SV80ED

Megrez 88 Fluorite

100mm range:
Megrez 102 F/7
StellarVue SV102ED (with or without the upgraded focuser?)


My comments were :

- that the Vixen and Skywatcher may come from the same factory so you are paying for the name. I could be wrong.

- the Vixen/StellarVue/Megrez are OTA's only

- he should check if the telescopes use FPL-53 glass not FPL-51. From my research tonight (Google) they all use FPL-53.

- the weak dollar does not help him

- think Mount! Mount! Mount! I am steering him to the EQ6

- I suggested starting small (i.e. the less expensive Skywatcher) but I do not think he is concerned about the cost (lucky bloke!)


Any replies are welcome.

cheers,
DJDD

[Octane]

DJDD,

You should add in there the new range of Orion EON ED scopes.

They look really, really nice. I might invest in the 80mm one myself, hopefully after the currency has gotten better.

Regards,
Humayun

[Miaplacidus]

Is it too out there to suggest the Televue IS scopes?
(Just mentioning to complete the list, since you suggest money is no major object. I have no experience with same, BTW, and am making no recommendation.)
Cheers,
Brian.

[DJDD]

hey, thanks for the replies.

re: televue telescopes.
i did not think of those as i just had a feeling they would be out of the ballpark. then again, they could be the same price as the stellarvue and vixens. :shrug: and to be honest, he should just get the skywatcher- start small/cheaper.

re: EON
i had forgotten about those until this morning after seeing an ad in my AS&T.

I also saw the TMB-80/480 but do not know much about it. also, not sure if it is sold in AU.

Actually, I am fiding the research aspect of this (via google and IIS- thanks, all!) quite a lot of fun.

thanks, again.

[Kal]

If he is interested in imaging then the baby Q comes to mind - the Takahashi FSQ85. You pay a small premium for it, but you won't have to add the cost of a field flattener.

As you mentioned in your OP though, Mount Mount Mount!

[AlexN]

DJDD - The TMB 80/480 is a stunner... add it to the list in my opinion...

Also, the Megrez 90FD... I note you had the Megrez 102 in the list, but not the M90... They are roughly the same price, the M90 uses fluorite glass, where the M102 does not, they both require the same field flattener, and are both the same (or very similarly priced)

Stellarvue and William Optics scopes are similar beasts, both are beautifully made, look great, have great optics, however, Stellarvue scopes are all hand tested... The QC on them is 2nd to none... Thats something to think about.

Kal's option of the babyq makes me a little weak at the knees! I want one OH SO BADLY!! however $$..

The Meade 5000 ED APO is also a great option, being a Triplet, it should provide great images....

I suppose you could say "start off with the cheaper smaller scope" however all thats going to do at the end of the day is cost him more money when he decides he wants better quality/more aperture etc..

I say, buy a mount first.. find out how much money you have left to spend, then work out what scope you can afford to buy, including the prices of any field flatteners you might need, any extension tubes you'll need to reach focus with the camera, a finderscope if the scope doesn't come with one etc etc.

Say you have 4000 to spend.
Mount : EQ6 Pro (what are they now? $2k?)
Leaving 2k
Megrez 90 $1399
Rings and dovetail $150
dedicated flattener $270
2" 50mm extension tube $35
Finder and mounting bracket $?? say 80?

There you have it, with enough spare change for a box of beer!

Thats the way I worked out what I was going to buy... found out in total how much I had to spend, added up prices of scopes with all the required accessories and mods etc.. then simply chose the most appealing one that fit into budget.

[DJDD]

Thanks, Kal.

I did not consider the Takahashi's for him, either.
Just way to expensive. I almost feel embarrassed to mention it! :lol:

although I make do with binoculars that bit of advice has sunk into my head!

thanks for your post.

[DJDD]

Thank for the detailed reply, Alex.

Re: the TMB- i only saw them recently online. why is it that brands with letters for names (I assume TMB is an acronym, too) always seem more professional? :)

I just saw a post recently about the Megrez 90, which had a good review here on IIS.

Thanks for the comments on the StellarVue. Good QC is always welcome.
Meade 5000 ED APO- until i saw the TMB i thought the shorter focal length of the Meade may be a detractor but...



:lol:


that is a good "top down" approach, although my friend is a bit of a "bottom up" kind of guy. :)

I will be seeing him again this weekend so we can go through the options.


OT:
every time i see the prices of gear now i kick myself for not spending my own cash a few months ago. But wouldn't we all go back in time if we could and buy up heaps of US$ ?


thanks, again.

[AlexN]

TMB is a set of initials Thomas M Bach - His lenses are very highly respected. TMB APO's are among the best..

Shorter focal lengths are good for a few reasons..
* More forgiving for someone beginning imaging.
* Nice wide fields of view (some love it, some hate it)
* Scopes with wide FOV's are usually smaller, easier to mount up, easier to balance

out of everything mentioned in this thread, (excluding the Tak), In order of what I'd buy

TMB (If you can get one)
Stellarvue
Wo megrez 90/Meade 5000 triplet (equal 2nd place)
Wo Megrez 102/SV102ED - much the same scope, the SV may be margainly better
EON80/Equinox 80 (Same scope, different name)
SW ED80/Orion ED80 (again, same scope different name)

[DJDD]

Hey Alex,

I appreciate your comments and your "what to buy" list. The fact that the costs are not in High-to-low order is instructional and bares out your previous comments.


thanks. Perhaps we will read a few reviews on his telescopes and se if there is a distributor in Australia.

Just lastly, what do you think of the Orion Premium ED 102 F/7?
It looks like a compromise in price and performance.

thanks again for your response.

DJDD

[AlexN]

the orion 102 is a clone of the william optics and stellarvue 102. From what i can tell its a lot of scope for the money. The wo 102 is currently my most used scope.

[DJDD]

Hi Alex,

Thanks for your reply.
also saw some of your posts on Cloudy Nights, one about the Orion Atlas mount.

cheers,
DJDD

[AlexN]

The Orion Atlus and the Skywatcher EQ6 are the same beast.. Identical in every way except color...

It is a VERY stable mount, and by far the best bang for buck mount you can go for.

The Celestron CGEM will be released late december/early january, and may give the EQ6 a run for its money, however thats all speculation until real world tests are performed... :)

Cheers.
Alex.

[multiweb]

Get the best mount you can afford then buy what you can with what's left.

[DJDD]

Thanks, Alex and multiweb.
i will let him know i just bought an skywatcher EQ6Pro and Skywatcher ED80 and we will see where that leads.

I think he is keen on the same mount but will probably lean toward one of the other telescopes mentioned below.

thanks, again!

[NCRAW]

Guys, a question (hopefully people will read this post). Would the Stellarvue 102 ED be a good lunar/planet viewing telescope with its focal length? I'm interested in the wider objects but moon observation and other planets is what i might spend most of the time doing. This is my first scope and i spent heaps of time reasearching and thinkin about getting the TV from the USA (not sure how prices are here in Aus but I assume they are 30% more as usual).

Would the TV still work well with hi mag EPs? and also does anyone know if it s fits straight to an HEQ5Pro with standard dovetail?

Many thanks

[Wavytone]

I bought mine as my "grab & go" - it is an excellent small refractor.
Very sharp flat field, no secondary spectrum on axis and off-axis it is still excellent.

The Orion and Stellarvue are clones.

[NCRAW]

So great for Lunar and planets?

[AlexN]

I have the Williams Optics Megrez 102 F/7 ED. I find for planetary viewing its pretty good, but it does not compare to my 11" SCT.. It shows a very sharp, contrasty and detailed view at 160x magnification, I find it to be great, but it does not resolve the same detail on jupiter that the C11 does.

For planetary viewing, you do need a bit of aperture.. I'd look towards a well corrected long focus 6" Achromatic refractor, or a decent sized newtonian as the cheapest option for great planetary viewing.

[NCRAW]

Grab and go is something im after so the 6" is definitely out and a 6" will need a bigger mount im assuming like the EQ6. I'm really keen on a good quality 4" refractor and im trying to compare it to say the ED100 Pro (gold ones) from skywatcher. I know the SV quality is years ahead but the SW is a f/9

[Wavytone]

The Orion ED102 f/7 is certainly better than I expected on moon and planets at high power. I used to think good refractors had to be f/12 - f/15 to perform properly and that is clearly no longer the case, thanks to much better glass types.

Originally I bought it for low power wide field casual observing (Vixen NLVW 30mm eyepiece) but I found to my pleasant surprise that with an 8mm its still tack sharp and with a 5mm the diffraction rings are barely discernable.

First quarter moon - you could spend hours exploring crater floors.

It will take 200X (3.5 mm) with no problems, and is better on Jupiter than my 180mm Maksutov (though I think that Mak has problems). Through this scope I'd swear the Jovian moons are distinctly non-stellar, though I know that is impossible with a 102mm aperture. The background sky is velvety black - no issue with scattered light, and the Airy disks are exactly what i expect of a well-corrected refractor. No spherical aberration, which means it was designed for imaging or use with a diagonal mirror - not a prism star diagonal.

If you want to get to 200X or more the real issue will be the quality of your eyepieces and keeping them clean; it means using a 3.5mm or less.

This scope deserves a couple of really good, sharp eyepieces with low scattered light, the contrast it gives is stunning.

[AlexN]

I've looked at the moon through my 102 F/7 with a 30mm UWA, to a 10mm in a 2.5x powermate. Views were fantastic. I've also put jupiter in the scope with the 10mm and 2.5 powermate, again, fantastic..

[KISA]

Hi,

I'm also looking for an ED80 type scope for astro imaging. I have found reading this and other forums to be very beneficial and from what I've read the Megrez 90 APO comes pretty highly regarded, though it's interesting to hear about the requirement for colour correction; being very new to refractors I was unaware of this.

Alex mentioned previously that the Megrez 90 and Meade 5000 were pretty much on par and I was wondering if the Meade needs colour correction also as it is a triplet as opposed to the 90 being a doublet?

I also noticed the Meade only has a single speed focuser compared the double speed of the 90, is this something I should also take into consideration?

Thanks,

Markus

[AlexN]

Color correction is not something that you can do. Refractors can show false color if they are not properly corrected by design. Generally, Triplets show better correction than doublets.. The Megrez 90 that I had (My dad has since taken it off my hands as I let him borrow it for a while, and he subsequently fell in love with it..) showed very very good correction.

The two speed focuser of the Megrez is nice, and I would think (assumption) that it would be better than the single speed on the meade unit for photography. However in both cases, the best option would be to budget for a moonlite or better, a feathertouch focuser for either of these scopes. I've got moonlite motorized focusers on both my C11 and my Megrez 102. For imaging, these are VERY accurate and easy to use.

Focusers should bear on your decision somewhat, but in the end, The focuser is replacable, the lenses are not. Pick the refractor with the best optics, worry about the ancillaries later.

Alex.

[NCRAW]

Back again guys. I pretty much settled on the Stellarvue 102ED. Like someone asked before, but taking into consideration this is my first scope ever, is it worth paying 300US dollars extra to get the Feather Touch focuser? as a beginner, will i notice the difference?

For the diagonal, I think i'll go with the WO carbon fibre one (forgot the model no) and then try to get myself some EPs. The SV102 comes with red dot finder so is it worth paying a bit extra and getting a finder scope from SV? and if so then what size?

Many thanks

PS. Still kicking myself for not getting a Tak TSA102 when I was in japan last yr or telling my parents to pick one up when they were there 5 months ago and 1 Aussie was 98 Yen!!

[AlexN]

Will you be using the scope for imaging? If so, Do not hesitate to pay $300 for the feathertouch... (I'd get it anyway myself, but for imaging it will make life MUCH easier)

I find my red dot finder is fine, some like finder scopes, some like dot finders.. I think you'll be happy with the red dot finder, if not, you can always get a finder later...

The WO carbon fiber diagonal is very good by all reports..

[StarLane]

DJDD

I have a Stellarvue ED80 Night Hawk Next Generation and I love it. I am fortunate to have received a hand picked lens from Vic Maris himself. The build quality is awsome and the optical quality is also right up there. Each scope is personally checked before despatch, no need to worry about having a lemon land on the door step. There's nothing better than a hand made feel and a production number to match.
It will be difficult for you to find the real glass type for SV scopes as SV plays their cards close to their chest for competition reasons, but I can tell you, it's the best around,.....and respecting SV's practises, I am not prepared to devulge that info here. This info is out there somewhere on the www.
With my scope there is no discernable CA on bright objects, I use it for visual and photographic purposes. The NHNG is a doublet, imagine how a triplet would perform??? The Oz distributor for SV is Peter Read from SDM Telescopes. Give him a call, very helpful and informative. I will never part with my SV......:thumbsup:

[NCRAW]

Thank you guys for the responses. I'm definitely going with the SV. I believe the one I saw is personally checked by Vic so thats a good thing.
I think I will stick to the standard focuser for now and see how it pans out and might keep the feather touch for the next scope. Praying for our dollar to get better then it will be a Takahashi TSA102. I will spend the equivalent of US300 on better EPs.

Not interested in imaging at this stage. This might change later though.

I already spoke to Pete from SDM and i wish i could buy from him but the price localy is so much more than what I can get overseas (damn dollar!!).

I bought the HEQ5Pro mount from Lloydscope and awaiting its arrival and then it gets all exciting getting the scope then selecting the correct EPs. I suppose 3 EPs for start plus a barlow would do the job? Also what mm should I get in order to have good wide viewing and zoom into planets and moon? if only i had 3?

[DJDD]

Thanks, StarLane.
It sounds like the StellarVue telescopes are quite good, especially with the feather touch focuser. I will pass this recommenfdation on.

cheers,
DJDD

[gbeal]

While the thrust of the heading indicates "refractor", let me toss this into the mix, as others have discussed SCT's and Newts.
The humble Newt is hard to beat all round.
Another is the Mak/Cass, or Mak/Newt. Both are exceptional value for money, but if a robust mount is out of the question then the Mak/Cass is the preferred option, as the Mak/Newt is quite large and heavy for its aperture.
Something like a 5" Mak/Cass would be where I was headed, similar views to a 4" apo, but at a fraction of the apo's cost.
Gary

[AlexN]

I find reflectors to give better views dollar for dollar than refractors, simply because unless you're spending big dollars on refractors, you're going to get false color... yes, tight stars in an APO are nice, but stars in a well collimated 10" newtonian are nice too, with NO false color, good contrast, and 10" of light gathering power that a 4" APO can not match...

I love looking through my 4" APO, but I've never seen as much detail in the 4" apo as my old 8" newt... and nothing compared to the 11" SCT..