Quote:
Originally Posted by glend
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
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.