Quote:
Originally Posted by neilbarber
it is more the quality of the two scopes that i was trying to find out about and ease of use. I did get a 65phq and had to send it back as the focuser wasn't working with weight on it so it's things like that which worry me more. I'm not a pixel peeper and I know the 65phq has been found to give rounder stars to the edge but have you found the FOT to be good or a little out?
|
I'm not seeing anything with the FOT86 that can't be corrected with attention to spacing between the flattener and sensor, but that's par for the course with most triplets. Between work and clouds I'm trying to find a reducer that works well with it, as I'd prefer a little more speed.
Optically I think it's quite good. I don't see any issue with the focuser, but I'm using a focus motor. Otherwise the build quality is decent, nice and solid but not overly heavily aka WO.
I have "invested" in a couple of the smaller Askar experiments and haven't been impressed at all, optically, even though their build quality seems OK. Wonky stars with one unit, blue halos with another (a supposed triplet), and horrendous field curvature on another. So far, these have proven to be bad investments, as the retailer pretty much said "you get what you pay for".