Quote:
Originally Posted by gregbradley
An older AP 180 F7 for US$24K does seem a bit overexcited.
I had a TEC180FL F7 for many years and it was a fine instrument. Perhaps the AP will perform a bit better in the red channel otherwise the TEC would be hard to surpass.
A 180 scope is large and heavy and a bit unwieldy really. It would need dark skies to shine.
Personally i think 160 is the maximum useful APO aperture. Above that you're best off with a compound scope and go even more aperture.
US$24K gets you a 14 inch CDK or IDK and the AP whilst lovely and nice tight stars would be hard pressed to match that aperture. Perhaps even a 17 inch.
But Roland's products are amazing and his perfectionism is reflected in his work and that is worth a premium just like any premium product does.
What that is worth to you would vary.
Greg.
|
For observing:
I've been to many star parties and the ultra high quality refractors
combined with top eyepieces always won against reflectors on
low contrast objects such as planets.
Mars would be a furry red ball on the reflector but you could make out
an ice cap and some surface detail with a refractor.
The exception to that was the
0.5 m Edith Winstone Blackwell Telescope (EWB) which
is a classical Cassegrain reflector (f/13.3) manufactured by Carl Zeiss of Jena in Auckland NZ.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stardome_Observatory
The best view of Jupiter I've ever seen in my life.
However - if you want to see faint galaxies then the large reflectors win.