Please buy this...

[Waxing_Gibbous (Peter)]

So I won't have to.
http://www.astronomyalive.com.au/pro...-123mm-f6.html
About 10k is the asking price which is not far from the bog standard 123 Apo from APM.
Just about 8K more than I can afford.
Mind you, I can probably get by with only one kidney.

[cometcatcher (Kevin)]

You'd have to wear cotton gloves with it. Even in some of the photos it looks like someone had fish and chips before the photo session.

[Hans Tucker (Hans)]

I note the constant use of LZOS OK4 Fluorite in the Astronomylive product description. As I have read OK4 is not Fluorite, so is the main element on this refractor objective OK4 or Fluorite. Even if Fluorite the $10K price tag is not justified for 4.8" scope. The soon to be released FSQ-130 would be a better investment if you are going to fork out $10K for a refractor, at least you will be getting more glass for your money.

[alocky (Andrew lockwood)]

http://www.moonrakertelescopes.co.uk/custom-builds.html
It's a pity that moonraker themselves don't acknowledge the significant contribution Cris has made to the design of this telescope. They've even copied his images and used them on their website along with some clearly fraudulent testimonial from someone named Derek. I've already contacted them to demand they change their ad.

[Waxing_Gibbous (Peter)]

Originally Posted by Hans Tucker

I note the constant use of LZOS OK4 Fluorite in the Astronomylive product description. As I have read OK4 is not Fluorite, so is the main element on this refractor objective OK4 or Fluorite. Even if Fluorite the $10K price tag is not justified for 4.8" scope. The soon to be released FSQ-130 would be a better investment if you are going to fork out $10K for a refractor, at least you will be getting more glass for your money.

Having owned both an AP155, a TEC 160ED and had the long-term use of an APM 130, I can attest that none of them were as out 'n out sexy as the Moonraker tube!!
At any rate that 4.5"ish is spot-on a perfect size for my ancient back and I doubt you'd notice the 7mm difference between it and an AP130.

From what I can glean, Russian OK4 is a fairly close match for FPL53. Perhaps with a little more lead & fluorite as H&S laws are probably not as strict in Russia!!
Heck, it could be made of crushed coke bottles for all I care.
Where LZOS shines over its competition is in the figuring of the lens elements.
Only AP and TEC are a match at any given aperture and with our $ in the sink, you'd wind up paying close to 10K for an AP or a TEC anyhow.

A Takahashi I wouldn't give house room!

[Waxing_Gibbous (Peter)]

Originally Posted by alocky

http://www.moonrakertelescopes.co.uk/custom-builds.html
It's a pity that moonraker themselves don't acknowledge the significant contribution Cris has made to the design of this telescope. They've even copied his images and used them on their website along with some clearly fraudulent testimonial from someone named Derek. I've already contacted them to demand they change their ad.

Duuude!
Steady on!
The AA website makes the same attributions. Its also a little disingenuous to say that they fail to acknowledge CEs contribution. Its a bit like saying Lambourghini, Ferrari and Bentley don't acknowledge the contribution of Gottlieb Daimler.

Every Mooraker is in some sense a 'one-off' with the customer's input sought from the get-go. They share the obvious components of tubes, rings, etc. and the customer (you, me, the spotty guy in the corner) adds their own touches.
The (beautiful) Schiaparelli is in fact an almost stock "Dark Matter" unit that's been downsized and minimally customised.

Having been on the 'phone with Moonraker for a good 1/2 hour last night I can say this: Nobody has ever given me so much care and attention on the off-chance that I MIGHT purchase a scope (or anything for that matter).
Good luck to them!

[AG Hybrid (Adrian)]

"ADVANCED & PROFESSIONAL LEVEL TELESCOPE - Exceptional quality telescope for Advanced & Professional users. Exceptional performance for those that wish to achieve everything. Sublime performance on the moon, planets, stars, double stars, star clusters, globular star clusters, nebulae & galaxies."

I think my head is going to explode. Its beautiful no doubt. But, no professional astronomer would use a 123mm refractor. Unless you count someone who ties to sell their astrophotography prints. In which case they would probably just use a TAK.

[alocky (Andrew lockwood)]

Originally Posted by Waxing_Gibbous

.

Having been on the 'phone with Moonraker for a good 1/2 hour last night I can say this: Nobody has ever given me so much care and attention on the off-chance that I MIGHT purchase a scope (or anything for that matter).
Good luck to them!

He called me shortly afterwards - I was pleased to find that I could deal direct with moonraker, and I will probably place an order in a couple of months, if only the oil price, Aussie dollar and my shares behave. I also found that Mark was extremely honest and quite fun to chat to. It would seem that the AA website description needs to be read extremely carefully and the hyperbole filtered with a large grain of fluorite. I agree that the quality of workmanship in these things is quite unique - heirloom stuff.
Cheers,
Andrew

[niko]

gee, I might buy a few if the checkout in the attached can be believed

[UniPol]

Yep, that's more like the price. I think I'll stick to my Tak TOA-130NFB.

[issdaol (Phil)]

Moonraker is a perfect match to AA/CE flagrant advertising :-) ha ha ha

Probably a great scope to have for a public showcase observatory/exhibition.

However I think I will stick to the Conservative Look and Trusted performance of my Tak TSA120 and TOA150 thanks

:-)