Go Back   IceInSpace > General Astronomy > General Chat
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 20-01-2017, 11:00 AM
Weird1's Avatar
Weird1 (Keith)
Registered User

Weird1 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Cobden, Victoria
Posts: 154
Nikon Refractor

Anybody got a lazy $13K sitting around doing nothing, then check this little beauty out http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/NIKON-100...-/131979290863

Cheers Keith
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 20-01-2017, 01:15 PM
el_draco (Rom)
Politically incorrect.

el_draco is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Tasmania (South end)
Posts: 2,315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Weird1 View Post
Anybody got a lazy $13K sitting around doing nothing, then check this little beauty out http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/NIKON-100...-/131979290863

Cheers Keith
Strikes me as "brand name" fame. I doubt you'd see much difference in performance with a decent W.O. or Tak. Its 100mm F12... and its second hand! You can a 150mm Tak for a few grand more, or a sizeable reflector for a bucket less... I wouldn't chuck my duckets at it for half the price me thinks...
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 20-01-2017, 10:00 PM
JA
.....

JA is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,052
Or Canon 5200mm ....


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRq18WpQZC0

Best
JA

Last edited by JA; 21-01-2017 at 11:18 AM. Reason: 5200 not 5600
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 22-01-2017, 09:50 AM
Astromelb
Registered User

Astromelb is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 379
Dear IIS team,
Very rare, very very good Nikon ED Glass optics - when Nikon actually IMHO made better optics than even Canon - but these days Canon make better optics, as attested to by Takahashi's telescopes which have always used Canon glass
Expensive yes, rare ? Very much so.
Collectors in Europe and the US would find this quite attractive, the price is somewhat high but this reflects the rarity of this offer.
Clear skies.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 22-01-2017, 12:21 PM
UniPol
Registered User

UniPol is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Lithgow, NSW
Posts: 1,685
I think the vendor is underselling this scope. Afterall, this an ultra rare scope with an exotic glass ultra rare objective. The shipping cost is ultra cheap and you can even make Markus an offer!

Last edited by UniPol; 22-01-2017 at 03:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 22-01-2017, 07:42 PM
LewisM's Avatar
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,389
Collectible, maybe, but it's no better than a Tak TSA-102 optically (in fact, I'd wager a TSA-102 betters it optically).

Overpriced? Subjective, but I'd say yes.

Do I want it? No. Not even if I had that disposable cash - much better options out there.

Like Derek Wong points out about his Zeiss 150 - great scope, but equally comparable to the Tak 150's and the AP's.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 22-01-2017, 07:43 PM
The Mekon's Avatar
The Mekon (John Briggs)
Registered User

The Mekon is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bowral NSW
Posts: 828
I think that anyone who bets that classic telescopes are going to appreciate like old Ferraris GTOs, Aston DB5s or D type Jags is going to be disappointed. If I had the money I would not hesitate to buy any of the former - but the Nikon? No way. I am a big Nikon Fan - have four of their binoculars but would not consider this unless it was around the $2K - 3K mark.
Much better to get a new Tak or wait for an AP. Heck, I may not even wait as I am considering a 140 CFF this year!
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 22-01-2017, 07:56 PM
LewisM's Avatar
LewisM
Novichok test rabbit

LewisM is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Somewhere in the cosmos...
Posts: 10,389
There is always someone with more money than common sense who thinks high dollar = perfection. Sometimes it is true, many times false values are attributed to "classics". A classic telescope still does the same thing a $50 Aldi scope does...a Nikon/Zeiss/Tak/AP can't change the laws of physics or alter seeing.

I spoke to 3 US collectors once when I was seriously considering importing a Nikon from Japan. They told me that the optics were good, but not as good as the hype/hyperbole would suggest. "Merely" Tak good and nothing better.

Heck, that Nikon is not even a fluorite (yeah, my fluorite obsession jokes...)
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 22-01-2017, 08:04 PM
dannat's Avatar
dannat (Daniel)
daniel

dannat is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Macedon shire, Australia
Posts: 3,427
ridiculous price though
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 22-01-2017, 08:29 PM
JA
.....

JA is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,052
It's a collectible, state of the art perhaps in its day. Would you own and use it today for its performance?

Would you own (if you could) a ($30,000,00) 1961 Ferrari 250 California or would the better performing $500-800,000 Ferrari motors of today be good enough. Heck why not a current model Nissan GTR Prob <$200,000, 2.7sec, 0-100km/h etc.... or a Subaru WRX

Sometimes it's not about the performance, BTW I'm not saying that it is not stellar, but rather the experience

Best
JA
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 22-01-2017, 09:27 PM
Atmos's Avatar
Atmos (Colin)
Ultimate Noob

Atmos is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 7,013
If it is rare and collectable, big price tags follow irrespective of actual quality. Is it good? Undoubtedly so! Better than the TSA-102? They may very well be exactly the same, better, worse? Doesn't matter though, the people that would buy this are collectors and may only ever look through it once or twice to check its optical quality.

People will drop $5,000 on ONE rare Pokemon card. Collectors items are collectors items. Consider those who'll spend $10,000,000 on a vase.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 22-01-2017, 09:35 PM
JA
.....

JA is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,052
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atmos View Post
...... Doesn't matter though, the people that would buy this are collectors and may only ever look through it once or twice to check its optical quality. .....
Good point ..... but i'm not sure they'd even do that. It would de-value like a star wars figurine out of its box

Best
JA
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 22-01-2017, 09:42 PM
Kunama
...

Kunama is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 3,588
I am thinking of getting this for the study ...... make a nice conversation piece.... I know guys who smoke that amount of money in a year, that scope will last much longer....
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 22-01-2017, 10:01 PM
Wavytone
Registered User

Wavytone is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Killara, Sydney
Posts: 4,147
That Nikon is fugly. Green hammertone enamel on rather crude alloy castings ? No thanks.

If I was going to spend that kind of $$$ for an ornament in the study I'd sooner have a real masterpiece of craftsmanship such as an 1880 Thomas Cooke brass refractor with a clockwork mount made of yellow phosphor bronze... a truly beautiful thing. Or a Questar 3.5".
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 04:10 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement