Astro-Physics 206mm for $100K USD

Hans Tucker (Hans) · #1 05-12-2010, 10:43 PM

Interesting..Tony Hallas is selling his Astro-Physics 206mm (8") f/7.7 Refractor via Auction on Astromart. Opening bid starts at $48K USD
or you can buy it now for $100K USD...apparently it is only one of two ever made by Roland Christen. Looks like a real beauty and of recent vintage..2008.

Bassnut (Fred) · #2 05-12-2010, 11:45 PM

Youde have to have rocks in yr head.

$78,700 buys you a CDK24" OTA (thats 24 inches!) AND an AP3600 mount with high precision encoders.

Please tell me an 8" refractor gives higher res than a 24" compound scope!, and is better value than a 24" WITH a seriously tricked up mount.

jenchris (Jennifer) · #3 05-12-2010, 11:56 PM

The 8" is more of a grab and go though - LOL...
I can imagine that I could buy a used canvas from the Tate Gallery for 5 million and a brand new one from an art shop for 20 dollars .

I imagine the second hand one being really dirty too.

Horse for courses - but value is not really a good comparison.

Kal (Andrew) · #4 05-12-2010, 11:58 PM

Wishful thinking on the price I reckon.

With a quick search of previous auctions on Astromart, you can see that there have been three previous occasions when people have listed AP 206mm refractors.

The first listing was in 2005, it was serial #206EDF04, an F7.75 scope made in 1993 that was passed in at auction after getting a maximum bid of $37,676

Second listing is the same scope a couple of months later and it passed in at auction with a maximum bid of $23,600

Third listing was earlier this year with a 1995 manufactured scope serial #206EDF17, it passed in at auction as well at $36,101.

Also, going by the serial number, it appears as though AP made at least 17 of these 206mm F7.75 beasts

Octane (Humayun) · #5 06-12-2010, 12:11 AM

I'm looking at you, Greg Bradley. You know you want to. : P

H

Waxing_Gibbous (Peter) · #6 06-12-2010, 01:58 AM

Who's Tony Hallas?

asimov (John) · #7 06-12-2010, 02:12 AM

If I had that amount of money to play with astronomically, It wouldn't be spent on a refractor that's for sure.

Kal (Andrew) · #8 06-12-2010, 09:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Waxing_Gibbous

Who's Tony Hallas?

an astrophotographer

http://www.astrophoto.com/

Lester · #9 06-12-2010, 09:14 AM

If I had that kind of money, it would be spent on a good "cloud filter" and a "steady seeing conditions machine".

ps, any left over would go for a deposit on anti sleep therapy.

Geoff45 (Geoff) · #10 06-12-2010, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassnut

Youde have to have rocks in yr head.

$78,700 buys you a CDK24" OTA (thats 24 inches!) AND an AP3600 mount with high precision encoders.

Please tell me an 8" refractor gives higher res than a 24" compound scope!, and is better value than a 24" WITH a seriously tricked up mount.

Refractors are never about value for money. If you are one of those people who want an 8" refractor and you are rich, you indulge yourself and buy it.

Note added: Maybe he's taking your advice Fred and raising the dough to buy a 24" etc etc

asimov (John) · #11 06-12-2010, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lester

If I had that kind of money, it would be spent on a good "cloud filter" and a "steady seeing conditions machine".

ps, any left over would go for a deposit on anti sleep therapy.

Ok, I'll start building the first 2 straight away Lester. As with anything astro that is expensive, that'll be 20% up front though please sir. Cheque or money order is fine with me.

30K sounds like a nice round figure

strongmanmike (Michael) · #12 06-12-2010, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassnut

Youde have to have rocks in yr head.

$78,700 buys you a CDK24" OTA (thats 24 inches!) AND an AP3600 mount with high precision encoders.

Please tell me an 8" refractor gives higher res than a 24" compound scope!, and is better value than a 24" WITH a seriously tricked up mount.

Res? res? sheesh it's all about res with you huh?

what about field of view man

1600mm fl = big beautiful field to fit lots in your shots = versitile yeh baby

4800mm Fl = looking through a straw at a postage stamp

He he

I'd go the 24" on an El Capitain too though

gregbradley · #13 06-12-2010, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Octane

I'm looking at you, Greg Bradley. You know you want to. : P

H

That's funny Humi!

The differences between APOs close together in aperture are not that great. Once you hit a high level of Strehl and accurate figuring and as long as it is a proven formula like oiled triplet then you are not going to get massive differences.

See these 2 test images. Same camera, same site, same conditions, AP140
TEC180. Both high quality, high strehl, oiled triplets, one fluorite (the TEC) one FPL53 (AP140):

http://www.pbase.com/gregbradley/image/115775756 TEC180
http://www.pbase.com/gregbradley/image/115775760 AP140

Do you see massive differences there apart from image scale?

Obviously the TEC180 will show more detail as it is larger. But stars, pinpoint sharpness to the corners of a large chip (Apogee U16M camera), lack of colour aberration seem the same to me.

How much better could an AP206 be over a TEC180 fluorite? It'd be better, but how much? Not a lot really in my opinion.

I see Tony Hallas uses a CDK17 now. Maybe he likes that better. It also has a reducer to make it F4.5 available so it is very versatile. It also is good for planetary and visual. As Fred says $100K buys a lot of high end gear.

There was an AP206 on Astromart recently that did not sell at US$45,000.
I think he is dreaming but you never know unless you ask.

I personally feel that the sweet spot for refractors is 155mm and my 180 is at the upper end of APO size for portability, performance, colorfree, large corrected image circle, high strehl etc etc. There was a TEC200mm fluorite recently for sale on Astromart for $36,000 that didn't sell. That would be very similar to the AP206 almost for sure. I don't know how much difference the coatings make - I am sure noticeable but the TEC has fluorite and if you've ever used one of the Tak fluorite scopes you'll know how nice fluorite is.

Having said all that it would still be an awesome scope and would be an amazing imaging machine as AP are simply the best bar none and the manufacturer all others are compared to. My AP140 is an amazingly perfect piece of optical and mechanical engineering with some incredible accessories like its unbelievably good reducer/corrector. What's not to love?

Greg.

Octane (Humayun) · #14 06-12-2010, 06:45 PM

I still think you need to add an AP206 to your war chest. : P

H

strongmanmike (Michael) · #15 06-12-2010, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Octane

I still think you need to add an AP206 to your war chest. : P

H

Yep! I agree Humi

...com'on Greg

Geoff45 (Geoff) · #16 06-12-2010, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strongmanmike

Res? res? sheesh it's all about res with you huh?

what about field of view man

1600mm fl = big beautiful field to fit lots in your shots = versitile yeh baby

4800mm Fl = looking through a straw at a postage stamp

He he

I'd go the 24" on an El Capitain too though

No Mike
Fred doesn't go for what he calls "wide field rubbish". Postage stamp rules!

Barrykgerdes · #17 06-12-2010, 10:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghsmith45

No Mike
Fred doesn't go for what he calls "wide field rubbish". Postage stamp rules!

And "narrow band" rules so chromatic aberation is not a real problem. Lots of captured light is what is required.

Barry

Hans Tucker (Hans) · #18 07-12-2010, 07:36 PM

It get better people. An Alvan Clark Co 4 inch refractor with wood case has also come up on the Astromart auction...or buy now for $16K USD..you know you want it.

.....1911 vintage

Bassnut (Fred) · #19 07-12-2010, 09:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by strongmanmike

Res? res? sheesh it's all about res with you huh?

what about field of view man

1600mm fl = big beautiful field to fit lots in your shots = versitile yeh baby

4800mm Fl = looking through a straw at a postage stamp

He he

I'd go the 24" on an El Capitain too though

Res?, is there anything else that counts? (apart from the massive extra photons captured for a given time, duh). On the 17" with a 0.66 reducer (cant see one for the 24") the FL is 2270mm. Out of the oh-dear, another-soso-WW-done-that zone and short of the postage stamp size gear you bang on about

.

strongmanmike (Michael) · #20 07-12-2010, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bassnut

Res?, is there anything else that counts? (apart from the massive extra photons captured for a given time, duh). On the 17" with a 0.66 reducer (cant see one for the 24") the FL is 2270mm. Out of the oh-dear, another-soso-WW-done-that zone and short of the postage stamp size gear you bang on about

.

Arhem, massive extra photons yes but from only a postage stamp size bit of sky

Yeh the 17" + reducer would be a bit better...buuuut that wasn't what you suggested

he he