Looking at both these scopes for my last scope purchase. Getting on in years so would like some help.
I'm looking at the 65phq because it's cutting out all the trouble on setting up back focus and had purchased one second hand unused but the focuser wasn't working right (sent it back) and when asked the question about it on their facebook page it would appear that their focuser wasn't that good, so has anyone got one of these and what is your views on them.
The fot86 looks to be very well made but the only reviews are on the larger scope they do. I know I'll still have the job of back focus but the quality looks a lot better. Again, has anyone got one and what do you think of it.
I have the WO Z61ii + Flattener + asi533mc pro and will be selling it and getting one of these to replace it. Mainly for photography but would like the option to view as well.
Thanks for any feedback.
Neil
My son purchased a founder optics 106 last year only for visual. He used a william optics carbon fibre diagonal and televue 13mm ethos and the focuser would roll down. Went back twice, which was enough. The focuser was poor as it could not be tightened.
As for askar, I have the FRA 500. I have a 36mm filter wheel, large oag and a zwo 2600, and the focuser on this scope is really nice.
When you look at the reviews they are all about how good a quality the Founder Optics are and the focuser locking so well but it's not until you find someone that has used one you really know. Thanks for the feedback.
Do like the Askar but is there a reason behind your choice?
Thanks
Flat field no need for backspace, optics are on par but imho slightly better than FO Also even with a flattener the FO still has some aberrations Nico Carver made a video comparison with these brands, not the exact scopes but askar vs FO vs skywatcher and the Askar had the best flat field, Skywatcher had best contrast, FO unfortunately was not as good in the corners
They are pretty much the same in price but was looking at which was going to be the better choice as this will be the last one i purchase. I wanted one that was going to be easy for me to set up and not worry to much about correct back spacing But the fot has the dedicated flattener and once set up I could just remove it and put in an eye piece. It was more the complaints about the ASKAR focuser not being that good that worried me. I do like the look of the Askar
The problem with a data set of one is that it could go either way and that’s all you know.
I bought a FOT86 for travel imaging, as its size/weight/demands are less than my trusty Esprit. I’ve no complaints so far. If you’re interested, I’ll take a couple of test shots and can make them available to you.
IMO you’re better off having an idea what targets you’re chasing as the two scopes have different focal lengths and thus FOV.
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?
The QA is a lottery and with both brands you can get lemons.
I have the Askar and has been flawless, and a walk in the park to use. The focuser is smooth and sturdy and doesn't have any issues handling the camera and filter wheel, coupled to the EAF. Tested with up to an APS-C size sensor and the field is flat. Can't comment for visual as I have never tested it.
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".
I have been a little put off with the Askar as the one i did get and returned the focuser didn't hold and movement wasn't smooth. Trouble is I did like the image I did get. It does seem that QA is going to be a bit of a gamble with both by what people are telling me
For what its worth, I've heard that a former Takahashi optical engineer is working for Founder optics, so hopefully the designs (and the QC) is leaning on that pedigree to produce a good product.
I can only speak to the ASKAR FRA400 that I own, and I've found it to be of high quality. the fit and finish is quite nice, the R&P focuser is tight and smooth, with no free play or focus shift.
Not having to mess around with back focus is very nice.
Yes, by what I have been able to find out they are going to concentrate on a smaller variety of scopes and concentrate more on the mid range, so not so many to choose from but would expect the QC to be a lot better. They are a Japanese design and Taiwanese made so may have better QA than the Chinese but you never know.....
I have an FOT86. It’s a lovely scope. Focuser is smooth looks very solid and well built.
I bought the dedicated flattener and the OTA screw on adapter. I thought these were well priced. I’m very happy with the telescope. I’ve attached my first image I took with it, M20.
Nice image Mark ..... had you tried it with just the flattener to see if there was any problem with the stars at the edge or tilt. I know they say the screw on adapter makes a difference but wondered how much.
That's with the reducer/fattener isn't it? what is the back focus distance on these?
That image was with the 1:1 flattener and the screw on adapter. I recall back focus was approx 72mm. I never used the telescope visually, so I can’t comment on what that would be like.
Also, I really dislike slide in flatteners , so the screw in adapter was always a requirement for me!
Quite a difference with the back focus you needed (72mm) to what Proastroz told me (55mm). I take it that's just with the Flattener that comes with it?
Quite a difference with the back focus you needed (72mm) to what Proastroz told me (55mm). I take it that's just with the Flattener that comes with it?
Yes a lot more backfocus (which is good in my books!). Where are you located? You can have a look at mine if you want I'm at bayside Vic, mornington penn Vic and ASV dark sky site.
Askar 65phq or Founder Optics fot86
so would like some help.
