It is of course interesting and pertinent to note that VTI disclaim already the fact of soft focus and coma abberation.
As Nathan said, at the end of the day, the choice is entirely yours. Nathan wasn't happy with his, and nor I after I bought it.
I was bitten by the "larger aperture refractor" bug, but quickly learnt you do indeed get what you pay for. You may get very lucky and get a good one, but you may get one like the one Nathan and I got.
It is of course interesting and pertinent to note that VTI disclaim already the fact of soft focus and coma abberation.
As Nathan said, at the end of the day, the choice is entirely yours. Nathan wasn't happy with his, and nor I after I bought it.
I was bitten by the "larger aperture refractor" bug, but quickly learnt you do indeed get what you pay for. You may get very lucky and get a good one, but you may get one like the one Nathan and I got.
I have not had a 127mm, but did have a 102mm, and I have to agree with your sentiments, Lewis. By the time I replaced the focuser with a Moonlite, it was no longer a cheap scope, and the Stellarvue 90mm I have now is vastly superior.
For the price I think cosmetic defects on the tube, or parts needing adjustment is ok, but the objective should have no permanent defects (eg. scratches in the coatings, finger prints that can't be removed). I belatedly had my objective replaced when I discovered that the fingerprints wouldn't clean off - during the cleaning attempt I discovered an inch long, shallow scratch in the coating as well, with the q-tip catching on the scratch.
I am continually amazed at the inability of most people to understand that you get what you pay for. Have a look at posts 11, 13 and 16 in this thread ,on the first page. The scopes now coming out of North group are of two types _ the better and more expensive have the japanese glass while those that are less expensive have the chinese glass. They just are not the same scopes in either fit or function. No wonder there is now a discaimer on the VTI site about the performance of the lower priced scopes.
I have not had a 127mm, but did have a 102mm, and I have to agree with your sentiments, Lewis. By the time I replaced the focuser with a Moonlite, it was no longer a cheap scope, and the Stellarvue 90mm I have now is vastly superior.
Agreed Laurie. At the time, I was tossing up between the Vixen FL102S, and the NG127. Aperture fever bit me, I initially went NG127. BAD BAD BAD mistake!
I quickly contacted the Vixen seller again, and I was LUCKY, and have NEVER turned back, as the Vixen - which was even cheaper than the fully upgraded NG127 - is indeed leaps and bound ahead of the NG. Simply no comparison.
Roll the dice, place your bets. The decision is entirely the purchasers.
I am continually amazed at the inability of most people to understand that you get what you pay for. Have a look at posts 11, 13 and 16 in this thread ,on the first page. The scopes now coming out of North group are of two types _ the better and more expensive have the japanese glass while those that are less expensive have the chinese glass. They just are not the same scopes in either fit or function.
Your comment on the two different Lenses, Do you know that as a fact, or are you making this assumption? I was under the impression that the more expensive "brand named" Explore Scientific version was the same (including the lens), but probably has some extra quality control (perhaps at the factory, and at Explore Scientific HQ) associated with it.
I am continually amazed at the inability of most people to understand that you get what you pay for. Have a look at posts 11, 13 and 16 in this thread ,on the first page. The scopes now coming out of North group are of two types _ the better and more expensive have the japanese glass while those that are less expensive have the chinese glass. They just are not the same scopes in either fit or function.
Precisely Allan.
Whilst I concede that the price is alluring, as I and a few others have said, you get what you pay for. Are you willing to bet $1100 on a "maybe performing" scope, that if you purchase from VTI or similar, you cannot return due to non-performance???? In the end, like me, you'll fork out the money, do a bunch of fixes and upgrades, decide it just is not worth it, and resell it at a loss.
VTI's statement/disclaimer speaks VOLUMES. Ignore it's implications and ramifications at peril.
...but these independent reviews speak volume that this is a very good scope and the glass is always FPL51. There is no mention of soft focus anywhere in these many unrelated reviews and these reviews are trust worthy. I own one too and over a few good nights, I look hard and long and I have to say, there is no soft focus issue. There was a slight hint of ca at high mag for bright objects.
Overall, I am a happy owner and user.
Allan, can you point us to the source of your information about new scopes with new glass coming out from NG?
I doubt the accuracy of your statement, as even the correct ES models are using the same FPL51 glass.
Ian
Sorry but I purchased my 5" scope before this flurry ie about 4-5 years ago. There were two hand picked scopes that were sent to Australia for evaluation. The first was snapped up by the importer who offered me the second scope but I did so on the proviso that it was a true Apo and all that that entailed or I would return it. After evaluating it for a few weeks I purchased the scope and have been extremely happy with it.
From the importer I learned about the different glasses ie Japanese hand figured which is mine and the Chinese machine figured objectives. The glass is not FPL51 but in fact is Japanese HOYA FCD1 (Dense Fluor Crown) glass in the initial scopes. They are indeed different formulated glass but used for the same corrective purposes.
The other fact about the movement of the optician that used to align the triplet objective leaving NG to go to Taiwan i was also informed by the same source.
These are the facts as given to me and my scope certainly backs up all that I have seen in the ensuing years, having looked through quite a few of them.
I'll keep my scope as I know it's heritage and also it's performance characteristics. I'll stack it up against any of these other scopes because I know I got a "cherry picked", hand-figured scope and I did pay a lot more at the time for it.
Allan
Last edited by allan gould; 25-04-2013 at 11:18 AM.
Yes, all the reviews say fcd1 Hoya.
So, Allan, this is just mouth to mouth ?
Any other information that there are now new scopes with new glass?
Is this info on Google search?
Would be interesting information if you could point to the source, so it could be shared, as I certainly have not seen any.
Ian, are you willing to post some images taken with your example? I will have a dig around for mine - likely on an older external terrabyte harddrive.
Maybe what I call soft, you yourself find acceptable. I guess it is all subjective.
But, VTI would not have added the disclaimer based solely on hearsay here on IIS. They obviously had unsatisfied customers returning them at a high enough rate, so added the disclaimer.
Look the Vti comments are a little out of context...they do state if you want TAK performance buy a TAK....however that said they make no such comments for the ES127ED.
Which in itself is interesting. Basically you you are undecided then buy the ES127ED it's a priced very reasonably.
Ian
Sorry but I purchased my 5" scope before this flurry ie about 4-5 years ago. There were two hand picked scopes that were sent to Australia for evaluation. The first was snapped up by the importer who offered me the second scope but I did so on the proviso that it was a true Apo and all that that entailed or I would return it. After evaluating it for a few weeks I purchased the scope and have been extremely happy with it.
From the importer I learned about the different glasses ie Japanese hand figured which is mine and the Chinese machine figured objectives. The glass is not FPL51 but in fact is Japanese HOYA FCD1 (Dense Fluor Crown) glass in the initial scopes. They are indeed different formulated glass but used for the same corrective purposes.
The other fact about the movement of the optician that used to align the triplet objective leaving NG to go to Taiwan i was also informed by the same source.
These are the facts as given to me and my scope certainly backs up all that I have seen in the ensuing years, having looked through quite a few of them.
I'll keep my scope as I know it's heritage and also it's performance characteristics. I'll stack it up against any of these other scopes because I know I got a "cherry picked", hand-figured scope and I did pay a lot more at the time for it.
Allan
Happy to know that at one stage in the past there was a "better" lens being used, and some lucky people have got the older version with the better lens. Great.
However, it has been suggested here in this discussion that "today", "right now" there are two types of lenses being used, one for the cheap $1199 version, and one for the more expensive Explore Scientific version. I guess what I would like to know is if this is actually based on "Fact", or just a guess based on emotions, and what was in the past?? Does anyone actually know?
If you know how to use the Internet then these are the specifications of the 127mm scope under question when it was first released..........
At f/7.48 the focal ratio of this OTA is tailored for fast wide field astrophotography and uses the finest Japanese FCD1 ED glasses (Extremely Low Dispersion glass). ED glasses were created to achieve a very small change in the refractive index at different wavelengths of light. This makes the Scope an excellent, affordable choice for a fast ratio, high performance optical work. Its fully multi-coated lenses ensure maximum light transmission from a triplet air-spaced optical design providing very good overall colour correction.
SPECIFICATIONS:
- Aperture: 127mm fully mutli-coated ED triplet.
- Air spaced optics hand figured glasses.
- Focal Length: 950mm - f/7.48
- Full multi-coated lenses
- Solid Aluminum optical tube (white)
- Full internal blackening and baffling
- 2-inch 10:1 Crayford focuser
- 1.25 -inch eyepiece adaptor
- Weight 7.1 Kgs
- Dimensions - 84.6 x 15.6 cm
you will note that it states the glass is FCD1 ED glass and that the triplette is made from Japanese hand figured glass.
All of these statements have been stated previously by me and were true in 1998-9. If you can prove my statements incorrect then do so.
If you can prove that the current NG scopes have the same specifications then show me.
Allan
.... I guess what I would like to know is if this is actually based on "Fact", or just a guess based on emotions, and what was in the past?? Does anyone actually know?
Well it all started back in 2006 (edit: actually 2008 not 2006) when My Astroshop imported 127s with a new middle lens (actually they changed the middle lens) ...a secret formula hand finished (as I am lead to believe they all are hand finished) and sold them as Prostar telescope. Now the price was around $3k incl ML focuser etc which IMHO was a good buy back then. Very tempting.
Now since then (around 2010/11) there has been discussion that this centre lens has changed from the original or the lenses are made somewhere else or use different materials (as they started ES127 sales).... I don't know but I suspect there are a lot of stories and little facts on this and a lot of emotion, this I do know.
I spoke to Gilman regarding the middle lens type when I purchased mine (in 2010), specifically asking for "the new lens" material.
He stated that yes there was a change back around 2005/6 (really not sure) and they they changed the lens material and grind hand finish and this had been that way for the newer 127s since then.
Now fast forward many years.....I do not know if they have changed the lens again or have changed the source of OEM grinding. These Chinese companies have a massive umbrella of influence and they make the same scopes branded as Meade and Celestron.
But you have to ask why sell ES127s at $1999 and same scope with different badge at $1200. I suspect that the the cheaper OTAs are the ones that didn't pass ES QA but this is pure pure speculation by me.
So, is the new lenses different...well up to 2010 they weren't unless I was told " not the truth" and have they changed since...I cannot say.
Am I happy with my 127 yes...I can even show interferometer tests done by physicists doing after market testing for shops in Germany. Those Germans like quantification on their products. The tests came up very well...unless of course they got the magic "special centre lens" units to test!
edit: the only query I have is that the Prostar was listed as F7.5, yet some articles say 952mm FL some 950mm and 127mm@F7.5 = 952.5mm, so I don't know if this is the difference. If it is less than F7.5 then all lenses must be made to match otherwise they would not meet at common FL point..
Last edited by wasyoungonce; 25-04-2013 at 04:33 PM.
It has been suggested in this discussion that TODAY (2013) there are TWO types of lenses being used, one for the cheap $1199 version, and one for the more expensive $1999 Explore Scientific version. OK, it looks as though this is probably not true (ie. the same lens is probably used for both), and it probably comes down to better quality control for the $1999 version compared to the $1199.
It has been suggested in this discussion that TODAY (2013) there are TWO types of lenses being used, one for the cheap $1199 version, and one for the more expensive $1999 Explore Scientific version. OK, it looks as though this is probably not true, and it probably comes down to better quality control for the $1999 version compared to the $1199.
I'm leaning this way....I suspect the Chinese still have a way to go with QA and ES does rejects some OTAs. I don't know I have heard this before but it's speculation.
However, one thing ...you will not be told by the OEM and no one in a position that knows is saying! So if your not sure...buy the ES127 you cannot go wrong for the price.
Maybe Astro Optical should re-start selling the Prostar units with tricked out ML focuser etc? I reckon they'd gets sales these days and indeed..or better yet the new 150mm ED's...Hmmmm.
Yes Brendon you are bang on .
My NG ( North Group are a different scope ) 127mm triplet had excellent optics easily taking 300x plus on the moon and planets .
As you all know I sold that scope to get a TAK M210 but now also own an Istar 127mm Achro and comparing these 2 127mm's was fun , up to 200x there was nothing between them but at the 250x the APO wins every time . But my TAK M210 is only idiling at that kind of magnifaction tho and easily takes 500x on a good night , so yes if you want Takahashi/AstroPhysics performance then buy one and be happy .
If like most and cant afford 3-15k on a scope get one of these for $1200 , good value .
By the way my Istar cost all of $630aud all up and I am very happy with its performance ( she's a lowely old Achromat , but a good one ) , but hey ,and she aint no Takahashi ! you get what you pay for I'm afraid so here is a photo of her .
Brian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wasyoungonce
Look the Vti comments are a little out of context...they do state if you want TAK performance buy a TAK....however that said they make no such comments for the ES127ED.
Which in itself is interesting. Basically you you are undecided then buy the ES127ED it's a priced very reasonably.
Last edited by brian nordstrom; 25-04-2013 at 07:01 PM.
Yes Brendon you are bang on .
