One Scope To Rule Them All

[JA]

Originally Posted by glend

Skysurfer, i understand your enthusiasm for those lenses but in terms of this tread they are "Out of Scope" so to speak, and of course way over budget anyway. As with the Nikon 400mm f2.8, mentioned by JA earlier.

A separate thread exploring camera lenses only needs someone to start it.

No one rules the air waves. Nothing is "out of scope". Conversation is just that.... Conversation. A free and open exchange. It's like short circuiting a brain storming session - you wont get the best discourse or result. If someone feels the need to filter such discourse, then let the mind do so, rather than doing it on the behalf of the community. Not directed at anyone, but in general terms, no one owns a thread - it is a community asset. If something goes somewhere in a thread, so be it. BTW since you've raised it again and my input on it, as an example in answering someone else, the Nikon 400m f2.8 I mentioned was within the $5000 budget purchased used as a manual focus version.

All good

Best
JA

[Peter Ward]

I used to think along those lines...if I was to use one telescope what would it be?

It didnt take me long to realise if you are doing imaging, there is no such creature.

So in order of focal length my current ensemble is: FSQ85, FSQ106, AP130GTX, AP155, AP RH 305, Alluna RC16. They all bring something different to the table, but only the FSQ85 fits your constraints....

If I was to choose just one....Probably the AP155 for sheer perfection and versatility.

[Tropo-Bob (Bob)]

Originally Posted by glend

Bob the mount is not inclusive in the budget, it is assumed. Likewise EPs are out of scope. Just looking at the scope itself. It can be any scope design, inc dobs, SCTs, Maks, etc.

Ok, I will try to play the game, since I can keep my 6 mounts and 60 EPs.

Mine would be a Tak 100mm F7.4 Refractor. Its light, gives great images (or there are some really talented liars out there!) and covers all the bases for me. I would use it for visual use only and most often on an altz mount.

I do not own the above, as it has too much overlap with my armada of other scopes.

HOWEVER, if asked 20 years ago, I would have said a 12.5 inch Dob. I would be up S**ts Creek now if that was my one scope for life!
Its not just the weight, my older eyes do not have the flexibility that they once had.

It would be interesting to ask the same question and break it up by age groups and perhaps ask if they could have any telescope for the next 10 years, what would it be?

Age has definitely moved me from being a big Dob fan to now being an admirer of small, quality refractors.

[LewisM]

Seems quality over quantity from every respondent thus far - Tak is ahead by a country mile.

[casstony]

Originally Posted by LewisM

Seems quality over quantity from every respondent thus far - Tak is ahead by a country mile.

Tak is just too expensive for most of us to buy at new prices though. If you're buying new, the Esprit will give images which are equal to the Tak at a much lower cost. The brake on the focuser needs to be applied a little to stop the drawtube from drifting and the finish is decent, not far behind Tak. Tak paint will chip fairly easily too.

I've got two flash refractors (NP101is, TSA120) but I bought them used in near new condition. The finish on the Televue is the best I've seen on any scope.

[ChrisV (Chris)]

So that Aldi scope isn't getting a mention?


Edit: I'm bored. Trains are running late and out of timetable order

[Alchemy (Clive)]

Given the 5k limit, Which was my budget at one time, I went for a WO 132FLT. I bought second hand and it included the factory flattener.

Why.... as I like imaging, it doesn't need to be colimated, flexure of the tube is not an issue (as was a largish newt I used to use), the focal length of 924mm is ok for most nights seeing, i haven't had any issues with focuser creep, it is APO I haven't had any noticeable fringing etc from the scope, it's not so big that it becomes unstable on my mount.

All in all pretty much meets my needs, good value for money, which when I spend 5k is what I am trying to get.

[PhilTas (Phil)]

+1 for TV85.
It's a beaut scope that punches above it's weight.
Cheers Phil

[Slawomir (Suavi)]

Originally Posted by Peter Ward

I used to think along those lines...if I was to use one telescope what would it be?

It didnt take me long to realise if you are doing imaging, there is no such creature.

So in order of focal length my current ensemble is: FSQ85, FSQ106, AP130GTX, AP155, AP RH 305, Alluna RC16. They all bring something different to the table, but only the FSQ85 fits your constraints....

If I was to choose just one....Probably the AP155 for sheer perfection and versatility.

You have a very impressive collection of some of the finest instruments Peter!

I can imaging a lot of photons being captured by such wonderful ensemble on clear nights

[doppler (Rick)]

As an all rounder I think a solid tube dob f5 or f6 (collimating a f4 sounds like a chore) with rings fitted so it can double as an imaging newt as well as reverting to a grab and go. And if you have the heebie jeebies about eyepiece position of a newt when eq mounted, a set of tube rotation rings would still fit in the budget.

My 10" f4.8 skywatcher dob is a great all rounder, fits in the back of my Daihatsu for traveling but is still light enough to ride on a Heq5 mount when imaging.

[Camelopardalis (Dunk)]

I'd be keeping my Edge 8 and Esprit 100...sneaking in under budget

The Edge is light enough to piggy back on the Esprit, so I can have high magnification planetary and wide field imaging/visual (almost) at the same time...conditions permitting.

Even the Tak propaganda machine owns an Esprit

[FlashDrive (Poppy)]

Originally Posted by Camelopardalis

Even the Tak propaganda machine owns an Esprit

Gee ... I wonder who that could be ....

[Atmos (Colin)]

Originally Posted by FlashDrive

Gee ... I wonder who that could be ....

"Once you go Tak yo never go back."
"Fluorite is the only form on glass."

[glend (Glen)]

Originally Posted by Atmos

"Once you go Tak yo never go back."
"Fluorite is the only form on glass."

My search suggests, that there are not many telescopes using crystalline fluorite, most using the high-fluoride glasses. Exceptions are the older Takahashi APOs and TEC APOs. Interestingly, Takahashi seem to have stopped using fluorite because the mating element glass contained a lot of heavy metals (and because the fluorite blanks became so expensive), and Flourite is relatively soft.
Many manufacturers are now using FPL-53 glass, i don't think TAK can claim the high ground there.
How many of the Taks listed in this thread are the heavy metal Flourite variant and how many are simply the now common FPL-53?

[LewisM]

Originally Posted by Atmos

"Once you go Tak yo never go back."
"Fluorite is the only form on glass."

Gee Colin, for an educated man you have a poor memory. It's Fluorite: anything else is just glass"

Academics these days...

[LewisM]

Originally Posted by glend

My research says, many telescopes advertised as using fluorite (or bearing a designation like “FL”) actually use high-fluoride glasses and not crystalline fluorite. Exceptions are the older Takahashi APOs and TEC APOs on sale today. Interestingly, Takahashi stopped using fluorite because the mating element glass contained a lot of heavy metals (and because the fluorite blanks became so expensive), and Flourite is relatively soft.
Many manufacturers are now using FPL-53 glass, i don't think TAK can claim the high ground there.

Why? All the modern Tak fluorites are PURE fluorite / CaF2 again - the FC-100, the FC-76, the FS-60, the FOA-60 and so on. REAL, GENUINE FLUORITE.

Not just in the older models.

Only Tak and TEC use fluorite in it's real form (Zeiss and Vixen did). William Optics DO NOT and never have despite their widely known BS advertising (which they HAD to change due to misinformation). A "Fluorostar" does NOT have single piece of real fluorite in it - the glass used though is FPL, which is fluorite ENRICHED glass.

[Octane (Humayun)]

Another reason why my Q will be pried from my cold dead hands.

It delivers the goods; though, the idiot behind it could be a bit more competent!

H

[LewisM]

Originally Posted by Octane

Another reason why my Q will be pried from my cold dead hands.

It delivers the goods; though, the idiot behind it could be a. It more competent!

H

Nah, the idiot does alright, but can be a bit of a gumby

[LewisM]

Originally Posted by Camelopardalis

I'd be keeping my Edge 8 and Esprit 100...sneaking in under budget

The Edge is light enough to piggy back on the Esprit, so I can have high magnification planetary and wide field imaging/visual (almost) at the same time...conditions permitting.

Even the Tak propaganda machine owns an Esprit

I was in a weak financial moment - leave me alone, oroit

It does it's job. Lots to improve on, but it's at least optically very good.

As for the A-P...well.....side by side right there with Tak, to the point I preferred it over the Tak. I paid the same for the A-P as I did for the Esprit 80 lol...yes, I got an ABSOLUTE BARGAIN (once in a lifetime!). If/when it goes up for sale, I assure you the price will be at minimum TWICE what I paid for it

[issdaol (Phil)]

Originally Posted by LewisM

I was in a weak financial moment - leave me alone, oroit

It does it's job. Lots to improve on, but it's at least optically very good.

As for the A-P...well.....side by side right there with Tak, to the point I preferred it over the Tak. I paid the same for the A-P as I did for the Esprit 80 lol...yes, I got an ABSOLUTE BARGAIN (once in a lifetime!). If/when it goes up for sale, I assure you the price will be at minimum TWICE what I paid for it

I'll remember to offer you a 1/4 of the asking price when you advertise it next week then