Now the Tak FSQ-106n is a goner...

jase (Jason) · #1 10-10-2006, 10:33 AM

As the Tak FSQ-106n will never hit production again (so if you've got one consider yourself very lucky), I'm on the hunt for a rich field refractor based astrograph. I do see some grey market and second hand ones come up now and then on Astromart, but they're begining to demand a higher price as they are a rare breed.

The replacements for the Tak FSQ-106n are;
Tak FS-102 NSV
or
Tak TSA-102 S
Both can be purchased with two different field flatners/focal reduces of varying power.
I would like to hear of anyone out there if they have had experience with these two scopes, in particular with large format CCD cameras. I'm not interested in observing, only imaging, so round stars all the way to edge is important.

There doesn't seem to be many refractors based on the flat field Petzval design...

Changing manufacturer, I see some potential in the William Optics FLT-110 considering it has a 4" focuser similar to the FSQ-106n. Not sure if the TMB design is proven.
http://www.william-optics.com/wowebs.../features0.htm

Astrophysics have some nice kit, but wait times will lead me to an anxiety attack.

Open to suggestions. Budget is around the $7k mark.

Thanks

RB (Andrew) · #2 10-10-2006, 10:42 AM

If you can stretch it a bit maybe consider the TOA 130S with a focal reducer or the TOA 130F with 4" focuser.
This brings them down to around f/5.8

JohnG (John) · #3 10-10-2006, 10:48 AM

I use an FS-102, not the NSV version, it uses the same flatteners and extenders as the TOA-130, excellent gear but you pay for it. Word is, on several groups that the older doublet is a better scope than the new triplets for photography, RB has seen what mine produces.

As far as WO is concerned, the word is that a new 130mm refractor is just around the corner.

Lot of new stuff coming onto the market.

Cheers

JohnG

RB (Andrew) · #4 10-10-2006, 11:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnG

RB has seen what mine produces.

John's done some awesome images with his setup.
Maybe give us some links to your best shots John.

Mind you his skill has a lot to do with it too.

Striker (Tony) · #5 10-10-2006, 11:07 AM

I like Andrews option.

I too arn't convinced with Williams optics TMB design..there should be an improvement but it's still early on...but the Taks have been proven.

saying that I wouldn't mind either of them.

jase (Jason) · #6 10-10-2006, 11:42 AM

Would be nice to see some images with the 102. Sounds like there is some unrest in the market at the moment. The 102's are certainly cheaper alternatives to the 106n (assuming you could get a new one);
FS-102 NSV $3750
TSA-102 S $4211
Prices from the AU Tak dealer. Certainly within budget. I would like to point out that these wouldn't be the main scope. I don't want to go too large. It would probably end up a guidescope when not used for imaging.

I have looked at alternative astrographs (i.e not refractors). ASA have some gear, but this would be more a primary scope, possibly secondary if you've got a high capacity mount.http://toptelescopes.com/astroSysteme.php

JohnG (John) · #7 10-10-2006, 12:18 PM

Thanks RB

(blushing)

Sorry, don't have a website, too technical for me.

My FS-102 is several years old now, but I have got the 2.7" reducer like RB to bring it down to f/5.6 and also the 1.8x extender which takes it up to f/12. Most of my photo's are at Prime Focus and I use the CA-35 (2") camera adapter and a 10:1 focusser. I don't use a CCD but a Canon EOS 350D.

Atached is a shot of Omega Cent I did recently, 10 x 60 seconds with the 350D (unmodded).

Cheers

JohnG

jase (Jason) · #8 10-10-2006, 01:03 PM

Thanks for providing the image JohnG. Just out of interest has this image been cropped?

JohnG (John) · #9 10-10-2006, 01:09 PM

Slightly on each end, not vertically though.

Cheers

JohnG

astroboy · #10 13-10-2006, 09:09 AM

Hi Jase
I'm looking around at similar gear to what your after.
Have you considered the TeleVue IS gear the improved rear elements should sort out the field flatness and illuination issues and the geared down focuser should be good .
Of course this is all theory I havent seen any images yet .
Another contender is the Tak E180 which would probably be a pain to use in the field since collimation is an issue but good in a permanant set up such as yours , still some problems with the focuser with cameras like the STL1100 but good for DSLRs.
The WO 110 sounds nice but ive seen the 105 and I don't think the focuser is up to the job with the STLs. maybe the 4" focuser is better.

Zane

jase (Jason) · #11 13-10-2006, 09:39 AM

Hi Zane,
I've checked out the TV scopes. They're nice. You only have to look at what the STL11k can do with the new TV127is - http://www.jburnell.com/STL1stLight.html
Very nice wide field work. The prices are reasonable. I'd like something that can handle the STL11k considering I've just placed an order for one. I should have it by late November.
The Tak180 is a very good option (I have thought about buying one), I'm interested to hear your collimation woes. Canberra astrophotograper - Steve Crouch has produced some sensational images with a 180+STL11k - http://www.pcug.org.au/~stevec/index.htm

Its a difficult call to make. There are not many scopes on the market that can handle the STL11k wide field. Sure you have some RC's and highend refractors. Most SCT's are out of the question, even with a 6.3 or 3.3 F/R. Though I'm interested to try it out on my C11 with GEG configured for F/4 mode. The 80mm F/R lens on the GEG should reduce vignetting and considering it was designed for 35mm film size frames, it may work ok with the STL11k. Will be sure to keep you posted.

Striker (Tony) · #12 13-10-2006, 02:59 PM

I will really be intersted in your results Jase.

I have also purchased the STL11000M and will be using it on my 10" LX200R...Like I said before it's not really suited for this scope but I am interested in how it will go at F10...if I have to crop some of the image thats cool I have plenty of pixels to play with....even though I have ordered the Feathertouch focuser I have not dismissed the Lumicon OAG....just a shame to lose a second focuser.

I'm glad your getting a STL11000m...you can help me.
I will be going for the Astrodon LRGB and HA filter set.

jase (Jason) · #13 13-10-2006, 03:21 PM

Hi Tony,
Indeed, happy to help out, though I think we'll both be bouncing ideas and concepts of each other.

I don't know how much time I'll get to use it. I only get down to my dark sky site on weekends. This will change with time however, as I'm progressively setting up the observatory for remote operations. Its damn hard to get internet comms faster than 56k where I'm observatory is located and even then I struggle because of a stupid electric fence interferring.

Hmmm. Filters - nice choice on the Astrodon's. I haven't decided yet so will be looking forward to seeing what you deliver. Custom Scientific aren't bad. I do like the sound of the Astrodon interline filters though. Considering they are balanced i.e don't need different exposure lengths for G or B is time saver.

Interestingly, on the C11, I have enough backfocus to have the Lumicon GEG and JMI NFC with Robofocus to reach focus. This gives me F/4 mode (1120mm) - a decent field of view for the STL11K. I'm keen to try out the computerised focusing accuracy instead of watching FWHM figures all the time.

jase (Jason) · #14 13-10-2006, 04:36 PM

Tony, just cruching some numbers...
You 10" LX200R with 2500mm F/L and a STL11K is going to give you a 33x49.5arcmin field of view! Nice.

But the image scale is .74 arcsec's per pixel. I hope you have some really really steady skies. Your tracking had better be good! Your exposures are going to have to be pretty long if you want to image at F/10.

Striker (Tony) · #15 13-10-2006, 04:42 PM

Yep I know all the downers....I think I will be imaging 2x binning giving me 1.5arcsec and no I have awful light poluted sky's in the suburbs of Brisbane.

Its all looking good for me...lol