Review: AOE152L F/8 Achromatic refractor/EQ5 mount

iceman (Mike) · #1 24-06-2005, 07:35 AM

Asimov has submitted a review for a scope he recently purchased, the AOE152L F/8 Achromatic refractor on an EQ5 mount.

Thanks to John for the review. You can see it at the IceInSpace Reviews page, or by clicking on the link below:

AOE152L F/8 Achromatic refractor/EQ5 mount

If you'd like to submit a review for anything in your astro kit, just send me an email or PM.

atalas · #2 24-06-2005, 10:23 AM

Nice review Asimov, It gives you a good overall picture of what you get in that package and some of the problems associated with a large refractor on the EQ5 mount .
This setup is a popular choice so thanks for posting.

Louie

trufflehunter · #3 24-06-2005, 10:35 AM

The OTA seems identical to the Meade AR6 but with a slightly longer dew shield (nice touch) right down to the handle underneath the focusser. If that's the case, it's a great scope! You'll probably have similar stability problems with the EQ5 as I had with the LXD55. It really deserves something more solid.
Thanks for the review, Asimov... it brought back fond memories!

asimov (John) · #4 24-06-2005, 02:17 PM

Thanks guys.

I've found that by adding the usual counter-weight on the EP end of the OTA, you can then lower the tripod accordingly to make it more stable. The weakest point seems to be where the telescopic legs join. If you could fully lower the tripod all the way, it would totally solve the mount wobble & dampening time would be down close to 1 sec.

Of course, then you'd need a low-profile matress to lay on to get to the EP!

anthony2302749 · #5 27-09-2005, 09:44 PM

Hi John

What an excellent review on the AOE152L. Prior to getting aperture fever I owned the 127mm (eg AOE127L) model which I purchased from <ST1

BATSC</ST1

. I fully agree with your review about the optics.

The optics on the 5” where fully collimated prior to picking it up from <ST1

BATSC</ST1

and I was able to compare my scope against a 6” Synta. Though the Synta was slightly larger in aperture it suffered greatly from chromatic aberration while the 5” seemed to be better corrected for it, though it still displayed a fringe of blue/violet colour around bright objects.

Side by side I found that the 5” offered a sharper more contrast view of the Moon and Jupiter as compared to the 6” Synta. On a one good night of viewing, under dark skies, I was able to discern galaxies down to 13 Mag plus (true, it real happen).

The scope was a big hit when I took it along to a Mars viewing night for the public back in 2003. The photographer for local paper was there and he like it so much that he took several photos, one of which ended up on the front cover of the local paper.

Anthony

janoskiss (Steve H) · #6 27-09-2005, 10:28 PM

Thanks for the informative review Asimov. Couldn't you rubbish it just a little?

Now I wish I had a big refractor too.

Do the AOE people know about your review?

asimov (John) · #7 28-09-2005, 04:15 PM

Hi guys.

Anthony, I'm still in 2 minds weather I did the right thing by choosing the 152mm over the 127mm. I had no doubt the 127 would have been better as far as 'violet fringing' was concerned, given it's slightly longer FL ratio. I just found it impossible to throw the chance away of owning a refractor that was bigger than the 127mm lol.

I love this refractor a lot though, the violet fringing I can ignore/put up with. I use aperture masks & fringe killers a lot on venus & jupiter. used in the right combinations, they completely elliminate violet fringing. DSOs are simply marvellous thru this scope. I'm definately sold on refractors, I just think the view thru a refractor is so much better than a newt. No diffraction spikes, stars pin-point, etc etc. I regularly split antares with it more often than not.

I've spent a lot of time collimating this scope, & finally it's that close to perfect, I'm totally satisfied. I use this scope more often than my 12.5" newt....It's just far more convenient to set-up & use. Taking nothing away from the 12.5" here! I love that scope too!

Tha't a neat pedestal mount under your 5"...Home-made? I've been thinking of doing this too. Certainly miles ahead of the EQ5 tripod!

Steve, I'll be selling the refractor (not because I want to...I'm dreading the day!) Can't take it with me to the US. Perhaps you might be interested when the time comes. It deserves to go to a really good home!

ving (David) · #8 28-09-2005, 04:57 PM

great write-up asimov

makes me want to rush out and buy... prolly the 5" one

asimov (John) · #9 28-09-2005, 05:06 PM

Oh Sorry Steve.....Yes, AOE know about it. I got permission from them 1st etc. I submitted the review to Raff before I through it on IIS.

dhumpie · #10 28-09-2005, 05:54 PM

Fantastic review. Several have commented (Cloudy Nights, S&T reviews, etc.) how the 5" refractors correct for CA much better than their 6" counterparts...

Darren

asimov (John) · #11 28-09-2005, 06:19 PM

Hi Darren. Long time no hear..Either way, your going to get *some* CA in either scope. I'm happy with the CA in mine. In hind-sight, I reckon the CA in the 152mm is worth putting up with to get the extra 1" of aperture.

I have no doubt had I opted for the 127mm I would have got the aperture fever & kicked myself for not getting the 152 lol. Some people can look "through" CA....& some can't. Naturally I want to own the 5" as well but my budget etc at the moment forbids it. But yes, I whole-heartedly agree....If you find it hard to put up with CA...the longer FL the better for achro's!!

Alternatively, get an APO!

anthony2302749 · #12 28-09-2005, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by asimov

Tha't a neat pedestal mount under your 5"...Home-made? I've been thinking of doing this too. Certainly miles ahead of the EQ5 tripod!

It was a great pedestal mount and was very stable. It was constructed out of 90mm galvanised pipe (the pier) and right angle steal for the legs. Each leg had a leveling screw and the three cables running to each leg help with overall stability. Alas I sold the whole lot for $1000 to fund my 12.5" project.

dhumpie · #13 29-09-2005, 05:44 PM

I agree asimov with the aperture fever thingy

You always go against conventional wisdom to own the largest aperture you can afford

Darren

mick pinner · #14 29-09-2005, 06:15 PM

good ramble there Asi, l've had my 152mm Skywatcher refractor for about 18 months, the one l've got has the adjustable front cell, though l haven't really used it much l did have it on the eq6 for a while and l was very impressed with the views, the CA in my scope is very minimal and with a VR-1 filter almost non-existant. l had it for sale for a while but l'm glad it didn't sell, it will make a great guide scope for my 16".

doug mc · #15 13-03-2007, 07:40 PM

Hi there , I have a question. Has anybody compaired chinese maks against their acromatic refractors inch per inch. Iam interested lunar and planitary observing. I am thinking of buying a 5 or 6 inch instrument. I currantly use a 10 inch reflector with saxon pyrex optics 50mm secondary and low profile focusor.

netwolf · #16 14-03-2007, 09:09 AM

FYI Currently Bintel seem to have a special on the 180Mak Pro for 1399. It was not on there website but one fellow user has rang up and purchased on at this price. This is the scope I sent AOE an email about but got no response. In USA these are sold as the Antares brand name and are apparently made using Vixen optics.

Regards