Jump to content


Photo

TEC 200

  • Please log in to reply
70 replies to this topic

#51 BPO

BPO

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 367
  • Joined: 23 Feb 2010
  • Loc: South Island, NZ

Posted 27 November 2012 - 03:48 AM

"I had an interesting discussion with Roland about old scopes at ASAE. He thinks people are crazy to pay a premium for his old scopes."

I'm glad to see that Roland and I agree on what I have been saying all along.


The problem is, this could be said of anything. Cars, watches, musical instruments, etc, etc, etc. Quality sets the benchmark, then scarcity brings its own value. I'd love to buy a Stradivarius for 70 or so Lira or Florins or whatever was the coin 'du jour', an air worthy P-51 Mustang for the $15K or so they were made for, or a Ferrari 250 GTO for $18K, etc.

Oh, and anytime you want to dump your Astro-Physics 10"Mak-Cass or 305RH or AP175, or AP180 or . . . at original cost, be sure to let me know!


I think it comes down to the intended purpose of the buyer. If it's astronomy there's no good reason to pay premium prices for old AstroPhysics telescopes.

#52 Stellarfire

Stellarfire

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1298
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2011
  • Loc: Switzerland

Posted 27 November 2012 - 06:43 AM

I think it comes down to the intended purpose of the buyer. If it's astronomy there's no good reason to pay premium prices for old AstroPhysics telescopes.



+1

Stephan

#53 Sunspot

Sunspot

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5470
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2005
  • Loc: Surprise, AZ

Posted 27 November 2012 - 09:27 AM

When I met Roland at the ASAE I told him I wanted to shake the hand of the best refractor builder in the business and he blushed bright red! :lol:

Paul

I had an interesting discussion with Roland about old scopes at ASAE. He thinks people are crazy to pay a premium for his old scopes. I have the distinct impression he really never set out to be the master, and now that he is, it's an unusual situation for him.

Anyway, he is anything but sentimental about his own equipment, which I though was odd at first, but then I realized if Roland and Yuri weren't that way, they'd be insufferable fatheads. So, I'll take the versions who put serious effort into nice telescopes, and when the glass is available and things look right, they make masterpieces they're willing to sell at cost.

-Rich



#54 M13 Observer

M13 Observer

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Western North America

Posted 27 November 2012 - 04:35 PM


Oh, and anytime you want to dump your Astro-Physics 10"Mak-Cass or 305RH or AP175, or AP180 or . . . at original cost, be sure to let me know!


I think it comes down to the intended purpose of the buyer. If it's astronomy there's no good reason to pay premium prices for old AstroPhysics telescopes.


I guess that would put you firmly into the first group. The first group doesn't own an Astro-Physics telescope and likely never will.

Now just what does all this have to do with the TEC200 anyway? I can't even imagine how I would go about handling such a beast!

#55 Mike Clemens

Mike Clemens

    Frozen to Eyepiece

  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Alaska, USA

Posted 27 November 2012 - 08:12 PM

> I can't even imagine how I would go about handling
> such a beast!

I do it like a firewood carry. I first lift it by the top 23" dovetail plate and then I cradle it like a bundle of firewood until it is completely mounted in the tip-in saddle.

It gets heavy. In 0F weather it gets heavy and paralyzingly cold.

My TEC200 turns 5 this Christmas.

#56 M13 Observer

M13 Observer

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Western North America

Posted 28 November 2012 - 12:36 AM

> I can't even imagine how I would go about handling
> such a beast!

I do it like a firewood carry. I first lift it by the top 23" dovetail plate and then I cradle it like a bundle of firewood until it is completely mounted in the tip-in saddle.

It gets heavy. In 0F weather it gets heavy and paralyzingly cold.

My TEC200 turns 5 this Christmas.


Brrr. It would stay on the mount until it was warm out. An f/7 180 is positively portable in comparison and I handle it in the same manner you describe, minus the cold weather. I drop back a size when it starts getting cold out. I just had a look at your pics on pbase. Now perspective makes the OTA look larger than it actually is, but still, your TEC200 is HUGE. Just how much does it weigh when it is ready to do the oof, I hope I don't get a hernia, on to the mount? I know for a fact that I won't even bother getting one and trying to lift it myself.

#57 Daniel Mounsey

Daniel Mounsey

    Vendor (Woodland Hills)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 5429
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2002

Posted 28 November 2012 - 01:38 AM

The TEC200 is an astonishing 20 lbs. lighter than this 8" TMB at least.

Attached Files



#58 Daniel Mounsey

Daniel Mounsey

    Vendor (Woodland Hills)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 5429
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2002

Posted 28 November 2012 - 01:40 AM

TEC200

Attached Files



#59 Mike Clemens

Mike Clemens

    Frozen to Eyepiece

  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Alaska, USA

Posted 28 November 2012 - 02:39 AM

> Just how much does it weigh when it is ready

I think its 50 lbs bare and about 80 lbs dressed with all the stuff I bolt on mine.

#60 mark8888

mark8888

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1746
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2010

Posted 28 November 2012 - 02:50 AM

The pic two posts above this of the TEC in the driveway is awesome.

Nice.

#61 Stellarfire

Stellarfire

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1298
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2011
  • Loc: Switzerland

Posted 28 November 2012 - 03:32 AM

I can't even imagine how I would go about handling such a beast!


Considering the dimensions of the TEC APO 200, it is surprisingly light. According the 2006 Owner's Manual, the OTA net weights are as following:
ED f/9 = 50lb / 23kg
FL f/8 = 45lb / 20kg

Anyway, for safe handling of that mighty OTA, a pair of Scope Totes would be a highly recommended accessory.

Stephan

#62 mark8888

mark8888

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1746
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2010

Posted 28 November 2012 - 04:14 AM

Here's the best pic I've seen which compares the sizes of the various TECs. Sometimes in pictures it's difficult to know what you're looking at because of the angle, but this one is reeeally clear.
http://www.unitronit.../TE-00-yuri.jpg

#63 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5073
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 28 November 2012 - 04:58 AM

There is surprisingly little difference between the TEC 140 and the TEC 180. And the TEC 140 is quite a small telescope, physically, IMO. A Sky-Wathcer 150mm f/8 achro is a bit larger, in fact, to put things into a more common perspective.


Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark

#64 Max Lattanzi

Max Lattanzi

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 543
  • Joined: 27 Jun 2007

Posted 28 November 2012 - 05:51 AM

Here's the best pic I've seen which compares the sizes of the various TECs. Sometimes in pictures it's difficult to know what you're looking at because of the angle, but this one is reeeally clear.
http://www.unitronit.../TE-00-yuri.jpg


And, to put things in perspective, this is 'the kid' nearby 'the father'... :cool:

Cheers,
-- Max

Attached Files



#65 snommisbor

snommisbor

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 867
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Cedar Park, TX

Posted 28 November 2012 - 10:01 AM

The TEC 200 makes that FT focuser look so small compared to the other scopes.

#66 M13 Observer

M13 Observer

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Western North America

Posted 28 November 2012 - 12:38 PM

The TEC200 is an astonishing 20 lbs. lighter than this 8" TMB at least.


At this size, they each have exceeded what I would personally call "portable". They are each a wonder to behold. On the other hand, had I a permanent observatory in a dark site . . . I can only dream of such. Which one performs best or is this the TMB with cell issues?

#67 Scott99

Scott99

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2827
  • Joined: 10 May 2007
  • Loc: New England

Posted 28 November 2012 - 12:42 PM

Here's the best pic I've seen which compares the sizes of the various TECs. Sometimes in pictures it's difficult to know what you're looking at because of the angle, but this one is reeeally clear.
http://www.unitronit.../TE-00-yuri.jpg


what a great picture! They should sell posters

Really I feel lucky to have a 6.3 inch refractor that is under 30 pounds and easy to handle. Compared to historic 6 inch refractors, that is a miraculous feat.

When you start to look at the 7 and 8 inchers....wow. magical machines for sure. Incredible amount of performance packed into a small package. You used to need an entire observatory building to use a 7 or 8 inch refractor!

#68 M13 Observer

M13 Observer

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2006
  • Loc: Western North America

Posted 28 November 2012 - 04:03 PM

There is surprisingly little difference between the TEC 140 and the TEC 180. And the TEC 140 is quite a small telescope, physically, IMO. A Sky-Wathcer 150mm f/8 achro is a bit larger, in fact, to put things into a more common perspective.


Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark


Well, maybe. I find that while it appears like there is only a small difference on paper, and even when the OTA's are lying side by side, there is actually quite a considerable difference in the handling of OTA's as one progresses through the sequence of, SOB (some other brand) from 105mm through 180mm. For one thing, it is not just the OTA but attached accessories as well. I double ring with my 155 and 180, and the second set of rings with attached dovetail saddle plate must be on the tube before it is placed into the primary rings on the mount, similar to how Mike works it with his 200. That really starts adding a lot of cumbersome weight.

#69 Stellarfire

Stellarfire

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1298
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2011
  • Loc: Switzerland

Posted 28 November 2012 - 06:29 PM

Which one performs best or is this the TMB with cell issues?



As far as I know, TEC offered the giant 200 APO in three versions: the ED f/9 and two Fluorite versions at f/7 and f/8. Production of the 200 has ceased and total production number is quite small, resulting in little user data available.
Considering such a large aperture with its heavy lens elements, combined with a focal ratio as fast as f/7, one automatically thinks on the reliability of the lens cell construction. But despite the surprisingly light OTA weight of the TEC 200, it is not renowed for lens cell issues.
Yuri knows his job.

Stephan

#70 Mirzam

Mirzam

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4433
  • Joined: 01 Apr 2008
  • Loc: Lovettsville, VA

Posted 28 November 2012 - 07:29 PM

The TMB scope with the lens cell issues is the 180ED f/9.

The TECs have no such issues.

JimC

#71 suburbanskies

suburbanskies

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 488
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2004
  • Loc: New Jersey, USA

Posted 28 November 2012 - 08:50 PM


And, to put things in perspective, this is 'the kid' nearby 'the father'... :cool:

Cheers,
-- Max


Ah, the son is taller than the father! :)






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics