Jump to content


Photo

Which would you rather have?

  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#26 maadscientist

maadscientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 108
  • Joined: 08 May 2013
  • Loc: Atlanta, Georgia

Posted 18 August 2014 - 08:52 PM

Maybe this is a thread hijack, but here are the pics of the Moon with the Celestron XLT 150 F5. Jim, I am sure you probably know who makes this scope. (I would like to know).

Chromatic aberration test:

Moon at 750 fl

Attached File  150f5moon.jpg   160.01KB   3 downloads

 

 

 



#27 maadscientist

maadscientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 108
  • Joined: 08 May 2013
  • Loc: Atlanta, Georgia

Posted 18 August 2014 - 08:54 PM

at 1500 fl, you can see the CA pretty good.

 

Attached File  150celestronXLTf5a.jpg   455.62KB   0 downloads

 

 



#28 maadscientist

maadscientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 108
  • Joined: 08 May 2013
  • Loc: Atlanta, Georgia

Posted 18 August 2014 - 08:56 PM

Trees at 150 yards

 

Attached File  150f5treeAuto.jpg   398.71KB   0 downloads

 

 



#29 maadscientist

maadscientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 108
  • Joined: 08 May 2013
  • Loc: Atlanta, Georgia

Posted 18 August 2014 - 08:57 PM

Crop

 

Attached File  150f5treecropAuto.jpg   296.06KB   0 downloads

 



#30 mogur

mogur

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1060
  • Joined: 29 Jul 2011
  • Loc: WI

Posted 18 August 2014 - 09:03 PM

The Vixen. Smaller, lighter, faster, larger FoV per EP, better CA. I had an AT 152 and really liked it, but it was just a bit big for me ergonomically. The lost 12mm wouldn't bother me much. A scope like that isn't for eaking out the last possible detail in faint fuzzies, and it will do better on lunar/planets due to less CA.



#31 stevew

stevew

    Now I've done it

  • -----
  • Posts: 4273
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2006
  • Loc: British Columbia Canada

Posted 18 August 2014 - 10:28 PM

Jim, you always make me laugh....

I suppose first I'd ask the Thugs, why did Hands on Optics, and Canadian Telescopes stop carrying the AT 152.

Then I'd make my decision...

 

Steve



#32 Neptune

Neptune

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 117
  • Joined: 16 Apr 2007
  • Loc: Arizona

Posted 18 August 2014 - 11:07 PM

I vote Vixen, better optical train with only a slight trade off in Aperture. 

 

David



#33 Starhawk

Starhawk

    Space Ranger

  • *****
  • Posts: 5489
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Tucson, Arizona

Posted 18 August 2014 - 11:12 PM

Synta makes the Celestron scope. They own Celestron. Little detective work needed, there. 

 

-Rich



#34 sg6

sg6

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 771
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2010
  • Loc: Norfolk, UK.

Posted 19 August 2014 - 02:14 PM

The Vixen.

 

How did you know it was "through a darkened hallway" with your head covered?



#35 maadscientist

maadscientist

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 108
  • Joined: 08 May 2013
  • Loc: Atlanta, Georgia

Posted 20 August 2014 - 11:36 PM

150 F5 Moon converted to black and to eliminate CA.

 

Attached File  150celestronXLTf5convertBW.jpg   318.96KB   0 downloads

 

 



#36 Ed Holland

Ed Holland

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2060
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2010
  • Loc: San Jose, CA and Oxford, UK

Posted 21 August 2014 - 04:10 PM

For me - probably the Vixen. More all round useable, given my bias towards planetary observing. The short focal length of either would complement the much longer lengths of my existing scopes.

 

When can you deliver? :)



#37 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19762
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 21 August 2014 - 05:46 PM

Maybe this is a thread hijack, but here are the pics of the Moon with the Celestron XLT 150 F5. Jim, I am sure you probably know who makes this scope. (I would like to know).

Chromatic aberration test:

Moon at 750 fl

attachicon.gif150f5moon.jpg

Almost certainly Synta makes the scope.  Synta owns Celestron and also several Synta executives are also on the Board of Directors of Long Perng in Taiwan.

 

Interesting how different scopes produce different manifestations of secondary spectrum.  If you look at the Synta 6" f/8, it produces the common violet-only fringing.  This f/5 puts up both violet/magenta and chartreuse fringing.  Grayscale rendering of the image is pretty nice, but to be honest I find the combination of both violet and limey yellow green in the colored images to be oddly aesthetically pleasing.  Perhaps not "true" but quite lively and dynamic, kind of like the way a Samsung smartphone AMOLED screen oversaturates and overboosts certain colors and highlights.

 

Nifty images.  And at f/5 it truly meets the "RFT" working definition.  Mt f/5.9 doesn't quite satisfy the criteria.

 

Regards,

 

Jim



#38 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19762
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 21 August 2014 - 06:07 PM

The Vixen.

 

How did you know it was "through a darkened hallway" with your head covered?

You can always look down your own shirt when hooded.  Every old spy knows that.

 

- Jim



#39 Kutno

Kutno

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2009

Posted 25 August 2014 - 06:41 AM

You're abducted off the street by hulking thugs, who silently drive you, head covered, to a rainy warehouse district in the city.  You hear a steel door roll open and then closed behind you, and are lead through a darkened hallway and pushed into a chair.  The hood is ripped away, and glaring light bombards you forcing you to squint.  As your eye adjust, you see the scrawny little rat-like man with a "Snidley Whiplash" style mustache sitting across from you behind a gray metal desk.  He says "choose".

 

The thugs lay two telescopes on the desk between you and rat-man.  One is a Vixen NA 140SS Neo Achromat and the other is an Astrotelescopes 152mm f/5.9 achromat.  The man repeats the command, "Choose" and adds "no cost to you, no strings attached, but you may choose only one."

 

Which one do you choose, and why?

 

Thanks,

 

Jim

 

 

The Vixen, because it's made by Vixen.  Great company.



#40 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19762
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 25 August 2014 - 09:47 PM

How about a third choice?

Three minutes and all you can carry in Barnett's eyepiece shed?

:bounce:  :choochoo:  :applause:  :bigshock:

 

Rex

Less and less to carry off these days.  I've been selling off eyepieces for quite some time.  Scopes too.  My goal is to have plenty of room to walk around in the shed so I can use it as much as a workshop and chart room as for astronomy gear storage.  In the end, I want my 16er, my 12.5er, my 9.25er, my 6er, my 140mm, my 5er, one of my 4-icnhers, one of my 3-inchers and one lone 60mm "throwback" scope to remind me where I come from.  Mounts must go too.  I have two Antares Piers.  They take up a lot of room.  I'll either break them down and build them back up only when observing with a long OTA, or else replace the CG5/Antares setup plus the Atlas EQ-G with something else in the same class as the CGE or heftier.

 

- Jim



#41 galaxyman

galaxyman

    Vendor - Have a Stellar Birthday

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 2431
  • Joined: 03 Apr 2005
  • Loc: Limerick, Pa

Posted 25 August 2014 - 11:21 PM

I would have to see both scopes side by side at a dark site, using quality eyepieces and at close magnifications on a variety of objects from star clusters to galaxies (even faint ones). Wouldn't mind throwing my ES 6" as a third scope under the same sky.
 
One thing I will say in a discussion I had with Roland Christen on Petzvals, that the rear lens must be correct or large enough diameter so not subject to vignetting. He did some calculations on some Petzvals when given the info, and found the rear lens too small of aperture by a good deal. Now whether that's also an issue with the Vixen 140 would only be known by its lens stats.
 
 
 

Karl
E.O.H.
 

Chesmont Astronomical Society - www.chesmontastro.org
Galaxy Log - http://www.youtube.c...r/GalaxyLog4565
Galaxy Log Blog - http://galaxylog.blogspot.com/
HASB - http://www.haveastellarbirthday.com
Telekit (Swayze optics) 22" F/4.5 Dob
Homemade (Parks Optics) 12.5" F/4.8 Dob
Vixen 5.1" f/5 reflector
TMB/APM 8" f/9 Refractor”The Beast”. One great DEEP SKY achro
ES 6" f/6.5 achro. Good one
Celestron Omni XLT 102 refractor.
Celestron 10x60mm Binos


#42 tomcody

tomcody

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1690
  • Joined: 06 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Titusville, Florida

Posted 26 August 2014 - 06:52 AM

 

How about a third choice?

Three minutes and all you can carry in Barnett's eyepiece shed?

:bounce:  :choochoo:  :applause:  :bigshock:

 

Rex

Less and less to carry off these days.  I've been selling off eyepieces for quite some time.  Scopes too.  My goal is to have plenty of room to walk around in the shed so I can use it as much as a workshop and chart room as for astronomy gear storage.  In the end, I want my 16er, my 12.5er, my 9.25er, my 6er, my 140mm, my 5er, one of my 4-icnhers, one of my 3-inchers and one lone 60mm "throwback" scope to remind me where I come from.  Mounts must go too.  I have two Antares Piers.  They take up a lot of room.  I'll either break them down and build them back up only when observing with a long OTA, or else replace the CG5/Antares setup plus the Atlas EQ-G with something else in the same class as the CGE or heftier.

 

- Jim

 

Jim,

I know you have mentioned simplifying things  in your collection a few times in these posts, I hope you get to where you want to be, I know it can be hard to sell off perfectly good stuff. One suggestion regarding the piers, perhaps building one or two permanent    piers in your backyard would work for you?

That way, all you need do is pop on a mount & scope and your ready to observe. The ATS permanent piers are well made and with the optional clear coat can stand being out in the weather and look good too!

Rex



#43 Mark Costello

Mark Costello

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3088
  • Joined: 08 Mar 2005
  • Loc: Matthews, NC, USA

Posted 26 August 2014 - 08:18 AM

 

I would have to see both scopes side by side at a dark site, using quality eyepieces and at close magnifications on a variety of objects from star clusters to galaxies (even faint ones). Wouldn't mind throwing my ES 6" as a third scope under the same sky.
 
One thing I will say in a discussion I had with Roland Christen on Petzvals, that the rear lens must be correct or large enough diameter so not subject to vignetting. He did some calculations on some Petzvals when given the info, and found the rear lens too small of aperture by a good deal. Now whether that's also an issue with the Vixen 140 would only be known by its lens stats.
 
 
 

Karl
E.O.H.
 

Chesmont Astronomical Society - www.chesmontastro.org
Galaxy Log - http://www.youtube.c...r/GalaxyLog4565
Galaxy Log Blog - http://galaxylog.blogspot.com/
HASB - http://www.haveastellarbirthday.com
Telekit (Swayze optics) 22" F/4.5 Dob
Homemade (Parks Optics) 12.5" F/4.8 Dob
Vixen 5.1" f/5 reflector
TMB/APM 8" f/9 Refractor”The Beast”. One great DEEP SKY achro
ES 6" f/6.5 achro. Good one
Celestron Omni XLT 102 refractor.
Celestron 10x60mm Binos

 

 

 

Five or six years ago, I played around with the idea of getting a 5" Petzval achromat.  I decided against it due to the concerns over the alignment of the lenses in these less expensive Petzvals and also guessing that the color correction for a 5"F5 Petzval would not be materially better than a regular 5"F6.5 doublet.  So I went with the ES AR127.  Maybe there was another good reason for going the way I did.  :grin:



#44 george tatsis

george tatsis

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 709
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Flushing, NY - Europe

Posted 26 August 2014 - 09:07 AM

Haven't tried the Vixen 140, but I do own a SW Startravel 150mm f/5. It is an excellent telescope for what it was designed to do, which is DSOs and wide field views. I've seen the first quarter Moon with it once, and the CA was NOT what I see in the posted picture above.  As far as CF goes, my Radians show none and my Pentax XLs very little.

 

I agree 100% with the findings of the best review (check link below) ever written on this topic. The views, pictures and simulations presented here are by far more realistic than the photon sensitive camera used in the previous pictures. Let alone the fact that this is a DSO scope, not a planetary one.

 

 

https://groups.yahoo...ns/topics/21124

 

George


Edited by george tatsis, 26 August 2014 - 12:27 PM.


#45 bremms

bremms

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2526
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2012
  • Loc: SC

Posted 26 August 2014 - 09:29 AM

My tolerable limt of CA is F/D about 1.5  for an achromat( inches). 2.0 is even better. At around 1.0 it's way too much color for me unless it's just an RFT. Younger folks seem less tolerant due to better blue/ indigo vision. I have a Jaegers 5" F5, and it's good for RFT use. My 6" F10 jaegers has well controlled CA . The one NA120 I looked through had about the same ammount of color. I was expecting correction like a 4" F15 or so.



#46 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19762
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 26 August 2014 - 06:26 PM

Haven't tried the Vixen 140, but I do own a SW Startravel 150mm f/5. It is an excellent telescope for what it was designed to do, which is DSOs and wide field views. I've seen the first quarter Moon with it once, and the CA was NOT what I see in the posted picture above.  As far as CF goes, my Radians show none and my Pentax XLs very little.

 

I agree 100% with the findings of the best review (check link below) ever written on this topic. The views, pictures and simulations presented here are by far more realistic than the photon sensitive camera used in the previous pictures. Let alone the fact that this is a DSO scope, not a planetary one.

 

 

https://groups.yahoo...ns/topics/21124

 

George

Excellent review!  Very, very accurate IMO.

 

I think I will field the 6" f/5.9 at our upcoming dark sky camp out at the end of October.  I haven't had it under truly dark skies yet; just suburban skies.  It'll be a nice complement, I think for a larger Dob.

 

- Jim


Edited by jrbarnett, 26 August 2014 - 06:41 PM.


#47 schang

schang

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 840
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2013
  • Loc: columbia, sc

Posted 27 August 2014 - 05:47 PM

It is no brainer for me, I'd choose the Vixen.  Performance aside, if I like it, keep it.  If I do not, I'd sell it and use the proceed to buy an AT 152 (which I doubt), or different type of scope and still have changes for other stuff.   :cool:  



#48 george tatsis

george tatsis

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 709
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Flushing, NY - Europe

Posted 29 August 2014 - 06:31 AM

 

Haven't tried the Vixen 140, but I do own a SW Startravel 150mm f/5. It is an excellent telescope for what it was designed to do, which is DSOs and wide field views. I've seen the first quarter Moon with it once, and the CA was NOT what I see in the posted picture above.  As far as CF goes, my Radians show none and my Pentax XLs very little.

 

I agree 100% with the findings of the best review (check link below) ever written on this topic. The views, pictures and simulations presented here are by far more realistic than the photon sensitive camera used in the previous pictures. Let alone the fact that this is a DSO scope, not a planetary one.

 

 

https://groups.yahoo...ns/topics/21124

 

George

Excellent review!  Very, very accurate IMO.

 

I think I will field the 6" f/5.9 at our upcoming dark sky camp out at the end of October.  I haven't had it under truly dark skies yet; just suburban skies.  It'll be a nice complement, I think for a larger Dob.

 

- Jim

 

Chances are you'll be impressed with the performance of the  6". However,what worries me is that you might start comparing it to your TEC, which happens to be one of the best telescopes ever produced.

 

See Jim, your eyes are accustomed to experiencing pristine views through the TEC, so I dunno how hard you are going to try to remain objective and somewhat lenient in your assessment that you are dealing with a fast achro and not an apo. :thinking: .

 

I suggest you not take the TEC along with you, and report your AT impressions as if you have never seen through a 6" telescope before. I don't think it (TEC vs AT) will matter much for DSO, but still....

 

George



#49 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 19762
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 29 August 2014 - 01:44 PM

 

 

Haven't tried the Vixen 140, but I do own a SW Startravel 150mm f/5. It is an excellent telescope for what it was designed to do, which is DSOs and wide field views. I've seen the first quarter Moon with it once, and the CA was NOT what I see in the posted picture above.  As far as CF goes, my Radians show none and my Pentax XLs very little.

 

I agree 100% with the findings of the best review (check link below) ever written on this topic. The views, pictures and simulations presented here are by far more realistic than the photon sensitive camera used in the previous pictures. Let alone the fact that this is a DSO scope, not a planetary one.

 

 

https://groups.yahoo...ns/topics/21124

 

George

Excellent review!  Very, very accurate IMO.

 

I think I will field the 6" f/5.9 at our upcoming dark sky camp out at the end of October.  I haven't had it under truly dark skies yet; just suburban skies.  It'll be a nice complement, I think for a larger Dob.

 

- Jim

 

Chances are you'll be impressed with the performance of the  6". However,what worries me is that you might start comparing it to your TEC, which happens to be one of the best telescopes ever produced.

 

See Jim, your eyes are accustomed to experiencing pristine views through the TEC, so I dunno how hard you are going to try to remain objective and somewhat lenient in your assessment that you are dealing with a fast achro and not an apo. :thinking: .

 

I suggest you not take the TEC along with you, and report your AT impressions as if you have never seen through a 6" telescope before. I don't think it (TEC vs AT) will matter much for DSO, but still....

 

George

 

I've owned the Astrotelescopes for almost 2 years, actually, and used it many times.  Here are my initial comments:

 

http://www.cloudynig...scopes-152-f59/

 

Given that my first "real" telescope was a 6" f/8 which I used exclusively for about 16 years and have used a C6 on and off for the last four years, it isn't possible to view the AT as if I'd never looked through another 6-incher.  But I actually consider that to be an advantage rather than disadvantage in drawing conclusions and offering opinions and advice on the AT.  It avoids the "gee whiz" kind of context-less praise you see from a first time user, and provides readers with reference points for deciding whether or not they are likely to enjoy the scope, virtues and vices included.

 

I continue to believe that a C6 with a Celestron FF/FR attached is a better option than the AT for most users.  Similar wide field capability, trading CA for a little edge of field light fall-off with wide true field eyepieces, and boatloads cheaper and easier to mount and transport than the big achromat.

 

But I sold the C6 and still have the AT.  Go figure.  :lol:

 

Regards,

 

Jim


Edited by jrbarnett, 29 August 2014 - 01:47 PM.


#50 Scott Beith

Scott Beith

    SRF

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 44465
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2003
  • Loc: Frederick, MD

Posted 29 August 2014 - 03:08 PM

Vixen.








Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics