Jump to content


Photo

AP 130 F/6 EDF vs AP 130 GT

  • Please log in to reply
42 replies to this topic

#1 JimP

JimP

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1522
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2003
  • Loc: South Carolina

Posted 19 August 2014 - 05:19 PM

So what do you suppose is the difference between the older AP 130 F/6 and the newer AP 130 Gran Turismo?

The difference in the OTA with all the bells and whistles of the GT is obvious. The older 130 F/6 is lighter by about 2 pounds I was told. Anything else?

Well I decided to go to the top and this is the answer I got:

 

"No difference optically. Both are oil spaced lenses. The original design (130F6) used glass that is no longer available in high quality levels so we were forced to change the design to another type. The glass we use must have no internal defects like striae or index variation. This glass was discontinued by the large glass makers, Ohara and Schott, and is now only available from a Chinese company. We tested this Chinese glass and it was not suitable due to high reject rate of over 40%. The newer design requires more extensive hand figuring (the old design was all-spherical), but I have a method for figuring that produces great results, so that's the way we are presently making them - newest glass of high quality and hand figuring."

 

Hand figuring by the man himself. Now that is pretty cool.



#2 Markab

Markab

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 191
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2012

Posted 19 August 2014 - 08:42 PM

I actually wasn't aware of the differences in glass composition between the two. I've owned the GT and regular 130. The GT tube is noticeably thinner, and I believe it is 1" smaller despite the longer focal ratio.  On the two samples I had acquired, the older 130 EDF actually star tested a tad better than the newer GT.  But I'm sure this is more of a sample-to-sample variation than anything else.



#3 Paul G

Paul G

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4986
  • Joined: 08 May 2003
  • Loc: Freedonia

Posted 20 August 2014 - 05:43 AM

I have both and have side by sided them over several years, zero visual difference. Roland posted on the ap-ug interferometry tests reports on a couple of 130 f6 objectives, can't get much better. I like the classic look of the f6,but prefer the GT's focuser.



#4 Mike Clemens

Mike Clemens

    Frozen to Eyepiece

  • *****
  • Posts: 7575
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Alaska, USA

Posted 20 August 2014 - 01:28 PM

> The GT tube is noticeably thinner

 

smaller diameter, but the original f/6 tube has got to be thinner



#5 Dwight56

Dwight56

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2010

Posted 20 August 2014 - 04:53 PM

I upgraded my focuser on my AP 130 F6 and I had the lens cleaned and inspected by Roland earlier this year due to a problem that surfaced with my Lens now its as good as brand new. Now all I need is some decent Astro weather if we don't wash away in Arizona.



#6 JonM

JonM

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 154
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 20 August 2014 - 06:08 PM

I asked this question of Marj at AP and was told that the EDF was designed primarily for film astro-photography while the GT was designed mainly for CCD.

 

I owned the GT for a while but sold it and kept a TEC140 because I wanted a bit longer focal ratio for galaxies and planets.  Saw no difference in quality of manufacture except for the lens cover that was more user friendly on the AP.



#7 orlyandico

orlyandico

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5360
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Singapore

Posted 21 August 2014 - 12:42 AM

The  big difference (for me) is that you can get an EDF under $5K   :tonofbricks:



#8 Markab

Markab

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 191
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2012

Posted 21 August 2014 - 01:14 PM

 

The  big difference (for me) is that you can get an EDF under $5K   :tonofbricks:

 

Only if someone is stupid or desperate enough to let it go for that.

 

 

 

One has been sitting on A-mart for a couple of weeks at that price level. As I've said before, my sense is that high-end scope prices have been drifting downward over the past several years.  Sell! Sell! Sell!



#9 JonM

JonM

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 154
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 21 August 2014 - 01:32 PM

You are correct, I think. A brand new 130 GT just went for $7000. Last year you could not find a used one under $7500. I sold mine last year for $8000. I guess there are more available with the recent deliveries and less people willing to pay high premiums over MSRP for these scopes.  Other factors my be competition as other choices become more numerous and the quality of those choices keeps improving.  I think AP is, and will be, the gold standard for most even if the science says others are just  as good. As more people have good experiences with other brands, the premiums people are willing to pay will most likely drop.



#10 Mike Clemens

Mike Clemens

    Frozen to Eyepiece

  • *****
  • Posts: 7575
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Alaska, USA

Posted 22 August 2014 - 12:19 PM

personally find an 130 f/6 EDF in a pebble CNC flared tube at $5500 to be far more desirable than a $7000 GT



#11 George9

George9

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 428
  • Joined: 11 Dec 2004

Posted 22 August 2014 - 03:15 PM

I cannot tell a difference in view between the two. For the same price, I would prefer the GT's shape and compactness. And even the ability to break down even though I never do it. Not sure I would pay $2500 for the difference though. George

#12 Paul G

Paul G

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4986
  • Joined: 08 May 2003
  • Loc: Freedonia

Posted 22 August 2014 - 04:55 PM

 

 

The  big difference (for me) is that you can get an EDF under $5K   :tonofbricks:

 

Only if someone is stupid or desperate enough to let it go for that.

 

 

 

One has been sitting on A-mart for a couple of weeks at that price level. As I've said before, my sense is that high-end scope prices have been drifting downward over the past several years.  Sell! Sell! Sell!

 

 

IIRC that one wasn't mint. But I think you are right, this is a soft time for sellers due to the economy. If/when the economy starts to boom again I'd expect prices to go up. During good economic times an f5 Stowaway could bring $10K. If/when Roland retires I would expect a bump up in price as well.



#13 NHRob

NHRob

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4913
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2004
  • Loc: New Hampshire

Posted 22 August 2014 - 05:02 PM

10k for a Stowaway?
LOL

#14 Paul G

Paul G

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4986
  • Joined: 08 May 2003
  • Loc: Freedonia

Posted 22 August 2014 - 05:07 PM

10k for a Stowaway?
LOL

 

Yup, and at least one sold for that price at the time.



#15 Markab

Markab

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 191
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2012

Posted 22 August 2014 - 05:26 PM

 

 

 

The  big difference (for me) is that you can get an EDF under $5K   :tonofbricks:

 

Only if someone is stupid or desperate enough to let it go for that.

 

 

 

One has been sitting on A-mart for a couple of weeks at that price level. As I've said before, my sense is that high-end scope prices have been drifting downward over the past several years.  Sell! Sell! Sell!

 

 

IIRC that one wasn't mint. But I think you are right, this is a soft time for sellers due to the economy. If/when the economy starts to boom again I'd expect prices to go up. During good economic times an f5 Stowaway could bring $10K. If/when Roland retires I would expect a bump up in price as well.

 

 

But, but...all the talking heads tell us the economy is booming and the stock market makes record highs day after day after day! LOL.  I agree though with what you are saying...my opinion is the economy is indeed still pretty bad in most parts of the country despite the tripling of the stock market in the past five years.



#16 Dwight56

Dwight56

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2010

Posted 23 August 2014 - 02:47 PM

Don't kid yourselves into believing the economy is anything what the talking heads say. Most people are just getting by. Over 77 million americans are into Debt Collections meaning they have not paid on there credit debt in 6 month's or more. A good chunk of American home owners are using food stamps. You Still have a lot of people just getting by making their house payments not mention those homes in foreclosure. Just because the Dow and the S&P 500 is making records that does not tell you a thing about how well the rest of the country is doing. Now back to AP 130's



#17 Starhawk

Starhawk

    Space Ranger

  • *****
  • Posts: 5508
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Tucson, Arizona

Posted 23 August 2014 - 03:06 PM

OK, so Dwight, now that we know you are a Prepper, the stack of AP gear makes sense- you'll go to your Bunker/Observatory and enjoy the newly dark skies created by the collapse of the power grid concurrent with the fall of civilization.

 

-Rich


Edited by Starhawk, 23 August 2014 - 03:06 PM.

  • Dwight56 likes this

#18 JJK

JJK

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1946
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2008

Posted 23 August 2014 - 07:42 PM

 

The  big difference (for me) is that you can get an EDF under $5K   :tonofbricks:

 

Only if someone is stupid or desperate enough to let it go for that.

 

Gee, I sold my AP130GT and AP180 f/9 EDT w/the 4" focuser for what I paid (I bought the former from AP and the latter used at a relatively high price). I thought I was being a decent chap.



#19 JJK

JJK

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1946
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2008

Posted 23 August 2014 - 07:44 PM

 

10k for a Stowaway?
LOL

 

Yup, and at least one sold for that price at the time.

 

I've been offered nearly $8K for mine.  I won't sell it.



#20 Markab

Markab

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 191
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2012

Posted 23 August 2014 - 08:43 PM

What is it about the Stowaway that makes it worth much more than a Traveler?  Obviously the rarity is really the only reason, as the performance aspects certainly would favor the Traveler, and it isn't like the Traveler is giving up much on the portability front, either.



#21 ryderc1

ryderc1

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 374
  • Joined: 15 Apr 2006

Posted 23 August 2014 - 09:03 PM

Very nice, Daniel! I've found Krylon spray paints match many commercial telescope colors, and the paint itself is of very high quality.

It's worth noting that Krylon changed their formula a couple of years ago, from the "recoat anytime" formula to one that must be recoated within 1 hour or after 24. Also, if a matte finish is desired as you described, the primer shouldn't be sanded smooth (which the instructions on the can might recommend), but left in its original state as initially applied.

 


Besides the extremely limited number produced I believe the f/5 Stowaway is Roland's only scope to date to have used CaF2 as one of its elements.


Edited by ryderc1, 23 August 2014 - 09:04 PM.


#22 JJK

JJK

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1946
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2008

Posted 23 August 2014 - 09:39 PM

What is it about the Stowaway that makes it worth much more than a Traveler?  Obviously the rarity is really the only reason, as the performance aspects certainly would favor the Traveler, and it isn't like the Traveler is giving up much on the portability front, either.

I have both, and have traveled worldwide with them.  The f/5 StowAway is really lightweight and compact.   I used to take the Traveler, AP wood tripod, AP 400QMD even on work-related travel, but the StowAway and the mount/tripod required are so much easier to lug.  When I travel with the StowAway, I bring only a diagonal with a TeleVue 3-6 mm Nagler zoom, and a Baader Mark V Binoviewer and two pairs of EPs for it.  The Traveler is more capable, but I'm tired of lugging stuff through airports.

 

Also, I used to have a WO 80 mm LOMO apo that was a pretty darn good performer and a steal at the price I sold it ($750).


Edited by JJK, 23 August 2014 - 09:40 PM.


#23 Dwight56

Dwight56

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 136
  • Joined: 17 Apr 2010

Posted 23 August 2014 - 11:21 PM

I'm  a prepper haha I don't think you will likely see the collapse of the power grid anytime soon that would be nice. nope still going to have to travel to get dark skies. Now where did I store those extra gas cans. hmmmmm



#24 Paul G

Paul G

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4986
  • Joined: 08 May 2003
  • Loc: Freedonia

Posted 24 August 2014 - 09:15 AM

What is it about the Stowaway that makes it worth much more than a Traveler?  Obviously the rarity is really the only reason, as the performance aspects certainly would favor the Traveler, and it isn't like the Traveler is giving up much on the portability front, either.

 

Rarity as an AP scope aside, it is an extremely well corrected 92.5 mm f4.9 fluorite triplet, only 14" long, only 6.5 lbs, works with a binoviewer. Not much out there that ticks all of those boxes. Tak's answer was the Sky 90 but it lacks the color correction of the Stowaway, is nearly 5" longer, is a little heavier and isn't as fast at f5.56.

 

With the Stowaway mounted on a Telepod or Universal Astronomics Light Deluxe head on a Gitzo cf tripod I can literally pick up the entire setup with my pinkie finger. The Traveler is 36% longer and 38% heavier and requires a larger mount. Still quite portable but not in the same league as the Stowaway.



#25 Derek Wong

Derek Wong

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 403
  • Joined: 27 Apr 2008
  • Loc: Glendale, CA

Posted 24 August 2014 - 10:59 AM

How is this for irrational, convoluted thinking - I would never buy the Stowaway for $10K, or even $6K.  However, it has become a favorite scope, and I would not sell it for $10K even though I could almost get an AP 1100 mount and a TMB 92mm f/5.5 for the same price!  I do agree with what Gus and JJK said.

 

Derek








Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics