Quote:How is the Questar standard optical tube attached to the control box? Press-fit, perhaps with glue, if I recall correctly?
Quote:For my part, I'm content to spend my telescope money on functionality rather than cachet.
Quote:Quote:For my part, I'm content to spend my telescope money on functionality rather than cachet. That I'll disagree with . The Questar is all about functionality. It is an old school style of functionality, not a new school GOTO style, but it is mostly about functionality. I didn't buy my Q for it's looks (and by extension, it's "cachet". The engineering behind the good looks does keep it going decade after decade.I understand the Rolex thing, to the extent that even though a Q will last forever, you could replace an ETX for the price of a full Q service. But the ETX would not function like the Q during any of it's lifetime. If old school mechanics is your style of functionality.
Quote:Speaking of engineering, however, I might point out that the engineering costs of the Questar have been paid off for over 1/2 century yet are still being charged for in the price of a new Questar.The Questar is touted to be a "portable observatory" with everthing fitting into the supplied carrying case. That is only true if used in the table top mode and personally, I don't consider a tabletop scope to be functional for astronomy no matter what its quality.
Quote:Quote:Speaking of engineering, however, I might point out that the engineering costs of the Questar have been paid off for over 1/2 century yet are still being charged for in the price of a new Questar.The Questar is touted to be a "portable observatory" with everthing fitting into the supplied carrying case. That is only true if used in the table top mode and personally, I don't consider a tabletop scope to be functional for astronomy no matter what its quality. We've discussed many times previously that the cost of Q in today's inflation adjusted dollars is considerably less than the original asking price, which was increased substantially in just a couple of years.Regarding the table top thing... have you ever tried a Questar?
Quote: K frank..my 71 nova ss is still here..can you say that about a modern car lets say in 40/50 years? i dont think so. New stuff is nice but not built to last and be worked on as old stuff. Thats the key to survival. Plus it hold's value if not make money in future. so each his own. john
Quote:But, it's still a 90mm, obstructed aperture telescope.No, I have never looked through a Questar. I don't see how its quality level would alter in any way my opinion of viewing by setting the scope on a tabletop. The Questar isn't going to make the tabletop any more steady or easy to move around.
Quote: IMO, a Questar is very much a niche telescope...
--------------------- --------------------- "Nothing exists but atoms and empty space. Everything else is opinion." Titus Lucretius Carus 99-55 B.C.
Steve Clayworth CPC Deluxe 800 HD, Criterion Dynascope RV-6, Questar 3.5 Standard, Astro-Physics 130 EDT F/8, Tele Vue Pronto, G-11 Gemini Too many eyepieces
Scopes: Celestron 9.25, Orion 80MM and 120MM EON Apo
Solar: Lunt LS60THa/PT/B1200/50DS
Binos: Canon 15X50 IS Mounts: CGEM and LXD75
Eyepieces: Explore Scientific, Meade & TeleVue
Camera: DMK 41, Canon 6D, SBIG STT-8300
Messier Certificate # 2508
My Images: http://www.astrophotogallery.org/u342-hfjacinto.html
The mid 20th Century was a time of Quality. We now live in a time of quantity
Quote: For some reason, a gorgeous photo cannot compete with an actual look-see, where my eyes capture the actual photons emitted long ago by the celestial object.
Clear skies, Erik
Visual astronomer since 1978.
Matthias Wirth 16" f/5
Takahashi FS-102 NSV on EM-10
Celestron 1983 C5
Zeiss, TeleVue and Celestron eyepieces
Nikon 18x70 IF-WP Zeiss Victory FL 7x42 Zeiss Victory FL 10x32
Nikon D40/D50/D5300 DSLR WO 105mm Triplet APO WO Zenithstar 66SD APO (Black 'n Blue) WO 8 x 45mm APO Bino UO 20 x 80mm Bino Vixen 80SS Refractor Orion 127mm Apex Maksutov Vixen GP-DX with Skysensor 2000 SBIG STV and e-finder
Quote:I've had four Questar 3.5s- two standards (one of which I still own), a duplex, and a field model. Every so often I'd think I needed more aperture, sell the Q, and buy a big scope- a 7" refractor on a big Losmondy mount, a 10" GEM newt, and even a 17" Coulter. And every time I'd get tired of hauling all that iron and glass around, and the long setup time. I'd sell it all and get another Q. There's nothing else that gives you a super high quality observatory in a tiny, portable package. (BTW, I once bought an early ETX as a less expensive scope for travel, but it was so mechanically and optically inferior to the Q that I dumped it soon after.) I do have a second scope- but it's even smaller: A 67mm Pronto I use for travel. I'm thinking of replacing it with a TV60 ;-)
A few telescopes of dubious value. Understanding wife and two curious cats. "Semper ubi sub ubi"
Quote: David Levy (a Questar owner) has many comets to his credit
Les Canon 10x42L IS Swift 8x44ED Ultralite Questar 50th Anniversary Model, Astro Trac wedge on Manfrotto 475 tripod Stellarvue SV90T 90mm Fluorite refractor, Porta mount head on Bogen 3068 tripod Vixen GP-DX on Baader Surveyor Tripod
Quote:Quote: David Levy (a Questar owner) has many comets to his creditBarry,Are you suggesting that David discovered those comets with his Questar?
Quote:I spoke to Cumberland also, and as an aside they have nothing to do with the broadband coatings. They only provide Questar with AlSiO coatings.
Quote:Jim's explanation is that moisture for this unusual phenomenon is that moisture can get in behind the overcoating and separate it from the BB coatings. As a physicist, I am having a hard time conceiving how this is possible without oxidizing the silver somewhere. If the topcoating were porous, I would think the inevitable result would be formation of silver oxide. Not so in this case.
Quote:It's easy to speculate that Questar has some magical formula for coatings that is superior to all others.