MarkLeica 8x20; Nikon Action 7x35; Vixen Apex Pro 8x42; Orion 15x63; Docter Nobilem 15x60WO Megrez II 80 FD / APM 107mm f/6.5 / Mewlon 210 on DM-6 + Berlebach Planet
APM/TMB 115/805 APO Celestron ED-80 Celestron 9.25
CG-5 Vixen Porta II
Naglers: 17T4, 13T6, 3-6 zoom UWANs: 28mm, 7mm Pentax 10XW, 10mm Radian
Misc EP: 50mm Parks, 42mm GSO, 2x TV Barlow, sundry plossls...
Matt in Oz
Takahashi Mewlon 210 F11.5 = 2415mm
Takahashi TSA120 F7.5 (out on loan) = 900mm
Takahashi FC76CSV F7.5 = 570m
Takahashi FS60CB F5.9 = 355mm
WO Megrez 120 ED on GP Mount
WO ZenithStar 80 ED II on Porta II
10" Meade LightBridge/Paracorr
Orion ED 100 on Polaris Mount
Astro-Tech 8" f6 Dob
Bushnell Ares 5
Meade 226 2.4" f11.7
SpaceScope 2.4" f15
-DannyMy warehouseMy Channel
Quote:Or look for an ED100 APO used. I paid $390 for mine.
Explore Scientific ED127Explore Scientific AR152Celestron Omni XLT 102 Orion XT10i
"The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands." Psalms 19:1
Starhopping inner city skies
8x30mm, vx80mm f/7.5, sw100mm f/9, wo120mm f/7.5,
µ180mm f/12, vx200mm f/9.75, µ210mm f/11.5,
vx130mm f/5, o254mm f/4.7
ES35,25, 17LVW, 11T6, 7UO, 24-8 zoom
Quote:I understand that the shorter the focal length the wider "rich field view. Thererfore would I be able to see planets in interesting enough detail with the f/5 scope? or do you need an f/10 for that? But than with the f/10 does that limit the capability of DSOs. Or given that these are both achromats, would it be better to spend a bit more money to get an ED scope with a smaller apeture but better image to counter the inherent flaws of an achromat.
Quote:The question now becomes, how much of a noticeable difference is there between an 80mm f/10 and an 100mm f/10 achromatic refractor?
Stellarvue SV85s LOMO and SV102A LOMO refractors, Discmount DM4 mount,
Quote:Find a used 100mm ED scope. Orion, Skywatcher, and Vixen all had versions of this scope.It will cost you about $400 used (be patient and one will turn up).These are superb little telescopes. excellent optical quality, light, decent mechanical quality.Older versions had a single speed focuser and that is fine. A two speed is totally unnecessary for this model.With used 100ED f/9 scopes so inexpensive, I would never recommend an f/10 achromat anymore.
SLAP Observer --- TMB130SS, SV102V(LOMO Lens), SV80ED Deluxe "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -- Edmund Burke. "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." -- George Orwell "The measure of a man’s greatness is not determined by what he accomplishes for himself, but by what he accomplishes for others.” -- Some Bald Guy
Joe (quote)"That does it! Next Big Bang, someone has got to rethink this gettin' old business!" Joe Daugert -------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>> ISTAR Scope Club <<<<<<<<<<<<
Quote:I think the optics are the same in that model, but the lens cell isn't quite as nice, i.e. collimatable.
Quote:Quote:I think the optics are the same in that model, but the lens cell isn't quite as nice, i.e. collimatable. Is the dew shield metal or plastic? Anyone know?The old CR-4's, the predecessor to these scopes, did not have a collimatable cell.Jon
Celestron C8 XLT on CG5 8inch EQ mounted newt Parks 8inch f/6 90mm mak
Quote:Joe, thank you for the link. Wow, that is a great price. Is the Celestron 102mm f/10 the same as the Skywatcher 102mm f/10, just re-branded? I've heard this happens a lot with the lower end range of scopes. I'm wondering why there is such a large price difference (even not considering the sale price). Is quality for one better than the other? Thanks
Orion XT12i with Swayze-refigured primary & Protostar secondary
Televue NP101 refractor
William Optics Megrez 90 refractor
Universal Astronomics Deluxe Mounts
Quote:Alternative view- If you can scrape up $2000 or so you can find a top notch wide field 100mm apochromat used, that will have no color correction issues. Once you use it you won't want anything less.
“I am the only person to ever ace a 1951 USAF resolution test. My 'to observe' list says 'done'. I do not use charts or atlases when I starhop; men do not use maps. One of my sketches won an SBIG deep sky imaging contest. I am the life of star parties I have never attended. I never say anything looks like a faint fuzzy - not even a faint fuzzy. Pilots aim green laser pointers at me. Don Pensack proofreads my CN forum posts.” - The Most Interesting Astronomer in the Universe
Quote:I'm going to be a curmudgeon here and frankly say that the "best refractor for a "newcomer" to astronomy...is an 8" or 10" reflector. Let the refractor be your SECOND scope purchase...
Solar Imaging Tutorial • Circa 1958 Gilbert 3" Reflector • Astro-Physics 105 EDT (Traveler) • Astro-Physics160 EDF • Astro-Physics175 EDF • Coronado 90/90/30 Hα • PSTs in Ha and CaK flavors • Circa 1810 Utzschneider,Reichenbach,Fraunhofer • Circa 1825 Merz,Utzschneider,Fraunhofer • Etc. etc.
12" Dob, 4" Mak, 3" APO, PST, bunch of green eyepieces & an understanding wife.
Quote:Thanks a lot for the responses.I guess why I am leaning towards a refractor is for a few reasons that I've identified since beginning my pursuit of a telescope. (1) Size. I live in an apartment and a Dobsonian would simply be too big and cumbersome to store, use and travel with. I want a scope I can use close to home but also throw in the car and drive to a dark spot and setup quickly. The Dobs would be stretching the limit of my desire for portability.(2) Ease of use... simple maintenance, no collimation, short cool down time, simple use of an alt-az mount.(3) From what I've been told, the mirrors in lower price range Newtownians can degrade after a few years as the coatings begin to oxidize. These are some of the reasons. Given everything I've read and discussed with people, "my gut" is leaning towards a 80mm-100mm refractor on an alt-az manual mount. As a starter scope. There are undoubtedly advantages to the Dobs and other designs but the factors of size and portability have me leaning towards getting into the hobby with a refractor. Those are my thoughts... I could be totaly off base too