Kmart 40mm-Thanks Mom|Jason60mm-Thanks Dad|C80SS-Thanks Wife|C90|C102|C6XLT|AP130EDFGT|C-11XLT EQ-2|EQ-3|CG5GT|Mach 1 & Eagle "For once you have tasted flight, you will walk the earth with your eyes turned skywards, for there you have been and there you will long to return".-Leonardo da Vinci "We're all in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars."-Oscar Wilde ~RIP Dad, you were my best friend...Godspeed!~
ALL my posts should be considered as opinions shaped by MY experiences and understanding of the facts.
Quote:After a little research, it may be a clone of this...http://neilenglish.net/a-groundbreaking-4-achromat-from-china/
Dave JessieOutreach Events
Quote: I prefer the term "planet viewer";and I agree that F15 certainly would be more desirable unless the scope were made with ED glass.
Quote: In my mind, a "planet killer" requires more than 4 inches of aperture. Roland Christen's article "What is the best Planetary Telescope" seems to agree with my experience.
The opinions expressed herein are solely mine as an amateur astronomer hobbyist & consumer. Information herein was correlated from experience, discussions with others, & research from multiple sources freely available at time of posting. All reasonable care & skill was used, but no warranty is made as to accuracy, & liability cannot be accepted for errors/omissions. This is for information only and not intended nor implied to be a substitute for professional advice.
Quote: In my book, any scope can properly designate itself as a planetary killer as long as it deviates from the common popular design in order to maximize its potential for planetary observing.
Quote: I see no need to deviate from the common, popular design for a telescope to be a "planet killer", it just needs to be a scope that is capable being seeing limited nearly all the time.
Whenever I have come into large sums of money in my life, I always put half of it aside to spend on fast cars and the pursuit of loose women.
I put aside the other half to spend frivolously.
Quote: Quote: In my book, any scope can properly designate itself as a planetary killer as long as it deviates from the common popular design in order to maximize its potential for planetary observing. From my point of view, a "planet killer" is a scope capable of providing the best possible planetary views under almost all circumstances. I see no need to deviate from the common, popular design for a telescope to be a "planet killer", it just needs to be a scope that is capable being seeing limited nearly all the time. I don't consider my 4 inch apo or any 4 inch scope to be a "planet killer" because most nights there is more to see than can be seen with any 4 inch scope. Jon Isaacs
Quote:From my point of view, a "planet killer" is a scope capable of providing the best possible planetary views under almost all circumstances. I don't consider my 4 inch apo or any 4 inch scope to be a "planet killer" because most nights there is more to see than can be seen with any 4 inch scope. Jon Isaacs
8" SCT80mm f7 EDSmall GEM
Quote:That would not work for me because that is an aperture-only approach. Plus I wonder how valid it really is? Most people will say in a heartbeat that for the typical observer in the typical circumstance that it is hightly unlikely that the seeing will be producing sub 1 arcsec of resolution...and many professional observatories strive to find places that can routinely provide this. So if that is the premise for the typical better evening, then seeing-limited becomes a 115mm scope for a 1 arcsecond atmosphere (probably why the 130mm class refractor is so popular)!!
Quote:You can get the original version of this scope that Stellarvue sold very briefly from Canadian Telescopes for $500 with free shipping, it differs from the new premium version by having a 2" crayford instead of a 2.5" R&P and it doesn,t have a removable section for bino viewing however its $300 cheaper, it was reviewed in S&T and did very well though that sample came from Hands On Optics.DA.
Mike Traub(Mr. Congeniality): I've learned that I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy it!:Shipfitters mottos; Cut to suit, pound to fit, paint to hide!: If it dosen't fit get a bigger hammer!......Retired and BROKE!!!!!!!!: The Maypole Observatory.
Quote:I don't consider my 4 inch apo or any 4 inch scope to be a "planet killer" because most nights there is more to see than can be seen with any 4 inch scope.
I guess it is marketing and shipping constraints that bias manufacturers against long tubes.
Quote:Is this new SV scope really any different than the Astro Telescope from HOO?
Show me an aging Greek and I'll show you the Nick of time.
JIM - 15x70-Ultra~TV-85/SM-60~MN-66~ Unistar Deluxe~Unimount Light~DM-6/Planet tripod
Quote:Here is a quote from Vic's post on the Yahoo Stellarvue Group:"So this month, for at least a limited time, I will produce another Stellarvue achromatic refractor, with performance on the level people expect from us. These will not be mere import telescopes which are untested and inconsistent. These telescopes will be triple tested by us, just like any other Stellarvue telescope. Only the best optics can survive our testing regiment."
In my mind, a "planet killer" requires more than 4 inches of aperture.
Quote:Quote: I guess it is marketing and shipping constraints that bias manufacturers against long tubes. I'm guessing it is also user friendliness that factors into the marketing decisions that affect what telescope design gets priority as to hitting the production lines. An F/15 or worse,an F/20 tube is extremely long and requires a really substantial mount that for a user such as myself wouldn't even entertain to owning due to my situation of not being able to permanently mount that setup in some sort of observatory. I have to take each and every telescope setup I own outdoors everytime it gets used,then reverse the proceedure when it's time to call it a night. That's my bias against this design because it requires far less effort to choose a completely different one like a 10 inch dobsonian that is far easier for me to get into action, with more horsepower under the hood in terms of resolution capability. My opinion is there many other backyard observers in the same boat,and that isn't lost on the scope manufacturers. I love 4 inch refractors that are a lot more grab and go capable and believe that desire is more widespread in this hobby. In the right circumstances for the right individual, a long tubed acro can be a wonderful tool.
Quote: I guess it is marketing and shipping constraints that bias manufacturers against long tubes.
Telescopes are instruments of hope and faith. Hope that a better, clearer and brighter universe can be observed. Faith that we can bring these discoveries back to our small planet and create positive changes for all of it's inhabitants.
Quote: Hmmm. "testing regiment" Vic must have an entire army of testers.
Quote: Quote: Hmmm. "testing regiment" Vic must have an entire army of testers. First, I would be quite suprised if Stellarvue sold a telescope every day, so it would not be a surprise at all that they could test every telescope they sold by three people.Second, they don't say how they test their telescopes, but using an artificual star and a clear lens cover with with a central obstruction, you can do a very comprhensive star test in less than 5 minutes that will tell you about the alignment, spherical abberations, or the presence of zones or turned edges, and the smoothness of the optics. If you know what you are doing, it is a pretty quick and easy thing to do.And since like most manufacturers today, they don't really specify a very objective quality level of their scopes like PTV or Sthreh (Strehl is so much better), they only have to look for meaningful errors (and that is not a bad thing at all if they really do test every telescope to be sure that there are no meaningful errors).Most of these small specialty companies simply don't sell that big a volume of telescopes, and they may make as much or more profit from the accessories and things they sell (field flattners, mounts, OEM products like eyepeices, etc) as they make from the telescopes they sell (and I am sure this is common in the industry).I am sure that the quality will be good. Stellarvue has a well deserved reputation of selling good quality equipment.But I am sure that they can be confident in this because the manufacturers they are using these days (yes, the ones in China) are proving that they can produce very high quality in serial production even with SCTs, with recent vintage SCTs routinely shipping with excellent optical quality.But it never hurts to check, and even if it is a star test to just confirm that there are no major issues with the scope, Stellarvue is to be congratulated for their quality control efforts.
Quote:Achro's strehl of .9 or better, APO's .95 or better.
A-P 130EDF GT
StarMaster 11 (Highly Modified)
Canon 10X30 IS Binocs
Complete Sets of Nagler T4's, T5's, T6's, TV Plossls, TAK LE's, UO Orthos, Celestron Ultimas
Quote:A 4" achromat would have to be about f/16 to have a polychromatic strehl of .95 I think
Quote:And again, I don't doubt the quality, only that they personally run every sample through an interferometer.
Tom Karpf (tkarpf) Vice President, Astronomical Society of Greater Hartford www.asgh.org
Quote:Has any one considered the Lunt 102ed f/7 for $729 over the SV102 "Planet Killer". Since most comments indicate an ED scope will have better color correction, etc. Just musing after reading this thread.
Quote:Quote:And again, I don't doubt the quality, only that they personally run every sample through an interferometer.Stellarvue does zygo AND star testing of every scope. They're a bit pricier than other 'similar' scopes because that testing takes time, and time costs money.http://www.optcorp.com/category.aspx?uid=1-600-765