Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

Equipment Discussions >> Refractors

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | (show all)
polaristom
sage


Reged: 12/17/07

Loc: Alaska
TEC 140 vs. 160
      #4504150 - 04/08/11 12:48 AM Attachment (359 downloads)

Well, I just up-graded from the TEC 140 to the TEC 160. When I opened the box I really wasn't ready for the size difference. With both the 20mm more aperture and the longer focal length make this looks like a hugh jump to me.
I sure wish these clouds would go away!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dbx
sage
*****

Reged: 02/13/08

Loc: CA
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4504161 - 04/08/11 01:01 AM

Dude, that is so cool on multiple levels. I must admit to breaking the tenth commandment.



Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JumboFlex
sage


Reged: 01/20/09

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: dbx]
      #4504170 - 04/08/11 01:11 AM

Excellent! I now know who to blame for the clouds and can stop being so hard on myself for getting a couple of new EPs.

I had an internal debate about the TEC140 vs the 160 as I was interested in both but after careful study and consideration of the dimensions and mass involved I realized that the 160 was too big for what I wanted. Not that I would walk by if one was sitting all lonesome on a street corner. I would someday still like a 160.

Are you going to keep the 140?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
blueman
Photon Catcher
*****

Reged: 07/20/07

Loc: California
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4504177 - 04/08/11 01:17 AM


I will not look at the TEC160, I will not!
Blueman


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jmiele
Patron Saint?
*****

Reged: 12/04/10

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: blueman]
      #4504180 - 04/08/11 01:22 AM

Gratz on that! Will you be keeping the 140? Or is it moving on? ..Joe

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
polaristom
sage


Reged: 12/17/07

Loc: Alaska
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: jmiele]
      #4504192 - 04/08/11 01:38 AM

The 140 must move on to help pay for the 160. Not too sure what it's worth. It's number 433 so it's only a couple years old. Any ideas on what to ask?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
moonnerd
super member


Reged: 12/18/08

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4504208 - 04/08/11 01:52 AM

I'll take it of your hands for a couple hundred...

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dbx
sage
*****

Reged: 02/13/08

Loc: CA
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4504210 - 04/08/11 01:54 AM

I have an original 1957 copy of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged book I'll trade you with =P haha

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
stevew
Now I've done it


Reged: 03/03/06

Loc: British Columbia Canada
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4504212 - 04/08/11 01:56 AM

Incredible....

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike Clemens
Frozen to Eyepiece
*****

Reged: 11/26/05

Loc: Alaska, USA
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: stevew]
      #4504240 - 04/08/11 02:32 AM

Exciting! Wait until you get a killer night on Jupiter with that thing.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Chris Schroeder
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/11/04

Loc: N.E. WI Sky Glow
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4504531 - 04/08/11 08:23 AM

Just plain awesome

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
LLEEGE
True Blue
*****

Reged: 03/03/05

Loc: Cloud-chester,NY
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Chris Schroeder]
      #4504698 - 04/08/11 10:18 AM

Some of my more memorable views were with the TEC160ED. You're going to enjoy it!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott99
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/10/07

Loc: New England
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: LLEEGE]
      #4504803 - 04/08/11 11:16 AM

very nice! This scope is not being made anymore, great purchase. Are you going to sell the 140 now?

Looks like the seedlings are getting ready for spring!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
peleuba
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/01/04

Loc: Southern PA
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4504851 - 04/08/11 11:39 AM

Quote:

The 140 must move on to help pay for the 160. Not too sure what it's worth. It's number 433 so it's only a couple years old. Any ideas on what to ask?





$2000 and I will pay shipping.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
gillmj24
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 12/06/05

Loc: PA
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: peleuba]
      #4504864 - 04/08/11 11:45 AM

They regularly sell for 5000-5500 on the other site.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ziggy943
Post Laureate


Reged: 08/11/06

Loc: Utah
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: blueman]
      #4504960 - 04/08/11 12:33 PM

Quote:


I will not look at the TEC160, I will not!
Blueman




Go ahead and look. Yuri has removed the 160ED from his stable of telescopes. You can't order one anymore so there is no temptation.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
russell23
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 05/31/09

Loc: Upstate NY
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: gillmj24]
      #4504963 - 04/08/11 12:34 PM

Quote:

They regularly sell for 5000-5500 on the other site.




That's what I always see them listed for - well out of my price range at this time, but I like to keep an eye on what scopes on my "someday" list go for.

Dave


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ziggy943
Post Laureate


Reged: 08/11/06

Loc: Utah
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4504964 - 04/08/11 12:34 PM

Quote:

Well, I just up-graded from the TEC 140 to the TEC 160. When I opened the box I really wasn't ready for the size difference. With both the 20mm more aperture and the longer focal length make this looks like a hugh jump to me.
I sure wish these clouds would go away!




You probably got one of the last ones. Congrats! You will enjoy the new scope.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
t.r.
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 02/14/08

Loc: Upstate NY
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Ziggy943]
      #4504971 - 04/08/11 12:37 PM

Well, finally, one of Yuri's scopes may actually increase in value like an AP...the TEC's are certainly worthy and its overdue.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
JumboFlex
sage


Reged: 01/20/09

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: t.r.]
      #4505104 - 04/08/11 02:02 PM

Are we talking just OTA or OTA plus rings, case, finder or what have you regarding selling price? Brand new TEC 140 with case, dovetail plate and rings all sourced from TEC is over 6000. Are they selling on the other site with all this included for 5000-5500? I wouldnt sell a used TEC 140, OTA only, for less than 4500. That would be my basement price unless desperate or the scope is in diminished condition.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
GeneT
Ely Kid
*****

Reged: 11/07/08

Loc: South Texas
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: blueman]
      #4505470 - 04/08/11 05:05 PM

Quote:


I will not look at the TEC160, I will not!
Blueman





Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jrbarnett
Eyepiece Hooligan
*****

Reged: 02/28/06

Loc: Petaluma, CA
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: russell23]
      #4505523 - 04/08/11 05:29 PM

I've seen them go for as low as $4200. Be patient and a desperation seller will inevitably come along.

Regards,

Jim


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scopyfrank
999 Forever
*****

Reged: 08/29/08

Loc: Luxembourg
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4505559 - 04/08/11 05:45 PM

Nice "finder" you got there
ENJOY IT, YOU LUCKY BOY!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jmiele
Patron Saint?
*****

Reged: 12/04/10

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Scopyfrank]
      #4505715 - 04/08/11 07:24 PM

What was retail on the TEC 160ED before it was no longer available?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ennis
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 09/11/06

Loc: The Outer Limits
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: jmiele]
      #4505725 - 04/08/11 07:29 PM

Quote:

What was retail on the TEC 160ED before it was no longer available?




IIRC, it was $8800. Serious money, to be sure, but considerably less than a TOA-150.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jmiele
Patron Saint?
*****

Reged: 12/04/10

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Ennis]
      #4505758 - 04/08/11 07:51 PM

Tell me about it! Freakin Mewlon's ain't cheap either. This has been a bad, uh well expensive 2011
Joe


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David PavlichAdministrator
Transmographied
*****

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4505975 - 04/08/11 10:39 PM

Man, that is gorgeous! And I still say that the 3545 Feathertouch is one of the great pieces of astrohardware out there. A true work of mechanical art.

David


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
mikeinfortmyers
member


Reged: 03/22/11

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: JumboFlex]
      #4505994 - 04/08/11 10:51 PM

I've got a lot of time on a friends TEC 160FL. He also went from a TEC 140 to a TEC 160FL and was very impressed. The difference was dramatic. What a difference 20mm makes

Mike


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
polaristom
sage


Reged: 12/17/07

Loc: Alaska
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: mikeinfortmyers]
      #4507033 - 04/09/11 01:12 PM Attachment (186 downloads)

Thanks everybody for all the info and discussion. I'm really looking forward to using this baby. I did buy it used on the "other" site, but it's pretty clean, I'm very happy with it.
Anyway, here is a picture of the business ends - only 20mm difference!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jmiele
Patron Saint?
*****

Reged: 12/04/10

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4507064 - 04/09/11 01:21 PM

They both look awesome! Will they ever be mounted at the same time? Any side by side review in our future? Joe

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
polaristom
sage


Reged: 12/17/07

Loc: Alaska
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: jmiele]
      #4507089 - 04/09/11 01:33 PM Attachment (151 downloads)

I only have a G-11 Joe,
Not too sure how I would do a side by side comparison.
I'll do the best I can to write a first light report. Maybe tomorrow, tonight is looking promising!

Dave, I agree 100%, the Feathertouch focuser on the TEC's are the nicest focusers I've ever seen. Really a work of art and so nice to use.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
polaristom
sage


Reged: 12/17/07

Loc: Alaska
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4507091 - 04/09/11 01:34 PM Attachment (163 downloads)

Sorry, I'm really having fun with these!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
MikeBOKC
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 05/10/10

Loc: Oklahoma City, OK
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4507194 - 04/09/11 02:23 PM

I think if I had those two scopes sitting around the house I'd take pictures of them on velvet.

Iwonder how many pms the OP has received so far saying "I'll buy that 140!"


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ybor
super member


Reged: 01/07/06

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: MikeBOKC]
      #4507251 - 04/09/11 02:50 PM

Is their a noticeable visual diference from the TEC 160 FL to TEC 140 since you have both scopes ?

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
polaristom
sage


Reged: 12/17/07

Loc: Alaska
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: ybor]
      #4507398 - 04/09/11 04:23 PM

??? Not sure what you mean ybor? Both scopes are the ED model. The 140 is a f-7 and 160 is an f-8. Thats about the only difference. One costs more!!!
I wish I had the FL, maybe in a couple years.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike Clemens
Frozen to Eyepiece
*****

Reged: 11/26/05

Loc: Alaska, USA
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: ybor]
      #4507409 - 04/09/11 04:30 PM

Nice comparison shots. It was the TEC200 that finally put scratches into my dinner table. (literally.. and figuratively? : )

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
polaristom
sage


Reged: 12/17/07

Loc: Alaska
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Mike Clemens]
      #4507518 - 04/09/11 05:31 PM

I don't know if you can see the new scratches in the table or not, but the wife noticed them right away. She's so happy with me right now!!!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scopyfrank
999 Forever
*****

Reged: 08/29/08

Loc: Luxembourg
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4507530 - 04/09/11 05:36 PM

scratch on the table is less dramatic than scratch on the lens

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
GeneT
Ely Kid
*****

Reged: 11/07/08

Loc: South Texas
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4507831 - 04/09/11 08:27 PM

Looks much larger.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wormstar
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 11/23/09

Loc: Central Ct
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: GeneT]
      #4507866 - 04/09/11 08:47 PM

Enjoy it!! I love mine- I see yours is #4, mine is #6.
Keith


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike Clemens
Frozen to Eyepiece
*****

Reged: 11/26/05

Loc: Alaska, USA
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: wormstar]
      #4508012 - 04/09/11 10:27 PM

I had #5.. sold it to Max in Italy

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
polaristom
sage


Reged: 12/17/07

Loc: Alaska
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Mike Clemens]
      #4508264 - 04/10/11 01:35 AM Attachment (166 downloads)

Tonight I got a great 3D view of the moon!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott99
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 05/10/07

Loc: New England
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4508766 - 04/10/11 10:29 AM

Quote:

Sorry, I'm really having fun with these!




this is why I usually sell the old scope first!

you better get moving - watch out for the "Gollum" effect - a couple more days and you won't be able to sell the 140!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Destrehan Dave
member
*****

Reged: 12/01/05

Loc: Destrehan, LA
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Scott99]
      #4685910 - 07/10/11 09:25 PM

Please give us an update on the original topic of the observational capabilities of the 140 versus the 160.

Thanks

DD


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
polaristom
sage


Reged: 12/17/07

Loc: Alaska
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Destrehan Dave]
      #4686190 - 07/11/11 12:35 AM

Dave, I live up in Alaska, it has been 3 months since it was dark enough to use my new scope. I've looked so forward to winter rolling around; I promise I'll write a full review once I get a good look. Probably a couple more months however!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mike Clemens
Frozen to Eyepiece
*****

Reged: 11/26/05

Loc: Alaska, USA
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #4687776 - 07/11/11 10:53 PM

The 160 is really going to deliver on the planets. Yuri and "Sky and Telescope" both downplay the difference between 140mm and 160mm but I think you will easily notice it. (Depending on observing habits.) Spend consistent time on Jupiter this Winter and you are going to be amazed. I am hoping for a heavy visual Winter after several years of photos only.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ybor
super member


Reged: 01/07/06

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Mike Clemens]
      #4689437 - 07/12/11 09:27 PM

HI

It would seem that these two great scope have not been compared in depth side by side on various objects to deterime if there are any real differences . A comparision would be nice to have maybe in a future TEC Festival with a TEC 140, TEC160 and TEC 180 to compare views .
If you are trying to decide between these 3 great scopes , I have not found any in depth reviews comparing them on visual performance .
Thank You


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Svezda
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/01/07

Loc: Texas
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: LLEEGE]
      #5528581 - 11/19/12 07:01 PM

Quote:

Some of my more memorable views were with the TEC160ED. You're going to enjoy it!



Me too...and also with the 140...so my plan to sell the 140 to cover most of the cost of the 160 didn't quite work out! My most memorable Jupiter observing session of my life was with the 140 but that was due to unprecedented (for me) dead still seeing conditions that I have never even come close to since. It was a revelation to me what a 5.5-inch scope could show on Jupiter. If I had more observing time I might have experienced something similar with the 160, but until I do I just can't let go of the perfect 140. The optics are just fantastic and the size is so convenient and easy to use. The 160, admittedly, is a lot more work to transport and set up.

Getting it balanced, also, is harder since due to the bulk and weight of the OTA, adjusting the tube within the rings to get the balance just right for any combination of eyepieces/turret/finders/diagonal is rather laborious. I will soon solve this problem with stainless weights at the rear of the OTA riding on a second set of TEC tube rings with TEC dovetail plates. This will allow much faster fine-tuning of the balance point plus will permanently shift the observing position from on the ground at zenith to maybe being able to sit in the lowest position of my Starbound observing chair.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Svezda
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/01/07

Loc: Texas
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: gillmj24]
      #5528599 - 11/19/12 07:11 PM

Quote:

They regularly sell for 5000-5500 on the other site.



People tend to really undervalue the wonderful TEC140 and so sometimes some real bargains can be found. Paul is one who knows a more accurate value. I paid a /very/ nice price of $5300 + 1/2 shipping ($40) for one with rings in a very nice custom hard case (~$300 new). That would be ~$5000 for OTA and rings (very nice, btw) w/o case and I think that's a bargain. They certainly haven't reduced in value since I bought mine about five or six years ago (#286).


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Svezda
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/01/07

Loc: Texas
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: wormstar]
      #5528620 - 11/19/12 07:20 PM

Quote:

Enjoy it!! I love mine- I see yours is #4, mine is #6.
Keith



I've got TEC160ED No.020, purchased in March 2008.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Svezda
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/01/07

Loc: Texas
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Scott99]
      #5528630 - 11/19/12 07:24 PM

Quote:

Quote:

Sorry, I'm really having fun with these!




this is why I usually sell the old scope first!

you better get moving - watch out for the "Gollum" effect - a couple more days and you won't be able to sell the 140!



I don't know what this effect is, but I developed it as soon as I had the 160 home...I fully intended to sell the 140 to get the 160. That didn't happen and may never happen, as much as I love the 140. Nicest and second most-used scope I have ever owned. Most used scope? My Teleport 14.5-inch. Takes all of five minutes to set up in the driveway and collimate...but only bout two minutes if I leave it open and covered in the garage with wheels on instead of collapsed down into the main body of the scope.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Paul G
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 05/08/03

Loc: Freedonia
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #5528759 - 11/19/12 08:37 PM

Quote:

Sorry, I'm really having fun with these!




Great picture!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
CounterWeight
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 10/05/08

Loc: Palo alto, CA.
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Paul G]
      #5528791 - 11/19/12 08:55 PM

Quote:

I've got TEC160ED No.020, purchased in March 2008.




I've number 30 April '09. Fantastic scope, never compared to a 140 though.

Love the side by side of the 2 scopes - lucky you!

Unfortunately I did have to sell my TOA 130(s) to complete funding the transaction - but no regrets Was fortunate to have a shadow transit on Saturn... steady seeing right after purchase... a ZAOII 4mm and I was quite a happy camper.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rachel W
member


Reged: 07/10/12

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Svezda]
      #5529280 - 11/20/12 01:36 AM

Quote:

Quote:

They regularly sell for 5000-5500 on the other site.



People tend to really undervalue the wonderful TEC140 and so sometimes some real bargains can be found. Paul is one who knows a more accurate value. I paid a /very/ nice price of $5300 + 1/2 shipping ($40) for one with rings in a very nice custom hard case (~$300 new). That would be ~$5000 for OTA and rings (very nice, btw) w/o case and I think that's a bargain. They certainly haven't reduced in value since I bought mine about five or six years ago (#286).




I bought a 2011 TEC-140 used late this summer with rings, finder/mount and a nice metal storage box - it's beautiful and awesome to view through. Paid $5,300 and shipping was included.

The owner was moving up to a Tec-180! I can't imagine the view through that sweet thing, but still an all the 140 is just terrific and Yuri is a delight to deal with.

Rachel


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ziggy943
Post Laureate


Reged: 08/11/06

Loc: Utah
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Rachel W]
      #5530000 - 11/20/12 12:10 PM

TEC's are wonderful scopes.

160 ED #001


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
saemark30
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 02/21/12

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Mike Clemens]
      #5530343 - 11/20/12 02:47 PM

Is this only for Jupiter or will Mars and Saturn show much difference between the 140 and 160?
Quote:

The 160 is really going to deliver on the planets. Yuri and "Sky and Telescope" both downplay the difference between 140mm and 160mm but I think you will easily notice it. (Depending on observing habits.) Spend consistent time on Jupiter this Winter and you are going to be amazed. I am hoping for a heavy visual Winter after several years of photos only.




Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Tom and Beth
Post Laureate


Reged: 01/08/07

Loc: Tucson, AZ
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: saemark30]
      #5531432 - 11/21/12 01:27 AM

I REALLY like my TEC 140, but it is probably a good thing that the temptation of getting a 160 or larger is overcome by the element Unobtainium.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ziggy943
Post Laureate


Reged: 08/11/06

Loc: Utah
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Tom and Beth]
      #5531434 - 11/21/12 01:33 AM

There is very little between the 140 and 160. I have viewed with them side by side on planets. The view of Saturn is slightly better, Cassini's is slightly easier to see and has better contrast. There is not a WOW difference.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
AlbertoJ
member


Reged: 02/20/08

Loc: Madrid (EspaƱa)
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Ziggy943]
      #5533510 - 11/22/12 08:19 AM

Quote:

There is very little between the 140 and 160. I have viewed with them side by side on planets. The view of Saturn is slightly better, Cassini's is slightly easier to see and has better contrast. There is not a WOW difference.




And what“s about deep sky observation? Has anyone compared them in DSO?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
vahe
professor emeritus


Reged: 08/27/05

Loc: Houston, Texas
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: polaristom]
      #5533551 - 11/22/12 08:57 AM

Now,

If Yuri would make me a 160 F/9 fluorite triplet, that would be my dream visual scope. F/9 is the sweet spot for apo design, they are essentially perfect.

I know, I am dreaming.

Vahe


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rfic1
sage
*****

Reged: 10/25/05

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: vahe]
      #5533676 - 11/22/12 10:19 AM

I could not agree more. I wish my TEC 180 was a f/9. If I was into imaging that was be a different story.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
RAKing
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/28/07

Loc: West of the D.C. Nebula
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: AlbertoJ]
      #5533751 - 11/22/12 11:06 AM

Quote:

And what“s about deep sky observation? Has anyone compared them in DSO?




There is just under 0.3 magnitude difference between the 140 and 160, so you might be able to pick out a few more details in some of the objects that aren't visible in the 140. Super tight doubles might be a little easier to split. (All of this presumes good sky conditions).

I can tell the difference between my 130 and my 140. I do a lot of variable star estimates and a mag 12 comp star is just that much easier to see in the bigger scope. A 160 would be "more better" for me.

Cheers,

Ron


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Yu Gu
member


Reged: 06/18/06

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: rfic1]
      #5533764 - 11/22/12 11:14 AM

Quote:

I could not agree more. I wish my TEC 180 was a f/9. If I was into imaging that was be a different story.




Why don't we all pitch this idea to Yuri, maybe he will make our dream scope!


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ziggy943
Post Laureate


Reged: 08/11/06

Loc: Utah
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: AlbertoJ]
      #5533935 - 11/22/12 01:07 PM

Quote:

Quote:

There is very little between the 140 and 160. I have viewed with them side by side on planets. The view of Saturn is slightly better, Cassini's is slightly easier to see and has better contrast. There is not a WOW difference.




And what“s about deep sky observation? Has anyone compared them in DSO?





If you really want deep sky performance get a big reflector. There's not much difference between a 140 & a 160.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Cabrillas
member


Reged: 07/19/09

Loc: Madrid. Spain.
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Ziggy943]
      #5535924 - 11/23/12 05:36 PM

As Yuri himself said, the biggest difference between 140 and 160 is...the price. Seriously, I've noticed a clear improvement on multiple stars. On DSOs, clusters are a bit more enjoyable, maybe for the same reason (M 11 with a Nagler 22 makes you scream!!), and I really don't know if I convince myself that I see more nebulosity. I guess that more aperture diminishes the "dimming" effect of filters.
About planets I still wait for a really stable night as the ones I had sometimes with the 140. Again, I think that more aperture will allow for a bit more magnification.

And I'm also suffering that Gollum effect. I say to myself that keeping the 140 is almost obscene, but to no avail...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
CounterWeight
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 10/05/08

Loc: Palo alto, CA.
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: Cabrillas]
      #5536388 - 11/23/12 10:36 PM


Numbers wise,

140ED is F/7 and the 160ED is f/8... just mentioning as I don't recall that in the prior posts.

Assuming good skies and high mag planet viewing (what I use my 160ED for mainly, though it's impressed me on many other objects) it's in the high mag (in good skies) that I think there would be any real notacible difference? Performance gets more non linear as you increase the mag.

TEC
scope->ep(mm) -> mag -> mag/in -> exit_pupil
140ED --> 4 --> 245 ---> 44.45 ---> 0.5714
140ED --> 5 --> 196 ---> 35.56 ---> 0.7142
140ED --> 6 --> 163.3..->29.63... -> 0.8571

160ED --> 4 --> 320 --> 50.8 ---> 0.5
160ED --> 5 --> 256 --> 40.64 --> 0.625
160ED --> 6 --> 213 --> 33.865 -> 0.75

... if you lengthen the focal ratio
160ED_f/9 -> 4 -> 360 -> 57.15 -> 0.444
160ED_f/9 -> 5 -> 288 -> 45.72 -> 0.555

Not sure I see a clear benefit over the f/8 which tops at 50x inch and a 0.5 exit pupil?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
RAKing
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 12/28/07

Loc: West of the D.C. Nebula
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: CounterWeight]
      #5536706 - 11/24/12 07:16 AM

What your chart shows me is that I could use a 5mm eyepiece in the 160 and enjoy a larger exit pupil for similar magnification as using a 4mm in my TEC 140. Physically, I cannot handle the 160ED, so it's a moot point. (I can always dream!)

Here in Virginia, my sky conditions don't let me push the maximum very often. I carry a 4mm eyepiece, but it's more of a "wish" than reality.

Cheers,

Ron


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Bob S.
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 07/14/05

Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: RAKing]
      #5536830 - 11/24/12 08:57 AM

A buddy of mine who has owned all of the TEC fluorite scopes from 110mm - 180mm has told me that 20mm jumps do not make a big difference in how the scopes perform (either 140 to 160 or 160 to 180). He did say that jumping 40mm makes a signifcant difference in how the scope perform visually.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ziggy943
Post Laureate


Reged: 08/11/06

Loc: Utah
Re: TEC 140 vs. 160 new [Re: CounterWeight]
      #5537520 - 11/24/12 04:53 PM

The wish was for the 180 F/7 to be an F/9, not the 160 F/8.

I'd be tempted by a 180 F/10 Flourite. I think it's a better planetary scale.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | (show all)


Extra information
30 registered and 51 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  Scott in NC, FirstSight, panhard, star drop 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 7855

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics