Quote:

---

We,have 3 variables here TOP,CURRENT ,MODERN.
Zeiss an all time great above and beyond question but not,CURRENT .
All CURRENTLY produced scopes from,AP ,TAK,TEC, officina stellare ,any size,Priced above or below 6k, have TOP optics,mechanics, MODERN materials,design,modular,capability. and so on___
of course there is televue with, TOP of the line optics , and great build.but unfortunately not,very MODERN in terms of,technique or materials or may be a little slow to catch up.(courtesy a paper,baffling
Which tends to peel off and an occasional loose rack till,advent of,starlight ).

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

After many comparisons (even with the Zeiss APQ-100/640) I wouldn't give the following one away for any of the above 4-inchers:

www.astro-foren.de/showthread.php?13579-Takahashi-FCT-100-640
(just move cursor on pictures to enlarge)

Since this multi-coated and (other than the APQ) air-spaced 100/640 fluorite-triplet is not available new any more, I personally would go for today's TSA-102/816 that has very similar characteristics of performance to the FCT-100.

Chris

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Any scope made by Astrophysics from the late 1990's onward would be my picks.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Any scope made by Astrophysics from the late 1990's onward would be my picks.

---

The difference between Televue refractors and Astrophysics refractors is the lenses. Televue refractor lenses are made of very exotic glass, but Astrophysics lenses are made from unobtanium.

---

Close. If you save up some money and watch Astromart, every so often someone sells off something with "Astro-Physics" engraved upon it or so labeled. Rarely there are bargains but they usually require the purchase of a "complete" kit which you will have to part out, unless it ends up being better than what you already have and you can afford to keep it all. The best bargains appear to be the AP130EDF telescopes, made from about 1995 on to 2003 or so. Since so many TEC140 and AP130GT telescopes have been produced and are still being produced since 2005, and as I type, the "older" 130EDF's can be found rarely for around $5700 to $6K. TEC140's come up from time to time for around $5K although I don't follow the second hand prices as closely. I hesitate to call any of these telescopes "used". At their value, you will generally find that they are very well cared for and while they have been out of the case and under the night sky, they are kept essentially in "as new" or close to it condition. Yes there can be paint chips on the dew shield edges, and where rings attach, etc, but if so, the price asked should reflect these slight imperfections. Yes, they are not "factory fresh" but in most cases they can be acquired with some patience and timing.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

This thread has not only very high quality scopes in it but has about as much "brand loyalty" built into it too. I'd definitely agree with you Rutilus. If he believes that his Carton 100mm F/13 ranks right up there with Taks I think he has a valid point. Therefore being an Istar lens user I'd definitely place Istar's triplets and fluorite ED's right at the top of the mix. I definitely believe the Istars are the "sleepers" currently available! Mike

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Refractors new available under $6K:
-Takahashi TSA-120.
-Takahashi TSA-102.
-TEC-140.
-Tele Vue NP-101.
-Tele Vue 85.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I like Barry's standards for attempting to segment the refractor field. Then I completely disagree with Astro Baby as emotion, and lack of exposure to other product governs his decision. I realize it is hard to be pragmatic if your experience is limited. But, if a,top 10 can be created by segment (as Barry suggests) then that would be a fairly largely inclusive field. Not every scope made in Siberia or Mongolia would likely make it, but that is not unexpected.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Refractors new available under $6K:
-Takahashi TSA-120.
-Takahashi TSA-102.
-TEC-140.
-Tele Vue NP-101.
-Tele Vue 85.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Best Overall Value in Top Grade Refractor available new Today would be the 6" LZOS APM for $3,999.

This is an unbelievable deal .

Mark

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Jon,

Thats was kind of where I was heading. i saw top 10 as a combination of quality, value, best sellers etc so to me top 10 would be a mix of scopes covering a range of values.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

NP-101. It's the most perfect scope I have owned. It is capable of providing highest quality views at all magnifications within reach of a 4 inch scope.

Jon

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

no love for fsq-106?

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Jon,

Thats was kind of where I was heading. i saw top 10 as a combination of quality, value, best sellers etc so to me top 10 would be a mix of scopes covering a range of values.

---

To my mind, there are just too many subjective factors to ever come to a consensus that is meaningful. Certainly Orion has sold far more 100mm f/6 than TeleVue has sold NP-101's, but a list of the top 10 refractors would only have room for one and while the 100mm F/6 is cheap and represents a good value, its primary redeeming attribute is its cost, it not a great telescope, Somebody without much knowledge from the outside reading this list of "top" 10 refractors could easily be mislead or confused.

---

I don't know if it is worth trying to frame every post in a way that someone with zero knowledge would not be confused. Being confused is a good thing as it means one needs to become more educated on a topic. So let that state of mind be what it is, a red light that one needs more information and then for them to go get it.

I would argue from the other standpoint on what should be considered: "Top 10 Current Refractors". Most popular (sales) means something. Someone trying to assert that there is some quality thing with a particular obscure telescope has a lot of subjectiveness in there. Some people will point out a Feathertouch focuser. Certainly a highly precision item. But does it make a scope without it fall from the list? If one tried to say the top 10 with best optical quality, well who has all the bench tests for all the production models of each line to prove that indeed what may be popularly construed as highest quality optic indeed really is in fact so high? No one. So in the end, it's all subjective based on the likes and dislikes of each person who made a list. So no one set of rhymes and reasons.

btw, if someone takes a great scope like the 120ST and tried to use it INCORRECTLY, then not the scope's fault...just the users. I put that scope on my list because so very many people like it for what it is, a wonderful low power refractive scanner of the heavens. Run around the heavens with it at 50x and not much difference one gonna see between it an a multi-thousand dollar extremely short focus APO. Same thing when one tried to put an ultra-short focal ratio APO up against a more traditional long focus APO for high magnification planetary observing...the short focal ratio one should not be on the list because it is being used in a way that is not where its strength is? Top 10 of anything always will be quite a subjective journey. The beauty of this exercise though is that it tells a story about each observer. Therein lies the value

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I would argue from the other standpoint on what should be considered: "Top 10 Current Refractors". Most popular (sales) means something.

---

Quote:

---

btw, if someone takes a great scope like the 120ST and tried to use it INCORRECTLY, then not the scope's fault...just the users. I put that scope on my list because so very many people like it for what it is, a wonderful low power refractive scanner of the heavens. Run around the heavens with it at 50x and not much difference one gonna see between it an a multi-thousand dollar extremely short focus APO. Same thing when one tried to put an ultra-short focal ratio APO up against a more traditional long focus APO for high magnification planetary observing...the short focal ratio one should not be on the list because it is being used in a way that is not where its strength is?

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Jon, pleeeeeeease dont say stuff like the NP101 is the most perfect scope ever ....it just eggs me on to buy one and I really do need some shoes and food quite soon

I have been shopping for a really excellent frac for ages but nothing so far is what I want, its either waaaaay too expensive, unavailable, too big to mount, supplier known to be a bit iffy etc etc.

I was in the market for a good APO for about about 6 months but never saw anything that really took me and shook me. It was mostly kind of nice but a lot of cash and for alot of cash I want something more than 'kind of nice'

---

Hi:

I am not going to claim that that the NP-101 is the most perfect scope ever because in the final analysis, it's just telescope like many others, it just has everything pretty much dialed in...

I just kind of stumbled into owning an NP-101. I had a Astro-Tech AT-102ED, used it a lot, I had a lot of fun with it, recognized it's short comings and decided I wanted a top quality apo. I knew Tom Trusock had written a review praising the NP-101 so when one became available at a very good price that was local, I just bought it. The whole flat field thing and the great color correction even out of focus were all new ground for me... that first night under dark skies with the 31mm Nagler... it was a new experience.

There are lots of good scopes out there, having owned one now for 2 or 3 years, I think the NP-101 offers a combination that is hard to beat...

I am a big believer that just about every scope has something to be enjoyed, that with the right attitude, I can enjoy and learn using most any scope. And I do...

The difficulty I have with this thread is simply that, enjoyable as they are, I have a hard time thinking of a scope like my ST-80 or the 100mm F/6 achromat as a potential "top 10 scope". There is pleasure to be had looking through them but as much fun as I have with them, their primary virtue is not what they can do but what they cost.

And if cost is the primary factor, in my experience, the top 10 refractors are all Newtonian reflectors.

Jon

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I am a big believer that just about every scope has something to be enjoyed, that with the right attitude, I can enjoy and learn using most any scope.

And if cost is the primary factor, in my experience, the top 10 refractors are all Newtonian reflectors.
Jon

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I'd accept the criticism that my experience with fracs is perhaps more limited than some, the TAL isnt the only frac I have used or owned by the way.

---

I don't know if it was you that came up with the abbreviation "frac", but whoever it was ought to be........well, they ought to be something! What a grating word! At least with the abbreviations Mak and Newt, we are taking the first few letters of the instrument type, it makes sense. With "frac" we are mining the middle of the word, kind of like if we said "sut" for Maksutov and "ton" for newtonian. "Hey I got a new "sut" last week but this puppy sure takes a long time to settle down!

Maybe instead of "frac" you could just put a little finger pressure on a few more keys and call it a "refractor"!

Seriously, call it what you want but I will always spell it out and even add a bit more - like triplet apo refractor, ED doublet refractor or fluorite apo refractor......but that's just me.

Barry Simon

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I hate "frac"!

Bill

---

Yeah I detest it also! Sounds like you're refering to "Frics" twin brother! Mike

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I hate "frac"!

Bill

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I hate "frac"!

Bill

---

Yeah I detest it also! Sounds like you're refering to "Frics" twin brother! Mike

---

Here's the deal:

Maksutov-Cassegrains are have long focal lengths but are short squat telescopes. Therefore a short, squat nickname is most appropriate, i.e. a MAK...

Newtonians can be quite long but in general they are also short and squat, not quite like a MAK though, a short nickname is again appropriate: Newt... a little slimmer than the MAK but not much.

Refractors are just the opposite, typically longer and thinner than one would expect. Thus the while a nickname is appropriate, it will not be a short, squat nickname but rather a long, flowing name. I am sure others will have better ideas than me but here's one:

Refinancator... Pronounced re-fi-nanc-a-tor.

Or maybe, refractator.. pronounced re-frac-ta-tor... (rhymes with a potatoer)

A small, fast refractator would be a "tator.

Jon

Edited by Jon Isaacs (01/07/13 10:25 PM)

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

The Celestron 102/4" F9.8 achromat. Not a fancy apochromat, not an expensive OTA, comes in many flavors and colors; comes on various mounts...but there's thousands of these things out there in various configurations, and thousands more being sold every year.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Alot of great, comparable scopes in today's market. I've owned the AP 130 EDF, AP Stowaway(F5), FSQ-ED. They were all spectacular. I've recently downsized from the heavy stuff(1 & 3)...meaning lighter weight mount and portability. My new, lighter TEC 110FL is equally spectacular to the above. And the mechanics are top notch. There are bigger and better on the market, but I'm at the stage where small is nice !

---

absolutely so !small ,portable ,high quality stuff wins in the end. Ordered the TEC a couple of weeks back !

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Alot of great, comparable scopes in today's market. I've owned the AP 130 EDF, AP Stowaway(F5), FSQ-ED. They were all spectacular. I've recently downsized from the heavy stuff(1 & 3)...meaning lighter weight mount and portability. My new, lighter TEC 110FL is equally spectacular to the above. And the mechanics are top notch. There are bigger and better on the market, but I'm at the stage where small is nice !

---

Absolutely so !small ,portable ,high quality stuff wins in the end. Ordered the TEC a couple of weeks back !

---

+1

Chris

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I too agree with the posts immediately above this one. Having had a lumbar laminectomy for a herniated disc at the young age of 19, I have to be forever careful to guard my back. Now that I am 60, the axiom is keep it at a size that I can handle. .... I think I am pretty much at my max comfortable weight in terms of wanting to move around various components so I will not succumb to aperture fever as I want to avoid hernia fever!

Barry
I'm near 60 myself. Sold my G11 also. I've never had a herniated disc, but as a Chiropractor, I know that any fatigue caused by lugging excessive weights...can certainly disrupt any back. Including mine. Down-sizing allows us to continue enjoying and sharing this marvelous passion.

Post Extras: