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 | (show all)
chaoscosmos
sage
*****

Reged: 01/26/13

Loc: Mission Viejo CA
Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101
      #5683768 - 02/16/13 03:51 PM

Apropos to some of the comments in the discussion 'Aperture isn't Everything'... I'm wondering if since the vast majority of my viewing will be in semi-light polluted skies, if I should focus on as large an aperture scope as I can afford. The idea being that, given my usual viewing environment, I would use it for planetary viewing primarily and do what I could with it for deep sky. So I'm wondering that given the above, if something like the SV 115 would be a better choice for me than the NP-101. Or is the NP-101 versatile enough that it might make up in my occasional dark sky opportunities what it might lose viewing from my backyard?

If you can throw light on the topic or offer your 2 cents, I appreciate it.
I'm open to alternative suggestions to the Stellarvue.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
la200o
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 09/09/08

Loc: SE Michigan, USA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: chaoscosmos]
      #5683847 - 02/16/13 04:39 PM

Both fine scopes. The NP 101 will give superb wide-field views as well as take high power very well.

Bill


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

Reged: 08/27/04

Loc: New Hampshire
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: la200o]
      #5683926 - 02/16/13 05:29 PM

TSA-120??

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott in NCAdministrator
80mm Refractor Fanatic
*****

Reged: 03/05/05

Loc: NC
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: NHRob]
      #5684091 - 02/16/13 07:14 PM

I realize that I'm just pointing out the obvious, but the 115mm scope will gather 29.6% more light than the 101mm scope. And with a 31T5 Nagler, you can still get a 3.15 degree TFOV with a 115mm f/7 scope. Admittedly that's not as wide a field as the NP101 will give you, but it's still a pretty wide field. The truth, though, is that they're both great scopes. I can't imagine you'd be unhappy with either one of them.

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

Reged: 09/27/06

Loc: Seattle, WA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Scott in NC]
      #5684163 - 02/16/13 08:04 PM

I'm in a similar situation, and can strongly recommend the 115mm scope. Actually, I recommend a 120mm ed refractor such as the Eon 120 or similar.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: chaoscosmos]
      #5684983 - 02/17/13 11:14 AM

Quote:

If you can throw light on the topic or offer your 2 cents, I appreciate it.




This is the way I look at it:

A $500, 10 inch GSO Dobsonian seriously outperforms either of these scopes at higher magnifications. If it fits in the field of view of the 10 inch Dob, the Dob is just so superior. Where the 115mm has a 13% advantage in resolution and 28% light gathering advantage over the NP-101, a 10 inch Dob has more than twice the resolving power and gathers about 4 times as much light, these are numbers that indicate huge differences at the eyepiece.

At the eyepiece, looking at the planets, looking at double stars, I'll take my 10 inch GSO Dob over my NP-101 if there is time for the Newtonian to cool. On those dark sky trips, a 10 inch Dob will do the number on the refractors.

The thing about the NP-101, it does the things that refractors do best, best... There is no field curvature in the widefields, there is no chromatic aberration at the highest magnifications. With it's 540mm focal length, it's like an 80mm in terms of field of view but it's a 4 inch. The 115mm is a small scope that is quite long but still small in terms of aperture. You can only do so much with 101.6mm or 115mm.

I recommend to things:

- Consider a second scope, that $500 Dob is an incredible value and a powerful tool. Point it at M13 or the Orion nebula.. it packs some punch.

- The StellarVue 115 is about $3200, it's a triplet but from what I can find out, apparently not an FPL-53 triplet, the FPL-53 costs more and provides the possibility of better color correction. I would swing my gaze over towards Astro-Tech, two scopes, the Astro-Tech 111 EDT and the Astro-Tech 106.

The Astro-Tech 111 EDT is very similar in aperture to the SV-115, it may even be manufactured by the same manufacturer as the SV-115. You are giving up very little aperture and saving a lot of money. The AT-106 uses the better FPL-53 glass, costs more than the 111EDT but still considerably less than the 115.

These are all good scopes. When you are looking at the difference between the NP-101 and the others, you are looking at a scope that takes it that last little bit, both mechanically and optically, that costs so much. It probably takes a trained eye to notice at first glance that at low powers with widefield eyepieces, the stars are round and sharp at the edge of the field in the NP-101. In the other scopes, there is field curvature to be seen, the views are still totally amazing...

If I didn't have an NP-101, I would probably now own a AT-106...

jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott in NCAdministrator
80mm Refractor Fanatic
*****

Reged: 03/05/05

Loc: NC
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 *DELETED* new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5685160 - 02/17/13 12:51 PM

Post deleted by Scott in NC (edited to correct some misinformation that I had mistakenly posted!)

Edited by Scott in NC (02/17/13 01:55 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rich V.
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 01/02/05

Loc: Lake Tahoe area, Nevada, USA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Scott in NC]
      #5685209 - 02/17/13 01:15 PM

In searching, I don't see where Vic has ever said that FPL-53 is used in the 115T. He'd say it if it was used; he has no hesitation claiming that glass is used in some of his other offerings.

In a SV group post from 2008, he hedges around saying he uses FPL-53 and denies using FPL-51:

"The optical design of the SV115T is as good as we make it. As
always, we will be prodded to disclose glass types. People will want
to know if it is FPL-53 as if this is the only good glass on the
market. While Ohara FPL53 is certainly better than Ohara FPL-51,
there are other excellent glass types made by Schott and others. The
fact is, the best optical systems we have ever produced are the LZOS
Advanced Optical Systems using OK4 Russian glass. These lenses
outperform our other lenses using FPL-53. This should explode the
myth that a telescope absolutely must have FPL-53 to be the best.
Certainly FPL-53 is excellent, but it is not the only game in town.

I think some people ask this question wanting to make sure it is not
the less expensive Ohara FPL-51. That is valid. I will state that the
115T does not use FPL-51. Bottom line is, the SV115T provides a color
free, perfect star test. The correction is as good as we can make it.
With these facts clearly stated, only the competition wants to know
specific glass types. We will clearly state how this telescope
performs but we will not give up three years of R+D just to satisfy
the nay sayers. We will let the 115 stand on its own merits. I am
making this post as a reference as I will be asked this question over
and over again."

A Schott ED glass combo of ZKN7/FK51/ZKN7 would be a good guess; FK51 has an Abbe number about halfway between FPL-51 and FPL-52 and this triplet combo can provide a Strehl of .95 or greater to meet SV's premium apo specs.

See:

Telescope Optics.net reference 1
Telescope Optics.net reference 2

Rich

Edited by Rich V. (02/17/13 01:29 PM)


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

Reged: 11/12/06

Loc: Sherman Oaks, CA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Rich V.]
      #5685223 - 02/17/13 01:24 PM

Quote:

In searching, I don't see where Vic has ever said he uses FPL-53 in the 115T.




He would never use it, since he doesn't make telescopes. He may have been extremely instrumental in selecting it from a catalog however...


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rich V.
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 01/02/05

Loc: Lake Tahoe area, Nevada, USA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: johnnyha]
      #5685239 - 02/17/13 01:34 PM

Quote:

Quote:

In searching, I don't see where Vic has ever said he uses FPL-53 in the 115T.




He would never use it, since he doesn't make telescopes. He may have been extremely instrumental in selecting it from a catalog however...




Edited to remove that ambiguity. Making the assumption that SV scopes are entirely rebrands may be going a bit far however...

Rich


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

Reged: 11/12/06

Loc: Sherman Oaks, CA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Rich V.]
      #5685250 - 02/17/13 01:40 PM


I know that Vic does some QC and tries to weed out the lemons, I didn't know it went any further than that. If so I certainly apologize. I was under the impression that versions of the SV scopes could also be purchased under different brand names from different vendors, so SV is similar to say Explore Scientific or Astro Tech...


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

Reged: 01/26/13

Loc: Mission Viejo CA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: johnnyha]
      #5685274 - 02/17/13 01:51 PM

Not seeing much on the net on the Astro-Tech 106, with regard to personal experiences... And if I'm reading this correctly, you guys are saying that SV, AT, and ES are in many cases essentially the same scopes?

Edited by chaoscosmos (02/17/13 01:52 PM)


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

Reged: 11/12/06

Loc: Sherman Oaks, CA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: chaoscosmos]
      #5685278 - 02/17/13 01:52 PM

Quote:

And if I'm reading this correctly, you guys are saying that SV, AT, and ES are in many cases essentially the same scopes?




Not necessarily but I had assumed they were all made by one of the two Chinese telescope makers Synta or GSO so, if not I apologize, maybe someone can jump in and clear it up...?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott in NCAdministrator
80mm Refractor Fanatic
*****

Reged: 03/05/05

Loc: NC
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: johnnyha]
      #5685279 - 02/17/13 01:53 PM

Well, now that you mention it, I really thought that I had read in the SV115T product description on the stellarvue.com website that that scope had an ED element made of FPL-53. But if that description was ever there, it's gone now. So I may have been mistaken, and may have confused this with another SV triplet apo scope like the SV80ST and the SV90T. There's currently no mention of glass types used for the SV105T, SV115T, and SV130T. I'll edit my post above, as I don't want to spread any misinformation.

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


Reged: 01/05/08

Loc: Canada
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Scott in NC]
      #5685304 - 02/17/13 02:08 PM

I think there is more to a good refractor than FPL-53 or who makes it. The mating glass is as important. The scope makers will make objective elements to whatever specification the purchaser desires. I like that Vic star-tests every scope and sends back those that don't meet spec. I am willing to pay a bit more for that and a for a well-executed design that I have confidence in. I'd be disappointed if with SV it's just a bit of QC on mass-produced scopes, but my understanding is that it is more than that.
...Keith


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
RGM
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 09/15/03

Loc: Burks Falls, Ontario, Canada
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: microstar]
      #5685334 - 02/17/13 02:25 PM

As a side note, you should not be asking Canadians for their 2 cents worth. We got rid of the penny on the 4th of Feb. Now you have ask for our nickel worth.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
LivingNDixie
TSP Chowhound
*****

Reged: 04/23/03

Loc: Trussville, AL
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: chaoscosmos]
      #5685428 - 02/17/13 03:46 PM

Quote:

Not seeing much on the net on the Astro-Tech 106, with regard to personal experiences... And if I'm reading this correctly, you guys are saying that SV, AT, and ES are in many cases essentially the same scopes?




That would be reading it correctly. SV has changed some minor things in the past on some scopes, but in the end there are only so many scope makers so the chances are you can buy the same product from another company... usually for less money. When you buy a new SV you are basically paying a premium for the owner of the company to basically "star test" and then repackage it for you, he does not send you any paperwork to you telling you how your scope tested. I can understand why, if one scope tested better and your buddy got it, you might be upset. However if he sent the paperwork out with the scope and said what his standard was that a scope had to pass by, he could get around that. In the end I don't see any value being added to the product without the paperwork.

In the end only you can decide if that is worth it to you. If it were me I would just go get a used Tak or Televue before paying that premium. If I was picking between a new Televue and a new Stellarvue in the four inch range, I would probably go with the Televue. However I am more of a Tak guy and if I were in your shoes I would look for a used FS102, but that is after the experience of owning a Tak FS78.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Rich V.
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 01/02/05

Loc: Lake Tahoe area, Nevada, USA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: LivingNDixie]
      #5685471 - 02/17/13 04:17 PM

To be fair, SV may just test and "repackage" the lower to mid range scopes but their premium scopes can be a mix-and-match build from components from various sources.

In the past they have built up scopes with Russian LZOS and LOMO objectives with USA Starlight focusers and their own CNC machined clamshells, flanges and extensions. I know my SV80S from 2007 is one of these scopes. There was no generic scope with those specs being produced.

I think this can be applied to their current premium scopes as well. Just because SV may not figure the optics, the scopes are built to a spec with parts sourced from a number of suppliers and meet a very high standard just the same.

My TMB 130 is a "built" scope with an objective from one source, a focuser from another with tube and rings from another. The same applies to the APM/LZOS scopes; that doesn't make them a "repackage" does it?

Sweeping statements should be backed up with evidence. This is the age of science based on evidence, not heresay, you know!

Rich


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


Reged: 06/18/06

Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Rich V.]
      #5685506 - 02/17/13 04:44 PM

No, it doesn't use the CHEAP FPL-51. It use the chinese equivalent FK-61. I wish I am that good at implying things...


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

Reged: 11/12/06

Loc: Sherman Oaks, CA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Rich V.]
      #5685510 - 02/17/13 04:46 PM

Yes my apologies then, if SV does use LZOS and LOMO obviously that sets them apart from generic.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
RTLR 12
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 12/04/08

Loc: The Great Pacific NorthWest
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: johnnyha]
      #5685548 - 02/17/13 05:10 PM

I don't think that all of the SV115Ts are all using the same glass. I don't think any of them use FPL 53 or FPL 51, but I like many people, don't know what glass is used. I think it could be from one of a number of glass makers. I can say one thing about my SV115T20 and that is that it is far from being "color free...".

Stan


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott in NCAdministrator
80mm Refractor Fanatic
*****

Reged: 03/05/05

Loc: NC
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: johnnyha]
      #5685582 - 02/17/13 05:25 PM

Quote:

Yes my apologies then, if SV does use LZOS and LOMO obviously that sets them apart from generic.




From the information readily available on the web (i.e., from either the stellarvue.com website or the SV Yahoo Group site), it does not appear that any SV scopes that are currently being produced are using lenses that are attributed to either LZOS or LOMO as sources. However, LZOS and LOMO lenses have been used at various times in the past.


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

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: chaoscosmos]
      #5685694 - 02/17/13 06:26 PM

I am an aperture red neck. 115mm over a 101mm.

I have to agree with Jon though.

It seems to me that you may be under the impression that a big aperture is of little use under suburban skies.

This simply is not the case.

I can see far more in my 14" scope than in my 8" scope, more in my 8" scope than in my 6" scope, and more in my 6" scope than my 5" scope when observing from my central Austin Tx back yard.

In fact, I have owned a half dozen 4" scopes and if anything I found them far less satisfying to use under typical light polluted skies.

The sky will wash out if you use too low a power (to big an exit pupil) in a small scope.

I would recommend that you do some research on the topic. What you will find is that you can often see more from a suburb using a big telescope than you can see in dark skies using a small telescope.

And when you do take a big scope to dark skies, you get a super-wow out of it.

But if you must have a refractor, get as big a refractor as you can afford, manage, and mount.

After owing maybe 15 refractors, the only one that interests me even slightly is my 6" APO. Nothing smaller has given me any real observing pleasure in my own sky conditions.

But my 14 gets used about 20 times as much from my back yard.

So I agree with Jon first, and the 120ED recommendation second. The more aperture, the better, especially if you are under typical light pollution. The more aperture you throw at most deep sky even under light polluted skies, the more you see.

M13 is barely a glow from my back yard in a 4" scope. In 6", it is only barely granular.

At 8", it starts to show some stars.

At 10", it becomes quite resolved.

At 14", it is fantastic.

Trust me, aperture is not wasted under typical suburban sky conditions.

Edited by Eddgie (02/17/13 06:41 PM)


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

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: chaoscosmos]
      #5685737 - 02/17/13 06:53 PM

Also, this...

About 6 years or so, there was the "Great 4" Refractor Shootout" posted in this very forum.

Several dedicated observers lined up a half dozen 4" telescopes and spent a great deal of time trying to decide on which scope was the "Winner." They did a huge amount of comparisons.

And guess which 4" telescope won? It was the one that seemed to show the sharpest, brightest image by most of the testers on most of the targets.

And the winner was???? The biggest 4" telescope..

See, as it turns out, one of the telescopes in the review was a 110mm telescope. While I protested vigorously about the outcome, the testers did not buy in to the fact that a 110mm telecepe would have a distinct advantage due to it's better resolution, better contrast, and better light gathering. And yet the biggest of the 4 telescopes was judged by almost all of the reviewers to have delivered the best views.

So, my advice to anyone wanting a good 4" scope is to get the biggest 4" scope they can find. A 120mm one would make a really fine 4" telescope.

So, at least as 4" scopes go, aperture is everything, because when compared to all of the other 4" telescopes the biggest 4" scope was judged to provide the best views...

Funny, eh? I love this story.

Try to find the review. Oh, I mean the review was totally excellent and a wonderful job. It was a superb article. I was just not at all surprised that the biggest scope won. I thought it was totally unfair to have a telescope with 10% more aperture in the mix because well, it had to me a complete advantage simply because it was bigger.

Think about that when you make your decision. 120mm to me should make a pretty fantastic 4" scope.


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

Reged: 12/03/07

Loc: Overland Park KS
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: RTLR 12]
      #5685834 - 02/17/13 07:50 PM

Stan,

What objects show color? Are you using higher magnifications when the false color shows up? I am strongly considering this scope, but you are the first person who has said they see false color in the SV115T. I think that SV praises this lens design as being totally color free. Thanks..

Bill


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Scott in NCAdministrator
80mm Refractor Fanatic
*****

Reged: 03/05/05

Loc: NC
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Bill Barlow]
      #5685959 - 02/17/13 09:08 PM

I've never looked through a newer SV115T. However, I just came inside a few minutes ago from observing with my SV115 f/7 TMB/LZOS version. Sirius had no false color whatsoever, appearing pure white, even at high power. I could not detect any aberrant color on the limb of the Moon or in any of the crater shadows either. Space around the edge of the Moon's limb and terminator appears pure black to my eyes.

After producing such a high optical quality 115mm refractor back in the 2004-2006 era, I can't imagine that SV would allow its successor to be anything less. But it would be interesting to hear from owners of the newer SV115T as well. So far Stan is the only one that I can recall stating that the color correction was anything less than one would expect from an apo triplet.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Bennett
super member
*****

Reged: 10/30/05

Loc: Clayton, California
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Scott in NC]
      #5686011 - 02/17/13 09:34 PM

I have owned the current version of the SV115T for the past two years, and I have turned it on Sirius, Venus and the moon on many occasions with no evidence of false color on those objects in focus. This is consistent with all of the other reports I have read. In addition, the comparisons that I seen reported between the LZOS version of the SV115 and the current version indicate they are indistinguishable.

Jeff Bennett


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
wolfman_4_ever
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 07/15/11

Loc: El Segundo, Ca, So. Cal
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Jeff Bennett]
      #5686392 - 02/18/13 03:00 AM

How is a 120 considered a big 4" telescope? It should be a small 5" considering it is only 7mm away from 127 (5") and 18.4mm from 101.6mm (4")

I'm just nit pickin


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Scott in NC]
      #5686403 - 02/18/13 03:56 AM

Quote:

After producing such a high optical quality 115mm refractor back in the 2004-2006 era, I can't imagine that SV would allow its successor to be anything less.




Look at the StellarVue 80mm line up. There are quite a variety of scopes of different qualities. The Lomo 80mm F/6 which was packaged and sold by a number of vendors including William Optics, Apogee and others is acknowledged as the finest 80mm triplet ever made. It's no longer in the line up.

StellarVue, William Optics, Astro-Tech, APM, Lunt, Orion are some of the vendors/sellers who buy from Kunming United Optical and Long Perng, two of the major manufacturers of quality refractors. Meade/Explore Scientific use someone else and of course Synta Optical with the their connections with Celestron, Orion and their own Sky-watcher line is a big player.

Eddgie does not like 4 inch scopes, I do.

Compared to a 8 or 10 inch scope, any of these scopes are seriously underpowered. The question has to be why a notorious cheapskate like Jon Isaacs would be willing to spend thousands of dollars on an NP-101 when he acknowledges that his $240 on Astromart 10 inch Dob provides better views of most objects...

The answer is in the size and ease of use... A fast 4 inch refractor is a "one trip out the door and I'm ready to go scope." It's around 2 feet long, weighs about 10lbs and doubles as a terrestrial scope. A 4 inch refractor doesn't require long to cool down and with the short focal length, it's a comfortable view on an alt-az mount.

I use 4 inch refractors a lot. On an average year, I probably get in around 150 nights of observing. Most of those nights will involve a 3 or 4 inch refractor. From my urban backyard, for an hour or two on a work night, there is plenty to see with a 4 inch and the time required for setup and tear down is about 5 minutes total including putting the eyepieces away.. From our dark sky site, it is always a big scope, 12.5 inch, 16 inches or 25 inches and a 3 or 4 inch apo to get those widefields of view.

I have owned 120mm refractors, too big to be a "one trip out the door and ready to go" scope... it's about that simple...

When one is choosing a scope, part of the equation is the performance, part of the equation is ease of use. My 25 inch F/5 has everything I own beat when it comes to shear high magnification performance but that is balanced by effort required.

Jon


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

Reged: 02/01/06

Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5686776 - 02/18/13 10:55 AM

Quote:

Eddgie does not like 4 inch scopes, I do.




While this is generally true (I find 4" of aperture to be less satasfying to use than 6" of aperture) my response was actually to the OPs point....

He is the one considering the 115mm telescope option.

I was mearly pointing out that if he is comparing a bigger telescope to a smaller one ( and I am assuming that since he is considering it the weight and size difference is not an issue), then the bigger scope should be a better performer.

I added the 120mm Synta because well, it is even bigger still.

However, it weighs no more than the Stellarvue.

The Synta 120mm OTA is 11.3 lbs and 38 inches long and it cost $1550.

While the tube on the SV is a bit shorter (27" so an eyepecie postion change of only about 4 or 5 inches when tube balance is taken into consideration) the SV weighs more than the Skywatcher 120 (11.5 lbs).

And for the price of the SV OTA alone, the OP could have a Skywatcher 120 ED, a Go-TO mount, and a nice selection of Naglers.

And, he would have a bigger aperture.

He could add the Skywatcher reducer if he needed a faster scope for imaging.

Having owned refractors ranging from an 80mm achromat to a 6" APO, I have found that my observing preference leads me to suggest that for someone that is only going to get one big refractor, bigger is better.

If you gave me personally the choice between the two scopes the OP is considering, I would go with the larger one.

But if you added the Skywatcher 120 into the mix, I would go for that scope first.

All of these scopes will take about the same size mount, all weight about the same, and all will do satisfying wide field, deep sky and planetary work.

But for me, bigger has always been better in terms of visual use, and that is why if the OP is limiting himself to the two choices he has provided, I would recommend the 115mm.

Too small for my tastes, and the 120 would be more palitable to me though.

I loved the Televue Petzvals I have owned, but they were not big enough for me.

I wanted an NP 127, but it was to expensive for me.

I have a 6" APO that costs my 60% of what the NP 127 would have cost, and honestly, it is the only refractor that I have ever really really loved.

I make no apologies for being an aperture red neck.

In cases like this where the OP is considering an choice between similar guality optics but one larger, I will almsot always suggest that they get the larger aperture.

If the 110mm scope beat the other 4" scopes in a big shootout, thing about how much better a 115mm scope is going to be.. LOL.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Eddgie]
      #5686893 - 02/18/13 12:16 PM

Quote:

All of these scopes will take about the same size mount, all weight about the same, and all will do satisfying wide field, deep sky and planetary work.




A Vixen Portamount, an EQ-3 both are acceptable for the NP-101, I don't either of these mounts would be adequate for the other two scopes.

If one is only going to have one scope, bigger is better. I think we are both in agreement that much bigger is better, not just marginally bigger.

Jon


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

Reged: 01/26/13

Loc: Mission Viejo CA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5686919 - 02/18/13 12:33 PM

Well, the only thing I'm sure about on this is that if a good used NP-101 pops up, I'm going to try to grab it. If nothing shows in a couple weeks I'll decide if the 4K is worth a new one...

If I didn't have a fondness for expensive hobbies, I could be driving a new car, no sweat...


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


Reged: 02/11/07

Loc: Nevada
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5686921 - 02/18/13 12:35 PM

I bought the SV115T20 in 2009. It has a 2 inch Feathertouch focuser and the tube extension that can be removed for binoviewing. Never see any false color except for the kind related to near horizon atmospheric diffraction. I also image with it without any detectable color issues. I enjoy the SV115T20 so much that I missed having a refractor to look through when imaging. I solved that problem by purchasing a used TEC 140. I love both of these scopes.

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

Reged: 09/27/06

Loc: Seattle, WA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5687063 - 02/18/13 02:47 PM



I have owned 120mm refractors, too big to be a "one trip out the door and ready to go" scope... it's about that simple...






I need to make a video. I take my 120 out all the time in one shot, and it's surprisingly easy. I remove the diagonal and place it in my eyepiece tray (along with eyepieces). I then pick it up by the mount legs and walk out the door. The only thing needed on my return trip is my viewing chair.


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

Reged: 01/26/13

Loc: Mission Viejo CA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: SteveG]
      #5687074 - 02/18/13 02:52 PM

At least your guy's competitive disagreements seem to be a bit more civil than they get sometimes on my photography forum.

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

Reged: 09/30/06

Loc: Westminster,Co Elev.5400 feet
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: chaoscosmos]
      #5687180 - 02/18/13 03:43 PM

When it comes to terms of convenience,we all don't have the same definition of what constitutes the ease of getting a fully assembled telescope out the door in "one shot". My brief experience with owning a 120mm,1000mm focal length OTA, mounted on an EQ5,was just that,brief. For me the effort involved as to taking that setup outdoors on a regular basis resulted in the scope seeing little useage,and was quickly sold. At the time my 8 inch F/6 Dob was easier for me to setup and I didn't mind waiting an hour for the scope to reach thermal stabiltity. Speaking only for myself,a 4 inch F/10 refractor on an EQ3 is pushing the envelope as to getting the rig through my doorways without bumping the scope.

What works for some as to the defintion of a grab and go setup doesn't necessarily work out for others.


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


Reged: 02/11/07

Loc: Nevada
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: KWB]
      #5687267 - 02/18/13 04:29 PM

I can pick up my SV115T when attached to my DM4 on top of a Gitzo 5541LS carbon fiber tripod. Its easy to bring the legs together and walk through the sliding door. This is my long road trip rig when the car is loaded with 4 passengers and luggage. I don't like to move the scope and DM4 when attached to the heavier Discmount wood legs.

I have owned an 80mm refractor but I find the extra light of my SV115T can keep things interesting all night when at dark sights. The 3+ degrees of true field of view are fantastic for sweeping the Milky Way. My TEC 140 has wonderful sharp views and shows a lot of objects as bright as a 8 inch Dob or SCT.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Robert Fink
member


Reged: 03/01/11

Loc: California
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: johnnyha]
      #5688248 - 02/19/13 02:48 AM

I've been using my SV 105 for three years. I've got to say it is one of the finest scopes I've ever used. There are theoretical resolution limits which I hav e found are quite accurate for my dob and sct, but my SV blows them away. I routinely provide the finest view the Planets at outreach events where there are even slightly adverse conditions in terms of seeing problems. I have no doubts that the bigger dobs and scts in better conditions should give better views but it seems those conditions are fairly rare. I've spent quite a bit of time looking through a friends SV 115 and I have to say that it too is a fabulous scope. I know Vic Maris. We aren't close friends, but i have lot of respect for him. i haven' met a man more dedicated to his customers or to making fine telescopes. I've seen much of his operation first hand. He may have used to repackage some of smaller scopes I.e. 50s and 60s, but he does not repackage the the 105 or the 115 or mass produce them. He doesn't have that that many people in his shop. I can highly recommend the 115 from personal experience.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Stellarvue 115 Triplet vs NP-101 new [Re: Robert Fink]
      #5688335 - 02/19/13 05:08 AM

We all face different situations and have different abilities and therefore different ideas of "easy look out the door in one trip.". When I picked up my 10 inch Dob, the seller just leaned down, picked up the entire rig by the base, opened the screen door with his shoulder and carried it down about 20 steps... I was impressed.

My personal maze does not work with a mounted scope longer than about 28 inches.

I am sure one sees a bit more in a 4.5 inch scope than a 4 inch but I am also sure that in this particular case the NP-101 shows considerably more than the 115. The big difference is the 540mm focal length versus the 800mm. For me, the value of a 4 inch refractor is the things it does that a larger scope cannot do. Last night, even with the moon, the low power views in the 4 inch were worth the trip. On the other hand, Jupiter was totally awesome in the 12.5 inch, just a nice view in the 4 inch.

Jon


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


Extra information
32 registered and 47 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: 3138

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics