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
Phil Hosey
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 10/29/08

Loc: LaGrange, GA
Refractor for imaging
      #5751564 - 03/23/13 11:03 AM

I'm looking for a refractor mostly for imaging, preferably something around the 700-800mm FL range. I had an AT111 and sold it not to long ago (bad idea), but these are not in stock right now. My budget is 2k for the OTA (I have everything else I need). I really want something comparable to the AT111. I've been considering the Meade series 6000 115mm, it appears to be very similar optically (from the specs anyway) to the AT111, it uses a similar type of glass. The AT111 was actually good enough for me regarding CA in my images, certainly better than the ES 127 EDT I tried a while back. The other scope I've considered is the AT106, but the focal length is a bit shorter than what I was looking for, although it appears to have the better glass type and faster f/ratio. I looked at some older posts regarding the AT106 and it appears there used to be a 'LE' version that was about $500 less, but now they only have the $2k version with the 2.7" focuser (same as the one on the AT111 which I found to be kind of 'meh'.)

So, the Meade seems somewhat close to the AT111, but more expensive (but available), and the AT106 edges out optically for the same price but doesn't fit my FL requirement.

I've been following the used market for a couple weeks and I did miss a deal on an AT111 because I was indecisive, but it seems to be really slow right now. I've also been recently burned so I'm going to stick with new I suppose. Are there other scopes I whould be looking at that I may have missed?


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

Reged: 10/29/08

Loc: LaGrange, GA
Re: Refractor for imaging new [Re: Phil Hosey]
      #5752009 - 03/23/13 02:31 PM

Well, I ended up placing an order for a Meade series 6000 130mm ED triplet. Highpoint had the demo used at the Meade booth from NEAF at $500 off the new price so I got that one. Should be here by the end of the week.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Brad Greig
member


Reged: 01/06/10

Loc: SE Texas
Re: Refractor for imaging new [Re: Phil Hosey]
      #5752185 - 03/23/13 04:02 PM

Enjoy it! Let us know how you like it!

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

Reged: 05/18/05

Loc: Mandeville, LA USA
Re: Refractor for imaging new [Re: Phil Hosey]
      #5752931 - 03/23/13 11:01 PM

Didn't get here quick enough. My suggestion would have been a used William Optics 110 Flourite triplet. I've seen a lot of them for well under 2K and they do make very nice imaging scopes.

Having said that, I'm looking forward to your first galaxy with that new 5" monster seeing that the galaxy season is upon us!

David


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

Reged: 10/29/08

Loc: LaGrange, GA
Re: Refractor for imaging new [Re: David Pavlich]
      #5753310 - 03/24/13 06:24 AM

Quote:

Didn't get here quick enough. My suggestion would have been a used William Optics 110 Flourite triplet. I've seen a lot of them for well under 2K and they do make very nice imaging scopes.

Having said that, I'm looking forward to your first galaxy with that new 5" monster seeing that the galaxy season is upon us!

David




David,
Actually I had pretty much settled on a new William Optics FLT 110 when accidentally found the deal on the Meade 130 for the same price. I don't know realisticly how much better galaxies would image in a 5" vs a 4" APO, but with my T2i, the 130 gives me .97 arcsec/pixel which is nearly at the limit of resolving power for the scope. That will work for the most of the larger galaxies, but the smaller ones will look better framed if I crop.


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


Reged: 08/25/05

Loc: W Chicago suburbs, IL USA
Re: Refractor for imaging new [Re: Phil Hosey]
      #5754973 - 03/24/13 09:07 PM

I'm really loving my William Optics GTF 102 5 element model. It was designed with a built in flattener for AP, and has a fantastic focuser now.

Timm


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gary BEAL
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 05/10/03

Loc: New Zealand
Re: Refractor for imaging new [Re: timmbottoni]
      #5755010 - 03/24/13 09:29 PM

Can the built in flattener models be reduced Timm?
I was an early adopter of the all original GT-81, but didn't bond with what I considered to be a below average focuser and sold it.
When I saw they were getting into the built in flattener versions, the ability to reduce was my biggest question. A least with the original I could reduce it with the TRF2008, and flatten it with the AT2FF, both worked very very well. If the focuser was up to snuff I'd still have it. The optics were quite nice.
Can you reduce them, have you tried it?
Gary


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


Reged: 08/25/05

Loc: W Chicago suburbs, IL USA
Re: Refractor for imaging new [Re: Gary BEAL]
      #5755096 - 03/24/13 10:16 PM

Quote:

Can the built in flattener models be reduced Timm?
I was an early adopter of the all original GT-81, but didn't bond with what I considered to be a below average focuser and sold it.
When I saw they were getting into the built in flattener versions, the ability to reduce was my biggest question. A least with the original I could reduce it with the TRF2008, and flatten it with the AT2FF, both worked very very well. If the focuser was up to snuff I'd still have it. The optics were quite nice.
Can you reduce them, have you tried it?
Gary




What do you mean, Can I reduce them?

The flattener is inside the tube, does that help in understanding?

Timm


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

Reged: 10/29/08

Loc: LaGrange, GA
Re: Refractor for imaging new [Re: timmbottoni]
      #5755540 - 03/25/13 06:05 AM

I'm thinking you would need a reducer only as the flattening has already occured. So your standard .8x reducer/flatteners would probably introduce too much reverse field curvature?

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


Reged: 08/25/05

Loc: W Chicago suburbs, IL USA
Re: Refractor for imaging new [Re: Phil Hosey]
      #5756259 - 03/25/13 02:09 PM

Oh, I understand now.

Since the flattener is in the middle of the tube, I don't think that there would be a way to reduce the focal length unless someone makes a reducer that isn't also a flattener.


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

Reged: 10/11/09

Loc: Clever, Missouri
Re: Refractor for imaging new [Re: timmbottoni]
      #5756467 - 03/25/13 03:47 PM

Aren't the Antares 2" reducers "just reducers" and not flatteners? They are relatively inexpensive too. I own the .5X and .7X and have the WO GTF 102. I'll have to try it sometime.

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


Reged: 08/25/05

Loc: W Chicago suburbs, IL USA
Re: Refractor for imaging new [Re: PatHolland]
      #5757770 - 03/26/13 09:34 AM

That would be interesting, yes please post results if you try them

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1


Extra information
37 registered and 42 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: 775

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics