Astro-Physics the Best Brand?
#151
Posted 25 September 2013 - 07:34 PM
Optically I cannot say that AP is the best, at this level only a computer can likely detect Tak,AP and TEC differences regardless of what you'll read in forums. When considering build, AP is number one hands down. Considering customer service TEC and AP tie for first, this applies to both new and used scopes. Yuri and Roland back the scopes for a lifetime regardless of owner where applicable.
#152
Posted 25 September 2013 - 07:34 PM
Better off getting 14" or 16" superfast newtonian + a great mount IMO.
You can go deeper faster, and have a wider fov and probably at a fraction of the cost of an AP.
#153
Posted 25 September 2013 - 07:35 PM
#154
Posted 25 September 2013 - 07:43 PM
#155
Posted 25 September 2013 - 07:49 PM
well iam getting to the point that I wanna purchace a high end scope and it can only be tak, then again I will try for a used model tho
#156
Posted 25 September 2013 - 08:10 PM
I'm on it for almost 5 years and was told by Roland that I won't get one so why lust for something you can't buy.
So Roland is calling it quits in less than five years? This is the first time I have ever heard that he is planning on this.
Maybe it's because he's going to make a 140 f/5 or some other optical configuration and offer them to the 130mm waiting list!
OK maybe not...
#157
Posted 26 September 2013 - 03:35 AM
Better off getting 14" or 16" superfast newtonian + a great mount IMO.
You can go deeper faster, and have a wider fov and probably at a fraction of the cost of an AP.
I agree with better deep space and planets, but how is a 14" Newt going to have a wider field of view? Also, premium Newts are expensive. A Parallax 14.5" is close to $8000 and the mount will be expensive. A decked out Teeter 15" with Servo Cat can be over $9000.
Derek
#158
Posted 26 September 2013 - 05:19 AM
#159
Posted 26 September 2013 - 05:23 AM
#160
Posted 26 September 2013 - 06:48 AM
This may sound heretical, but really why would one wait years to a 5" refractor to use as a glorified telephoto , and pay an arm and leg for it ?
Better off getting 14" or 16" superfast newtonian + a great mount IMO.
You can go deeper faster, and have a wider fov and probably at a fraction of the cost of an AP.
Exactly which super fast Newtonoian are you thinking of? I don't think you can do the wide field views with a Newtonian and get the good edge correction, coma correctors are good but not that good, that will require a specialized astro-graph.
Here's one:
Riccardi-Honders Astrograph
It's a 12 inch and seems quite capable of some wonderful widefield images. However at 12 inches and F/3.8, I don't think you will probably get the same wide field fields of view as one could with the 130GT operating at F/4.7.
And, I don't think it would be a money saver, a used 130GT with a field flattener is probably in the $6000-$7000 range, the 12 inch Riccardi-Honders more than twice that.
Jon
#161
Posted 26 September 2013 - 08:07 AM
David
#162
Posted 26 September 2013 - 08:14 AM
No one can say Ap is better than tak they r both rated maybe even tied for 1st or best scopes.
Oh yes I can and I can say so without ever looking through the scopes...quality, fit & finish and customer support/service set the AP apart. There is good reason why AP scopes either hold their value or appreciate. NO OTHER manufacturers does. I have had a sample of each major apo manufacturer in my hands and the AP is indeed numero uno...My opinion, I'm entitled to it and no one will change it.
#163
Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:04 AM
This may sound heretical, but really why would one wait years to a 5" refractor to use as a glorified telephoto , and pay an arm and leg for it ?
Better off getting 14" or 16" superfast newtonian + a great mount IMO.
You can go deeper faster, and have a wider fov and probably at a fraction of the cost of an AP.
Where can you get a 14 inch for astrophotos for the same price as an AP? Few people are buying APs for visual use. Its all about the photos.
#164
Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:12 AM
#165
Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:14 AM
#166
Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:19 AM
as my post says the only reason taks lose some value is its mass produced so any and all mass produced produts no matter what they are will lose some, but the reason that maybe Ap dont is cause of the 10 yr wait and its not produced, SO u have to take that into account.
Also i was talking about image quailty THERS NO DIFFERENCE IN EITHER SCOPE AND IN THE EP.
#167
Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:23 AM
Did the original owner disassemble it to add a new focuser, etc.? How experienced was this person in this task. Did they scratch the scope while working on it? Did they mess up the assembly?
And most importantly - how did they treat the optics. Was the scope kept in an observatory out in the elements? Indoors? How did the original owner manage dew related issues? Did he bring a cold scope in from outside let the lens dew up and then put the cap on it? Did he keep the cap on the optics when the scope wasn't being used?
Was the seller honest about the scopes condition and optics. I had someone totally lie to me about the condition of an FS-128 I wanted. And when I tried to return it, I had to threaten him to get him to refund my money.
So I agree with hfjacinto, new is the way to go if possible.
#168
Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:28 AM
#169
Posted 26 September 2013 - 09:54 AM
#170
Posted 26 September 2013 - 10:14 AM
No one can say Ap is better than tak they r both rated maybe even tied for 1st or best scopes.
Oh yes I can and I can say so without ever looking through the scopes...quality, fit & finish and customer support/service set the AP apart. There is good reason why AP scopes either hold their value or appreciate. NO OTHER manufacturers does. I have had a sample of each major apo manufacturer in my hands and the AP is indeed numero uno...My opinion, I'm entitlted to it and no one will change it.
I disagree. APs used prices maintain only because of the lack of supply. It has nothing to do AP being better than anyone. Its a supply issue. Even if AP is the best, if they made 1000+ scopes a year, used prices would not maintain the way they do.
#171
Posted 26 September 2013 - 10:20 AM
One more thing...because I make this statement, MY opinion, why does it get peoples panties in a bunch? Why do you feel compelled to argue or contradict...a statement of personal opinion? And why does this only seem to happen with this particular brand? It seems to infuriate, segregate and isolate folks. Why? It is just a telescope afterall...the best in my opinion. Why should that cause anyone grief?
#172
Posted 26 September 2013 - 10:32 AM
if they mass produced the scopes supply would not be an issue so used scopes would go down, i bought my tec for 5200 same would happen to AP if it wasnt 10 yr wait
#173
Posted 26 September 2013 - 10:40 AM
#174
Posted 26 September 2013 - 10:50 AM
And where does that demand come from? Because of the low supply? Do people feel compelled to pay the higher prices for something because it is rare only. No, AP's command tyhe prices they do and the resale because of what they are, not how few are available. But you are certainly entitled to your opinion, I'll respect it, please respect mine.
Oh I do respect your opinion, just giving mine. Rarity is not right word but more supply of these scopes, coupled with public perception, is the reason for the prices. Now the public perception is a result a APs outstanding quality but to say AP is unrivaled in their quality is not accurate. Infact there many drawbacks to using an AP scope like limited adapters and accessories and a narrow range of purpose specific models, something Tak excels at.
#175
Posted 26 September 2013 - 10:53 AM
...but to say AP is unrivaled in their quality is not accurate
Who stated this? Not me...not anyone I see. I stated AP is #1 IMHO, but there are indeed many nipping at their heels. I respect others opinions as well...I'm leaving it at that.