Jump to content

  •  
  • Home
  • Articles & Reviews
  • Photo Gallery
  • Members

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Which refractor should I buy?

Started by Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_* , Nov 06 2003 06:25 PM
This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
143 replies to this topic

#126 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 30 November 2003 - 04:47 AM

Hello again everyone - I've been away for a couple of weeks so haven't been following the forum. Thanks again everyone for your advice. I have finally bought a scope - an ETX105. It was on offer at a knock down price and I couldn't resist. I'm very pleased with it but I still dream of an apo refractor - one day! At least my space problems are solved and the wife is happy with the 'little' scope taking up much less room. Thanks again.

Phil :bow:

#127 IDONTSEEIT

IDONTSEEIT

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,147
  • Joined: 04 May 2003

Posted 30 November 2003 - 05:12 AM

Cogradulations Phil,

I think that's a great choice for your situation, I have the Orion 102mm Mak, it's a great "little" scope, it doesn't have goto, and I'm not sure about how the coatings would compare with Meade's, but it handles magnification very well. I think you will enjoy the views greatly, and they'll be false color free, woohoo!!

Enjoy your scope, the local weather, and my work schedule won't cooperate with me, I hope you have more time under the stars than I have lately.


Best regards,

#128 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 30 November 2003 - 09:39 AM

PhilD,
I too think you made a wise choice. The optics dont have to be messed with and are sharp. I love my Meade Mak and you will too, its as close to an APO as we will get for now. I want a big APO someday too. Isnt Saturn awsome thu it? My 7" Mak blows away my C8" on planetary that assures me the Mak was an excellent choice. Ive read that the UHTC coatings help as much as adding an 1" in aperture, if so yours is close to mine probably. I wish mine had such special coatings. They are more delicate than mine however so be leary of any cleaning whatsoever, resist the temptations...........happy viewing, Dave

#129 jimandlaura26

jimandlaura26

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 890
  • Joined: 19 Nov 2003

Posted 30 November 2003 - 11:15 AM

Yes, the short tube is the Nighthawk. The 80/9D is better for planets and moon with respect to (lack of) color and higher magnification; whereas the Nighhawk gives much wider field of view for DSOs (eg., 4.X degrees) and has the edge on ease-of-transport (airplane carryon size). The latter factors for the Nighthawk (together with a recent sale of $100 off) are what led me to purchase it. Much of my viewing is from light polluted skies 30 miles south of Wash., D.C., so DSOs are rather hard to come by with 80mm aperture. That said, it is truly amazing what these little scopes can pull in with their high contrast (and lack of color)... so much so that I'm am driven to flock the inside of my 8" Celestron reflector (Model G8-N) to reduce stray light and make it competitive with my Stellarvues (in light polluted skies). With respect to mounts, I use a motorized Celestron CG-5 modified for much better stability and greater height (important for refractors at zenith) with oak hardwood tripod legs and wedge (see http://www.alsastro.com/ ) good solid aluminum knobs (see http://business.cts....n/focusknobs/). It's good enough for visual tracking and in its current configuration roughly equivalent to Stellarvue's Stablelock... with the exception that unlike Stellarvue I have not yet taken this mount totally apart to add good grease and perform some bearing tweaks. I am also in the throws of purchasing a DiscMount DM-6 alt-azimuth (reviewed on Cloudy Nights). I have gone down the road of portability and high quality rather than lots of bells and whistles and heavy mounts that tend to distract and discourage frequent observing (as many newgroups and astronomy club experience attests to).

Jim M.

#130 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 02 December 2003 - 05:12 PM

In the price range you noted the best refractor is the Stellarvue AT1010. However, it is a wide field telescope more suited to visual pursuits of DSO's than the planets; when coupled with a Nagler it is frankly hard to beat for the price. In reference to the 127 MAK from Orion, it is better for the planetary viewing than the Stellarvue. However, it in no way compares in quality to the Stellarvue . If you are willing to spend more, you could consider the Stellarview SV102DN which is proported to be an excellent telescope with the increase in light gathering given the larger appeture.

#131 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 02 December 2003 - 11:11 PM

Many people would consider Orion 80mm ED as an excellent choice for its price. It's also quite small, only 600mm long. On the flip side, SV refractor is ready availabe while you may have to wait a while to get your hand on the Orion.

#132 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 07 December 2003 - 06:01 AM

Dont mean to but in, but all these comments about high f scopes producing better images than low f ones for planets and opposite for dso is just nonsense. it may be an issue for photography, but not for visuals. im surprised so many of you believe this common myth.

#133 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 07 December 2003 - 09:14 AM

In an achromat a high f/ usually means less color, so in this regard it is no myth.

#134 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 07 December 2003 - 10:52 AM

Ive owned a lot of different fl refractors and fl does make a big diff IF you want to go hi-mags on planets and moon. The fast widefield low fls are great for just that wide lowmag. If you push them like a f11-f15 they go south with CA FAST. They arent made for that and the manufactures are the first ones to admit it. The only fast fl refractors ive ever seen that dont exhibit this are the APOs. I think the best setup is an APO of f6 or so combined with an accessory that raises the fl for planetary like the Taks have, perfect setup for both occasions, wish my ship would quit sailing and come to port so I could buy such a fine instrument! Dave

#135 jrcrilly

jrcrilly

    Refractor wienie no more

  • *****
  • Posts: 36,028
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2003

Posted 07 December 2003 - 11:37 AM

Dont mean to but in, but all these comments about high f scopes producing better images than low f ones for planets and opposite for dso is just nonsense. it may be an issue for photography, but not for visuals. im surprised so many of you believe this common myth.


Welcome!

You're not "butting in"; I'm sure we're all interested in all the opinions we can get. I dunno about the myth, though. My experience has been in agreement with the ideas expressed here. The exception I would expect would be an APO with a very short native focal length, and I can't think of one right now. The very short focal length refractors I've owned were Petzval styles (TV Genesis SDF, Vixen NA) and the extra doublet compromises planet performance on those compared to a longer native FL scope of equal quality.

#136 Scott Beith

Scott Beith

    SRF

  • *****
  • Posts: 48,307
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2003

Posted 07 December 2003 - 01:32 PM

I own the Orion 5" Mak and the Stellarvue Nighthawk - both are outstanding high quality scopes in my opinion.

Scott

#137 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 07 December 2003 - 04:01 PM

I supppose I should have added that I mean high quality refractors from steller, tak, astro and such. Not the short tube ones orion, meade and celestron one. exxept the orion, apo,very nice.

#138 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 07 December 2003 - 11:05 PM

I think the best setup is an APO of f6 or so combined with an accessory that raises the fl for planetary like the Taks have



Dave;

Could you explain this?

Thanks
Keith

#139 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 08 December 2003 - 08:09 AM

Hi Phil,

Perhaps I missed a prior answer to question #3?

3. Are Tele Vue scopes really that good and worth the money, even at high magnification?

Did Ron B[ee} really pass on that one? My answer for your third question is yes, especially at high powers. If you were working with two or three times your maximum $900 budget a TV telescope might suit your needs. The TV 85,TV 102, and TV NP101 all have great optics. The TV 102 is a bit long and the TV NP101 lists for more than triple your budget but the TV 85 is a perfect compact APO. Although the TV 85 gives up some aperture to your 4" telescope it may be the best all around short telescope available. All of the TV telescopes will take magnification better than your previous achromat and other less expensive telescopes.

Perhaps there is a Tele Vue Apo in your future. Even coveted "Evergreen" TV 85s sell regularly on http://www.astromart.com for less than $1400.

Don

#140 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 08 December 2003 - 09:06 AM

Keith,
Certain Taks have accessorie lenses that attach to the focuser body changing the scopes fl. Thay arent cheap and neither are the telescopes. Only manufacturer that does it that I know of but there probably are other hi end manufacturers that do it as well. I dont remember exactly which models it works on just remember seeing it. Since I knew I couldnt afford it at the time I stored it in my short term memory instead of the long term. Dave

#141 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 08 December 2003 - 12:44 PM

Dave;

Thanks for the reply, guess I'll keep my eyes open for some more info.

Keith

#142 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 08 December 2003 - 01:05 PM

I did some research for you Keith its the FSQ APOs that are f/5 and the extender Q makes them f/8.

#143 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
    • topic starter

Posted 13 December 2003 - 12:30 PM

Phil don't bother with a refractor if you can get a MakSutov Cassegrain - I have an M715 Intes Micro and I've been looking at Jupiter mornings from my tiny London balcony. Stunning! I could see lighter ovals against the cloud belts, Ganymede is more than just a point. I've got the standard version 1/6th wave and it's really small. If you can afford it and have the time, wait for the new 5" or 6" F15 Intes Micro MCass's coming soon. Unfortunately you cannot spend les than 800 quid on a planetary scope, and expect to get decent images. I'm going to upgrade to the 8" F15 which should be even better. Don't get a cheap Mak with an aluminised spot on the back of the mirror and don't get anything with a central obstruction bigger than 30% - or you won't see any decent detail. Get a Rumak if you can with a central obstruction of around 26% or better. Try and go for an F15-F20 as this decreases the central obstruction size.
I've learnt the hard way and I wasted a lot of money getting here. Hope this helps!
Nick

#144 matt

matt

    Vendor (Scopemania)

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,991
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2003

Posted 13 December 2003 - 03:03 PM

Nick, where did you get information on yet-to-come out Intes Micro scopes, especially on this upcoming F/15?
Back to Refractors

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Astronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members

Recent Topics




  1. Cloudy Nights
  2. → Equipment Discussions
  3. → Refractors
  4. Privacy Policy
  5. Terms of Service ·


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics