Jump to content

  •  

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.

Photo

New telescope: Bresser Messier AR-102 f/4.5

  • Please log in to reply
287 replies to this topic

#26 marcus_z

marcus_z

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 332
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2016
  • Loc: SE Germany

Posted 08 April 2017 - 04:32 AM

Oh, I forgot to mention the possibility to use filters. It might work to use an narrowband green-filter (e.g. OIII-filter) for exit pupils all the way down to an exit pupil of 0.7mm to observe the moon, but that is to be tried out...



#27 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 80,996
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 08 April 2017 - 05:03 AM

The scope is an achromat and has the same limitations as all other achromats. Bresser has announced it to appear at the beginning of 2017. So finally it is on the market ;-)
I have been tempted by it quite for a while. It just sounds insane to use a 700€ N31T5 with a scope for 259€. If I buy it I will let you know how it performs...

 

I use a 31 mm Nagler plus a Paracorr in $100 130 mm F/5 Newtonians..  you have it, use it..

 

$300 for an 4 inch ED doublet..  I doubt very much it's FPL-51 equivalent if it actually is ED.. otherwise.. if it were true ED, you could make the scope F/7 and sell boat loads..  not need to waste it on an F/4.5...

 

Jon


  • Sarkikos, beanerds and Arminovski like this

#28 marcus_z

marcus_z

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 332
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2016
  • Loc: SE Germany

Posted 08 April 2017 - 07:03 AM

Jon, having the right eyepiece for the scope is not my issue. My question is wheather I have enough advantages if I buy the scope and place it right next to my FC-100D and my 10" Dobson. It'd only serve for cyclops wide-field observations with large exit pupils. Isn't a pair of binoculars more advantageous? I haven't decided yet...



#29 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 17,521
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 08 April 2017 - 07:16 AM

I don't understand why any observer would bother viewing the Moon and planets through a 102mm f/4.5 achro.  Or even bother thinking about it.  That's like using a screwdriver to hammer a nail.  What you need is a hammer.  

 

The telescope would have a CA ratio of 1.13.  The Sidgwick Standard is 3 or greater.

 

This scope should be used for low-power wide-field deep sky.   That's exactly how I would use it.

 

Mike

+1  waytogo.gif

 

Mike


  • rogeriomagellan likes this

#30 starcanoe

starcanoe

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,487
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2013
  • Loc: Gulf Coast, Panhandle of Florida

Posted 08 April 2017 - 07:49 AM

 

 

Any filter will not correct the damage done to the image by chromatic aberration, but will only mask it.

 

There's Baader's fringe-killer, too.

 

 

Nitpicking...but that not exactly true.

 

Best:  all light of various colors "in focus"

 

Next Best: Light that is in focus not filtered...light that is not focused is filtered out.

 

Worst: Light that is in focus AND the light that is out of focus BOTH allowed to reach the image plane.

 

 

Oh, and when the Nagler 13 first came out....I was using it with a 15 dollar surplus copier lens held in a cardboard tube held together by masking tape.


Edited by starcanoe, 08 April 2017 - 07:51 AM.

  • beanerds likes this

#31 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 08 April 2017 - 07:56 AM

I don't understand why any observer would bother viewing the Moon and planets through a 102mm f/4.5 achro.  Or even bother thinking about it.  That's like using a screwdriver to hammer a nail.  What you need is a hammer.  

 

The telescope would have a CA ratio of 1.13.  The Sidgwick Standard is 3 or greater.

 

This scope should be used for low-power wide-field deep sky.   That's exactly how I would use it.

 

Mike

Hi, Mike.

 

I understand your point of view. For planetary use, it is far from being the most appropriate instrument. I've read threads on CN forum from guys who claim that Mak-Cass, Schmidt-Cass telescopes, apochromatic refractors, long tube achromats and even an 8" f/6 Dob can produce much better views of planets like Jupiter and Saturn. But there is nothing that would prevent someone from trying to use it for that purpose. Imagine that someone is traveling to the country and he wants to take only his very portable Bresser 4" refractor.


  • mwedel and Terra Nova like this

#32 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 08 April 2017 - 08:20 AM

Someone who has more than just a little smattering of optics or of apochromatic refractor glass knowledge may shed some light here. 

 

From the sales price, if the Bresser Messier AR-102 f/4.5 contains ED glass, could it be some kind of or even FPL-51? If FPL-51 is the lowest ED glass type compared to FPL-52 and 53 and far inferior to Fluorite, isn't there a faint possibility that it might be made of it or be made of a cheap version of it? 

 

We also could assume that there has been a drop in the price of ED glass, especially of FPL-51 type in the international market that could probably justify that sales price. Or not? On the other hand, maybe we should consider that the glass used is just one factor. The most important factor, I agree but not the only one.



#33 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31,045
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 08 April 2017 - 10:15 AM

 

I don't understand why any observer would bother viewing the Moon and planets through a 102mm f/4.5 achro.  Or even bother thinking about it.  That's like using a screwdriver to hammer a nail.  What you need is a hammer.  

 

The telescope would have a CA ratio of 1.13.  The Sidgwick Standard is 3 or greater.

 

This scope should be used for low-power wide-field deep sky.   That's exactly how I would use it.

 

Mike

I dunno. I look at the moon and the planets with my ST80/ST120 all the time when I have them out. They're not ideal for that use, but they're not nearly as bad as people's comments would suggest.

 

I'm not against looking at the Moon and planets with these scopes ... once, for the experience.  I've viewed the Moon and Jupiter through my ST80.   Now I know never to do it again.

 

Mike


Edited by Sarkikos, 08 April 2017 - 10:26 AM.

  • nicknacknock, T1R2 and howardcano like this

#34 mwedel

mwedel

    Goofing off

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,180
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Claremont, CA

Posted 11 April 2017 - 08:28 PM

 

Bresser has different AR102 models:

AR102xs/480:

RC=102² x 0.508 / 460 = 11.5

with an exit pupil of 2.7mm your effective RC value is RC_eff=11.5 / 2.7 = 4.2

only complex eyepieces will be acceptable for this aperture ratio. Consider Nagler, Ethos, Panoptics...

 

AR102s/600:

RC=102² x 0.508 / 600 = 8.8

with an exit pupil of 2.1mm your effective RC value is RC_eff=8.8 / 2.1 = 4.2

not every eyepiece can be used. I don't accept Plössls at this aperture ratio.

 

AR102/1000:

RC=102² x 0.508 / 1000 = 5.3

with an exit pupil of 1.3mm your effective RC value is RC_eff=5.3 / 1.3 = 4.2

all different kinds of eyepieces can be used.

 

AR102L/1350:

RC=102² x 0.508 / 1350 = 3.9

with an exit pupil of 0.9mm your effective RC value is RC_eff=3.9 / 0.9 = 4.2

And even that's not all, there's also the f/4.5 AR102S Comet Edition:

 

AR102S Set Up For observing 500
 
Bresser AR102S unboxing 18   600

 

It's a fun and eminently portable richfield scope. Flew with me to Texas in a duffel bag a couple of weeks ago and I bagged 108 Messiers with it. 

 

Someone brought up the problem of what to do if you want to look at Jupiter, the moon, etc., and all you have along is a richfield scope. I made a set of nested aperture masks out of pipe caps and candy jar lids. Stopped down to 60mm, it's an acceptable solar system scope. I wish manufacturers of RFTs would just sell the scopes with dustcaps made of nested aperture masks, they're quite useful when you want to look at bright stuff but you brought a widefield scope for other reasons.


  • rowdy388, BinoGuy, rogeriomagellan and 1 other like this

#35 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,509
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 12 April 2017 - 06:36 AM

 

I'm skeptical.  A 4" f/4.5 ED refractor for ~$300 U.S.?

Yes, it'd be nice if they've come up with a Poor Man's Genesis for that price, but I find that hard to believe.  And wouldn't a 4" f/4.5 ED doublet have substantial spherochromatism?

 

Clear Skies,

Phil

Yeah, that's what I was just thinking. A 4" with ED glass for ~$300? No way.

 

In a thread on astro-foren.de http://www.astrotref...TOPIC_ID=209314 a Lunt Europe employee confirms, that the 102/460 has ED glass, but that Bresser decided to label it as an achromat, because it would have too much false color, due to its short focal ratio, to be called an ED, because to most people an ED is synonymous with a nearly color free lens. 

 

 

 

es ist ein ED Achromat.
Mit klassischen Kron- oder Flint-Gläsern kann man bei dem Öffungsverhältnis nicht arbeiten, da würde man ein Kaleidoskop erhalten. Deshalb haben wir dem kurzen ED Gläser gegönnt. Aber nur weil er ED Gläser hat wollen wir nicht sofort von einem Apo reden, denn natürlich ist bei diesem Öffnungsverhältnis trotz ED Gläsern bei hohen Vergrößerungen noch Farbe zu sehen. 

 

 

Translation:

It is an ED achromat.
You can't work at this aperture ratio with traditional crown and flint glass, because that would result in a kaleidoscope. Thus we allowed the use of ED glasses. But we don't want to call it an apo, just because it uses ED glass, because, naturally, at this aperture ratio, false color is there to be seen at high magnifications.

 

So, apparently, we do have a $300 ED refractor. 

 

If anyone wants one badly enough, I can order one for them through the Danish Bresser dealer, where it costs $285.50. Shipping to the US is approximately $75. Figure $400 with customs an all that. 

 

If you all want it tested thoroughly, we can set up a crowdfunding campaign, so I can buy it and test it and write an interesting article about it. grin.gif    

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark


  • SteveG, Ben L, sparrowhawk and 5 others like this

#36 Phillip Creed

Phillip Creed

    Idiot Seeking Village

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,275
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2006
  • Loc: Canal Fulton, OH

Posted 12 April 2017 - 08:44 AM

If I've done the math correctly, and assuming it's FPL-51 glass, that makes the CA roughly equivalent to a 4" f/16 traditional crown/flint achromatic doublet.  Noticeable false color at higher powers, yes, but probably fine for the "good enough for visual" guys that would like it as an RFT but with enough color correction to dip their toes into the waters of planetary viewing every now and then.

Kind of a "Poor Man's Genesis", only because it's an ED doublet, it won't have the Genesis' flat field.  A 460mm focal length would have to show some degree of field curvature even with a 31T5 / 30ES-82 on the business end, though it would probably play second fiddle to the *MASSIVE* field of view--5.23° for the 31T5 and 5.36° for the 30ES-82.

The real game-changer, in my opinion, is if it's scaled up a bit to, say, a 5" f/6 ED doublet for $600-$800 U.S.

 

Clear Skies,

Phil

 


  • Sarkikos, RichA, T1R2 and 1 other like this

#37 KevH

KevH

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 917
  • Joined: 08 Mar 2010
  • Loc: Maine

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:10 AM

If I've done the math correctly, and assuming it's FPL-51 glass, that makes the CA roughly equivalent to a 4" f/16 traditional crown/flint achromatic doublet.  Noticeable false color at higher powers, yes, but probably fine for the "good enough for visual" guys that would like it as an RFT but with enough color correction to dip their toes into the waters of planetary viewing every now and then.

Kind of a "Poor Man's Genesis", only because it's an ED doublet, it won't have the Genesis' flat field.  A 460mm focal length would have to show some degree of field curvature even with a 31T5 / 30ES-82 on the business end, though it would probably play second fiddle to the *MASSIVE* field of view--5.23° for the 31T5 and 5.36° for the 30ES-82.

The real game-changer, in my opinion, is if it's scaled up a bit to, say, a 5" f/6 ED doublet for $600-$800 U.S.

 

Clear Skies,

Phil

 

 

I'd be more worried about the spherochromatism than the equivalent achromatic color correction.  I'd be willing to bet that a 4" f/4.5 at that asking price is going to have a good deal of it which will have a greater impact on planetary performance than the mild CA of a f16 achro. 


  • Astrojensen and Peter Besenbruch like this

#38 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31,045
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:14 AM

I would use any f/4.5 refractor for deep sky - especially low-power deep sky - rather than planet/lunar.  I wouldn't be too concerned about its performance for planet/lunar.  It's like an ST80 owner being concerned about how it shows the Moon or Jupiter.  The wrong tool for the job.

 

On the other hand, if it's the equivalent of a 4" f/16 achro, it should not be so very bad for planet/lunar.

 

Mike


Edited by Sarkikos, 12 April 2017 - 11:00 AM.


#39 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:20 AM

 

 

I'm skeptical.  A 4" f/4.5 ED refractor for ~$300 U.S.?

Yes, it'd be nice if they've come up with a Poor Man's Genesis for that price, but I find that hard to believe.  And wouldn't a 4" f/4.5 ED doublet have substantial spherochromatism?

 

Clear Skies,

Phil

Yeah, that's what I was just thinking. A 4" with ED glass for ~$300? No way.

 

In a thread on astro-foren.de http://www.astrotref...TOPIC_ID=209314 a Lunt Europe employee confirms, that the 102/460 has ED glass, but that Bresser decided to label it as an achromat, because it would have too much false color, due to its short focal ratio, to be called an ED, because to most people an ED is synonymous with a nearly color free lens. 

 

 

 

es ist ein ED Achromat.
Mit klassischen Kron- oder Flint-Gläsern kann man bei dem Öffungsverhältnis nicht arbeiten, da würde man ein Kaleidoskop erhalten. Deshalb haben wir dem kurzen ED Gläser gegönnt. Aber nur weil er ED Gläser hat wollen wir nicht sofort von einem Apo reden, denn natürlich ist bei diesem Öffnungsverhältnis trotz ED Gläsern bei hohen Vergrößerungen noch Farbe zu sehen. 

 

 

Translation:

It is an ED achromat.
You can't work at this aperture ratio with traditional crown and flint glass, because that would result in a kaleidoscope. Thus we allowed the use of ED glasses. But we don't want to call it an apo, just because it uses ED glass, because, naturally, at this aperture ratio, false color is there to be seen at high magnifications.

 

So, apparently, we do have a $300 ED refractor. 

 

If anyone wants one badly enough, I can order one for them through the Danish Bresser dealer, where it costs $285.50. Shipping to the US is approximately $75. Figure $400 with customs an all that. 

 

If you all want it tested thoroughly, we can set up a crowdfunding campaign, so I can buy it and test it and write an interesting article about it. grin.gif    

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark

 

Hi, Thomas.

 

Yeah, I got a reply from them about two days ago and there is no mistake on their website. It is what it is. The refractor really contains ED glass but it is not in the same league as some great apo refractors available in the market for sale, of course. Just a real portable rich field telescope. In that sense, it must have visual quality enough for that purpose. 


  • Sarkikos likes this

#40 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:32 AM

 

 

Bresser has different AR102 models:

AR102xs/480:

RC=102² x 0.508 / 460 = 11.5

with an exit pupil of 2.7mm your effective RC value is RC_eff=11.5 / 2.7 = 4.2

only complex eyepieces will be acceptable for this aperture ratio. Consider Nagler, Ethos, Panoptics...

 

AR102s/600:

RC=102² x 0.508 / 600 = 8.8

with an exit pupil of 2.1mm your effective RC value is RC_eff=8.8 / 2.1 = 4.2

not every eyepiece can be used. I don't accept Plössls at this aperture ratio.

 

AR102/1000:

RC=102² x 0.508 / 1000 = 5.3

with an exit pupil of 1.3mm your effective RC value is RC_eff=5.3 / 1.3 = 4.2

all different kinds of eyepieces can be used.

 

AR102L/1350:

RC=102² x 0.508 / 1350 = 3.9

with an exit pupil of 0.9mm your effective RC value is RC_eff=3.9 / 0.9 = 4.2

And even that's not all, there's also the f/4.5 AR102S Comet Edition:

 

 
 
 

 

It's a fun and eminently portable richfield scope. Flew with me to Texas in a duffel bag a couple of weeks ago and I bagged 108 Messiers with it. 

 

Someone brought up the problem of what to do if you want to look at Jupiter, the moon, etc., and all you have along is a richfield scope. I made a set of nested aperture masks out of pipe caps and candy jar lids. Stopped down to 60mm, it's an acceptable solar system scope. I wish manufacturers of RFTs would just sell the scopes with dustcaps made of nested aperture masks, they're quite useful when you want to look at bright stuff but you brought a widefield scope for other reasons.

 

I suppose that is your only 4" refractor. Right?



#41 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,855
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 12 April 2017 - 09:35 AM

Well, it's pretty cool that it apparently really does have ED glass. It sounds like it could make a great replacement for the various short-tube achromats, with much less CA and better mechanical quality. I just hope they managed to make the optical quality decent - it can't be easy to accurately figure a F 4.5 scope, I'm under the impression that ED glass is harder to figure than regular, and it's not like they have a lot of budget for it.


  • Sarkikos likes this

#42 Starman81

Starman81

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 3,701
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Metro Detroit, MI, USA

Posted 12 April 2017 - 10:58 AM

 

 

I'm skeptical.  A 4" f/4.5 ED refractor for ~$300 U.S.?

Yes, it'd be nice if they've come up with a Poor Man's Genesis for that price, but I find that hard to believe.  And wouldn't a 4" f/4.5 ED doublet have substantial spherochromatism?

 

Clear Skies,

Phil

Yeah, that's what I was just thinking. A 4" with ED glass for ~$300? No way.

 

In a thread on astro-foren.de http://www.astrotref...TOPIC_ID=209314 a Lunt Europe employee confirms, that the 102/460 has ED glass, but that Bresser decided to label it as an achromat, because it would have too much false color, due to its short focal ratio, to be called an ED, because to most people an ED is synonymous with a nearly color free lens. 

 

 

 

es ist ein ED Achromat.
Mit klassischen Kron- oder Flint-Gläsern kann man bei dem Öffungsverhältnis nicht arbeiten, da würde man ein Kaleidoskop erhalten. Deshalb haben wir dem kurzen ED Gläser gegönnt. Aber nur weil er ED Gläser hat wollen wir nicht sofort von einem Apo reden, denn natürlich ist bei diesem Öffnungsverhältnis trotz ED Gläsern bei hohen Vergrößerungen noch Farbe zu sehen. 

 

 

Translation:

It is an ED achromat.
You can't work at this aperture ratio with traditional crown and flint glass, because that would result in a kaleidoscope. Thus we allowed the use of ED glasses. But we don't want to call it an apo, just because it uses ED glass, because, naturally, at this aperture ratio, false color is there to be seen at high magnifications.

 

So, apparently, we do have a $300 ED refractor. 

 

If anyone wants one badly enough, I can order one for them through the Danish Bresser dealer, where it costs $285.50. Shipping to the US is approximately $75. Figure $400 with customs an all that. 

 

If you all want it tested thoroughly, we can set up a crowdfunding campaign, so I can buy it and test it and write an interesting article about it. grin.gif    

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark

 

 

Ok, with the confirmation of ED glass making this a fast semi-apo (at best), I am interested... Wish it was available in the US directly though! 


  • Sarkikos and rogeriomagellan like this

#43 Phillip Creed

Phillip Creed

    Idiot Seeking Village

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,275
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2006
  • Loc: Canal Fulton, OH

Posted 12 April 2017 - 11:27 AM

 

 

If anyone wants one badly enough, I can order one for them through the Danish Bresser dealer, where it costs $285.50. Shipping to the US is approximately $75. Figure $400 with customs an all that. 

 

If you all want it tested thoroughly, we can set up a crowdfunding campaign, so I can buy it and test it and write an interesting article about it. grin.gif    

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark

 

Ok, with the confirmation of ED glass making this a fast semi-apo (at best), I am interested... Wish it was available in the US directly though! 

 

Definitely not the choice for planets, but it'd be a vast improvement over the Prince-concert levels of purple that a 4" f/5 achromatic doublet would display.  Plus, you'd have a 4" scope that could fit the entire Veil Nebula in the same FOV with a 1.25" eyepiece.

For $400 U.S., that might be worth it.

 

Clear Skies,

Phil


  • Starman81 and BinoGuy like this

#44 Starman81

Starman81

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 3,701
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Metro Detroit, MI, USA

Posted 12 April 2017 - 11:53 AM

 

 

 

If anyone wants one badly enough, I can order one for them through the Danish Bresser dealer, where it costs $285.50. Shipping to the US is approximately $75. Figure $400 with customs an all that. 

 

If you all want it tested thoroughly, we can set up a crowdfunding campaign, so I can buy it and test it and write an interesting article about it. grin.gif    

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark

 

Ok, with the confirmation of ED glass making this a fast semi-apo (at best), I am interested... Wish it was available in the US directly though! 

 

Definitely not the choice for planets, but it'd be a vast improvement over the Prince-concert levels of purple that a 4" f/5 achromatic doublet would display.  Plus, you'd have a 4" scope that could fit the entire Veil Nebula in the same FOV with a 1.25" eyepiece.

For $400 U.S., that might be worth it.

 

Clear Skies,

Phil

 

 

That sounds pretty good, Phil! Though I would want primarily to experiment with focal reduction for NV purposes... Yes, I've gone over to the bright side! 

 

The focuser seems short enough that perhaps the optics could handle a 2" 0.5x focal reducer and still come to focus with an image intensifier. For my specific case, that would yield a whopping 4.5° TFOV @ a super fast f/2.25 with a very decent 4" of aperture--very difficult to pull off with any telescope. 

 

Thomas' offer is sounding pretty good right now! :)


  • Phillip Creed likes this

#45 hottr6

hottr6

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,171
  • Joined: 28 Jun 2009
  • Loc: 7,257', Magdalena Mtns, NM

Posted 12 April 2017 - 12:12 PM

No-one has noted the 6.2lb weight (includes "accessories").  That is AT66ED territory.

 

I wonder what inexpensive field-flattener would work with this?



#46 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,509
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 12 April 2017 - 02:52 PM

 

Thomas' offer is sounding pretty good right now! :)

Just send me a PM. 

 

 

Clear skies!
Thomas, Denmark



#47 Jobryant

Jobryant

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 455
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2009

Posted 12 April 2017 - 02:54 PM

Anyone know if or when this will become available in the US?  



#48 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,509
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 12 April 2017 - 03:02 PM

Anyone know if or when this will become available in the US?  

No idea, but with a little patience, they should soon arrive at Teleskop-Service or APM, both of which will ship to the US. APM has several partners in the US, so they should theoretically carry whatever APM carries, right? APM partners in the US includes Agena Astro Products, Woodland Hills Camera and Southeastern Camera. 

 

I would try asking them.

 

Bresser belongs to the same group of companies as Lunt and Explore Scientific, so I don't really understand why they don't carry the full Bresser line in the US. 

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark


  • AndresEsteban likes this

#49 mwedel

mwedel

    Goofing off

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,180
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Claremont, CA

Posted 12 April 2017 - 04:05 PM

 

And even that's not all, there's also the f/4.5 AR102S Comet Edition:

 

It's a fun and eminently portable richfield scope. Flew with me to Texas in a duffel bag a couple of weeks ago and I bagged 108 Messiers with it. 

I suppose that is your only 4" refractor. Right?

It is at the moment. I've had others in the past and will doubtless have others in the future. More to the point, it's the only 4" refractor I've ever had that fit easily into carry-on luggage without disassembly. Why do you ask?


  • Sarkikos likes this

#50 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 12 April 2017 - 05:20 PM

 

 

And even that's not all, there's also the f/4.5 AR102S Comet Edition:

 

It's a fun and eminently portable richfield scope. Flew with me to Texas in a duffel bag a couple of weeks ago and I bagged 108 Messiers with it. 

I suppose that is your only 4" refractor. Right?

It is at the moment. I've had others in the past and will doubtless have others in the future. More to the point, it's the only 4" refractor I've ever had that fit easily into carry-on luggage without disassembly. Why do you ask?

 

Well, I just thought that in case it was not the only one or if you told that you'd had others, I'd like to ask how you liked it compared to the others.




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.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics