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
283 replies to this topic

#51 marcus_z

marcus_z

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 300
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2016
  • Loc: SE Germany

Posted 12 April 2017 - 05:34 PM

Whoever wants to order one, don't forget to order the microfocus extension :-)
  • JIMZ7 and rogeriomagellan like this

#52 mwedel

mwedel

    Goofing off

  • *****
  • Posts: 1179
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Claremont, CA

Posted 12 April 2017 - 06:40 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.

 

It's a complicated beast, with good and bad points. Good points are the wide field, light weight (6.2 lbs), and compact size. I've used it on a lightweight carbon fiber tripod with a Universal Astronomics DwarfStar head and it was fine, perfectly stable. Oh, and control of stray light is excellent, with nice AR multicoating, baffling, and flat blacking of in the inside of the tube and the dewshield. Fit and finish are also very nice, a definite step up from the Orion/Celestron/Meade level. The only irritation there is the focuser wheels, which are plastic and feel very cheap. Unfortunate that on what is otherwise a well-built and comfortable scope, the one thing that you touch all the time is so low-end. I'm looking into having them replaced with custom metal wheels.

 

Not so good points are those you'd expect from a 4" f/4.5 achromat - working at full aperture, the CA on bright targets is psychedelic. The moon looks like several moon images in different colors, almost but not quite perfectly stacked. Jupiter is just a big multicolored smear, and moons within about half a planetary diameter of the disk are hard to see or almost completely invisible. My sample has some spherical aberration as well.

 

I would not recommend it as a first or only scope, for sure. As a portable, widefield sweeper, it's great. The attention to stray light control means that image contrast is excellent, which really matters at low magnifications where the skyglow won't be spread out much. It does give that crispness and clarity of view that keeps me coming back to refractors. But it doesn't give useful, let alone pleasing, views of the moon or planets until it's been stopped down to about 60mm, at which point it has the same limitations of any 60mm scope. In either case, 100x is about as high as you'd want to go.

 

So I'm intrigued by this AR102XS. If it's built, blackened, and baffled to the same standard, but gets the CA under control, it would be a definite advance over the Comet Edition and a more versatile scope. I hope it gets sold stateside, at the price they're quoting I'd probably grab one just out of curiosity. I've been getting progressively more interested in low power, widefield observing over the last few years, and I already have a stable of other scopes for other purposes, so I don't mind taking a chance on what might prove to be a fairly specialized instrument. If it performed like the Comet Edition otherwise but just had less CA, that would be enough for me to keep it and send the Comet Edition on to a new home. I also travel a fair amount and having a carry-on-able 4" is definitely desirable, which is why I don't just get a 120ST or something bigger.


  • Sarkikos, hottr6, ArsMachina and 1 other like this

#53 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 12 April 2017 - 07:02 PM

Whoever wants to order one, don't forget to order the microfocus extension :-)

Good advice.



#54 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 12 April 2017 - 07:07 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.

 

It's a complicated beast, with good and bad points. Good points are the wide field, light weight (6.2 lbs), and compact size. I've used it on a lightweight carbon fiber tripod with a Universal Astronomics DwarfStar head and it was fine, perfectly stable. Oh, and control of stray light is excellent, with nice AR multicoating, baffling, and flat blacking of in the inside of the tube and the dewshield. Fit and finish are also very nice, a definite step up from the Orion/Celestron/Meade level. The only irritation there is the focuser wheels, which are plastic and feel very cheap. Unfortunate that on what is otherwise a well-built and comfortable scope, the one thing that you touch all the time is so low-end. I'm looking into having them replaced with custom metal wheels.

 

Not so good points are those you'd expect from a 4" f/4.5 achromat - working at full aperture, the CA on bright targets is psychedelic. The moon looks like several moon images in different colors, almost but not quite perfectly stacked. Jupiter is just a big multicolored smear, and moons within about half a planetary diameter of the disk are hard to see or almost completely invisible. My sample has some spherical aberration as well.

 

I would not recommend it as a first or only scope, for sure. As a portable, widefield sweeper, it's great. The attention to stray light control means that image contrast is excellent, which really matters at low magnifications where the skyglow won't be spread out much. It does give that crispness and clarity of view that keeps me coming back to refractors. But it doesn't give useful, let alone pleasing, views of the moon or planets until it's been stopped down to about 60mm, at which point it has the same limitations of any 60mm scope. In either case, 100x is about as high as you'd want to go.

 

So I'm intrigued by this AR102XS. If it's built, blackened, and baffled to the same standard, but gets the CA under control, it would be a definite advance over the Comet Edition and a more versatile scope. I hope it gets sold stateside, at the price they're quoting I'd probably grab one just out of curiosity. I've been getting progressively more interested in low power, widefield observing over the last few years, and I already have a stable of other scopes for other purposes, so I don't mind taking a chance on what might prove to be a fairly specialized instrument. If it performed like the Comet Edition otherwise but just had less CA, that would be enough for me to keep it and send the Comet Edition on to a new home. I also travel a fair amount and having a carry-on-able 4" is definitely desirable, which is why I don't just get a 120ST or something bigger.

 

Well, as far as I know, for wide field work, CA is not an issue. But I suppose that the amount must be less than the Bresser Comet Edition. 

 

One of the advantages of the AR-102xs is that it comes with a much better focuser compared to the refractor that you currently own. So, I guess that it would please you more just for that. 


  • Karl Fabian likes this

#55 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 30001
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 13 April 2017 - 05:42 AM

Don't buy a hammer to do the work of a screwdriver.  The Bresser Messier AR-102 f/4.5 would be best for deep sky.  Save your money for a different scope if you want to observe the Moon and planets.

 

Mike


  • Astrojensen, junomike, DHEB and 3 others like this

#56 mwedel

mwedel

    Goofing off

  • *****
  • Posts: 1179
  • Joined: 16 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Claremont, CA

Posted 13 April 2017 - 07:26 PM

 

Well, as far as I know, for wide field work, CA is not an issue. But I suppose that the amount must be less than the Bresser Comet Edition. 

 

One of the advantages of the AR-102xs is that it comes with a much better focuser compared to the refractor that you currently own. So, I guess that it would please you more just for that. 

 

Both good points! 



#57 jring

jring

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2016

Posted 26 April 2017 - 09:33 AM

Hi,

 

there was a long and heated discussion on this scope on a german astro forum - a well known optics designer speculated on a doublet with BAF6/FK61 with CA roughtly comparable to an 102mm f7.5 fraunhofer in the discussion and recommended a 102mm f6 ED doublet with the same glasses as an improved design (comparable to a 102mm f12.5 FH).

 

Also somebody who needed a guiding tube agreed to get one and sb. else agreed to test that example - I can't wait for the results.

 

http://forum.astrono...opics/1279705/1

 

I will keep you posted!

 

Joachim


Edited by jring, 26 April 2017 - 09:37 AM.

  • Sarkikos, Bomber Bob, BinoGuy and 2 others like this

#58 Gofr

Gofr

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 531
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2016
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 26 April 2017 - 10:21 AM

Would be interesting to see. I have to sy though, that F4.5 does sound like a tempting proposition for a low power sweeper as well as large DSO scope. Heck, it could even be small and light enough to act as a larger finderscope on a larger dob. It certainly does seem to have its qualities.
  • Sarkikos likes this

#59 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 30001
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 26 April 2017 - 11:12 AM

But if you have astigmatism, be sure your prescription is up to date.  Or use a Dioptrx.

 

Mike



#60 jring

jring

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2016

Posted 27 April 2017 - 07:40 AM

Hi,

 

first results are in - not so hot unfortunately... CA of the 100 f4.5 ED looks a lot like the 100 f5 achro below...

 

http://forum.astrono...alt#Post1281339

 

and here's more pictures with separate color channels.

 

https://www.flickr.c...th/34160193491/

 

Thanks to Tomy Navratil for the images and whoever supplied the sample for that.

 

Joachim


  • Bomber Bob and Radioamateur like this

#61 Gofr

Gofr

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 531
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2016
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 27 April 2017 - 09:53 AM

Well despite the use of some sort of ED glass, it seems Bresser wasn't kidding when they said it was still classed as an achromat. At F4.5 though, it is to be expected. It's just so short. Still, I can't help feeling it isn't so terrible provided you stick to lower power views, which is just what such a scope is meant for anyway. Looking at the ever venerable CA chart below, one can see it's still better than a 6 inch F5 achro (heck it seems to even match a 6 inch F8), and many people seem to enjoy those for the low power views, so...

 

post-849-0-30515700-1462896353.jpg


Edited by Gofr, 27 April 2017 - 09:57 AM.

  • Sarkikos likes this

#62 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 30001
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 27 April 2017 - 10:07 AM

So ... the CA ratio for the Bresser 102 f/4.5 would be 1.125.  Just say 1.1.  About at the level of an ST120, 120mm f/5 achro.

 

Mike


Edited by Sarkikos, 27 April 2017 - 10:12 AM.


#63 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2586
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 27 April 2017 - 10:53 AM

Well, that's a little disappointing. I wish they'd have used the ED glass in something a little slower. I have a couple of F/5 achromats and I really don't think they'd gain much by going any faster; the exit pupil is already about as large as I want with my low power eyepieces. Making the tube a little shorter wouldn't really improve portability either.

#64 jring

jring

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 458
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2016

Posted 27 April 2017 - 03:28 PM

Hi,

 

as Gerd Duering has recommended in the german thread, at f6 it would have been a semi apo comparable to an f12 FH (if his guesses for the ED and partner glasses are right).

 

Unfortunately Bresser has not (yet?) chosen that path... the fact that they have a very similar 102mm f6 achro at the same price point might have played a role...

 

It's still a capable instrument for those hunting for the richest field -  and don't want to use binoculars ;-)

 

Joachim


Edited by jring, 27 April 2017 - 03:30 PM.

  • rogeriomagellan likes this

#65 Starman81

Starman81

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 3664
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2008
  • Loc: Metro Detroit, MI, USA

Posted 27 April 2017 - 03:43 PM

About what I expected... If it came to the US, I would still experiment with one for NV observing purposes. I have two fast achros already Orion ST80 and ST120 that I am going to be using but the Bresser 102 would be nice and light and light still and more versatile than the ST80. 


  • Sarkikos likes this

#66 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 01 May 2017 - 07:41 AM

Hi,

 

as Gerd Duering has recommended in the german thread, at f6 it would have been a semi apo comparable to an f12 FH (if his guesses for the ED and partner glasses are right).

 

Unfortunately Bresser has not (yet?) chosen that path... the fact that they have a very similar 102mm f6 achro at the same price point might have played a role...

 

It's still a capable instrument for those hunting for the richest field -  and don't want to use binoculars ;-)

 

Joachim

Hi, Joachim.

 

As you have mentioned above, Bresser already has a 4" (102mm) f/5.9 achromatic refractor that is probably made of crown and flint glass. But it would be great if they revamped this model with the same ED glass blend that they have used to manufacture the AR-102xs f/4.5. I doubt that there would be a huge price increase. 

 

On the other hand, I was wondering here if someone uses a Baader Semi-Apo filter with the Bresser Messier AR-102 f/5.9, the telescope could not reach the performance level of an f/7 or maybe an f/8 achromat. 



#67 Gofr

Gofr

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 531
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2016
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 04 May 2017 - 03:09 PM

I can't help but shake the feeling of how much I want this little F4.5 scope now. I don't have a wide field scope, but think this would be great. It would have the bonus of being small and light enough to even ride on my EQ2, making it the ultimate portable scope for wide field views or for just having mounted alongside any other bigger scopes I may have on my bigger Exos 2 mount. Plus, with the use of a solar continuum filter to cut down on the CA, it would still make a great white light solar scope with a wedge. I'd also be curious to try it out with a baader 495 lp  filter for higher mags as well, though not expecting any huge miracles, of course, but still. Should also be nice with a nebula filter at dark sky sites also when looking for nebulas. Hm......I want one now.


Edited by Gofr, 04 May 2017 - 03:12 PM.

  • Sarkikos likes this

#68 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 04 May 2017 - 06:42 PM

I can't help but shake the feeling of how much I want this little F4.5 scope now. I don't have a wide field scope, but think this would be great. It would have the bonus of being small and light enough to even ride on my EQ2, making it the ultimate portable scope for wide field views or for just having mounted alongside any other bigger scopes I may have on my bigger Exos 2 mount. Plus, with the use of a solar continuum filter to cut down on the CA, it would still make a great white light solar scope with a wedge. I'd also be curious to try it out with a baader 495 lp  filter for higher mags as well, though not expecting any huge miracles, of course, but still. Should also be nice with a nebula filter at dark sky sites also when looking for nebulas. Hm......I want one now.

Unfortunately, it is not available for sale on APM or TS websites, at least not yet. Otherwise, it could be shipped to North America. The only 4" refractors available for sale and shipping are the ones below:

 

http://www.teleskop-...00-mm--OTA.html

 

http://www.teleskop-...e-Assembly.html

 

https://www.apm-tele..._1_22739_2.html



#69 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 04 May 2017 - 07:08 PM

Hi.

 

For those here who wish to see a picture of a deep sky object taken with the AR-102xs, all you gotta do is to click on the link below:

 

https://www.bresser....tical-Tube.html


Edited by rogeriomagellan, 05 May 2017 - 08:52 AM.


#70 Gofr

Gofr

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 531
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2016
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 04 May 2017 - 11:23 PM

 

I can't help but shake the feeling of how much I want this little F4.5 scope now. I don't have a wide field scope, but think this would be great. It would have the bonus of being small and light enough to even ride on my EQ2, making it the ultimate portable scope for wide field views or for just having mounted alongside any other bigger scopes I may have on my bigger Exos 2 mount. Plus, with the use of a solar continuum filter to cut down on the CA, it would still make a great white light solar scope with a wedge. I'd also be curious to try it out with a baader 495 lp  filter for higher mags as well, though not expecting any huge miracles, of course, but still. Should also be nice with a nebula filter at dark sky sites also when looking for nebulas. Hm......I want one now.

Unfortunately, it is not available for sale on APM or TS websites, at least not yet. Otherwise, it could be shipped to North America. The only 4" refractors available for sale and shipping are the ones below:

 

http://www.teleskop-...00-mm--OTA.html

 

http://www.teleskop-...e-Assembly.html

 

https://www.apm-tele..._1_22739_2.html

 

Astro market's got your back. ;)

 

https://www.astromar...e-5164157145873


  • mrsjeff likes this

#71 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 05 May 2017 - 08:56 AM

 

 

I can't help but shake the feeling of how much I want this little F4.5 scope now. I don't have a wide field scope, but think this would be great. It would have the bonus of being small and light enough to even ride on my EQ2, making it the ultimate portable scope for wide field views or for just having mounted alongside any other bigger scopes I may have on my bigger Exos 2 mount. Plus, with the use of a solar continuum filter to cut down on the CA, it would still make a great white light solar scope with a wedge. I'd also be curious to try it out with a baader 495 lp  filter for higher mags as well, though not expecting any huge miracles, of course, but still. Should also be nice with a nebula filter at dark sky sites also when looking for nebulas. Hm......I want one now.

Unfortunately, it is not available for sale on APM or TS websites, at least not yet. Otherwise, it could be shipped to North America. The only 4" refractors available for sale and shipping are the ones below:

 

http://www.teleskop-...00-mm--OTA.html

 

http://www.teleskop-...e-Assembly.html

 

https://www.apm-tele..._1_22739_2.html

 

Astro market's got your back. wink.gif

 

https://www.astromar...e-5164157145873

 

Ok. Good news.



#72 tony_spina

tony_spina

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2473
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2004
  • Loc: So. Cal.

Posted 05 May 2017 - 01:02 PM

At approximately 18in long this might be the solution for me for a travel scope to take down south of the equator in a future trip planned to Peru

 

I was planning on using a ST80. But 20mm aperture would be nice on DSOs



#73 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 16422
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 05 May 2017 - 04:07 PM

Interesting although when I chose "Canada" as my location, the website added the appropriate shipping cost but didn't subtract the VAT?

 

Mike



#74 Gofr

Gofr

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 531
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2016
  • Loc: Canada

Posted 06 May 2017 - 01:56 PM

Interesting although when I chose "Canada" as my location, the website added the appropriate shipping cost but didn't subtract the VAT?

 

Mike

You have to click to continue on with the checkout after that. It will then update to the non-VAT price.



#75 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1814
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 06 May 2017 - 07:58 PM

 

Interesting although when I chose "Canada" as my location, the website added the appropriate shipping cost but didn't subtract the VAT?

 

Mike

You have to click to continue on with the checkout after that. It will then update to the non-VAT price.

 

Hi.

 

Has yours been delivered yet?




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