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

The AT72EDII is out!

  • Please log in to reply
480 replies to this topic

#26 Astronomics

Astronomics

    Vendor: Astronomics

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 6,628
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2004
  • Loc: Right Here

Posted 09 June 2017 - 03:56 PM

The AT65EDQ are supposed to ship to us on 6/22.  I can only think that is where the confusion lies.



#27 gwlee

gwlee

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,880
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2015
  • Loc: 38N 120W

Posted 09 June 2017 - 05:12 PM

Do you know who you talked too?  The e-mail that went out gave a date of 3-4 months.  I can only assume the person here thought it was the current 72.  We don't expect the scopes until October.

Michael,

 

i called a couple of times this morning and talked with two different people. Not  sure who said "6/22, " but it's no problem. I have an AT72ED to use until then. 

 

Can you tell me whether the AT mult-reticle finder and base can be moved from my AT72ED to the ED2?

 

Also, what is the diameter of the ED2 dew shield? Is it same diameter as the ED? I ask because i want to order a solar filter now for the eclipse in August. 

 

Thanks

 

gary



#28 Sockrateez

Sockrateez

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,164
  • Joined: 11 May 2019
  • Loc: Arizona

Posted 09 June 2017 - 06:15 PM

The AT65EDQ are supposed to ship to us on 6/22.  I can only think that is where the confusion lies.

Didn't you read the thread title - the 72mm is already out.


Edited by JCAZ, 09 June 2017 - 06:17 PM.


#29 ZMass

ZMass

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 357
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2007

Posted 09 June 2017 - 07:08 PM

The thread title is incorrect.  Should be "The 72mm is coming".  Looks like a nice scope!


  • Sockrateez likes this

#30 glend

glend

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,923
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2014

Posted 09 June 2017 - 08:24 PM

Yes it looks wonderful, it would look great on my desk, but you can't really do much with a 72mm apeture. Ok maybe some wide field AP, but its not much bigger than a guidescope. Tell me how you will use it? 


  • asl547 likes this

#31 gwlee

gwlee

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,880
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2015
  • Loc: 38N 120W

Posted 09 June 2017 - 08:48 PM

Yes it looks wonderful, it would look great on my desk, but you can't really do much with a 72mm apeture. Ok maybe some wide field AP, but its not much bigger than a guidescope. Tell me how you will use it? 

I don't usually feed trolls, but here goes :-)

 

It's what some call a "Grab and Go" telescope. It's light weight, compact, easily hand carried on a sturdy alt/az mount to dodge trees, easily transported in a small automobile along with passengers,  quick to setup and cool, very easy to use, and requires a minimum of related paraphernalia.

 

Because it's small, it's strengths are portability and wide fields. It's excellent for low-power cruising the milky way, casual lunar observing, keeping track of planets and some of their larger satellites, keeping track of brighter DSOs, and watching eclipses, but it wouldn't be my first choice for observing most DSOs or planets because it can't go very deep or show much detail compared to a larger scope. However, I often use mine for observing planets and brighter DSOs when portability is more essential than ultimate resolution and light grasp. It's an instrument that splits the difference between the capabilities of a hand held binocular and a general purpose astronomical telescope. 

 

Ready to observe, scope (AT72ED shown) , mount, and wooden tripod are about 22# total and rock steady to 122x. 

 

I also use this scope and mount on a compact Bogen 3021 photo tripod as a spotting scope or when I need  an extremely portable astro scope. In this configuration, total weight is 14#, and it's reasonably steady at 61x. 

Attached Thumbnails

  • AT72EDr3.jpg

Edited by gwlee, 09 June 2017 - 11:48 PM.

  • jimandlaura26, Jon Isaacs, zjc26138 and 10 others like this

#32 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31,254
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 10 June 2017 - 09:08 AM

That wooden tripod is overkill for this little scope.  Just put it on a MicroStar and a lighter, less cumbersome tripod, like a Vanguard Auctus Plus 324AT or Bogen 055XB.

 

Mike


Edited by Sarkikos, 10 June 2017 - 09:10 AM.


#33 gwlee

gwlee

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,880
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2015
  • Loc: 38N 120W

Posted 10 June 2017 - 09:31 AM

That wooden tripod is overkill for this little scope.  Just put it on a MicroStar and a lighter, less cumbersome tripod, like a Vanguard Auctus Plus 324AT or Bogen 055XB.

 

Mike

It's on a DwarfStar mount, which is lighter than the MicroStar you are recommending. I prefer the heavy wooden tripod for use at home because it's extremely stable and the whole rig weighs 22#, which is easy for me to handle. It's also inexpensive and easy on the hands in cold weather. 

 

When i occasionally need something less cumbersome, i put the scope and mount on a lighter and more compact photo tripod where everything weighs in at 14#. 


Edited by gwlee, 10 June 2017 - 09:40 AM.

  • scott4comp and daquad like this

#34 Bill Barlow

Bill Barlow

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,589
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Overland Park KS

Posted 10 June 2017 - 09:46 AM

Will your new AT 72mm triplet come in other colors besides white?

 

Bill



#35 Astronomics

Astronomics

    Vendor: Astronomics

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 6,628
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2004
  • Loc: Right Here

Posted 10 June 2017 - 10:27 AM

Will your new AT 72mm triplet come in other colors besides white?

 

Bill

It is actually an FPL53 doublet.  This will be our only color. 



#36 Astronomics

Astronomics

    Vendor: Astronomics

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 6,628
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2004
  • Loc: Right Here

Posted 10 June 2017 - 10:27 AM

 

Do you know who you talked too?  The e-mail that went out gave a date of 3-4 months.  I can only assume the person here thought it was the current 72.  We don't expect the scopes until October.

Michael,

 

i called a couple of times this morning and talked with two different people. Not  sure who said "6/22, " but it's no problem. I have an AT72ED to use until then. 

 

Can you tell me whether the AT mult-reticle finder and base can be moved from my AT72ED to the ED2?

 

Also, what is the diameter of the ED2 dew shield? Is it same diameter as the ED? I ask because i want to order a solar filter now for the eclipse in August. 

 

Thanks

 

gary

 

I will measure it at the office on Monday for you no problem.



#37 gwlee

gwlee

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,880
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2015
  • Loc: 38N 120W

Posted 10 June 2017 - 10:31 AM

Will your new AT 72mm triplet come in other colors besides white?

 

Bill

The new AT72EDii is going to be an FPL 53 doublet. I haven't noticed any chromatic aberration in the existing AT72ED though, but i am not doing astro photography. I am not sure about the tube colors, but believe it's just going to come in black and white. 



#38 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31,254
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 10 June 2017 - 01:04 PM

 

That wooden tripod is overkill for this little scope.  Just put it on a MicroStar and a lighter, less cumbersome tripod, like a Vanguard Auctus Plus 324AT or Bogen 055XB.

 

Mike

It's on a DwarfStar mount, which is lighter than the MicroStar you are recommending. I prefer the heavy wooden tripod for use at home because it's extremely stable and the whole rig weighs 22#, which is easy for me to handle. It's also inexpensive and easy on the hands in cold weather. 

 

When i occasionally need something less cumbersome, i put the scope and mount on a lighter and more compact photo tripod where everything weighs in at 14#. 

 

Obviously the DwarfStar will work.  But I like the MicroStar for the AT72ED because a somewhat beefier head will help when I'm using heavier, 2" eyepieces.  I use my DwarfStar for even lighter scopes, like the C90, which can only use 1.25" eyepieces.

 

Mike


Edited by Sarkikos, 10 June 2017 - 01:05 PM.


#39 gazes

gazes

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 6
  • Joined: 27 Mar 2017
  • Loc: Chicago IL

Posted 10 June 2017 - 01:04 PM

It weighs 4.65 pounds with the dovetail and rings. We will not have an 80mm doublet. I can't justify the 8mm difference in the line and prefer the jump to a triplet. We have tried same sizes in different optical configurations in the past and it would lock customers up to the point of not purchasing anything.

In that case, any plans for a doublet somewhere between the 80 and 115 mm triplets?

 

   Stuart


  • Augustus likes this

#40 gwlee

gwlee

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,880
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2015
  • Loc: 38N 120W

Posted 10 June 2017 - 03:31 PM

 

 

That wooden tripod is overkill for this little scope.  Just put it on a MicroStar and a lighter, less cumbersome tripod, like a Vanguard Auctus Plus 324AT or Bogen 055XB.

 

Mike

It's on a DwarfStar mount, which is lighter than the MicroStar you are recommending. I prefer the heavy wooden tripod for use at home because it's extremely stable and the whole rig weighs 22#, which is easy for me to handle. It's also inexpensive and easy on the hands in cold weather. 

 

When i occasionally need something less cumbersome, i put the scope and mount on a lighter and more compact photo tripod where everything weighs in at 14#. 

 

Obviously the DwarfStar will work.  But I like the MicroStar for the AT72ED because a somewhat beefier head will help when I'm using heavier, 2" eyepieces.  I use my DwarfStar for even lighter scopes, like the C90, which can only use 1.25" eyepieces.

 

Mike

 

I have been slowly refining this configuration for a few years to get it to do what i need at this observing site. I don't use 2" EPs or a 2" diagonal with this scope, and I replaced a MicroStar mount with a DwarfStar mount and don't use any EPs weighing over 8 oz to save some weight and increase stability, which limits this scope to about a 3.5 degree FOV. 

 

i have thought about experimenting with a tripod made from unobtainium, but it would probably double the cost of the combo and 22# meets my fixed-base weight requirement. When I occasionally need lighter weight for increased mobility, i can drop six pounds by putting the scope/mount on a photo tripod that i already own, so this doesn't seem like a promising path. 

 

I am considering replacing the AT72ED with a lighter 76mm Tak refractor that has a 1.25" focuser, which would cut a couple more pounds and add 4mm of aperture, but would also add a few more inches of tube length. It's an expensive change with some obvious benefits, but might have some unintended stability consequences, so nothing to rush into. 

 

Upgrading to the AT72EDii is a modest refinement to the scope with no obvious drawbacks and a marginal cost of about $150 after reselling the AT72ED, so it's an easy decision. 


Edited by gwlee, 10 June 2017 - 04:17 PM.

  • Sarkikos likes this

#41 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 84,237
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 10 June 2017 - 07:37 PM

Regarding mounts.. My AT-72ED rides on a Bogen 3040 "sidesaddle"..  Handles heavy eyepieces, it's a rugged mount that was probably 15 years old when I bought it 20 years ago.. Still going strong.. 

 

AT-72 on Bogen with eyepieces CN.jpg
 
Jon

  • jimandlaura26, zjc26138, elwaine and 2 others like this

#42 gwlee

gwlee

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,880
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2015
  • Loc: 38N 120W

Posted 10 June 2017 - 11:12 PM

 

Regarding mounts.. My AT-72ED rides on a Bogen 3040 "sidesaddle"..  Handles heavy eyepieces, it's a rugged mount that was probably 15 years old when I bought it 20 years ago.. Still going strong.. 

 

 
 
Jon

 

Jon, does this tripod use the 3047 head? I had a TV60 that worked well for me side saddle on  this head, so it's the first configuration that i tried with the AT72ED, but for some reason it felt awkward. (Might have been DM6 exposure). 

 

I called Larry at UA to order a MicroStar that i had owned before. Larry recommended the lighter DwarfStar,for the AT72ED. I was skeptical, so he shipped both to me and said, return the one you don't like. I returned the MicroStar. However, I don't use it with 2" EPs and diagonals. 

 


Edited by gwlee, 10 June 2017 - 11:53 PM.


#43 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 84,237
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 11 June 2017 - 12:48 AM

Jon, does this tripod use the 3047 head? I had a TV60 that worked well for me side saddle on  this head, so it's the first configuration that i tried with the AT72ED, but for some reason it felt awkward.

 

 It is a 3047. There are two versions of the 3047 head that I know of.  This one is the older, shorter version.  I have replaced the AT-72 dovetail with a section of dovetail I cut, drilled and tapped to get the spacing and balance. 

 

I use it with a 2 inch diagonal and eyepieces like the 31 mm Nagler and 41 mm Pan.. I have been using sidesaddle mounting for close to 20 years,  it's second nature. 

 

Jon



#44 Astronomics

Astronomics

    Vendor: Astronomics

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 6,628
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2004
  • Loc: Right Here

Posted 11 June 2017 - 08:10 AM

 

It weighs 4.65 pounds with the dovetail and rings. We will not have an 80mm doublet. I can't justify the 8mm difference in the line and prefer the jump to a triplet. We have tried same sizes in different optical configurations in the past and it would lock customers up to the point of not purchasing anything.

In that case, any plans for a doublet somewhere between the 80 and 115 mm triplets?

 

   Stuart

 

Not at the moment.  We have another project we are getting final quotes on at the moment.  I have a TMB designed 107mm FPL-53 doublet we had looked at, but the odd glass size was causing an issue getting blanks which made the price very high.


  • Jon Isaacs and Tyson M like this

#45 dagadget

dagadget

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 891
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Avon Park, Florida

Posted 11 June 2017 - 08:48 AM

I would guess that a 102 mm Doublet is in the mix as an idea. Astronomics and AT does do things logically. Triplets at 80 mm 115mm 130mm and one on the borads at 152mm. So let's see a doublet at 72mm so a doublet at 102 makes sense. that is a common blank glass size so should keep prices down. It is very interesting watching what is going on but what is happening is giving us good products at good prices that performs very well. So whatever the project is I am sure it will fit a nice niche in the market. I have certainly been impressed with the AT 115EDT and the AT 130EDT. Now if only Florida would have a week of clear days and nights so I can use them again.....

 

 

David 


Edited by dagadget, 11 June 2017 - 08:50 AM.


#46 sparrowhawk

sparrowhawk

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 382
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Minnesota / United Arab Emirates

Posted 11 June 2017 - 09:03 AM

 

 

It weighs 4.65 pounds with the dovetail and rings. We will not have an 80mm doublet. I can't justify the 8mm difference in the line and prefer the jump to a triplet. We have tried same sizes in different optical configurations in the past and it would lock customers up to the point of not purchasing anything.

In that case, any plans for a doublet somewhere between the 80 and 115 mm triplets?

 

   Stuart

 

Not at the moment.  We have another project we are getting final quotes on at the moment.  I have a TMB designed 107mm FPL-53 doublet we had looked at, but the odd glass size was causing an issue getting blanks which made the price very high.

 

TMB 92SS? bounce.gif

 

 

Shawn


Edited by sparrowhawk, 11 June 2017 - 09:04 AM.


#47 Astronomics

Astronomics

    Vendor: Astronomics

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 6,628
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2004
  • Loc: Right Here

Posted 11 June 2017 - 09:17 AM

 

 

 

It weighs 4.65 pounds with the dovetail and rings. We will not have an 80mm doublet. I can't justify the 8mm difference in the line and prefer the jump to a triplet. We have tried same sizes in different optical configurations in the past and it would lock customers up to the point of not purchasing anything.

In that case, any plans for a doublet somewhere between the 80 and 115 mm triplets?

 

   Stuart

 

Not at the moment.  We have another project we are getting final quotes on at the moment.  I have a TMB designed 107mm FPL-53 doublet we had looked at, but the odd glass size was causing an issue getting blanks which made the price very high.

 

TMB 92SS? bounce.gif

 

 

Shawn

 

Sort of.  Roger Ceragioli went over the original TMB92 lens design and optimized it using glass that wasn't available 10 years ago.  Roger's optical knowledge is truly legendary, so I can't wait to see the optic if we can get it done.  We can't call it a TMB as it is a collaborative effort.  IF, big if, cost can be held in check we would call it an AT92.


  • sparrowhawk, KevH, Anthony236J and 4 others like this

#48 gwlee

gwlee

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,880
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2015
  • Loc: 38N 120W

Posted 11 June 2017 - 09:22 AM

 

Jon, does this tripod use the 3047 head? I had a TV60 that worked well for me side saddle on  this head, so it's the first configuration that i tried with the AT72ED, but for some reason it felt awkward.

 

 It is a 3047. There are two versions of the 3047 head that I know of.  This one is the older, shorter version.  I have replaced the AT-72 dovetail with a section of dovetail I cut, drilled and tapped to get the spacing and balance. 

 

I use it with a 2 inch diagonal and eyepieces like the 31 mm Nagler and 41 mm Pan.. I have been using sidesaddle mounting for close to 20 years,  it's second nature. 

 

Jon

 

I am sure 3047 head will take just about any load. I still use mine for viewing static targets.



#49 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31,254
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 11 June 2017 - 12:56 PM

One problem that I see for both the old and new versions of the AT72ED - and similar scopes as well - is the tendency for the OTA to be imbalanced when observing with heavier 2" diagonals and 2" eyepieces.  

 

To compensate for the heavier back-end when using a heavy 2" eyepiece and diagonal, either the OTA needs to be shifted forward on the mount or a weight needs to be added toward onto the front-end of the OTA.  I don't want to install a counterweight onto the OTA of this telescope.

 

To shift the OTA forward, the dovetail needs to be extended farther back.  Installing a longer dovetail on the new version of the AT72ED - or piggybacking a longer one onto the smaller dovetail of the old version - does not help unless that longer dovetail extends much farther back.  Extending it forward will not help.

 

However, if you extend the dovetail back far enough to compensate for the imbalance caused by a heavy eyepiece, the dovetail has a good chance of hitting the focuser knobs.  You can avoid this by positioning the dovetail directly below the telescope and keeping the focuser knobs horizontal, on the left and right sides of the OTA.  But then, if you want to keep the focuser knobs horizontal, you have to attach the telescope on top of the mount, as on a photo tripod head.  Positioned directly on top of a mount makes the OTA subject to being off balance and falling back when the OTA is pointed toward zenith.  Not too good.

 

On the other hand, if you attach the OTA to the side of the head - as in the Dwarfstar, Microstar and M2 heads - then you need to position the focuser knobs vertically in order to avoid the long back-extended dovetail.  But in that case, the finder base will be in an awkward position.  So in order to place the finder base in a non-awkward position, you end up positioning the focuser knobs diagonally, which is an awkward position for the focuser knobs.

 

Unfortunately, if you want to use heavy 2" eyepieces with this scope, you either deal with an imbalanced OTA when pointing toward zenith or you deal with awkwardly positioned focuser knobs.  Neither option is ideal.

 

That is, unless possibly you place the AT72ED on a mount which is so much heavier and beefier than what I've been using, that it overwhelms the inherent tendency to imbalance.  But IMO putting a little scope on a big mount obviates the grab-n-go advantage of the little scope.

 

Or you can just mount the scope on top of a decent photo-tripod style head - like my 501HDV - and clamp it down real hard when pointing toward zenith.  IMO, not a good solution.  Been there, done that, don't want to go back.

 

Mike


Edited by Sarkikos, 11 June 2017 - 05:02 PM.

  • rogan likes this

#50 iKMN

iKMN

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 717
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2015
  • Loc: South Florida

Posted 11 June 2017 - 01:36 PM

 

 

 

 

It weighs 4.65 pounds with the dovetail and rings. We will not have an 80mm doublet. I can't justify the 8mm difference in the line and prefer the jump to a triplet. We have tried same sizes in different optical configurations in the past and it would lock customers up to the point of not purchasing anything.

In that case, any plans for a doublet somewhere between the 80 and 115 mm triplets?

 

   Stuart

 

Not at the moment.  We have another project we are getting final quotes on at the moment.  I have a TMB designed 107mm FPL-53 doublet we had looked at, but the odd glass size was causing an issue getting blanks which made the price very high.

 

TMB 92SS? bounce.gif

 

 

Shawn

 

Sort of.  Roger Ceragioli went over the original TMB92 lens design and optimized it using glass that wasn't available 10 years ago.  Roger's optical knowledge is truly legendary, so I can't wait to see the optic if we can get it done.  We can't call it a TMB as it is a collaborative effort.  IF, big if, cost can be held in check we would call it an AT92.

 

 

Wow an AT92... just saying if you do come out with one I will be ordering.  I absolutely love my AT115.

 

cheers

 

k




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