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

BRESSER 4 Inch f 4.5 AR 102XS Refractor visual observers’ REVIEW

  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 TimVerst

TimVerst

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2017

Posted 23 November 2017 - 04:18 PM

For me, the 102SX is a solid, wide/rich-field travel scope.I’ll pimp up the finder-scope and dew shield, making this one a keeper.

Click here to view the article
  • DHEB likes this

#2 View2

View2

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1692
  • Joined: 20 May 2016
  • Loc: Vancouver, WA USA

Posted 23 November 2017 - 10:44 PM

Looks like a quality setup

#3 nicknacknock

nicknacknock

    Always Mr. Random at every airport...

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 9809
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Nicosia, Cyprus

Posted 24 November 2017 - 03:21 AM

Nice review which got me thinking. I have two trips next year and I was thinking which scope to take. This one is something I can take without worrying too much. Now on the list of possible scopes.

 

FYI Kemble's Cascade should look lovely in a 30mm wide field eyepiece...


  • deepwoods1, DHEB and rogeriomagellan like this

#4 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1650
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 24 November 2017 - 06:30 AM

Nice review.



#5 jfinkler

jfinkler

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: 23 Nov 2014
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 24 November 2017 - 05:31 PM

fwiw, it may not say so on the scope but bresser is advertising the lens on this scope as ED glass:

 

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



#6 bananarep

bananarep

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 14
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2011

Posted 24 November 2017 - 07:56 PM

"Removing that dust cap from a vinyl-lined rim is like extracting a compliment out of the mother-in-law. Tough."

 

Classic lol.


  • Traveler, Radioamateur, Augustus and 1 other like this

#7 Reading Colin

Reading Colin

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 25 Nov 2017

Posted 25 November 2017 - 01:55 PM

Appreciate the review Tim

I have the scope and got it for its size and portability, really can't disagree with the finder have replaced it with a right angle finder that I had from my previous scope,  though am still trying to get the aperture cover off to use it !

It is as you say seriously difficult to get off

I use it with 25 and 9mm eyepieces  with a Barlow but what are the 2 extension tubes for as using them either singly or as a pair when inserted into the focuser draw tube I'm not able to get any view whatsoever  -  I'm not using the scope for photography so it it the eyepieces and there particular magnification and focal length that are incompatible 

Can you help or advise me 

 

Thanks 



#8 Littlegreenman

Littlegreenman

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4307
  • Joined: 08 May 2005
  • Loc: Southern California

Posted 26 November 2017 - 02:45 AM

Nice review. I'm tempted, but living "across the pond"* it seems Bresser will not ship here. Although CN member in Europe offered to act as a go-between in post #42 in this thread:

 

https://www.cloudyni...-102-f45/page-3

 

(This post has a lot of speculation, and a lot of posting along the lines of: it can't be a true apochromatic scope and it's no good for planetary. True, but it sounds quite decent for wide field.)

 

I've also had my eye on an AT 72mm f/6, which is also small, probably close to a true apochromat, but slower. And less aperture. My guess is the Bresser, besides having a wider fov may be brighter and reach deaper on Milky Way etc. ?

 

Tip:  "...and searching for plastic holding screws that kept popping out into long grass..."  When I have my act together I put a tarp down under my viewing area, and this is a major reason why. Also for insects lurking under foot.

 

LGM



#9 DHEB

DHEB

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 444
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Sweden

Posted 26 November 2017 - 03:34 PM

Nice review. Thanks. I have had this telescope since last June as my grab-and-go and travel scope and have only had good experiences.  I use it mostly for visual variable star observing. CA is present only around the brightest of stars but that does not bother me at all. Accessories (finder, diagonal, eyepiece) are a waste of money and CO2 emissions. Should not be included at all. As you say, buyers should know they must buy quality stuff if they do not yet have them. I use it mounted on a Vixen APP TL 130 tripod. Excellent combination for a visual G&G and travel scope. All in all an excellent telescope for a real low price.

 

My experience and some pictures:

https://www.cloudyni...-3#entry8003060

 

https://www.cloudyni...-3#entry8069767


  • rogeriomagellan likes this

#10 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1650
  • Joined: 13 Oct 2016

Posted 26 November 2017 - 05:26 PM

fwiw, it may not say so on the scope but bresser is advertising the lens on this scope as ED glass:

 

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

If others and you wish to read a discussion about the Bresser Messier AR-102xs and its ED lenses, click on the link below:

 

https://www.cloudyni...ier-ar-102-f45/


  • DHEB likes this

#11 DHEB

DHEB

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 444
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Sweden

Posted 27 November 2017 - 04:22 AM

 

fwiw, it may not say so on the scope but bresser is advertising the lens on this scope as ED glass:

 

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

If others and you wish to read a discussion about the Bresser Messier AR-102xs and its ED lenses, click on the link below:

 

https://www.cloudyni...ier-ar-102-f45/

 

That is really a good thread, with lots of info! smile.gif


  • rogeriomagellan likes this

#12 DHEB

DHEB

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 444
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Sweden

Posted 27 November 2017 - 04:27 AM

Nice review which got me thinking. I have two trips next year and I was thinking which scope to take. This one is something I can take without worrying too much. Now on the list of possible scopes.

 

FYI Kemble's Cascade should look lovely in a 30mm wide field eyepiece...

I can warmly recommend this telescope as an excellent G&G - Travelscope, lightweight and small, yet very capable instrument. As I wrote above, I suggest mounting it on a Vixen APP TL 130 tripod, using a Vixen Porta II mount. The combo is very stable and extremely lightweight.

 

I also use an Omegon 2" diagonal and (mainly) an Explorer Scientific 82 degree 18 mm eyepiece, which gives 3.2 degrees field at 25.6 X. Alternatively I also use an ES 82 deg 8.8 mm eyepiece, that gives 1.5 degrees field at 52X.

 

Good luck!


Edited by cincosauces, 27 November 2017 - 04:31 AM.

  • rogeriomagellan likes this

#13 Maurolico

Maurolico

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 211
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017

Posted 27 November 2017 - 03:32 PM

I had a chance to play a bit with this scope thanks to a friend. Overall I agree with the review, albeit the main CA I've found in this case is a beautiful "binocular-alike" yellow rim around the bright half of the Moon which always remind me the saints' headlights depicted by the medieval master painter Beato Angelico. However the violet was missing, adsorbed by the yellow. Commonly, inward out-focus does bring forth violet as well as backward out-focus does bring forth yellow, hence under 2mm exit pupil the fine focuser option is indeed advisable.

The accessories are plastic toys, and switching toward a better 2inch mirror diagonal does improve the view ALOT, because whereas Trapezium looks bloated with TV and ES both 11mm riding on the shipped diagonal, it is plainly resolved in its four stars when both the EPs rides a WO 2inch DuraBright; and the yellow color of the bright side of the Moon is also lesser scattered (urban centre, city lighs everywhere, I don't know at dark site). Carbon star R Lep (Hind's Crimson Star) was a pin-point red dot as well as Betelgeuse was dark orange; CA began to appear with high magnitude and brighter spectral classes A to O (Sirius, Rigel and so on) but this was irrelevant for the wondrous sight of M42/43 nebulosity (without narrowband UHC; with UHC it was simply magnificent for a LP site). The "birdy" shape was very apparent.

One could be expecting "warp drive" effect upon buildings antennas due to the short focal length, instead also in daylight time the field distortion is not bad at all and the outfocus toward the field stop is tolerable - yet for whom are familiar with middle-class binoculars.

The weird thing is a single instruction paper leaf stating that: "when using an EP in the telescope, one of the extension tubes must be mounted. For most eyepieces, the longer extension tube should be used"; well - on the contrary - none of the EP used (2 and 1.1/4 inches) did achieve focus in this manner, neither with the diagonal in place: to achieve focus no extension tube must be used. Nor is achieved the straight-thru focus; there is no way to achieve straight-thru focus with or without tubes either: they are still short altogether. With the diagonal and without extension tubes, the scope did get focus from 34 to 9mm EPs (surely also with EPs > 34mm and < 9mm, but not tested) either of 2 or 1.1/4 inches. Without the diagonal those EPs didn't get focus. The scope is very portable and fits also some eyepieces bags. The scope was mounted upon an AZ3 and albeit stable and well-balanceable even with 2inch accessories, a better mount is advisable. This is a lovely and performant G&G scope.


  • DHEB likes this

#14 jstrandberg

jstrandberg

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 94
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2006
  • Loc: Prescott, AZ

Posted 01 December 2017 - 12:53 PM

It doesn't look like this is available in the US, which is too bad because it looks like a great scope.



#15 nicknacknock

nicknacknock

    Always Mr. Random at every airport...

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 9809
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Nicosia, Cyprus

Posted 02 December 2017 - 01:25 AM

jstrandberg,

 

You can always import it from Europe. Your price would be net of VAT by the way. Shipping should not be prohibitive.


  • zjc26138 likes this

#16 DIMITRIS K.

DIMITRIS K.

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 56
  • Joined: 23 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Athens, Greece

Posted 06 December 2017 - 05:48 AM

Great review!! Many thanks!!

I've changed viewfinder and star diagonal to something more "serious". The supplied ones are absolutely crap,i had a broken screw and damaged crosshair in my viewfinder (i used a hair from my head to fix it!!!!!). Review is absolutely accurate about telescope performance. My only disagrement is the use of 30mm eyepiece. I think it's useless in such focal ratio, because it overcome  the minimum useful magnification of the telescope. I think 20-25mm eyepiece is the minimum.


  • rogeriomagellan likes this

#17 BinoGuy

BinoGuy

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 369
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2014

Posted 06 December 2017 - 12:31 PM

For what it is worth, and not to hijack the thread, a couple of us CNers just received a SkyWatcher GTI mount and scope from the UK within the past 10 days.  Shipping was annoying but not prohibitive, and what choice is there when the kit isn’t sold in the colonies?

 

Nice review. I’ll want to se results against my new SW 102Mak and budget ES 90 that arrived on Monday and will be hosting a Lunt wedge for solar (been on a bit of a tear lately).


  • rogeriomagellan likes this

#18 David Veliath

David Veliath

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2017

Posted 29 January 2018 - 09:42 AM

I know that this is an old thread and i don't blame you if you don't respond, but how do you think this would stack up against a Celestron C6? Both look very portable so I'm talking about views here. I am most interested in DSOs and lunar visual. I am about to buy my first telescope, its between this and a C6.

 

Thanks!



#19 DHEB

DHEB

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 444
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Sweden

Posted 05 February 2018 - 12:01 AM

I know that this is an old thread and i don't blame you if you don't respond, but how do you think this would stack up against a Celestron C6? Both look very portable so I'm talking about views here. I am most interested in DSOs and lunar visual. I am about to buy my first telescope, its between this and a C6.

Thanks!


I have the Bresser Messier AR102XS and so not think it qualifies as a lunar telescope. You can of course look at the Moon with it, but with a focal length of 460 mm it is difficult to get high powers with it. Also CA will be noticeable at high powers and may bother you. For me, the AR102XS is an excellent grab and go and travel scope very well suited for low power, wide field observation. Good luck!

#20 Maurolico

Maurolico

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 211
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017

Posted 05 February 2018 - 07:28 AM

I know that this is an old thread and i don't blame you if you don't respond, but how do you think this would stack up against a Celestron C6? Both look very portable so I'm talking about views here. I am most interested in DSOs and lunar visual. I am about to buy my first telescope, its between this and a C6.

 

Thanks!

As long as for "DSOs" you do not mean some open clusters, Veil nebula and large HII regions, I will go with the C6. These two scopes are very different aimed scopes. For planets, Moon, globular cluster, PNs, galaxies and double stars, the C6 wins: for aperture and focal length either. For low power widefield pan scanning and sky framing, the AR102s is better suited.



#21 Maurolico

Maurolico

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 211
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017

Posted 05 February 2018 - 08:06 AM

Note: the term "portability" is a bit ambiguos: often is implied few steps walkaway grab&go rig (OTA + mount), but more often is intended bare backpacking trekking, bicycle/motorcycle riding and bus/rail/air trips; hence the C6 + mount is those cases is a bit of an annoyance to deal with than the AR102s.


Edited by Maurolico, 05 February 2018 - 08:10 AM.


#22 morden8uk

morden8uk

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 735
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2005
  • Loc: Southampton, England

Posted 19 July 2018 - 02:32 AM

Nice review indeed. I'm thinking of purchasing one now. so to be clear it claims ED glass (FPL-51/53?) is this only 1 of the lenses that make the doublet?. So in effect is it a Petzval scope?.

 

Rob



#23 petmic

petmic

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 166
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2016
  • Loc: Central Europe

Posted 19 July 2018 - 02:40 AM

I think it is only AR127 and AR152 in Bresser line that use Petzval design.

 

I have got AR102S and it is certainly not a Petzval design. AFAIK AR102XS is basically a shortened AR102S and in order to reduce the chromatic abberation they used ED glass on one of the doublet lenses. It is definitely not a ED scope though.


  • rogeriomagellan likes this

#24 morden8uk

morden8uk

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 735
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2005
  • Loc: Southampton, England

Posted 19 July 2018 - 02:58 AM

Thanks Peter.

 

Right so a semi-apo it is then. I'm just catching up with threads/posts on this scope. I'm interested for sure as part corrected wide field sounds like a nice step up from Skywatcher's ST80/120.

 

Rob



#25 petmic

petmic

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 166
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2016
  • Loc: Central Europe

Posted 19 July 2018 - 03:14 AM

Hmm...not sure if I would call it a semi-APO. I had a chance to look through it once and CA seems to be pretty close to my AR102S. That means it is well pronounced on bright stars. Surprisingly, my experience is that ETX80 f/5 shows less CA - maybe due to the cemented objective?

 

I personally consider AR102XS to be an ordinary (although very short) achromat. The ED glass just brings the CA close to the usual low f ratio achromats. If they used the same glass as on AR102S the CA would be so bad that nobody would probably buy that scope. That's all the ED label means in this case in my opinion.


  • morden8uk likes this


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