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

Got a AT102 ED

  • Please log in to reply
132 replies to this topic

#26 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 05 March 2018 - 06:29 PM

 

 

Have you tested the focuser yet?

I just gave it a whirl on a light pole.  Seems fine with even a 5mm Radian.  I notice no color with lower powers, but see some color on the edge of objects with a 5mm Radian.  Seems to be very clear and clean so far.  A little more snappy than my C5.  This scope is also much lower on power with the same eyepiece.

 

2l8xh6b.jpg

 

Correct if I'm somehow wrong but your tube has got nothing to do with the new Astro-Tech AT102ED. 

 

Well maybe i have a Tak and don't know it.  It is the new AT102.


  • Terra Nova likes this

#27 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 05 March 2018 - 06:35 PM

 

Seeing was bad last nite with dropping temps, but it was clear. With a 32mm and 21mm Tele Vue plossl's , M41, 42 , 45, 37, and 38 all looked great. M42 also looked super with a 5mm Radian and the 3mm Delite was a little too much for the seeing. Plan to get some 2" eyepieces soon. I would bet a 21mm Ethos would be a killer for this scope.

Why stop at 21mm? A 34mm 68 would give wider FOV, probably weigh less, and show faint DSO brighter. For low power I like 4-5mm exit pupil, which would be 28-35mm for an F7. The Hyperion 36mm 72* also comes to mind. Or ES 30mm 82 if you like a counterweight to raise the eyepiece position. Any of these would give a significantly larger FOV and cost much less than a 21 Ethos. The 21 Ethos is really for sub F5 Dobs, although it can certainly be useful in other scopes. Low power for Dobs, medium power for cats. I don’t know how much I would use one in my 4” Apo though. Not wide enough for low power finder ep and too wide for 95% of targets. I suppose Coat Hanger, Pleiades and Beehive would be good.

That being said I would love a 21 Ethos for my 8” F4.

Scott

 

I sold everything off last year and now getting back eyepieces. Got 3 more coming this week.  I made two mistakes in life, bought my first Nagler sometime around 1993 and bought a 13mm Ethos over a year ago.  The Nagler was a life changer for me back in the day and for sure the Ethos was a real wake up call. It's hard to go back after having the best. 

 

A nice set of Ethos would be the way to go. But i also love the older Tele Vue Wide fields, Delites and Radians.



#28 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 05 March 2018 - 08:43 PM

The scope feels well built and solid.  Feels like i am picking up my FS102 as far as build goes. No cheap feel to it at all.


  • zjc26138, Terra Nova, Bomber Bob and 1 other like this

#29 rogeriomagellan

rogeriomagellan

    Surveyor 1

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

Posted 06 March 2018 - 06:33 AM

 

 

 

Have you tested the focuser yet?

I just gave it a whirl on a light pole.  Seems fine with even a 5mm Radian.  I notice no color with lower powers, but see some color on the edge of objects with a 5mm Radian.  Seems to be very clear and clean so far.  A little more snappy than my C5.  This scope is also much lower on power with the same eyepiece.

 

2l8xh6b.jpg

 

Correct if I'm somehow wrong but your tube has got nothing to do with the new Astro-Tech AT102ED. 

 

Well maybe i have a Tak and don't know it.  It is the new AT102.

 

Thank you very much for the sarcasm. 



#30 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 06 March 2018 - 07:06 AM

 

 

 

 

Have you tested the focuser yet?

I just gave it a whirl on a light pole.  Seems fine with even a 5mm Radian.  I notice no color with lower powers, but see some color on the edge of objects with a 5mm Radian.  Seems to be very clear and clean so far.  A little more snappy than my C5.  This scope is also much lower on power with the same eyepiece.

 

2l8xh6b.jpg

 

Correct if I'm somehow wrong but your tube has got nothing to do with the new Astro-Tech AT102ED. 

 

Well maybe i have a Tak and don't know it.  It is the new AT102.

 

Thank you very much for the sarcasm. 

 

Next time think before banging away jay.



#31 Moondust

Moondust

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 578
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2006
  • Loc: The Show Me State

Posted 06 March 2018 - 10:50 AM

 

 

 

 

 

Have you tested the focuser yet?

I just gave it a whirl on a light pole.  Seems fine with even a 5mm Radian.  I notice no color with lower powers, but see some color on the edge of objects with a 5mm Radian.  Seems to be very clear and clean so far.  A little more snappy than my C5.  This scope is also much lower on power with the same eyepiece.

 

2l8xh6b.jpg

 

Correct if I'm somehow wrong but your tube has got nothing to do with the new Astro-Tech AT102ED. 

 

Well maybe i have a Tak and don't know it.  It is the new AT102.

 

Thank you very much for the sarcasm. 

 

Next time think before banging away jay.

 

He said correct him if he was somehow wrong, he didn't ask for chastisement.  No need for that here.  "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone on these forums ".


  • stevew, SteveG, MSWcdavis and 2 others like this

#32 treadmarks

treadmarks

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 982
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2016
  • Loc: Boston MA

Posted 06 March 2018 - 11:06 PM

That is a good looking scope. The photo on its product page doesn't do it justice.


  • Steve Cox likes this

#33 Tyson M

Tyson M

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3834
  • Joined: 22 Jan 2015
  • Loc: Alberta, Canada

Posted 06 March 2018 - 11:26 PM

Looking forward to hearing more reports with this scope! 



#34 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 07 March 2018 - 06:15 AM

Soon as i get a steady nite i will know more. 



#35 rodb

rodb

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 898
  • Joined: 19 May 2008
  • Loc: MD, USA,

Posted 07 March 2018 - 11:55 AM

 

 

Seeing was bad last nite with dropping temps, but it was clear.  With a 32mm and 21mm Tele Vue plossl's , M41, 42 , 45, 37, and 38 all looked great.  M42 also looked super with a 5mm Radian and the 3mm Delite was a little too much for the seeing.  Plan to get some 2" eyepieces soon.  I would bet a 21mm Ethos would be a killer for this scope.

The 21E is a great EP in almost any Refractor however for this OTA I'd more readily use a 31T5 or similar.

 

 

They're all good.  The 21mm Ethos, the 31mm Nagler, the 41mm Panoptic and a bunch of others too.  At F/7, I like the 35mm Panoptic.  

 

shrug.gif

 

Jon

 

Jon, If I may ask a quick question off topic? The TV 85 is f7, as you know. I have that Pan 35. Would you consider that EP as an optional finder, if along with, say a Starbeam?

 

Thanks, Rod



#36 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 07 March 2018 - 06:40 PM

I seem to not need a finder with this scope with a 1.25" 32mm Tele Vue Plossl.  I will try out a 2" 40mm Wide field when i get a clear nite.  I am sure that will be much more of a wide field.


  • Tyson M likes this

#37 NHRob

NHRob

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8107
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2004
  • Loc: Southern Cloud-Hampshire

Posted 08 March 2018 - 07:36 AM

Let us know how it does on planets. 



#38 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 08 March 2018 - 06:52 PM

Let us know how it does on planets. 

Maybe in a few months. 



#39 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 09 March 2018 - 08:26 PM

Had more time tonite. Used a 2" 40mm Wide field Tele Vue. You sure don't need a finder scope, just point and the object is easy to find. I can get all of Orions belt in the FOV. The double cluster looks super with a 15mm Wide field, nice sharp and clear. No color is noticed while viewing deep sky stuff.  I hope get a shot at the moon soon and a planet or two also one morning.  


  • Lewis Cason, Bomber Bob, Tyson M and 1 other like this

#40 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 12 March 2018 - 06:21 PM

Bought a solar wedge for this scope so we will how it does on the sun.



#41 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 24 March 2018 - 01:53 PM

Hope to try it out on the moon tonite and i will compare it to a super sharp 125 EXT.


  • Tyson M likes this

#42 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 24 March 2018 - 08:23 PM

Just did a three way. My old sharp 1976 C5 and a insane sharp 125ETX.   Seeing is a good 8 tonite.  This AT 102 ED is a shocker on the moon , it just flat out eats up the C5 on sharpness and contrast.  The ETX 125 is hard to compare with since it a F/15 system vs F7 for the AT102 ED.  With any given eyepiece the power is over double what the AT102 ED is.  The 102 ed wins with nice sharp wide fields of view by far ove the other two scopes.  With a 32mm Tele Vue Plossl or a 2" Wide Field 40mm Tele Vue no finder scope is needed as you just point near the object and it is in the FOV.

 

It is a toss up between the ETX125 and AT102 ED.  The EXT gives insane high power views that are color free while there is some color noticed on the moon with the 102ed, just a tiny bit of purple at high powers.  But the ETX can't give the crazy wide fov's the 102 ed can.  I think both scopes offer up some great views, one being F/7 and one at f/15 is like a horse of a diff color.   There are good and bad in all scopes. The focuser on the ETX is garbage at best while the foucser on the AT 102 ED is very smooth and tight.  It would be hard for me to pick just one scope as the winner beween the 125ETX and AT102 ED.

 

I would say the AT 102 ED is about the best bang for the buck going these days.


Edited by CHASLX200, 24 March 2018 - 08:29 PM.

  • bob midiri, zjc26138, stevew and 2 others like this

#43 Bill Barlow

Bill Barlow

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4411
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Overland Park KS

Posted 24 March 2018 - 08:46 PM

Is this scope a doublet?  What type of glass does it have?

 

Bill


Edited by Bill Barlow, 24 March 2018 - 08:46 PM.


#44 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 25 March 2018 - 04:14 AM

Is this scope a doublet?  What type of glass does it have?

 

Bill

Yes.  I think FK61 ED glass.  I am shocked a $600 scope can be so good.  20 years ago you would have never found a deal like this.


Edited by CHASLX200, 25 March 2018 - 04:54 AM.

  • starbob1 and Bomber Bob like this

#45 BarrySimon615

BarrySimon615

    Pa Bear

  • *****
  • Posts: 4362
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2004
  • Loc: New Orleans, LA

Posted 25 March 2018 - 09:36 AM

Just did a three way. My old sharp 1976 C5 and a insane sharp 125ETX.   Seeing is a good 8 tonite.  This AT 102 ED is a shocker on the moon , it just flat out eats up the C5 on sharpness and contrast.  The ETX 125 is hard to compare with since it a F/15 system vs F7 for the AT102 ED.  With any given eyepiece the power is over double what the AT102 ED is.  The 102 ed wins with nice sharp wide fields of view by far ove the other two scopes.  With a 32mm Tele Vue Plossl or a 2" Wide Field 40mm Tele Vue no finder scope is needed as you just point near the object and it is in the FOV.

 

It is a toss up between the ETX125 and AT102 ED.  The EXT gives insane high power views that are color free while there is some color noticed on the moon with the 102ed, just a tiny bit of purple at high powers.  But the ETX can't give the crazy wide fov's the 102 ed can.  I think both scopes offer up some great views, one being F/7 and one at f/15 is like a horse of a diff color.   There are good and bad in all scopes. The focuser on the ETX is garbage at best while the foucser on the AT 102 ED is very smooth and tight.  It would be hard for me to pick just one scope as the winner beween the 125ETX and AT102 ED.

 

I would say the AT 102 ED is about the best bang for the buck going these days.

So given the obvious differences in focal length - almost 1900 mm for the ETX 125 and 714 mm for the AT 102 ED, the ETX focal length is 2.62 x greater than the AT 102 ED.  Knowing that you could compare both telescopes at close to the same magnification using a barlow or PowerMate or just different eyepieces of different focal lengths.  I don't know what eyepieces you have but it is likely that you have a few that would level the playing field.  For example a 14 mm Explore Scientific 82  or a TV Delos 14 in the ETX would be fairly well matched by either a 5 mm Nagler type 6 or a TV Delos 6 mm in the AT 102 ED.  Note, my examples are just that, examples.  I am sure you can match magnifications in both scopes; I think that comparison would be what many would like to see.

 

Barry Simon



#46 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 25 March 2018 - 12:00 PM

So given the obvious differences in focal length - almost 1900 mm for the ETX 125 and 714 mm for the AT 102 ED, the ETX focal length is 2.62 x greater than the AT 102 ED.  Knowing that you could compare both telescopes at close to the same magnification using a barlow or PowerMate or just different eyepieces of different focal lengths.  I don't know what eyepieces you have but it is likely that you have a few that would level the playing field.  For example a 14 mm Explore Scientific 82  or a TV Delos 14 in the ETX would be fairly well matched by either a 5 mm Nagler type 6 or a TV Delos 6 mm in the AT 102 ED.  Note, my examples are just that, examples.  I am sure you can match magnifications in both scopes; I think that comparison would be what many would like to see.

 

Barry Simon

I am going to try to stay near the same power next time for the 102 and 125 ETX.  The most power i have is a 3mm Delite at the time.  While i can see the moon at 600x with the ETX the image is dim.  I need a Barlow to really push the 102 ed.  A 5mm Radian looks darn good in the ETX and that is still crazy high power for a cheap 5" Mak.  The 3mm Delite was still not pushing the 102 ED to the max.  So gotta get me a barlow soon.



#47 amzking

amzking

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 659
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2017
  • Loc: Space Coast, Florida

Posted 04 April 2018 - 04:11 PM

Whelp, I just ordered the exact same thing, same accessories and everything (thanks for the info on the shoe) and am really excited to try it out when it gets here!  I went with the Porta 2 mount instead because I didn't want to take a chance having to take the mount apart like you did.  I wanted it for a grab and go now that the sun is setting later, and for starhopping.  Really excited at your saying a finder is hardly needed, can't wait to try my ES82 30mm with it.

 

My only "good" high power EP is the Baader Zoom, so if anyone has any ideas on what quality higher-power EP would work well with this scope, I'm all ears for recommendations.  Still a newbee here.



#48 SeattleScott

SeattleScott

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6227
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2011

Posted 04 April 2018 - 05:46 PM

3.5mm would give you the max rated magnification. Not saying you couldn’t go higher on Moon if optics are good enough, since Moon is so bright. If you want maximum contrast you could get a Vixen 3.4mm HR. Might still be on sale for $240. But tracking will be a little tricky with just 42 deg AFOV and a manual mount. So you might sacrifice a little contrast for wider views. 3.5 Delos would be very good, or go hyperwide with the SV Optimus 3.6mm. Not really optimized for planetary but the 110 deg FOV would make tracking easy. So it is a trade off. More lenses allow wider views, but more lenses increase light scatter and reduce contrast. You just have to decide how much AFOV you are willing to sacrifice for contrast, and a budget, and we can help you from there.

Scott

#49 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 18540
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 04 April 2018 - 06:14 PM

3.5mm would give you the max rated magnification. Not saying you couldn’t go higher on Moon if optics are good enough, since Moon is so bright. If you want maximum contrast you could get a Vixen 3.4mm HR. Might still be on sale for $240. But tracking will be a little tricky with just 42 deg AFOV and a manual mount. So you might sacrifice a little contrast for wider views. 3.5 Delos would be very good, or go hyperwide with the SV Optimus 3.6mm. Not really optimized for planetary but the 110 deg FOV would make tracking easy. So it is a trade off. More lenses allow wider views, but more lenses increase light scatter and reduce contrast. You just have to decide how much AFOV you are willing to sacrifice for contrast, and a budget, and we can help you from there.

Scott

If it's a super good lens it will do 100x per inch. 



#50 amzking

amzking

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 659
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2017
  • Loc: Space Coast, Florida

Posted 04 April 2018 - 06:16 PM

3.5mm would give you the max rated magnification. Not saying you couldn’t go higher on Moon if optics are good enough, since Moon is so bright. If you want maximum contrast you could get a Vixen 3.4mm HR. Might still be on sale for $240. But tracking will be a little tricky with just 42 deg AFOV and a manual mount. So you might sacrifice a little contrast for wider views. 3.5 Delos would be very good, or go hyperwide with the SV Optimus 3.6mm. Not really optimized for planetary but the 110 deg FOV would make tracking easy. So it is a trade off. More lenses allow wider views, but more lenses increase light scatter and reduce contrast. You just have to decide how much AFOV you are willing to sacrifice for contrast, and a budget, and we can help you from there.

Scott

I hate to go to the max rated mag since this is my grab-and-go in my Bortle 5 skies.  Maybe a 5 or 6?  And maybe around $100 or so?  Definitely as wide as possible.  




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