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

Intes Micro no more?

  • Please log in to reply
123 replies to this topic

#51 luxo II

luxo II

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 677
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 12 July 2018 - 05:08 AM

Personally I’d expect the TEC is better mechanically (the Russian OTA are quite crude) ... optically I don’t know. I haven’t used a TEC 200mm, though there’s one TEC I know of in my country - Kunama on CN - and maybe one day a chance for side by side comparison.

Edited by luxo II, 12 July 2018 - 06:38 AM.

  • Joves likes this

#52 Stopforths

Stopforths

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 48
  • Joined: 07 Apr 2018

Posted 12 July 2018 - 04:30 PM

This happened in the early in the early 90's with zeiss east german scopes and brother kev jumped on a even at the time  expensive  apq100/1000 used as a demonstrator here in new zealand.

 

It increased in value somewhat  in a few short years given the mixture of quality and rarity.  Kev sold it moved to an apq130/1000 which has increased in price somewhat also since .

 

This doesn't always happen quality and desirability are factors along with rarity.  

 

 

There will be a collectors market and the way the scopes are looked after their condition etc will be a factor.

 

Re the intes Micro scopes they are no masterpieces mechanically or to look at but the optics do seem to be top shelf.  Be interesting to see if they buck the trend and increase in value now they are no longer available.

 

I owned a 715 always regret selling that and the current 10 inch I brought for a song.  Be surprised if the 10 doesn't increase somewhat in value.  I'd say it would be about 3-4000US at present much less than its new price.  Maybe it will increase to 6-8,000 over the next decade or so who knows???


  • Joves likes this

#53 Joves

Joves

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 31
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013

Posted 13 July 2018 - 01:48 AM

Personally I’d expect the TEC is better mechanically (the Russian OTA are quite crude) ... optically I don’t know. I haven’t used a TEC 200mm, though there’s one TEC I know of in my country - Kunama on CN - and maybe one day a chance for side by side comparison.

Thanks for the reply mate. Reason for the question is that I am actually the current owner of the scope you know of and have never seen through an Intes Micro. Was asking more so out of curiosity.



#54 Marcsabb

Marcsabb

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 417
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2015

Posted 13 July 2018 - 03:29 AM

Russian telescopes are more sturdy than crude. There are no imperfection of assembly, no play in the mechanisms in all the Intes I've seen. Also, the paint they use, while very smelly for years, it's also very resistant to scratches and bumps. The design is very functional with no concessions to weight saving or aesthetics. 


Edited by Marcsabb, 13 July 2018 - 03:29 AM.

  • Andy Howie, meade4ever, Jaimo! and 2 others like this

#55 Joves

Joves

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 31
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2013

Posted 13 July 2018 - 03:50 AM

They are, or were should I say, very well built scopes by all accounts. Lots of great reports regarding their performance, can’t recall reading many (if any) negative comments about them.

 

APM’s currently listed 14” Mak Cass would be a sight to behold... as is the 44k euro price tag!



#56 JohnH

JohnH

    Mercury-Atlas

  • ****-
  • Posts: 2892
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Squamish BC Moved!!!!!

Posted 14 July 2018 - 10:40 PM

How would an Intes Micro 8” Mak Cass, like the 203/1200 compare to, say a Tec MC200 f15.5?

The Intes M809 8" f/10 is a superb scope.


  • meade4ever and Joves like this

#57 ccaissie

ccaissie

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1664
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Whitefield, Maine

Posted 15 July 2018 - 03:46 AM

So are you saying my 6" f/6 Argonaut with the Russian optics is now more desirable than ever?



#58 tmaestro

tmaestro

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 429
  • Joined: 22 Jul 2015
  • Loc: West of Houston, Texas

Posted 15 July 2018 - 08:54 AM

So are you saying my 6" f/6 Argonaut with the Russian optics is now more desirable than ever?

You probably won't find anything to match its optical quality with the money you'd make by selling it.



#59 Kevin Barker

Kevin Barker

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 710
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2009
  • Loc: Auckland, NZ

Posted 15 July 2018 - 04:24 PM

The f-15.5 would have a smaller Central Obstruction and deliver a bit more planetary contrast.

The f-10 will allow a wider fov. It has the same aperture and focal length as an 8 inch SCT.

 

I have the 6 and 7 inch I-M f-10 scopes. They have very smooth wavefronts and deliver lovely images. The 7 does take a bit of time to cool but at my 36 deg S latitude cooling is not too much of an issue.

 

My 8 inch f-15 I-M does take a bit longer to cool down. And the very long focal length of 3.0 m give or take does restrict it's use.

 

On the very best nights I would expect the 32% obstructed 8 inch f-10 would lose out to the 24% or less obstructed 8 inch f-15.5 on Jupiter and low contrast planetary viewing. The 8 inch would still not be a slouch mind you.

 

The old adage of aperture minus central obstruction comes into play here. A CO difference of about 8% of 203 mm or 16 mm for an obstructed scope. This is enough to be apparent at the eyepiece when viewing low contrast objects.

 

On DSO's and clusters the views at the same magnification would be very similar.

How would an Intes Micro 8” Mak Cass, like the 203/1200 compare to, say a Tec MC200 f15.5?


  • RAKing and Joves like this

#60 photoracer18

photoracer18

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2202
  • Joined: 02 Sep 2013
  • Loc: Martinsburg, WV

Posted 19 July 2018 - 04:09 PM

I used to work for Hands On Optics during the period when they were a dealer for Intes, Intes Micro, and LOMO. I agree that all the optics were top notch (otherwise I would not have owned a few). Mechanically in the early days the I/IM stuff often came thru with lots of things loose, and in one case the secondary of a Mak-Newt totally unscrewed during shipment and fell down and damaged the primary. So we (read that as I) had to spend time tightening things down and sometimes re-collimating things. I Will say that by the time LOMO got in the business and established LOMO America they never had these issues. I think Gary made a deal with Markus to open the boxes and fix any obvious things before they were shipped to us. Once they were sold they seldom came back to us with an issue (except for a guy who totally screwed up the primary mirror adjustment on a LOMO 150 and broke something then tried to fix it himself). Somebody said on here built like T-72 tanks. I think it goes back farther than that, more like T-34 tanks from WWII. I think they melted them down and made just about everything out of them. Sometimes when they were traded in or Gary bought something at an event I had to bring them up to specs. I worked fixing 10x as many SCTs for sure. I just took delivery of an Intes Micro MN56 for a really good price simply because the secondary screw was loose and it lost collimation. I forgot how much these things really weighed.

Edited by photoracer18, 19 July 2018 - 04:15 PM.

  • Live_Steam_Mad and Conaxian like this

#61 coopman

coopman

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5278
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2006
  • Loc: South Louisiana

Posted 23 July 2018 - 08:59 PM

Is my seldom used MN66 now an instant "classic scope"?

#62 BravoFoxtrot

BravoFoxtrot

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 78
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2007
  • Loc: Colorado

Posted 23 July 2018 - 09:09 PM

Is my seldom used MN66 now an instant "classic scope"?

Probably.  smile.gif

 

15 years or so ago, I almost pulled the trigger on one.  I bought C11 instead that was sold again in a few months.  I wish now that I would have bought the Intes.   Lesson learned.



#63 MortonH

MortonH

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 834
  • Joined: 12 May 2007
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 24 July 2018 - 04:38 AM

I have a pre-loved M500 on its way to me. Not sure of the vintage - it has the passive air vents round the corrector but no fan. 

 

Will be interesting to see how it compares to my other scopes.



#64 Marcsabb

Marcsabb

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 417
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2015

Posted 24 July 2018 - 06:09 AM

I have a pre-loved M500 on its way to me. Not sure of the vintage - it has the passive air vents round the corrector but no fan. 

 

Will be interesting to see how it compares to my other scopes.

Early versions didn't have those holes and the tube diameter was also smaller. This version should also have better internal baffles. Behind the front ring with the there should be a collar of filter paper, to let air in but keep dust out. The condition of that collar (if not removed - some users would do that) is a good indication of the how old the telescope and of the environment in which it was kept.


  • MortonH likes this

#65 elwaine

elwaine

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2068
  • Joined: 18 Jun 2006
  • Loc: Jupiter

Posted 24 July 2018 - 11:14 AM

Russian telescopes are more sturdy than crude. There are no imperfection of assembly, no play in the mechanisms in all the Intes I've seen. Also, the paint they use, while very smelly for years, it's also very resistant to scratches and bumps. The design is very functional with no concessions to weight saving or aesthetics. 

That's not my experience with Russian made Maks. I took apart, and re-assembled, an Intes-Alter M809 Deluxe. Yes, it was sturdy, but it was also crudely made. Imperfections in the design and assembly caused the meniscus to chip under steel retaining clamps. Metal on glass was a very crude way to hold the meniscus in place. There were other poorly executed features as well. Here is the link to my photo journal of my Intes-Alter M809 make over.

 

One should always beware of the man with one case... so my experience with the Russian Mak may be atypical (although I have read reports of others who share my assessment of Russian Maks). I'd rate the optics in the M809 as a 9 and the build quality as a 7. In comparison, I'd rate my TEC Mak as a 10 for optics and a 9 for build quality. (I took off 1 point on the TEC build quality because I do not care for the way the dew shield attaches to the OTA... but otherwise it's a 10.) 


Edited by elwaine, 24 July 2018 - 11:18 AM.

  • Live_Steam_Mad, Joves and Tyson M like this

#66 vahe

vahe

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1557
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Houston, Texas

Posted 26 July 2018 - 06:14 PM

This all reminds me of a post by Markus Ludes on CN back in 2011, it was an attempt by him to clarify the confusion and set the record straight on who are/were the major Maksutov producers in Russia.

.
It is a fairly long and detailed post but there is one comment related strictly to Intes Micro that is worth repeating here now that IM is history, here are his exact words:

.

“Opsys (INTES MiCRO) scopes are not very expensive, but they are also not cheap. If you think they are very expensive, name us another company worldwide who make such high quality Maks for less price, there are non! Zeiss Maks 150 and 180 or Questar cost a lot more, so INTES MICRO is for the quality they deliver inexpensive.”

.

So true.

.

Vahe


  • MortonH, Hesiod and Conaxian like this

#67 JohnH

JohnH

    Mercury-Atlas

  • ****-
  • Posts: 2892
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Squamish BC Moved!!!!!

Posted 27 July 2018 - 01:23 PM

This all reminds me of a post by Markus Ludes on CN back in 2011, it was an attempt by him to clarify the confusion and set the record straight on who are/were the major Maksutov producers in Russia.

.
It is a fairly long and detailed post but there is one comment related strictly to Intes Micro that is worth repeating here now that IM is history, here are his exact words:

.

“Opsys (INTES MiCRO) scopes are not very expensive, but they are also not cheap. If you think they are very expensive, name us another company worldwide who make such high quality Maks for less price, there are non! Zeiss Maks 150 and 180 or Questar cost a lot more, so INTES MICRO is for the quality they deliver inexpensive.”

.

So true.

.

Vahe

Couldn't agree more.

 

And I have looked through the 3 sizes and Mak offered by Questar

 

That's not my experience with Russian made Maks. I took apart, and re-assembled, an Intes-Alter M809 Deluxe. Yes, it was sturdy, but it was also crudely made. Imperfections in the design and assembly caused the meniscus to chip under steel retaining clamps. Metal on glass was a very crude way to hold the meniscus in place. There were other poorly executed features as well. Here is the link to my photo journal of my Intes-Alter M809 make over.

 

One should always beware of the man with one case... so my experience with the Russian Mak may be atypical (although I have read reports of others who share my assessment of Russian Maks). I'd rate the optics in the M809 as a 9 and the build quality as a 7. In comparison, I'd rate my TEC Mak as a 10 for optics and a 9 for build quality. (I took off 1 point on the TEC build quality because I do not care for the way the dew shield attaches to the OTA... but otherwise it's a 10.) 

I have an M-809 and it cost $1800 back in 2006.  I got a well known optical worker here to do a clean, lubricate and adjust on it. I have to rate the optics around 9.5/10. Wide fields with a 41mm Pan or 55 Plossel are amazing as are the planetary view.



#68 Jaimo!

Jaimo!

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 2990
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Exit 135 / 40° North

Posted 28 July 2018 - 11:05 PM

Russian telescopes are more sturdy than crude. There are no imperfection of assembly, no play in the mechanisms in all the Intes I've seen. Also, the paint they use, while very smelly for years, it's also very resistant to scratches and bumps. The design is very functional with no concessions to weight saving or aesthetics. 

That's not my experience with Russian made Maks. I took apart, and re-assembled, an Intes-Alter M809 Deluxe. Yes, it was sturdy, but it was also crudely made. Imperfections in the design and assembly caused the meniscus to chip under steel retaining clamps. Metal on glass was a very crude way to hold the meniscus in place. There were other poorly executed features as well. Here is the link to my photo journal of my Intes-Alter M809 make over.

 

One should always beware of the man with one case... so my experience with the Russian Mak may be atypical (although I have read reports of others who share my assessment of Russian Maks). I'd rate the optics in the M809 as a 9 and the build quality as a 7. In comparison, I'd rate my TEC Mak as a 10 for optics and a 9 for build quality. (I took off 1 point on the TEC build quality because I do not care for the way the dew shield attaches to the OTA... but otherwise it's a 10.) 

 

I don't know if it is fair it generalize Russian scopes, or Intes scopes for that matter, as the name "Intes" represents 3 separate companies: Intes, Intes-Micro and Intes-Alter.  All may have had varying QC standards spanning a number of years.  I have an Intes and feel it is better described above by marcsaab rather than elwaine.  While the focuser on my MK-67 was not the greatest, the OTA is spartan but well made.

 

penny.gif penny.gif ,

Jaimo!



#69 luxo II

luxo II

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 677
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 29 July 2018 - 12:19 AM

Speaking of mak manufacturers that have been and gone it seems there’s another one - what is known about Construzione Ottiche Zen ? http://www.costruzioniottichezen.com

There’s one for sale on that “other site”.

While their website has some very interesting maksutov scopes, from what I can make of the Italian websites, while they did make a few stunning scopes their overall quality was erratic to poor.

Is this company alive, or dead ?

If alive I’d be prepared to take a punt on one to see if it’s any good.

Edited by luxo II, 29 July 2018 - 12:28 AM.


#70 vahe

vahe

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1557
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Houston, Texas

Posted 29 July 2018 - 08:47 AM

Speaking of mak manufacturers that have been and gone it seems there’s another one - what is known about Construzione Ottiche Zen ? http://www.costruzioniottichezen.com

There’s one for sale on that “other site”.

While their website has some very interesting maksutov scopes, from what I can make of the Italian websites, while they did make a few stunning scopes their overall quality was erratic to poor.
 

 

One thing that is a red flag in my opinion is the length of the tube on the 10" advertised on Amart, take a look at the last photo, the overall tube length is very short and is similar to SCT, meaning F/2 primary.

Nearly all quality MCT's that I am familiar with employ F/3 +/- primaries.

.

Vahe



#71 Bill Barlow

Bill Barlow

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4202
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Overland Park KS

Posted 29 July 2018 - 10:04 AM

I don't know if it is fair it generalize Russian scopes, or Intes scopes for that matter, as the name "Intes" represents 3 separate companies: Intes, Intes-Micro and Intes-Alter.  All may have had varying QC standards spanning a number of years.  I have an Intes and feel it is better described above by marcsaab rather than elwaine.  While the focuser on my MK-67 was not the greatest, the OTA is spartan but well made.

 

penny.gif penny.gif ,

 

Intes-Alter is not a separate company.  Alter is an acronym that I can’t recall the exact translation, but means something like “astronomical telescope and  excesseries”.  

 

Bill


  • Live_Steam_Mad and stuart keenor like this

#72 skyjim

skyjim

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2188
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2007
  • Loc: Miller Place, NY

Posted 30 July 2018 - 10:58 PM

The early Intes Micro scopes were called Alter scopes then it became Intes Micro, before them though was just the name Intes. Scopes like the MK66 and MK67 were Intes branded scopes then for some reason the workers of that company started the Intes Micro brand and called there first scopes Alter M series then just Intes Micro.

I have owned a few both the early just Intes MK66 then Intes Micro M603, MN56,M6511 and the last was the M703. Except for the last scope which was the M703 most of the focusers and mechanical built quality was about the same, good but no buttery smooth focus systems there, the last scope the M703 I had re built and tried to get the focuser to not be stiff and finally just bought an outboard focusing system, it clearly was always on the stiff side. Out of all those scopes the M603 and the early MK66 were the best built and the focusing was very acceptable but the optics were all very good, lets say most were 9's but the 6511 was 10. I would hope that someone would bring these scope back but China can now produce scope which are almost there equal but there is nothing out there that best these old Intes/ Intes micro scope accept for the TEC scopes.


  • Live_Steam_Mad likes this

#73 coopman

coopman

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5278
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2006
  • Loc: South Louisiana

Posted 31 July 2018 - 01:18 PM

I know that every time I use my MN66 I am shortly cursing with glee.
  • MortonH and Jaimo! like this

#74 skyjim

skyjim

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2188
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2007
  • Loc: Miller Place, NY

Posted 31 July 2018 - 11:42 PM

My older brother owns three Intes/ Intes Micro scopes, a MK67, M500 and an excellent M703, all bought from Mike at ITE back in the day, he will not budge on selling any of them yet but when he hears this posting he will never let them go. 


  • Phil Barker likes this

#75 Bill Barlow

Bill Barlow

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4202
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Overland Park KS

Posted 01 August 2018 - 09:58 AM

Hi Jim, good to see you back on CN.  I picked up an Intes MK66 earlier this year that was in like new condition.  It was bought through ITE back in 2003 and it has excellent optical quality, about the best I have seen in a MAK.  Hope to hang onto it for quite some time since it is becoming harder to find these Russian scopes.

 

Bill




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