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

APM 140mm DOUBLET APO REFRACTOR

  • Please log in to reply
21 replies to this topic

#1 Larry Carlino

Larry Carlino

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 31
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2006

Posted 10 September 2018 - 08:45 AM

Some two dozen observing sessions and direct comparisons with instruments of known quality have convinced me that this APM 140ED is indeed an excellent telescope. It is well built, nicely finished, and it boasts very fine optical quality. In addition, its relatively light weight and short tube length allows the effective use of a mid-size equatorial or alt-azimuth mount. It has almost the punch of a 6-inch refractor in a package that is clearly more portable.

Click here to view the article
  • Jon_Doh likes this

#2 ichdien

ichdien

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 103
  • Joined: 27 Nov 2008

Posted 10 September 2018 - 09:57 AM

"The TEC 140 is a beautifully-crafted telescope with outstanding optical and mechanical quality, but it is expensive and just heavy enough to require a beefy mount . . . ."

 

Hmmm . . .  APM lists the 140's weight, with rings, as 9.8 kilograms.  TEC lists the weight of their 140, without rings, as 8.6 kilograms.


  • AstroNutz likes this

#3 Larry Carlino

Larry Carlino

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 31
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2006

Posted 10 September 2018 - 10:24 AM

I've just weighed the APM 140ED and got 8.4kg with the rings attached.  I did have a TEC 140 triplet several years ago and never did weigh it, but I found that it was not quite stable enough on the same UA Unistar set-up that is being used for the APM.  The length of the scopes is basically identical, but the TEC is a bit more front-heavy because of its triplet lens configuration.

Larry C



#4 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 29494
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 10 September 2018 - 01:32 PM

I thought that seeing quality and not optical quality was the most common reason any given instrument does not resolve to the Dawes limit, and that as aperture increases wholly irrespective of figure quality of the optics, the probability of seeing not supporting the Dawes Limit split goes up.  Few places on Earth support sub-arc-second seeing consistently yet any scope larger than 4.56" has a sub-arc-second Dawes limit.    



#5 Sheldon

Sheldon

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • Posts: 33
  • Joined: 19 Jun 2005
  • Loc: Broken Arrow, OK

Posted 10 September 2018 - 05:21 PM

Tim Havens and compared my 10" Starliner Deluxe Newtonian to his Takahashi 150mm ED Doublet.  We aimed at Jupiter where there was no question on either of our parts as to which presented the best image; the Starliner  won.  The we went to a small spiral Galaxy which showed up very well in my Starliner.  It was brighter - naturally than the image in his Takahashi; the fact of the matter - however - is that the 6" refractor showed the spiral arms clearly whilst my 10" just showed far less.  My conclusion - affirmed since and by many - is that a super high quality refractor can more than make up for light gathering deficit through superior contrast.    The Starliner is the best planetary scope I've used, but anyone who would not recognize the potential of a high quality 140mm refractor on DSOs is missing the point.


  • roadi and Jon_Doh like this

#6 RichA

RichA

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 969
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Toronto, Canada

Posted 14 September 2018 - 06:27 PM

I thought that seeing quality and not optical quality was the most common reason any given instrument does not resolve to the Dawes limit, and that as aperture increases wholly irrespective of figure quality of the optics, the probability of seeing not supporting the Dawes Limit split goes up.  Few places on Earth support sub-arc-second seeing consistently yet any scope larger than 4.56" has a sub-arc-second Dawes limit.    

Doesn't always work that way.  Even when images "look" poor in a larger scope, you often see more detail than in a smaller one for a variety of reasons, colour rendition, contrast, resolution all play a part.  Also, good seeing doesn't always match the surroundings you might think.  I once live with a backyard verging on a major street, but the seeing was the best I've had and consistent.  I could regularly in the summer split 0.6-0.7 doubles with an 8."  Go figure



#7 oldtimer

oldtimer

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2025
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2008
  • Loc: Lake County Illinois

Posted 15 September 2018 - 01:36 PM

I've said it before and I'll probably say it again, There are only 3 planets worth looking at and one of those only every 2 years. That said I'm not concerned about CA. With almost countless other objects to view I'll not give up my 140mm Vixen. In fact even at F5.7 it does a better job on the planets then my old 6" F8 achro.. Bought mine used for $900 and never regretted it.



#8 Deep13

Deep13

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4032
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2005
  • Loc: NE Ohio

Posted 15 September 2018 - 05:10 PM

Well, someone has to ask. How much does it cost?


  • FreddyH and ram812 like this

#9 HansD

HansD

    Lift Off

  • *****
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 23 Feb 2013

Posted 18 September 2018 - 11:11 AM

‘The question invariably comes up:  Is this telescope truly “apochromatic”?’

 

This is a simple question, with a simple answer. Two glass elements can only bring two wavelengths of light to focus at the same point, therefore it is achromatic. It takes three elements to bring three wavelengths to focus at the same point, which would make it apochromatic.

 

It is quite possible that an achromat outperforms an apochromat in a particular application, such as visual impressions of planets and doubles. And it may be that one does better visually and the other does better photographically. If you use a narrow band filter there may be no difference at all.

 

Manufacturers who feel the need to mislabel things are simply being dishonest.



#10 spaceoddity

spaceoddity

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1775
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2009
  • Loc: Cloudsylvania

Posted 18 September 2018 - 03:53 PM

Well, someone has to ask. How much does it cost?

Too much for me. 

 

https://farpointastr...focuser-bundle/



#11 Jeff Morgan

Jeff Morgan

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9996
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2003
  • Loc: Prescott, AZ

Posted 19 September 2018 - 02:07 PM

What type of back focus capability does the APM 140 have?



#12 Deep13

Deep13

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4032
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2005
  • Loc: NE Ohio

Posted 20 September 2018 - 03:18 AM

$3600 plus the cost of a mount. For a 4.5" telescope.



#13 TomK1

TomK1

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 125
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2016
  • Loc: Grosse Pointe Woods, Michigan

Posted 26 September 2018 - 11:32 PM

5.5".......not 4.5".



#14 Starlease

Starlease

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 92
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2018
  • Loc: Rocky mountains.

Posted 27 September 2018 - 10:43 AM

My 5 inch apo shows the dark lanes in the trifid nebula better than my 10 inch Dob.  There is something about refractors.


Edited by Starlease, 27 September 2018 - 10:43 AM.

  • ram812 and Cowboybob like this

#15 Deep13

Deep13

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4032
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2005
  • Loc: NE Ohio

Posted 09 October 2018 - 10:40 PM

5.5".......not 4.5".

Oh, yes. My mistake.



#16 SteveFour86

SteveFour86

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 335
  • Joined: 14 Dec 2009
  • Loc: Bay City, OR

Posted 13 October 2018 - 09:49 AM

Thank you for the review it was very detailed and informative.  Some day I will be able to drop that kind of money on a scope.


  • Cowboybob and Mage like this

#17 niksi

niksi

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: 21 Oct 2011

Posted 17 October 2018 - 11:24 AM

I have been using it now for almost 3 years. I use the number 0006. Its great on moon and planets. Its also good for deep sky. Stars are almost perfect, but there ist still a glimps of astigmatism.



#18 starmanbob

starmanbob

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 4
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2014

Posted 06 November 2018 - 12:35 PM

Thanks for the thorough review Lawrence.  I have a nice 100mm Stellarvue triplet, and I've always thought about adding something in the 140 range for a little more punch.  The APM sounds like it would fit the bill pretty well.  I'm a purely visual observer, so I can't really see the point in going all out for a top of the line fluorite rig.  Any one have any thoughts/opinions re: the value of a 140 vs a 100 (101.5, lol) for visual?  Thanks...



#19 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 15106
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 10 November 2018 - 07:45 AM

The APM 140ED was on my Radar and still could be if one surfaced locally.  I only wish Markus had used a smaller OTA instead of using the same OTA for the 152ED.

I understand the cost savings on his part, but a smaller, lighter OTA would be better for some folks with smaller mounts and lifting limitations.



#20 SirOtto

SirOtto

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 19 May 2018
  • Loc: Staatsburg, New York

Posted 14 November 2018 - 10:43 AM

How about it's use in Astrophotography?  Anybody try?



#21 Stargazer3236

Stargazer3236

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3073
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Waltham, MA

Posted 19 November 2018 - 01:56 PM

Being naive about EUR prices. The Price listed on APM includes VAT? If so, do we deduct the VAT from the cost of the telescope before shipping costs?



#22 nicknacknock

nicknacknock

    A man of many qualities, even if they are mostly bad ones

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 10254
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Nicosia, Cyprus

Posted 20 November 2018 - 01:54 AM

With 2.5" focuser: EUR 2,100.84 export price + shipping cost

With 3.7" focuser: EUR 2,521.01 export price + shipping cost

 

Above prices apply to those outside the European Union, hence outside the scope of VAT. 




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