1911 replies to this topic

[M44]

getting off-topic.

[slavicek]

Or is it that the TOAs are just a convenient reason to replace the LE and TAO ranges with a single replacement? 

NO. There's actually more to it but I do not think this is the thread to discuss it.

I only brought eyepieces into discussion here because they have been used to test Agema telescope. 

[nicknacknock]

All, kindly discuss the scope and stop eyepieces comparisons

[Peter Natscher]

All, kindly discuss the scope and stop eyepieces comparisons

I think this topic has run its course.  It is getting off topic too many times. Someone else can start a new Agema topic when there's real user information.
 

[peleuba]

I think this topic has run its course.  It is getting off topic too many times. Someone else can start a new Agema topic when there's real user information.
 

 

Not so fast...   

 

I think its time for Eduard and Lana to address some of the important items raised in this thread...  Specifically, what can be expected when users star test their lenses.   Will it be a cornucopia of color in the defocused image or something else?   This will allow Agema to get out in front and control the message rather then some offshore third party in Europe performing tests, publishing the results and offering unfavorable commentary.

 

I hope Ed and Lana don't pass on this opportunity to discuss performance in a thread whose subject is the very telescopes they produce.

Edited by peleuba, 25 April 2024 - 09:28 AM.

[25585]

The TPL are really excellent eyepieces and do work really well with the TOA. It's surprising but even the 6mm is fairly easy to use and doesn't feel quite as tight as the eye relief numbers would suggest but no, they are not for people who observe with glasses

 

FWIW I can tell the difference in sharpness in the center between an ES 8.8mm, a Pentax XW 10mm and the TPL 9mm. The TPL is superior but you really have to look for it. 

 

And yes, I am a complete and total TPL fangirl

Will they keep you keeping your TOA though?

 

I have a Tak FC100DL, which at F9 is a little slower than the Agemas, so guess its nearest like the DZ which is a little faster at F8. Would either Tak be a good litmus test for how any eyepiece would perform with an Agema? Both makes use Steinheil design.

Edited by 25585, 24 April 2024 - 11:49 AM.

[Ben the Ignorant]

I think its time for Eduard and Lana to address some of the important items raised in this thread...  Specifically, what can be expected when users star test their lenses.   Will it be a cornucopia of color in the defocused image or something else?   This will allow Agema to get out in front and control the message rather then some offshore third party in Europe performing tests, publishing the results and offering unfavorable commentary.

 

I hope Ed and Lana don't pass on this opportunity to discuss performance in a thread whose subject is the very telescopes they produce.

 

 

What can be expected in the star test has been shown

 

[RichA]

 

What can be expected in the star test has been shown

 

agema semi-apo.png

 

The problem with intra and extrafocal star images to determine colour error is  that there is no uniformity in how they are taken.  Not via magnification, illumination levels, exposure control, white balance, post-processing, or what camera is used.  You can get a rough idea of what the colour might be like from one, but there is no way to directly compare them with another scope unless strict photographic protocols are implemented.  In my opinion, those images appear to be problematic, especially the multi-coloured in-focus diffraction image which I've not seen in any scope, only a shift toward green at extremely high powers.

[25585]

As Agemas are made in limited numbers, later optics can be improved. Not all Astro Physics made in their history were perfect, and various other esteemed makers have been known to have had glitches.

 

But what do people here expect from a top doublet? Do they expect top triplet or more complex optics performance? All advertising should be taken with a pinch of salt anyway.

 

Agema v other slow FL doublets, current and classic, is what should matter. Refractor cognoscenti should know that. How does the SD120 compare with 115-120mm ED apo rival doublets? Ditto for 150s. The 130 is v the 125s & 127s I guess.

 

Forget >2 lenses, concentrate on =2 only.

Edited by 25585, 26 April 2024 - 10:07 AM.

[jrazz]

Will they keep you keeping your TOA though?

 

I have a Tak FC100DL, which at F9 is a little slower than the Agemas, so guess its nearest like the DZ which is a little faster at F8. Would either Tak be a good litmus test for how any eyepiece would perform with an Agema? Both makes use Steinheil design.

I am keeping my TOA... Hopefully will get improved sky conditions in the next couple of months

[Far Star]

As Agemas are made in limited numbers, later optics can be improved. Not all Astro Physics made in their history were perfect, and various other esteemed makers have been known to have had glitches.

 

But what do people here expect from a top doublet? Do they expect top triplet or more complex optics performance? All advertising should be taken with a pinch of salt anyway.

 

Agema v other slow FL doublets, current and classic, is what should matter. Refractor cognoscenti should know that. How does the SD120 compare with 115-120mm ED apo rival doublets? Ditto for 150s. The 130 is v the 125s & 127s I guess.

 

Forget >2 lenses, concentrate on =2 only.

"The amplitude of residual deviation in our system is 2.5–3 times smaller than the Abbe criterion for apochromatic lenses. The system’s Polychromatic Strehl Ratio exceeds 90% for the entire 430–700nm visual range.  .....

By carefully selecting our glass and fluorite and using the refractive index data from the actual glass melt, we produce optics precisely fabricated according to calculated design."

 

Source:  https://www.agemaopt...com/telescopes/

[25585]

I am keeping my TOA... Hopefully will get improved sky conditions in the next couple of months

There is the truth, rubbish in = rubbish out. Better skies = better results & better scopes pay you back. 

[Heywood]

As Agemas are made in limited numbers, later optics can be improved. Not all Astro Physics made in their history were perfect, and various other esteemed makers have been known to have had glitches.

But what do people here expect from a top doublet? Do they expect top triplet or more complex optics performance? All advertising should be taken with a pinch of salt anyway.

Agema v other slow FL doublets, current and classic, is what should matter. Refractor cognoscenti should know that. How does the SD120 compare with 115-120mm ED apo rival doublets? Ditto for 150s. The 130 is v the 125s & 127s I guess.

Forget >2 lenses, concentrate on =2 only.

My assumption has been that, if Takahashi can make a great fluorite doublet, and history shows that it can, then Agema can do even better with a little aspherization, modern glasses, etc. Certainly good enough for most of us.

Edited by Heywood, 26 April 2024 - 12:01 PM.

[slavicek]

As Agemas are made in limited numbers, later optics can be improved. Not all Astro Physics made in their history were perfect, and various other esteemed makers have been known to have had glitches.

 

But what do people here expect from a top doublet? Do they expect top triplet or more complex optics performance? All advertising should be taken with a pinch of salt anyway.

 

Agema v other slow FL doublets, current and classic, is what should matter. Refractor cognoscenti should know that. How does the SD120 compare with 115-120mm ED apo rival doublets? Ditto for 150s. The 130 is v the 125s & 127s I guess.

 

Forget >2 lenses, concentrate on =2 only.

Agree but they claim their doublet is better then "High end" triplets (as per famous graph) so they should be held to that standard.

I am still waiting for answer to my simple question...

Extraordinary claims will get extraordinary scrutiny, and that's good!

[Jeff Morgan]

My assumption has been that, if Takahashi can make a great fluorite doublet, and history shows that it can, then Agema can do even better with a little aspherization, modern glasses, etc. Certainly good enough for most of us.

 

Having used mine for three years, I am satisfied that it is at least as good as my older APO doublets (A-P and Tak), and two triplets (LOMO and TMB). My Newtonian probably had less color, but I can’t be sure. 

 

I am sure that I am not losing sleep over low-post count anonymous trolls (probably “burner” accounts though I would be mildly curious who they are hawking for) or questionable test apparatus.

[FirstSight]

Moderator directive post:

 

- Fair negative critiques of the quality of a vendor's product are permissible.

What is not permissible is to extend that into vendor-bashing or a rant that amounts to same.  See CN Terms of Service 1(f). Any posts which, in the discretionary judgment of the moderators, crosses over from fair critique to bashing the vendor are subject to immediate removal.

[Lana Try]

To all Agema Optics customers:

 

I've had the privilege of getting to know many of you virtually, starting from the moment you placed an order, through the journey until your telescope arrived at your doorstep, and even beyond. Eduard and I have had the pleasure of meeting some of you in person.

No matter where you are – whether in the USA, Germany, Ukraine, Hong Kong, Japan, France, Canada, or England – you are members of the growing Agema family.

I've emphasized this before, but it's worth repeating: if you ever encounter any concerns with our products, have questions, need advice, or have a special request, please don't hesitate to reach out to us directly. You will never be left alone to navigate any issue.

For those who haven't purchased Agema telescopes directly from us, if you haven't yet, I encourage you to reach out and introduce yourself. We value the opportunity to connect with you.

 

Always yours,

Lana,

Agema team!

[Holger aus Brandenburg]

Hello,
Last Saturday I tested the Agema SD130 SN005 extensively with an Astro colleague in terms of color purity with a view to the waveform test report. In order to reproduce the information from the report, various prisms were used. A Baader/Zeiss 36, an M44 from Zeiss and a 2” Baader/Zeiss. I personally use a 2" TV Everbright mirror. Enough material to compare the Agema and the present test protocol under the real starry sky.
First of all, we were unable to understand the test results of the waveform protocol! But let's be more specific: We tested the color purity of the Agema, SN005, on Regulus and Vega. Unfortunately, the seeing was not always optimal. At 230x (4.5mm Delos) on Regulus, the Agema with the Everbright in focus does not show any false colors, intrafocal a slightly reddish ring, extrafocally this shifts into a slightly blue ring. When the prisms were used, the star test visibly deteriorated and the false colors increased. Larger prisms, clearer false colors. Conclusion, the optics of the SD130, SN005 are designed for use with a diagonal mirror, not a prism. This also makes the suggestion made in this thread to use prisms for the longitudinal chromatic aberrations tested from the waveform protocol unnecessary. But I would also like to emphasize once again that even on Vega, no CA can be seen in focus; the previously described CA only appears defocused. But this real image of Vega also does not match the star test shown in the waveform protocol, the real star test looks different. The statement made in the protocol that the RC index determined means that the SN005 is a semi-apo is not comprehensible. At this point I will not question the waveform protocol or even speculate about the result.
Anyway, I'm more than happy with this Agema, as my astro colleague said, if you can focus on the individual stars in M13, there is little doubt that this is an apo and that's how it was. A comparison between a TEC 140FL and the Agema is still pending, but I will report back then.

Holger

[scoale]

Holger aus Brandenburg, on 29 Apr 2024 - 04:01 AM, said:

Hello,
Last Saturday I tested the Agema SD130 SN005 extensively with an Astro colleague in terms of color purity with a view to the waveform test report. In order to reproduce the information from the report, various prisms were used. A Baader/Zeiss 36, an M44 from Zeiss and a 2” Baader/Zeiss. I personally use a 2" TV Everbright mirror. Enough material to compare the Agema and the present test protocol under the real starry sky.
First of all, we were unable to understand the test results of the waveform protocol! But let's be more specific: We tested the color purity of the Agema, SN005, on Regulus and Vega. Unfortunately, the seeing was not always optimal. At 230x (4.5mm Delos) on Regulus, the Agema with the Everbright in focus does not show any false colors, intrafocal a slightly reddish ring, extrafocally this shifts into a slightly blue ring. When the prisms were used, the star test visibly deteriorated and the false colors increased. Larger prisms, clearer false colors. Conclusion, the optics of the SD130, SN005 are designed for use with a diagonal mirror, not a prism. This also makes the suggestion made in this thread to use prisms for the longitudinal chromatic aberrations tested from the waveform protocol unnecessary. But I would also like to emphasize once again that even on Vega, no CA can be seen in focus; the previously described CA only appears defocused. But this real image of Vega also does not match the star test shown in the waveform protocol, the real star test looks different. The statement made in the protocol that the RC index determined means that the SN005 is a semi-apo is not comprehensible. At this point I will not question the waveform protocol or even speculate about the result.
Anyway, I'm more than happy with this Agema, as my astro colleague said, if you can focus on the individual stars in M13, there is little doubt that this is an apo and that's how it was. A comparison between a TEC 140FL and the Agema is still pending, but I will report back then.
Holger

Hi, Holger. Thank you for sharing your experience and I'm glad that you are happy with your scope.

I also appreciate you commenting on your comparison with prism and mirror diagonals; your conclusions match my experience. I can tell you with certainty that my TEC 140 and TSA 120 prefer my baader bbhs mirror diagonals to my baader bbhs prism diagonnals. I only use prisms with my SCT.

Just one person's opinion, but the only color I care about is IN FOCUS. For example, my SVX doublet shows plenty of color out-of-focus but none that I can discern in focus at high power on targets like Vega. In fact, the color I see with this doublet near focus helps me bring stars to perfect focus.

But, for me, color is only one dimension of performance and I'm probably not as obsessive about it as some. I am, however, very fixated on a clean, intense airy disk with a faint first ring and no hint of coma, collimation, astigmatism, pinching, or other junk light in the outer rings. I have several refractors that struggle with this criteria and I am interested in whether you have seen any evidence of these issues with your Agema? I also wonder whether you saw evidence of the zones depicted in the report - even modest zones are easy to see when star testing.

Lastly, how quickly does it cool and how well does it handle falling temps? I really like how much faster my doublet cools versus my triplets. Some of my triplets take a loooong time to cool (I'm not just talking about absence of a heat plume) and struggle with falling temps.

It would be great to see star test images from a few of these scopes.

Best, Stephen

[Aleksandr Naumov]

Hello Holger!

 

Thanks for the great test report!

The result with the mirror is encouraging; I want to make such comparison.

The upcoming "TC vs Agema" match is so intriguing.

[25585]

It would be interesting to know how Agemas perform with bino viewers, which usually have prisms, and which bv to buy.

 

Do people normally put bino viewers into a mirror diagonal?

[Scott99]

So it turns out listening to Roland Christen, Yuri, and Agema on the mirror diagonals was right.....quelle surprise!    They're working the same way they have for the last 50 years....

Edited by Scott99, 29 April 2024 - 12:19 PM.

[betacygni]

It would be interesting to know how Agemas perform with bino viewers, which usually have prisms, and which bv to buy.

Do people normally put bino viewers into a mirror diagonal?

Don’t think being an Agema scope would change anything. Typically for high power binoviewing an amplifier/glasspath/barlow is used anyway to negate prism issues in the binoviewer.

I typically use mirror diagonals with my binoviewers, but that’s just because I think mirrors are universally the safer option to not add any optical funny business, without having to worry about scope speed, etc. That said I did just buy a BBHS prism diagonal to try out with my own eyes.

Edited by betacygni, 29 April 2024 - 12:27 PM.

[Jeff Morgan]

It would be interesting to know how Agemas perform with bino viewers, which usually have prisms, and which bv to buy.

 

Do people normally put bino viewers into a mirror diagonal?

 

I asked Lana about this. She calculated and graphed the polystrehl for me, and it cooled my interest in prisms. 

 

Essentially, it takes the far red and blue ends of the graph and bends them down. Probably why TEC and A-P are also not very excited about prisms.

 

If you are that worried about scatter, get one of the Vernonscope silver diagonals.

 

Edit: Normally the mirror vs. prism debate is in the context of lowest scatter planetary observing. Using a BV is a whole different animal in terms of the results/benefits. One accepts a number of significant costs (weight, balance, complexity, money) but the benefit (using both eyes) is quite large.

In that context, don’t worry about a slight reduction on the far ends of the spectrum and buy the prism.

Edited by Jeff Morgan, 29 April 2024 - 12:58 PM.

[Jeff Morgan]

That said I did just buy a BBHS prism diagonal to try out with my own eyes.

 

I like my BBHS quite a bit. Sold off my A-P Maxbright.