52 replies to this topic

[moshen]

Any chance the interferogram can be posted? Would be interesting to see if the surface error correlates with the DPAC in green.

[The Mekon]

 It's a great scope!  I  like the logo a lot  too. If I was to order one say a 135 or 140 for my empty Unistar-AP tripod would ask for it on both sides.  David

Catalin, are you listening?    Yes the only complaint I have with my 132 is that the logo needs to be on both sides!

[gnowellsct]

Catalin, are you listening?    Yes the only complaint I have with my 132 is that the logo needs to be on both sides!

I corresponded with him about this earlier today.  He is too humble.  He thinks brands are over-commercialized.  He wants subtlety.  He doesn't want that gorgeous CFF high on a mount proclaiming its identity to the hoi polloi at NEAF.    I told him Vixen does it, AP does it, everyone does it.  No dice.

 

But he will send you a decal if you ask nicely.

 

Greg N

[Jeff B]

So ask nicely. 

[gnowellsct]

So ask nicely. 

I did!

[gnowellsct]

I should mention that if I *don't* put a CFF decal on the blank space I might fall to the temptation to put on a decal like this:

 

[Jeff B]

I refer you to this thread for my visual findings for this scope:

 

https://www.cloudyni...-and-tec-160ed/

 

Excellent really, with color errors only becoming visible higher up in magnification (beyond 190X to 230X or so depending on configuration), but retaining excellent image sharpness on the Moon.  The planets, Jupiter in particular, are just not available in the evening yet. 

 

This scope, at F6.5, is fussy about the bino-viewer and corrector combinations I use and performs best at high power so far with the Denk Power switch system and a Zeiss Sharpest viewer sold by Denis Levatic (though I still want to try out the Baader GPC's).   I found a mirror diagonal a must except at low powers where the chromatic artifacts my Baader/Zeiss prism diagonal introduce (especially in combination with a bino-viewer) are not visible.

 

One thing interesting is that I tried out using my AP .75X telecompressor (2.7" Photo-Visual Telecompressor 27TVPH).  At least on the bench in DPAC, using my AP diagonal, I could reach focus with my DPAC eyepiece holder with about 35mm of in-travel to spare.   This gives an ~F4.9 system (!).   However, I did notice some degradation of SA in green and red, but a little bit of help in blue.   This configuration in mono-vision with something like a TV Nagler 5 or Ethos 21 could be spectacular.  I base this upon my using the scope at F6.5 but with my old Brandon 40mm erfle, which showed terrible astigmatism after about the 50% FOV span but what a wide field (!) .  The Naglers and Pans are much better corrected for astigmatism off-axis. 

 

So, the only thing visually left really is for me to still dial in the bino-viewer configuration which gives the best high power viewing. 

 

Jeff 

[Astrohobby]

 It's a great scope!  I  like the logo a lot  too. If I was to order one say a 135 or 140 for my empty Unistar-AP tripod would ask for it on both sides.  David

Hi there,

 

that`s what I asked for mine and it looks so good!

 

Best  Oliver

[neptun2]

Thank you for sharing your impressions. I also have ordered CFF 135 f6.7 but it will take at least 2 more months to come.

[Jeff B]

So a bit of a follow up to my posting, number 32, above.

 

I have called this scope an APO in search of a good Bino-viewer/corrector combination.

 

Well, I found one.  Big time.

 

I had the CFF out last night principally to align my AP900 GTO (using the daytime technique but at night with a star).  Having done that I turned the scope first to Jupiter, then Saturn.  I started with the "Zeiss Biggest" viewer with Baader 1.25X and 1.7X GPC's with my AP diagonal.  I mounted the GPCs down in to the 2" adapter and quick changer assembly that Denis Levatic provided.  The seeing was really rather calm and I started with the 1.25X GPC but quickly ramped up to the 1.7X jobbie.  Wow, Jupiter was engrossing and I quickly maxed out my available eyepiece power with my humble 9mm UO orthos (~195x).  Lots of belt detail when the seeing locked in.  Went over to Saturn.  Very, very nice with that etched quality Saturn has with Cassini, the globe shadow and the ring boundary against the blackness of space.  Belt detail on the globe too.  Very nice.

 

So off to Vega which displayed surprisingly good color correction, better than when using the Zeiss with my Denk power switch.  Spherical correction was first rate too but there were obvious color differences between the inside and outside of focus ring patterns.  But focus, was better than expected with just a bit of red/blue splashing around the stellar core (which was rather white) during moments of unsteady seeing (which was typically induced by my air conditioner's plume when it came on.  I had to look over it).  The double/double was superb.

 

Still retaining the 1.7X GPC, I then swapped out the Zeiss "biggest" for the Zeiss "sharpest", also from Denis.  This viewer has a mirror with a shorter prism light path but an overall slightly lower light path than the "biggest" viewer.  In previous comparisons I've noted the "sharpest" viewer was indeed sharp (but not all that sharper really than my Denks or other Zeiss viewers but still very, very subtly sharper).

 

Oh my!  The double double was very sharp with hard white stellar cores with very faint first diffraction rings. Just wonderful.  So, back to Vega.  

 

BAM!  I was taken a bit aback by the lack of any color splashing and the intense white stellar core.  Ramping through focus showed notably less color tint difference than with the Zeiss "biggest" (or my Denk II which I tried later).   Turning to Saturn, it was very, very sharp and even a tad more "etched" with a tiny bit less lateral color than with the Zeiss "biggest".   Inserting the 12mm Claves brought the magnification down to the point where I found it difficult to detect any differences in color rendition between the viewer with no differences in sharpness.

 

I then covered the scope, came inside and got back up this morning to look at the Moon.

 

BOOM, BAM!!!

 

Wow (!), just an amazing view with the "sharpest", 1.7 x GPC, AP diagonal and 9mm UO orthos.  Very steady seeing.  The scope and optical train had all settled down during the night and what really struck me front and center were the sharpness and total lack of color tinting, refraction, fringing, splashing or whatever on the brightly lit rims of crater walls or their central peaks.  I find this to be a very demanding test, right up there with Vega and Sirius.  Speaking of which, I was struck again by the lack of color splashing and the intense whiteness of Sirius's stellar core.  Racking in and out of focus did show some color but of the same tint on each side with identical rings and an excellent collapse down into focus from each side.  Wow, true APO performance.  I found myself looking around for my 7mm UO pair but couldn't find them.  

 

Speaking of Sirius, the Pup was easy.  However, due to the older coatings inside the viewer, Sirius had two other "companions" due to internal reflections (Vega was a triple system  ).  This annoys some, but I ignore it.

 

One more final treat was that there was a tight double star just off of the lunar northern terminator line, maybe 1/10 a degree or so.  Just beautiful with a white core to the primary and blue/purple for the much fainter companion.  

 

So, after this long dissertation, I have indeed found the "right", synergistic, high power bino-viewer system for this scope:  Zeiss "sharpest" from Denis Levatic and the Baader 1.25 and, especially, 1.7x GPCs.

 

Jeff 

[scooke]

I just went to the CFF web site and they have a beautiful 8" F8 refractor.

24,990 euros.

That's $37,672 Canadian dollar. 

Second mortgage on the house anyone?

My opinion,  Never buy what you can't afford.

[supermucho]

Jeff B thank you so much for all your info.  I really appreciate the time and effort to offer a great perspective and facts about your instruments.  In addition, there are other folks supporting the CFF brand and indeed, one that I need to learn about.  Up until this point I was concentrated on APM, TEC and Stellarvue; however, after some research, it appears that Stellarvue advertises the 180mm instrument but I am not sure they have actually manufactured them.  Your input is valuable and very much appreciated.

[Jeff B]

You're quite welcome Supermucho.

 

I love doing this kind of stuff.

 

I recently sold off the CFF.  "I have just too many scopes & stuff and I need to reduce my inventory" was my rationale. 

 

So what did I do?  As part of the deal, I got an older Meade 10" LX50, a DiscMount DM4 with extras and a basically new Losmandy LW tripod.

 

So much for having too much stuff around.  

 

Oh well...   

 

God, grant me the serenity to accept those things I cannot change.......

[elgol20]

Can someone comment on the warranty on CFF refractors? Here in Europe it seems 2 years only. TEC has lifetime warranty I guess. Cannot really believe this difference, seems crucial

[drprovi57]

When I was in the market for a 200mm refractor I looked at both TEC and CFF - I too considered the warranty question, but decided that customer support was more important.  I believe both TEC and CFF scopes are designed and built at the highest quality.  I did decide to purchase the CFF 200 F/6.5 refractor and have used it primarily for astrophotography (visual views with a bino-viewer is great as well).  CFF customer support has been excellent - very responsive and helpful.  Any serious optical or mechanical issues would show up within the 2 year period, none in my case, and I believe CFF would still provide excellent customer support beyond the 2 year warranty period.  Given the quality of the CFF and TEC scopes I would not worry too much about the warranty beyond 2 years - both would provide many years of excellent performance.  

 

Remember - with proper care and handling both CFF and TEC should provide a lifetime of great viewing and imaging.

 

Jason

[JimP]

Got yourself a very nice scope young man! Hang onto it, unless, of course, you’re only selling it so that you can purchase a larger one! LOL

 

Best,

 

Jim

[weis14]

You're quite welcome Supermucho.

 

I love doing this kind of stuff.

 

I recently sold off the CFF.  "I have just too many scopes & stuff and I need to reduce my inventory" was my rationale. 

 

So what did I do?  As part of the deal, I got an older Meade 10" LX50, a DiscMount DM4 with extras and a basically new Losmandy LW tripod.

 

So much for having too much stuff around.  

 

Oh well...   

 

God, grant me the serenity to accept those things I cannot change.......

Don't feel bad Jeff.  Since I traded you some "surplus" stuff in the CFF160 transaction, I have somehow acquired 3 new mounts and 1 new tripod.  I sold two other mounts though, so the collection is not quite growing as fast as it looks!

 

No new scopes though!  I'm quite happy with the CFF for now!  It is an amazing scope.

[JimP]

“Recently sold off the CFF…” Great report then you sold it off.

Oh well have a nice day.

JimP

Edited by JimP, 23 August 2021 - 08:06 PM.

[Jeff B]

“Recently sold off the CFF…” Great report then you sold it off.

Oh well have a nice day.

JimP

Yeah, now I'm stuck with that stoooopid TEC 160ED.  

 

Oh, the misery!   

 

Oh the humanity!  

[dan_1984]

Can someone comment on the warranty on CFF refractors? Here in Europe it seems 2 years only. TEC has lifetime warranty I guess. Cannot really believe this difference, seems crucial

You should not worry. I think Catalin at CFF will help you well beyond those 2 years of warranty. I have a 203 mm f6.5 CFF refractor and I love it. Customer support is excellent

[Jeff B]

Well, the CFF 160 F6.5, which is the subject of this thread, was purchased used by me and it was well past the two years from original purchase and shipment.

 

No complaints at all from me but both Catalin and, especially, Pal, took a bunch of time to patiently explain the design and what I was seeing in the high power intra and extra focal star test images....hint...no coma or astigmatism at all but they appear distinctly different from each other.  

 

Jeff

[Psion]

I also ordered one, so I'm very curious about it!

[paul32444]

I also ordered one, so I'm very curious about it!

I’ve really enjoyed mine. To me it’s the perfect combination of aperture, length, and weight and I travel to dark sites as much as possible. As much as I wanted the 180, I decided that 160mm is about as large as I want to handle and it fits nicely in my camper van on a DM6. 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[weis14]

I owned Jeff B's CFF160 for a while and it was a great scope.  I moved on from it, but that was due to some downsizing choices that I was making at the time and not a reflection of the scope itself.

[The Ardent]

I owned Jeff B's CFF160 for a while and it was a great scope.  I moved on from it, but that was due to some downsizing choices that I was making at the time and not a reflection refraction of the scope itself.