Review: The Vixen FL55ss
Posted 08 September 2019 - 11:32 AM
Click here to view the article
- paulsky, zjc26138 and dUbeni like this
Posted 13 September 2019 - 09:06 PM
Great review. I do think these small refractors can be a lot of fun.
Another application for these small telescopes is spectroscopy!
I am sure your Vixen FL55ss would work as well as my Borg 55FL. This is not a great image of open cluster NGC 6231, but the Wolf-Rayet star (HD 152270 = WR 79) sticks out (the lines to the right are the spectra)
Thank you for promoting these wonderful small telescopes.
- zjc26138, eros312, gustavo_sanchez and 2 others like this
Posted 15 September 2019 - 10:10 PM
Good review! I wonder though if anyone has compared these small, fast refractors against normal camera lenses?
Posted 16 September 2019 - 04:34 AM
Where are the pictures of the scope???
- wrnchhead and JB103 like this
Posted 16 September 2019 - 04:41 AM
Very interesting! Which kind if equipment do you use?
I use also a Canon ef200 f/2.8: the FL55ss is noticeably better even at f/4 (less CA, tighter stars, less coma).
The lens however is smaller, lighter (but the refractor+reducer is smaller than a 200 and a 300mm lens) and much faster.
I focus manually, sometimes with the help of a mask, and feel easier to do so with the refractor.
The lens is obviously more handy for daytime photography
Posted 24 September 2019 - 08:25 PM
the star tests I have seen on a full frame via astrobin yield un impressive stars at the edges, I have no way of knowing if this was because of spacing. Have you tested with ff?
Posted 25 September 2019 - 11:10 AM
No, I have only an aps-c sized camera.
On Vixen's website there are the spot diagrams for flattener and reducer+flattener, with flats and a picture taken with a Canon camera (https://www.vixen.co...roduct/37253_9/ ).
With a FF there could be the need of some work on star shapes at the edges
I also contacted them through the site asking about spacing because am still pondering my next camera (FF DSLR or cooled ccd), and a couple of days later they answered me sending a diagram from which I understood that the sensor has to be 63,5mm behind the reducer, and that the adapter I have offsets that distance for Canon's cameras.
- Cziffra likes this