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

Anyone else see this?

  • Please log in to reply
63 replies to this topic

#26 Kunama

Kunama

    Aussie at large

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,608
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Canberra, Australia

Posted 17 September 2019 - 04:28 PM

Why do people care so much about the glass, if the view is good I couldn't care less about FPL/Schott/Ohara.....

Why would someone suddenly feel better about their scope if they discover it has 53 when they thought it was 51?????


Edited by Kunama, 17 September 2019 - 04:31 PM.

  • Paul Hyndman and Tyson M like this

#27 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 18,938
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 17 September 2019 - 04:32 PM

Why would the vendor remove the "Schott" logo for only a design change -when the logo seems to be a huge selling point?  Something else is amiss hereconfused1.gif

Most likely because the design change could potentially be the glass. 


  • Terra Nova and IMB like this

#28 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 18,938
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 17 September 2019 - 04:35 PM

Why do people care so much about the glass, if the view is good I couldn't care less about FPL/Schott/Ohara.....

Why would someone suddenly feel better about their scope if they discover it has 53 when they thought it was 51?????

IME it's all about pricepoint.  Selling an OTA with guaranteed FPL-53 (or 51) places it in a different category than those that don't use those glasses.

By not disclosing such, people are concerned they will be paying for something they may not be getting.

No big deal as though that don't mind this will still buy and those that do mind will find other sources of what they want.


  • howardcano, wrnchhead and 25585 like this

#29 Kunama

Kunama

    Aussie at large

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,608
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Canberra, Australia

Posted 17 September 2019 - 04:45 PM

IME it's all about pricepoint.  Selling an OTA with guaranteed FPL-53 (or 51) places it in a different category than those that don't use those glasses.

By not disclosing such, people are concerned they will be paying for something they may not be getting.

No big deal as though that don't mind this will still buy and those that do mind will find other sources of what they want.

I have seen pretty ordinary FPL53 scopes and some very fine FPL51 scopes, merely listing FPL53 is not going to guarantee anything.

Given there are several grades of each glass and that the other elements are just as important in the design of the objective, I think the use of "FPL53" has become a marketing term just like "Apo"

I have seen lots of scopes with APO written on them that were far from it......


  • Terra Nova likes this

#30 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 18,938
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 17 September 2019 - 04:54 PM

I have seen pretty ordinary FPL53 scopes and some very fine FPL51 scopes, merely listing FPL53 is not going to guarantee anything.

Given there are several grades of each glass and that the other elements are just as important in the design of the objective, I think the use of "FPL53" has become a marketing term just like "Apo"

I have seen lots of scopes with APO written on them that were far from it......

IME most FPl-53 have been excellent but I'm sure some lemons slip through the cracks.

Bottom line is a lower grade FPL-53 is still FPL-53 and what you pay for (as compared to something  unknown).

I equate it to "Steak".  I know when I'm paying for it, It may not be Grade A, B or even C,  but it's still steak I'm getting and not a Pork Chop.

IMO Non-disclosure leads to potential cheaper materials for the same selling price.  Happens all the time.

 

Back on topic, only Kevin can clarify what's going on here (with Jon's opening post).



#31 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 85,162
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 17 September 2019 - 06:29 PM

I have seen pretty ordinary FPL53 scopes and some very fine FPL51 scopes, merely listing FPL53 is not going to guarantee anything.

Given there are several grades of each glass and that the other elements are just as important in the design of the objective, I think the use of "FPL53" has become a marketing term just like "Apo"

I have seen lots of scopes with APO written on them that were far from it......

 

The Synta/Skywatcher/Orion FPL-53 doublets have shown themselves to be excellent performers and members who have tested them with DPAC have found them to be very good. A switch to FPL-51 class glass with a Abbe number around 83 instead of the FPL-53 at 95 would not be a step forward. I notice your scopes all seem to be either Fluorite or FPL-53.  Any reason why that might be?  

 

Abbe numbers, polychromatic strehls, focal ratios, apertures, the potential is there with FPL-53 that isn't there with FPL-51...   

 

Jon


  • IMB and wrnchhead like this

#32 Kunama

Kunama

    Aussie at large

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,608
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Canberra, Australia

Posted 17 September 2019 - 07:39 PM

The Synta/Skywatcher/Orion FPL-53 doublets have shown themselves to be excellent performers and members who have tested them with DPAC have found them to be very good. A switch to FPL-51 class glass with a Abbe number around 83 instead of the FPL-53 at 95 would not be a step forward. I notice your scopes all seem to be either Fluorite or FPL-53.  Any reason why that might be?  

 

Abbe numbers, polychromatic strehls, focal ratios, apertures, the potential is there with FPL-53 that isn't there with FPL-51...   

 

Jon

I like green focusers !!!! grin.gif


  • Terra Nova, gene 4181 and wrnchhead like this

#33 stevew

stevew

    Now I've done it

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,464
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2006
  • Loc: British Columbia Canada

Posted 17 September 2019 - 07:49 PM

I don't care what glass they use, I still can't get past the gold fleck paint, miss matched colored dew shield, and cast aluminum focusers. 

I have never heard a bad word about the optics, and I'm sure there are thousands of happy owners, but I prefer my refractors to have the classic refractor look. 


  • Terra Nova and Kunama like this

#34 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,855
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 17 September 2019 - 08:17 PM

Personally, I like the way SW scopes look, although I'd agree that I'd prefer something ultra-classy like a Tak in that regard.



#35 John Huntley

John Huntley

    Mercury-Atlas

  • ***--
  • Posts: 2,611
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2006
  • Loc: SW England

Posted 17 September 2019 - 10:11 PM

My understanding is that the Synta have always used an FPL-53 / Schott mix in the ED pro series, even for the older ones. The addition of the Schott sticker to the tube of the black and white finished ones was the result of a promotional marketing agreement with Schott. Maybe that agreement has ended now ?. I'll bet that the glass types used are the same though.

 

My old gold / cream (schott stickerless) ED120 has superb optics both in terms of CA correction for it's spec and the figure of it's objective. It's had a Tak FC-100DL and a TMB/LZOS 130 F/9.2 triplet for company for the past 3 years and is far from overshadowed by those much more expensive scopes in terms of performance smile.gif

Attached Thumbnails

  • ed120giro.jpg

Edited by John Huntley, 17 September 2019 - 10:12 PM.

  • eros312, Terra Nova, Agatha and 3 others like this

#36 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 85,162
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 18 September 2019 - 03:09 AM

I don't care what glass they use, I still can't get past the gold fleck paint, miss matched colored dew shield, and cast aluminum focusers. 

I have never heard a bad word about the optics, and I'm sure there are thousands of happy owners, but I prefer my refractors to have the classic refractor look. 

 

I am not a big fan of the build, of the paint colors but I am a big fan of the optics.  That why I went with the Orion 120mm Eon.  It's the 120mm F/7.5 Skywatcher optics in a Long Perng OTA.  No goofy colors, just good old black. (It's actually a gorgeous gloss black with chrome siver trim)  A nice sliding dew shield, machined tube rings, a machined rotating focuser, I consider it one of the best looking scopes one can buy.  A little to flashy to be classic but mechanically it's a very nice scope that is an excellent performer.

 

Eon Case Open.jpg
Eon Number 2 Backyard 1.jpg
 

My friend painted up his Orion ED-100 and added an old WO focuser I had.  

 

Tom's ED 100 High Res CN.jpg
 
To my eye, that's the best looking ED-100 I've ever seen and Orion/Skywatcher could have chosen a similar paint scheme and had themselves a beautiful looking scope.
 
Jon

 


  • stevew, John Huntley, RAKing and 6 others like this

#37 beanerds

beanerds

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,131
  • Joined: 15 Jul 2008
  • Loc: Darwin Australia

Posted 18 September 2019 - 05:44 AM

I guess you either put up with it and buy a scope from them, or you don't.

 

I think it makes more sense to go by reviews, honestly. Lens design has a lot to do with color correction. You can mess up a lens with good glass or make an overachiever with cheaper glass.

 

I have a 150ED, which doesn't disclose glass type. It has some chromatic aberration, but honestly, I don't think you could make an ED doublet of 150mm and F/8 focal ratio that didn't. It doesn't have enough to be a problem to me.

Yes  , I think you hit the nail on the head , I have an ED100 APO  ( yes its an APO ) with the said FPL53 and its almost CA free on all objects , it's lack of SA and good coatings allow easy 250-300x on good nights .

 

Now the ED150 with un-disclosed glass types is almost exactly like my lovely Long Perng 110mm f6 APO ( yes its an APO )  the same scope as the  Orion EON 110mm f6 doublet but un-branded ,,, anyway my 110mm f6 when compared to my 100mm f9 is as CA free on all objects , it's SA control is probably better as it does show a better star test using quality TV eyepieces at stupid high powers and that's saying something with only 660 mm to play with  .

 

Long Perng don't say what the mating element they used with the lovely FPL51 in this scope ,  the same  as SW don't on the ED150 but that does NOT ! take away that these scopes perform excellently for the price , it works and man they could be using crushed up tire's as the mating element ,, but by golly it really works .

Who are we to complain ? a 110mm f6 or 150mm f8 or any of the other scopes out there with the image quality seen here for little $$$$ ,,, come on .

 

This is where the ED80 , 100 , 120 and now the 150 really shine .

 

My 5c .

 

Beanerds .


Edited by beanerds, 18 September 2019 - 06:06 AM.

  • belgrade and 25585 like this

#38 helpwanted

helpwanted

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,061
  • Joined: 04 Jul 2007
  • Loc: Phoenix, AZ

Posted 18 September 2019 - 12:05 PM

Maybe SW just ran out of stickers? ...and the sticker manufacture is on backorder... seriously, it could just be that simple!



#39 RAKing

RAKing

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,778
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2007
  • Loc: West of the D.C. Nebula

Posted 18 September 2019 - 02:00 PM

Maybe SW just ran out of stickers? ...and the sticker manufacture is on backorder... seriously, it could just be that simple!

I wish it were so.  The Schott label is silk-screened (or printed) onto the tube at the Synta factory.  It is not a sticker and these metal tubes are made in batches, not one at a time.

 

Ron



#40 stevew

stevew

    Now I've done it

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,464
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2006
  • Loc: British Columbia Canada

Posted 18 September 2019 - 08:13 PM

 

I am not a big fan of the build, of the paint colors but I am a big fan of the optics.  That why I went with the Orion 120mm Eon.  It's the 120mm F/7.5 Skywatcher optics in a Long Perng OTA.  No goofy colors, just good old black. (It's actually a gorgeous gloss black with chrome siver trim)  A nice sliding dew shield, machined tube rings, a machined rotating focuser, I consider it one of the best looking scopes one can buy.

I always liked the Long Perng build and finish. It's too bad that Orion discontinued them.

Classy looking scope.

 

Steve


Edited by stevew, 18 September 2019 - 08:15 PM.

  • Jon Isaacs, SteveG and 25585 like this

#41 SteveG

SteveG

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,510
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2006
  • Loc: Seattle, WA

Posted 19 September 2019 - 11:14 AM

I always liked the Long Perng build and finish. It's too bad that Orion discontinued them.

Classy looking scope.

 

Steve

Me too. You can still get them in white from Europe:

https://www.teleskop...3--Focuser.html


  • stevew and IMB like this

#42 Nippon

Nippon

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,376
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 19 September 2019 - 11:40 AM

I don't get it. People seem perfectly willing to spend huge bucks on premium brands that don't tell you what they use but demand that economy brands reveal every detail.  


  • beanerds, aa6ww and Terra Nova like this

#43 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Mercury-Atlas

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,855
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 19 September 2019 - 11:42 AM

Don't most of the premium brands disclose glass types?

#44 KevH

KevH

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 936
  • Joined: 08 Mar 2010
  • Loc: Maine

Posted 19 September 2019 - 11:47 AM

I don’t care either way but I think it’s more the sudden change and lack of consistency between models.

Skywatcher: “Lets sticks a Schott logo on the tube.”

Also Skywatcher: “You don’t need to know the glass and it isn’t important anyway.”

Edited by KevH, 19 September 2019 - 11:57 AM.

  • areyoukiddingme and wrnchhead like this

#45 Nippon

Nippon

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,376
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 19 September 2019 - 01:11 PM

Don't most of the premium brands disclose glass types?

Tele Vue does not. Vixen very sparsely identifies FPL53 is used in their ED doublets but the mating element they do not. Most other premium brands may say what the low dispersion element is but not the mating element. I have heard It said the reason Tele Vue does not is to keep their optics a secret but that seems silly as I would think any company could just buy a TV refractor and determine what glass is in it.

I think they don't disclose what they use so they can design their optics the way they see fit without outrage from the arm chair opticians AKA the peanut gallery:)

If a company comes up with a exotic high performance design using glass types that are not well known or respected by the peanut gallery it could get tabooed here on CN and other forums and sales suffer. Consumers could end up loosing out on an excellent product for no good reason.


Edited by Nippon, 19 September 2019 - 01:12 PM.

  • belgrade, Terra Nova, Spikey131 and 1 other like this

#46 Nippon

Nippon

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,376
  • Joined: 22 Oct 2009
  • Loc: Central Florida

Posted 19 September 2019 - 01:22 PM

There was quite the little fuss about the new Astro Physics 92 Stowaway.  I believe AP uses Hoya FCD100 glass which is supposed to be the equivalent to O'hara FPL53. But that is not what all the fuss was about. No it was because the lens coatings were green so some suspected the optics were made in China for AP. It can all get quite sily in my opinion.


Edited by Nippon, 19 September 2019 - 01:23 PM.

  • 25585 likes this

#47 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 85,162
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 19 September 2019 - 01:45 PM

I don't get it. People seem perfectly willing to spend huge bucks on premium brands that don't tell you what they use but demand that economy brands reveal every detail.  

 

This is how I see it:

 

- Premium brands are known quantities.  They're not in a competitive marketplace, you know what you are getting.  TeleVue makes 5 basic telescopes, the TV-60. The 76, 85, NP-101 and the NP-127.  The most recently introduced models were the TeleVue 127 and TV 60 were 2003, they've been making these same basic telescopes with minor modifications for 16 years..  There are no hidden surprises.  It doesn't take a optical guru to figure out that the doublets are using FPL-53 or something very similar, you couldn't get the color correction with FPL-51 type glasses.  

 

- Mid level and entry level scopes are a different story.  They are more of a commodity, they are manufactured in a relatively small number of factories and the name of the end seller is pasted on the OTA along with some minor mechanical and possibly optical variations and that's your scope.  Very often there are FPL-51 and FPL-53 versions of the same scope.   

 

- Did you want to buy the Orion version of the 130mm F/7 FPL-51 triplet for $3000 when someone else was selling the same basic scope for under $2000?  On the other hand, if you are price shopping for a TeleVue 85, there are many choices that will save you more than a $1000 but you won't be getting that same build quality and design.  You buy a TV-85 because that's the scope you want and you are willing to pay a premium for it. 

 

- I think it helps the seller to know what glasses are used.  Prior to the introduction of the ED-80 by Orion, Orion had sold at least one ED-80 but it was based on FK-5 and essentially an achromat.  Knowing that the ED-80 was using the same ED glass as Astro-Physics went a long way in developing the market for the ED-80.. It wasn't just another fake ED scope.

 

Jon


  • eklf, Nippon, Terra Nova and 4 others like this

#48 jag767

jag767

    Kinesis Custom Machining and Refinishing

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1,203
  • Joined: 20 Jun 2013
  • Loc: Massapequa, NY

Posted 19 September 2019 - 02:44 PM

Theres 2 ways I look at this, and I think price plays a huge factor into which one I subscribe to. If I spend the money for a high end refractor, I want the reports for the optics I purchase. No one buys a corvette without asking for the specs. It's all based on premium performance.

On the other hand, if I'm buying a refractor which is at a value price point, I dont care. I want to look through it and see what I see. If I dont see any color, and the star test looks good, the view is pleasing, well thats good enough for me.

#49 25585

25585

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,078
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 19 September 2019 - 03:37 PM

Someone posted a link to the Skywatcher USA Evostar 120ED wwebpage.

 

https://www.skywatch...s/evostar-120ed

 

As of the Evostar 150 ED, I thought Skywatcher wasn't revealing glasses anymore.. I am seeing it listed for the Evostar 80nmm, 100mm and 120 mm as well as all the Esprit refractors. It just so happens these all use FPL-53.

 

scratchhead2.gif

 

Jon

The 80, 100 & 120 (being older models than 50, 72 & 150) have long had their glass components advertised. This was why the 3 new models raised concerns over quality, by not mentioning the glass anymore. 


Edited by 25585, 19 September 2019 - 03:38 PM.

  • IMB likes this

#50 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 85,162
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 19 September 2019 - 03:46 PM

Theres 2 ways I look at this, and I think price plays a huge factor into which one I subscribe to. If I spend the money for a high end refractor, I want the reports for the optics I purchase. No one buys a corvette without asking for the specs. It's all based on premium performance.

On the other hand, if I'm buying a refractor which is at a value price point, I dont care. I want to look through it and see what I see. If I dont see any color, and the star test looks good, the view is pleasing, well thats good enough for me.

 

Does Astro-Physics, Takahashi or TEC provide optical reports?  I don't know about TEC and Tak, I have never heard in an interferogram from either but I could be wrong.  An optical report is a piece of paper, the quality of the report depends on who did the testing and how the testing was done.  It's a matter of trust that the testing and analysis was done right.  If you trust the testing was done right, then trusting that the fabrication and finishing was done right follows.  

 

When you buy a Corvette, you get the specs, that analogous to getting the aperture, the focal ratio, the ED glasses used.  But unless things have changed, you don't get an individual dyno-test of the rear wheel horsepower of the vehicle.  That would be analogous to the optical test of a refractor.  

 

Jon




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