52 replies to this topic

[madcoverboy]

Kevin seems to have quietly snuck this onto the website without an annoucement: BT-127XL-SD Binocular Telescope.

 

Our newest and largest XL Series Binocular Telescope features 5″ apochromatic (FCD100 / FK-61 triplet) objectives, with a relatively-short 650mm focal length. The BT-127XL-SD was created to be the highest-performing production binocular telescope on the market, without regard to cost. One look through the eyepieces will convince you that we succeeded. Unlike other large-aperture binoculars, the BT-127XL-SD is remarkably-lightweight at just 25 lbs., and therefore easy to transport and mount. Finished in iridescent Luna Pearl White with anodized silver trim, it’s also quite attractive. Mount it on the gorgeous Oberwerk TR3 hardwood tripod, with silver-anodized Oberwerk fork mount, and it’s a stunning conversation piece for the home or office with a view. The BT-127-XL-SD includes our premium 30x (22mm) 70° AFOV eyepieces. 46x (14mm) and 93x (7mm) are also available.

Accepting orders beginning April 6th for delivery in early May.

 

Nothing on pricing or the fork mount, but if the APM 120-SD-45s retail for US$4000, probably the same territory. (EDIT 1: On closer inspection, the Obies are advertised as "APO FCD100/FK-61 triplet" and the APMs as a "2-lens FPL 53 SD", so these Obies may set you back a lot more!) This probably goes a way toward explaining why the 110 Ultras were discontinued earlier this year too.

 

EDIT 2: Emailed Kevin, he responded within the hour, these bad boys will retail for $4995.

Edited by madcoverboy, 31 March 2020 - 12:22 PM.

[junomike]

I think $4G's is a little conservative.  Also, looks like they may accept 2" eyepieces, can anyone confirm/deny that?

[Rich V.]

Nice to see a full 5" BT offering.  The focusers are clearly larger than the 100mm's 1-1/4" ones; would like to hear more about this.

 

The description says it's a dual ED triplet design; sounds interesting but the pricing will reflect that as well as the additional aperture.  I'd imagine it would be $5000.+ in an 1-1/4" format and clearly more if a 2" format.  If 2", are the prisms sized appropriately for the larger eyepiece field stops or are they undersized like the APM 150s?

 

Rich

[madcoverboy]

There’s more stats in the product comparison page (scroll to bottom).

[Rich V.]

So it's 1-1/4" focusers.  A 2.33° FOV isn't too shabby for a 5", though...

 

Thanks.

[oldmanrick]

Very interesting instrument!   Nice to see more choices in the big BT category.

 

Hoping to see user reports this summer.  It'll be interesting to see how the triplet objectives compare to the doublets from APM.

 

Looks like the prisms are enlarged enough to give 100% aperture coverage for the 1.25" eyepieces.  Also IPD range is better than the APM 150, so some who are looking for smaller minimum IPD should be interested.

 

Rick

[range88]

What does 5″ apochromatic (FCD100 / FK-61 triplet) mean?

1 FCD100 triplet

2 FK-61 triplet

3 triplet containing FCD100 and FK-61

Which one?

[Beg]

In December Kevin told me that it was going to be a triplet using both SD and ED FK95N and FK61. And he wanted to keep the weight down so it could mount with an N12 head. 26lbs might be pushing that.

[edwincjones]

I recall in the distant past the refractor folks saying there was a big difference

between 4" and 5", but not that much between 5" and 6".

 

Was this true for refractors,

is this true for binoculars?

 

 

edj

[Cali]

In December Kevin told me that it was going to be a triplet using both SD and ED FK95N and FK61. And he wanted to keep the weight down so it could mount with an N12 head. 26lbs might be pushing that.

I darn need a crane to help mount my 25x100's. Can't imagine what its gonna take to mount a 25LB binocular. - When you do get it mounted ping me so I can come over to take a peek :>)  

 

- Cal

[Beg]

Unfortunately the N12 mounting goal did not happen..... 

[sonny.barile]

Pheeew.   That’s twice as heavy as the SD100. The TR3 tripod is probably up to the task and there is a fork mentioned in the write-up. TR3 doesn’t list the fork as an option yet. I wonder what that will look like......

Edited by sonny.barile, 01 April 2020 - 04:12 PM.

[madcoverboy]

Pheeew.   That’s twice as heavy as the SD100. The TR3 tripod is probably up to the task and there is a fork mentioned in the write-up. TR3 doesn’t list the fork as an option yet. I wonder what tat will look like......

I suspect the fork from the discontinued BT-100-45s could be resurrected. Never had a chance to play with the Nitrotech counterbalance tech, but a straightforward mechanical fork seems safer for the long-run for an heirloom-quality instrument like this!

[The Ardent]

Sometimes smaller is better. I’d feel more confident recommending the 100mm models.

[sonny.barile]

Odd thing. I can’t find the 127’s on the websight unless I use your link. 

[Mr. Bill]

Interesting......unfortunately just looked at my investment portfolio.....  

[StarAlert]

Interesting......unfortunately just looked at my investment portfolio.....  

Yeah, the timing of this rollout couldn’t have been worse. 

[StarAlert]

This would be a tough choice for me. The APM 120-45-SD can be bought for about $4,300 and weighs five pounds less. Is the extra 7mm of aperture worth it?
Tough call! It might be worth it if you already have a mount that can handle the 25lbs. My DSV-3 tops out at 20lbs. 

[madcoverboy]

This would be a tough choice for me. The APM 120-45-SD can be bought for about $4,300 and weighs five pounds less. Is the extra 7mm of aperture worth it?
Tough call! It might be worth it if you already have a mount that can handle the 25lbs. My DSV-3 tops out at 20lbs.

You’re paying for a triplet over a doublet, but I don’t know if I have the visual acuity to pick up on the differences unless you’re planning on using this as a planet-killer with sub-6mm eyepieces.

[Rich V.]

Odd thing. I can’t find the 127’s on the websight unless I use your link. 

Seems the page is "not quite ready for prime time", perhaps.  No reason to put the page up on the site unless there's an appropriate mount ready for it?  

 

How did the OP, madcoverboy, find the URL?

[StarAlert]

How did the OP, madcoverboy, find the URL?

My same thought...

[madcoverboy]

Seems the page is "not quite ready for prime time", perhaps. No reason to put the page up on the site unless there's an appropriate mount ready for it?

How did the OP, madcoverboy, find the URL?

Stumbled across it when looking at the product comparison table.

Edited by madcoverboy, 02 April 2020 - 11:03 AM.

[Beg]

Now that the cat is out of the bag, Kevin sent me a few emails the past year regarding this bino. He put a lot into it and he was really excited about it. I bet it's  going to be really sweet, to say the very least.

[oldmanrick]

Hmmmm--, interesting that the comparison chart now shows 99% effective aperture coverage for the 127 versus 100% last time I looked a few days ago.  Maybe there's a "shrinkage factor" following manufacture and assembly!    I doubt that this would be visible in use, but interesting that it was changed.

 

Rick

[sonny.barile]

Hmmmm--, interesting that the comparison chart now shows 99% effective aperture coverage for the 127 versus 100% last time I looked a few days ago.  Maybe there's a "shrinkage factor" following manufacture and assembly!    I doubt that this would be visible in use, but interesting that it was changed.

 

Rick

I about fell over laughing........