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

New AT102EDL

  • Please log in to reply
92 replies to this topic

#76 Moondust

Moondust

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 673
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2006

Posted 25 May 2020 - 12:32 PM

I will not flip my SVAccess 102 for this....

 

I will not flip my SVAccess 102 for this....

 

I will not flip my SVAccess 102 for this....

HELP!!

 

lol.gif

What would be the point?


  • jimandlaura26, rustynpp, stevew and 3 others like this

#77 erin

erin

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 716
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2018
  • Loc: MA

Posted 27 May 2020 - 07:07 AM

Moondust—exactly! I was just joking....although I do like the look of the rings and handle and it is fun to try new scopes. Not enough for all the hassle though.


  • stevew likes this

#78 Brollen

Brollen

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 479
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Maryland, USA

Posted Today, 06:24 AM

This looks exciting and enticing. I had the AT102ED with fixed dew shield and it was terrific!

 

But what I would like... Mike@Astronomics any chance of seeing an EDL scope with more aperture? Say in the 110mm to 125mm range? jump.gif



#79 russell23

russell23

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,607
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted Today, 07:23 AM

This looks exciting and enticing. I had the AT102ED with fixed dew shield and it was terrific!

 

But what I would like... Mike@Astronomics any chance of seeing an EDL scope with more aperture? Say in the 110mm to 125mm range? jump.gif

There are the AT 115 and 130mm triplets that fill that role.  



#80 Brollen

Brollen

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 479
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Maryland, USA

Posted Today, 09:17 AM

There are the AT 115 and 130mm triplets that fill that role.  

Those are triplets - I’m speaking of doublets, which are usually lighter, acclimate quicker, often have lesser mounting requirements aperture-for-aperture, etc.


Edited by Brollen, Today, 09:18 AM.


#81 sunnyday

sunnyday

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,722
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2019
  • Loc: Ottawa,Canada

Posted Today, 09:33 AM

if anyone is interested, i have a 102mm ed lunt for sale.
why here is the reason.

https://www.astronom...-7-doublet.html

thanks cool.gif



#82 russell23

russell23

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,607
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted Today, 09:38 AM

Those are triplets - I’m speaking of doublets, which are usually lighter, acclimate quicker, often have lesser mounting requirements aperture-for-aperture, etc.

Yes.  I agree with all those aspects of doublets - which I prefer myself.  But I think if you are asking Astronomics then from the business perspective side, the 115mm and 130mm triplets fill that role.

 

Consider the prices:

 

102mm f/7 FK-61 doublet:  $599

102mm f/7 FCD-100 doublet:  $1095

115mm f/7 FK-61 triplet:  $1399

130mm f/7 FK-61 triplet:  $1899

 

How do you wedge 110mm and 125mm doublets into that price structure?

 

I think you would have to use FK-61 glass to make it work - if possible.  For example,  How about a 112mm f/7  FK-61 doublet for $949 and then a 122mm f/7 FK-61 doublet for $1349.

 

If you use FCD-100 glass in these new doublets then they are going to cost as much or more than the triplets of similar aperture.   That would be a very confusing set of options.

 

Even what I proposed would be confusing within the price structures.  Do you get the 122mm f/7 FK-61 doublet for $50 less than the 115mm f/7 triplet?   The better color correction of the triplet would likely cause people to give up the 7mm aperture better correction.

 

That's more what I would be worried about from a business perspective.  



#83 Brollen

Brollen

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 479
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Maryland, USA

Posted Today, 10:16 AM

Yes.  I agree with all those aspects of doublets - which I prefer myself.  But I think if you are asking Astronomics then from the business perspective side, the 115mm and 130mm triplets fill that role.

 

Consider the prices:

 

102mm f/7 FK-61 doublet:  $599

102mm f/7 FCD-100 doublet:  $1095

115mm f/7 FK-61 triplet:  $1399

130mm f/7 FK-61 triplet:  $1899

 

How do you wedge 110mm and 125mm doublets into that price structure?

 

I think you would have to use FK-61 glass to make it work - if possible.  For example,  How about a 112mm f/7  FK-61 doublet for $949 and then a 122mm f/7 FK-61 doublet for $1349.

 

If you use FCD-100 glass in these new doublets then they are going to cost as much or more than the triplets of similar aperture.   That would be a very confusing set of options.

 

Even what I proposed would be confusing within the price structures.  Do you get the 122mm f/7 FK-61 doublet for $50 less than the 115mm f/7 triplet?   The better color correction of the triplet would likely cause people to give up the 7mm aperture better correction.

 

That's more what I would be worried about from a business perspective.  

What you say may be true. All I know is that Astronomics excels at delivering amazing scopes at amazing prices and values.

 

I see Teleskop Express has a 125mm FPL-53/Lanthanum doublet for an approximate 1260 EUROs — around $1400 USD. I’m sure Astronomics could deliver similar value at similar or a better price.

 

Anyways, would love to hear from Mike on this... And maybe the simple answer is, that they have no interest in doing so.



#84 drd715

drd715

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 439
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2015
  • Loc: Fort Lauderdale

Posted Today, 10:18 AM

Those are triplets - I’m speaking of doublets, which are usually lighter, acclimate quicker, often have lesser mounting requirements aperture-for-aperture, etc.

There are a few doublets out there that are in a bit larger size than 102mm. But as you increase aperture you need to raise the F number to keep the same level of CA control. F-7 in an ed doublet with FPL-53 equivalent glass at 102mm aperture is very good, but to get the same CA correction in a 115mm or 130mm F-8 or F-9 would have to be the F number. You can still get a decent CA correction with up to about 140mm at F-7, but not as good as a 102mm at F-7 or 80mm F-6 FPL-53 equivalent scope.

There are trade offs in going from a doublet to a triplet which can make the mid to long F-number doublet a good choice. First off there are only 4 surfaces to add up any polishing deficiencies instead of 6 surfaces. A doublet cell weighs considerably less than a triplet. Triplet OTA's tend to be nose heavy and over all the OTA is heavier plus may need a heavier focuser end for balance (adding a camera and aft end equipment helps with the balance). For those is fast temp delta observing sites the doublet usually cools quicker. Advantage to the triplet is better CA correction in the lower F numbers.

Sub F-6 and critical astrophotography may require a triplet at 100mm and larger. 80mm and below a doublet can be fairly good at F-5 or so. Still a triplet if made well is supior.

Now the real difference in the final choice between two scopes will be the optical quality and the build quality including a focuser quality comparison. It simply comes down to the fact that better is more expensive.

The decision as to how much better compared to how much more cost and how much dollars a person is willing/capable of spending is the final determinant. Final decision is whether or not an individual finds the best performance to dollar cost for them.

And this is why a "better" scope at a good value is so appealing. The 102edl is a scope in that nitch.

In the larger doublet value field the 120mm skywatcher and the APM140ED come to mind. Probably not as CA free as a 102edl FPL-53, but good scopes.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk
  • rustynpp and Jethro7 like this

#85 Astronomics

Astronomics

    Vendor: Astronomics

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 6,627
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2004
  • Loc: Right Here

Posted Today, 10:54 AM

Actually, to bring the 125 and 152 in to this country and be able to make a reasonable profit (meaning being able to justify the outlay of capital over a period of time due to the price of the instruments to begin with) the prices going to be a tad higher than TS to be honest. I have to figure in free shipping, Cloudy Nights discount, and a credit card surcharge. All those added in take around 10% of the retail price off the top, which puts a pretty hefty squeeze on the bottom line. Not complaining, just being upfront.

I would be at $1595 for the 125
$2795 for the 150.
  • stevew, eros312, Don Taylor and 3 others like this

#86 jag767

jag767

    Kinesis Custom Machining and Refinishing

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 1,177
  • Joined: 20 Jun 2013
  • Loc: Massapequa, NY

Posted Today, 11:31 AM

Actually, to bring the 125 and 152 in to this country and be able to make a reasonable profit (meaning being able to justify the outlay of capital over a period of time due the price of the instruments to begin with) the prices going to be a tad higher than TS to be honest. I have to figure in free shipping, Cloudy Nights discount, and a credit card surcharge. All those added in take around 10% of the retail price off the top, which puts a pretty hefty squeeze on the bottom line. Not complaining, just being upfront.

I would be at $1595 for the 125
$2795 for the 150.


Honestly that'd be excellent. You're lower than the skywatcher ed doublets with a much nicer product IMO.
  • rustynpp and stevew like this

#87 Brollen

Brollen

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 479
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Maryland, USA

Posted Today, 12:54 PM

Actually, to bring the 125 and 152 in to this country and be able to make a reasonable profit (meaning being able to justify the outlay of capital over a period of time due to the price of the instruments to begin with) the prices going to be a tad higher than TS to be honest. I have to figure in free shipping, Cloudy Nights discount, and a credit card surcharge. All those added in take around 10% of the retail price off the top, which puts a pretty hefty squeeze on the bottom line. Not complaining, just being upfront.

I would be at $1595 for the 125
$2795 for the 150.

Thanks for a response Mike and for being upfront. As jag767 said, that price on the 125 is very good. It would be a beautiful scope in the Aston Martin Grey if it ever saw the light of day.



#88 GOLGO13

GOLGO13

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,159
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2005
  • Loc: West Virginia

Posted Today, 01:03 PM

Thanks for a response Mike and for being upfront. As jag767 said, that price on the 125 is very good. It would be a beautiful scope in the Aston Martin Grey if it ever saw the light of day.

A 125 with a reasonable weight would be pretty awesome. It would work on all the smaller mounts, and thus be pretty popular I think.

 

These lighter weights are possible. I had a Vixen 130mm SS which was 15 pounds with a 2.5 inch moonlite on it (probably lighter with the stock focuser). That was very easy to mount.



#89 Brollen

Brollen

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 479
  • Joined: 18 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Maryland, USA

Posted Today, 01:08 PM

There are a few doublets out there that are in a bit larger size than 102mm. But as you increase aperture you need to raise the F number to keep the same level of CA control. F-7 in an ed doublet with FPL-53 equivalent glass at 102mm aperture is very good, but to get the same CA correction in a 115mm or 130mm F-8 or F-9 would have to be the F number. You can still get a decent CA correction with up to about 140mm at F-7, but not as good as a 102mm at F-7 or 80mm F-6 FPL-53 equivalent scope.

I’ve often wondered about this. Quite honestly it all seems rather formulaic to me.

 

For instance there seem to always be 110mm f/6 scopes being made with FPL-51 or 61 glass ... why??

 

Why f/6?? Why not make 110mm f/7 scopes with FPL-53 or the FCD-100 glass? If 125mm f/7.8 scopes can be created at competitive prices with the better glass, why not 110mm or 115mm doublets at f/7?

 

Ok, I’ll stop my rant. I feel better now.

 

Clear skies!


  • russell23 likes this

#90 russell23

russell23

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10,607
  • Joined: 31 May 2009
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted Today, 01:20 PM

I’ve often wondered about this. Quite honestly it all seems rather formulaic to me.

 

For instance there seem to always be 110mm f/6 scopes being made with FPL-51 or 61 glass ... why??

 

Why f/6?? Why not make 110mm f/7 scopes with FPL-53 or the FCD-100 glass? If 125mm f/7.8 scopes can be created at competitive prices with the better glass, why not 110mm or 115mm doublets at f/7?

 

Ok, I’ll stop my rant. I feel better now.

 

Clear skies!

I think to some extent this is simply the result of what the manufacturers offer as design options.  See for example:

 

http://www.longperng...ct=list&catId=1

 

Anyone company that can fund it could offer any of those options branded with their name.  I don't know how much cost would be added to request modifications in focal ratio, which requires and alteration of lens design.



#91 Astronomics

Astronomics

    Vendor: Astronomics

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 6,627
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2004
  • Loc: Right Here

Posted Today, 01:33 PM

Modifications count as a custom run with at least a 100 piece minimum starting order. Then you have to pay for lens design if you don’t have your own optical designer. Then you can choose to make a demo run of lenses like when made the TMB 130. Then you wait around a year for the finished product that you have usually placed a substantial down payment on to pay for some raw materials. Many times it is simply easier to have a company make a design and then let different brands pick and choose telescopes. Some will have exclusive rights to the instruments if they have a good enough relationship with the manufacturer.
  • eros312, Bomber Bob and sunnyday like this

#92 Auburn80

Auburn80

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,065
  • Joined: 01 Apr 2013

Posted Today, 05:57 PM

Not sure what general specs you based your calculations on Mike but I'd be the first in line for a 125 fcd100/lanth like the new 102. A problem as you say is that it would probably be a year + away.
I really like my 140 but for me it's too much for my mount and I'm not ready to drop 2K on a mount upgrade (the eq6 family is too heavy).

Edited by Auburn80, Today, 06:02 PM.


#93 Passerine

Passerine

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 217
  • Joined: 12 Nov 2011
  • Loc: California SF Bay Area

Posted Today, 09:48 PM

Not sure what general specs you based your calculations on Mike but I'd be the first in line for a 125 fcd100/lanth like the new 102. A problem as you say is that it would probably be a year + away.
I really like my 140 but for me it's too much for my mount and I'm not ready to drop 2K on a mount upgrade (the eq6 family is too heavy).

One thing that might help differentiate an AT125EDL doublet from the existing AT130EDT triplet would be to make the 125 doublet a longer scope, e.g. f/8 (or even longer).  Not everyone would like the longer focal ratio, but the Tak FC100 DZ and DL models have plenty of fans (f/8 and f/9).

 

Just a thought.

 

Dave


Edited by Passerine, Today, 09:49 PM.



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