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

My email came in today for AP130

  • Please log in to reply
60 replies to this topic

#51 cdr dcm

cdr dcm

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: 20 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Duluth, MN

Posted 30 June 2020 - 09:45 PM

I don't want to rain on anyone's AP parade but I doubt there is a noticeable difference between the AP 130 and the TEC 140 FL (which is available with a few months' wait). In fact the extra 10 mm of aperture might give the TEC the edge. Near perfection of design and production is the case with both (including Tak and a few others) Physics and your eyeballs, not to mention atmospheric conditions, are likely to be the limiting  factors for any of these.


  • zjc26138, turtle86, payner and 5 others like this

#52 AstroGabe

AstroGabe

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,523
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2010
  • Loc: SE Wisconsin

Posted 30 June 2020 - 09:50 PM

I don't want to rain on anyone's AP parade but I doubt there is a noticeable difference between the AP 130 and the TEC 140 FL (which is available with a few months' wait). In fact the extra 10 mm of aperture might give the TEC the edge. Near perfection of design and production is the case with both (including Tak and a few others) Physics and your eyeballs, not to mention atmospheric conditions, are likely to be the limiting  factors for any of these.

 

Good points.  One thing that really appeals to me about the AP130GTX over the TEC (I've considered getting one for years) is the portability.  Having the scope break down makes it really portable for travel.  Also, for my imaging, which will be my primary use, I've read in the past that there has been some issues with TEC having bloated blue stars on some sensors.  


  • gjanke likes this

#53 gnowellsct

gnowellsct

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 16,244
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2009

Posted Yesterday, 12:08 AM

I don't want to rain on anyone's AP parade but I doubt there is a noticeable difference between the AP 130 and the TEC 140 FL (which is available with a few months' wait). In fact the extra 10 mm of aperture might give the TEC the edge. Near perfection of design and production is the case with both (including Tak and a few others) Physics and your eyeballs, not to mention atmospheric conditions, are likely to be the limiting  factors for any of these.

Well it's 10 mm more aperture and it's 10% more focal ratio, and that adds up surprisingly more than you might think.  The TEC 140 is an imposing and large instrument close up.  That it is a top performer there is no doubt.  

 

980 mm focal length to the GT's 819.  About 16 cm longer or 6.3 inches.   The tube on the TEC 140 is one diameter for the whole length, the GT130 is tapered after the light rays have converged a bit.  The TEC 140 has the larger objective and with the larger objective comes not just a wider dew shield but a *longer* one.

 

So all told the TEC 140 is an imposing physical presence and compared to the GT130 is like one of those impossibly tall runway supermodels.   I don't think the weight is that different from the GT130.

 

Both scopes are solid on a G11 class mount.

 

I don't think the 10 mm of aperture is, for my purposes, worth the additional transport/storage problems.    But then I cheat.  When I want more aperture I put my 92mm on top of the c8.  Or the C14.  And I even put the 92 mm on top of the GT130 which isn't necessary, is kinda silly, does not expand available aperture, but is a great deal of fun.   In any event I'm not in a position of needing the extra 10 mm. 

 

If anything ever happened to the much-valued GT130 I would strongly consider replacing it with a CFF or TEC, in spite of my reservations about the TEC's size.   CFF has a 135 mm f/6.7.  At least for now they do. 

 

I have more refractors than I should have, though.  

 

Greg N


  • John Gauvreau likes this

#54 snommisbor

snommisbor

    Apollo

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 1,445
  • Joined: 15 Jun 2009
  • Loc: Cedar Park, TX

Posted Yesterday, 04:51 PM

I don't want to rain on anyone's AP parade but I doubt there is a noticeable difference between the AP 130 and the TEC 140 FL (which is available with a few months' wait). In fact the extra 10 mm of aperture might give the TEC the edge. Near perfection of design and production is the case with both (including Tak and a few others) Physics and your eyeballs, not to mention atmospheric conditions, are likely to be the limiting  factors for any of these.

Before I got rid of my 140 I did a comparison with my buddy’s 130. There was a slightly detectable difference in views but nothing worth wanting to go from a 130 to 140. Where the big difference is, is in size. I was amazed at how much bigger the 140 was to the 130. After that viewing session though I did decide to sell my 140 and did upgrade to a 160 due to that slight difference. Of course now with the 130 coming I may have to think hard about getting rid of the 160 and going to a 180.


  • cdr dcm, Lookitup and gjanke like this

#55 ryderc1

ryderc1

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 586
  • Joined: 15 Apr 2006

Posted Yesterday, 06:53 PM

Before I got rid of my 140 I did a comparison with my buddy’s 130. There was a slightly detectable difference in views but nothing worth wanting to go from a 130 to 140. Where the big difference is, is in size. I was amazed at how much bigger the 140 was to the 130. After that viewing session though I did decide to sell my 140 and did upgrade to a 160 due to that slight difference. Of course now with the 130 coming I may have to think hard about getting rid of the 160 and going to a 180

A few months ago I weighed my 2003 AP 130/6 and TEC 140 ED. Both had their rings and mounting plates attached but no diagonal. I was surprised to find that the weights were within one pound of each other.  And given that AP 130's made after my model (e.g. the GT and the GTX) are heavier than my 2003 EDFS, a TEC 140 ED with rings is actually lighter than the more recent 130 AP's yet has 10mm more aperture. Since I could no longer justify owning two scopes so close in size and performance with some trepidation I passed the 130 along to a new owner.


  • cdr dcm, Heywood, leviathan and 2 others like this

#56 Swanny

Swanny

    Messenger

  • ****-
  • Posts: 426
  • Joined: 12 Mar 2017
  • Loc: AZ

Posted Yesterday, 06:54 PM

Let’s pump the brakes on ‘a few months’ to get a TEC140FL. My neighbor is about to year 2 on his wait. I was on the list with a quote of 6 months that was quickly bumped back to a year and a half. I chose to move to a Tak130. Still better than 8 years but there are other scopes as good as the above mentioned without the wait.

#57 cdr dcm

cdr dcm

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: 20 Jun 2008
  • Loc: Duluth, MN

Posted Yesterday, 07:41 PM

Certainly can't argue with the choice of the Tak 130!


  • leviathan likes this

#58 andysea

andysea

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,852
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Seattle, WA

Posted Yesterday, 08:58 PM

I had the TOA130. Coupled with the 4" flattener it was an amazing imaging scope.



#59 turtle86

turtle86

    Mr. Coffee

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,499
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2006

Posted Yesterday, 09:06 PM

I don't want to rain on anyone's AP parade but I doubt there is a noticeable difference between the AP 130 and the TEC 140 FL (which is available with a few months' wait). In fact the extra 10 mm of aperture might give the TEC the edge. Near perfection of design and production is the case with both (including Tak and a few others) Physics and your eyeballs, not to mention atmospheric conditions, are likely to be the limiting  factors for any of these.

 

I wound up with the AP 130 GT but really I’d be just as thrilled with a TEC 140 or Tak 130 TOA.  All are superb.


  • payner, Paul Morow and Kunama like this

#60 donadani

donadani

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,015
  • Joined: 20 Jul 2015
  • Loc: Germany

Posted Yesterday, 11:57 PM

Had the AP-130EDF-GT but sold it after a comparison with an older AP-130EDT on the planets - both great but the views in the EDT with f/8 were a little bit more stable for me. The big strenght of the GT is it´s compactness and possibility do divide the tube in three parts - so perfect for journeys if needed. The GT with rings, dustcap, 3" AP dovetail was 9.3kg.

 

Before some weeks came up an older 130EDFS with tailored tube and peppled paint - for a good price - and I couldn´t resist! smile.gif condition was not the best but price good and no dings or dents so I could bring it back it nearly "like new condition" - I absolutely love the tailored tube scope from AP! For me the nicest scopes AP ever made. 

 

A TEC 140 is great too - of course - especially the optics! but the tube is not as refined as those from AP and focuser is a FeatherTouch - yes great - but not unique - I prefere the AP´s ones just if they come without micropinion as with this EDFS.

 

So give me the TEC to enjoy the best views (no wonder with 10mm more aperture) - a instrument to use. But give me the AP to enjoy and celebrate just the use of the scope AND the views. With the older ones - you love it to pull off the dewcap and push it on again with the different side on front - or you hate it wink.gif The rings and plate has to be stored separately and is another step you have to do before viewing. With the TEC I open the case and the scope is more or less ready to go - more comfortable of course.

 

Btw. the EDFS with rings, 3" dovetail and dustcap is 10kg straight so same as the TEC and a bit more as the newer EDF-GT.

 

Yes maybe I should sell one again - but both are used frequently and I really can not decide which one to let go and luckily there´s no hurry...


Edited by donadani, Today, 12:18 AM.

  • plyscope likes this

#61 k5apl

k5apl

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,155
  • Joined: 19 May 2006
  • Loc: Arkansas

Posted Today, 10:06 AM

This is a very interesting thread and my $.02 is several years ago my friend Chuck and I compared the AP130GT to the TOA130 looking at Jupiter.  Used same eyepiece manufacturer (AP, TV, Zeiss) for comparable power, same diagonals, sitting next to each other.  At highest powers the TOA was slightly sharper (makes sense!).

 

As a previous poster noted, the advantage of the GT is that it can be broken down into 3 pieces for travel purposes. My GT has viewed "epic" skies on top of Haleakala volcano at 10K feet altitude in Maui, HI.  A great place that has minimum light pollution and clear skies.  I could never have brought a TOA size scope with me (cost, wife, and mount considerations).  So I had a great scope in a great location for many visits.  A true visual test environment.

 

What is an "epic" night?  You look up and see so many bright stars that you have trouble recognizing the major constellations. You see clouds in the South, but then realize its the Milky Way.  Add in the GT and good accessories and its a wonderful experience.  Rigel is an easy split, many stars around the C asterism in the Double Cluster, and the two small stars near the Double in the middle of the Trifid make it look like a 'double-double'. What I saw there has never been duplicated anywhere that I have viewed in the continental U.S.  And that couldn't have

happened (for me) without a 130mm refractor that could easily travel.

 

IMO the best telescope is the one that fits the owner's purpose (and is used frequently).  And we are blessed to have a myriad of refractors to choose from.  Blanket statements about which one is "best' are not credible to me.

Bottom line for me was to get my refractor to a location that would allow the optics to demonstrate their quality.

YMMV, and that's OK.


  • Paul Morow, jeremiah2229 and Suavi like this


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