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

Orion 120ST Testing

  • Please log in to reply
114 replies to this topic

#51 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 06 October 2020 - 01:10 PM

The weather was wonderfully clear last night and the seeing pretty good, certainly good enough to evaluate this sample in real life.....and it did not disappoint, in fact, quite the opposite.

 

I looked at Vega, Jupiter, Saturn, and, later, Mars.  I started with mono-vision then later ditched that in favor of bino-viewing.  I used my AP 2" diagonal, the viewer was an excellent sample Denk II with 1.4x/2.0x/2.8x  (or there about) powerswitch/OCS system.  I evaluated the scope at full (120mm), 80mm, and 52mm apertures.   Eyepieces were my trusty, good old Celestron 10mm, 15mm, 17mm, and 22mm jobbies in pairs for bino viewing and a Silver Top 2X barlow for mono vision.  

 

Mono Vision

 

I did mono vision mostly to do star testing on Vega and quickly settled in with the 10mm plossl w/2x barlow at full aperture, yeah, a little low but enough to do the job.  I did not use a green filter as I wanted an ...unfiltered experience (HAH!).  Vega is a tough test and yup, a bunch of color all around a nice little yellow airy disk surrounded by a couple of colorful diffraction rings.  The center zone was obvious sweeping around focus, showing a "hot spot" outside, close to focus.  But the spherical correction was rather good, with the two outer rings being uniform in thickness and brightness and very similar on each side of focus, with the exception of the overlying CA, which I had to look through.  There was no astigmatism or coma to be seen.  This is all consistent with the DPAC and indoor star testing, except outside, the star test was "cleaner".  At low magnifications, say under 35x, the "CA" was almost invisible on Vega.

 

Stopping the aperture to 80mm, radically improved the "CA" and star test.  At 120x, the airy disk was much whiter with a single diffraction ring with notably less overlying "CA"...but it was still there.  The intra/extra focus diffraction patterns were almost identical and much sharper.  Importantly, as I carefully got really close to focus, the donut pattern simply fell, uniformly, into and then out of the airy disk.  I could detect no real spherical error.  Not a perfect star test at 80mm aperture (could see some zoning way out of focus), so it's just really, really good.    Again, no astigmatism or coma anywhere.  This performance is entirely consistent with the images in DPAC, which shows no really meaningful SA at this aperture but some zoning.  

 

Stopping the aperture to 52mm, with the hole in the dew shield cap, was a lesson in perfect star testing.  At focus...still at 120x (!), the airy disk was white with just the faintest of blue around it.  Moving a little off of focus did show the blue a bit and different tinting in the diffraction rings inside and outside of focus but it all got quickly swallowed by the airy disk at focus.   Just perfect really.

 

Bino-vision

 

I performed a brief star test at higher magnification on Vega (~165x) at full aperture and got the same result so I started in first on Jupiter.  I was surprised just how sharp the image was at full aperture with plenty of surface and belt detail.  The image was however, dominated by the out of focus color, giving the planet a very yellow appearance (note in the DPAC images at full aperture, the red and green are fairly close to each other in focus, this means the yellow is too).  I had to take my time carefully focusing for sharpest belt detail.  The atmospheric dispersion (AD) around the planet seemed much more pronounced as well in comparison to the SW 120ED I had out too.  And yes, there really was no real comparison between the two as the 120ED was obviously the optically superior scope with notably sharper, more finely detailed and color free views (though there was some AD).  But the 120ST didn't suck out loud either, by itself, or in comparison to the 120ED on Jupiter.   If I had to project, I'd say the 120ST would be sharper on Jupiter than my C5 despite the obvious differences in CA as the the 120ST is notably smoother in figure with better SA (at least in yellow/green).  That might be an interesting comparison....someday.

 

At 80 mm aperture, again, the CA and AD was much improved and Jupiter looked really good actually with plenty of belt detail.  It was interesting to just reach up and pull the mask off of the objective as I could get immediate A-B-A comparisons (  yes, the mask is snugged right on top of and touching the glass scared.gif faint.gif   ). Pulling the mask quickly off, I had to retouch the focus a tad, but there was obviously more CA, however, the image was still rather sharp and with more detailing as afforded by the larger aperture with its greater resolving power and brighter image.  I didn't do any aperture comparisons at similar exit pupils, though I did later on Mars with the Denk power switch.   

 

With its predilection for a yellow tint, the 120ST did very nicely on Saturn at full aperture, being nicely sharp with Cassini's division obvious and the AD and CA seemingly more in the background compared to the views of Jupiter.  The 120ED was still the better optic, but the differences were not as pronounced as with Jupiter.  The 120ST was very nice really, again, I was surprised at how nice.   At 80mm aperture, Saturn was first rate for the aperture.  The residual CA was just not bothersome to me and I quickly ignored it as the Image was very sharp and that's what drew my attention.  At 100x I could pick out Cassini's division.  With at 52mm aperture the image was pristine, color free, and very sharp.  Despite the small aperture I was taken aback at the quality of the image.  But I could not pick out the division though there was the gap between the planet and the rings and maybe the planet's shadow on the rings as a really thin black "hair" .  

 

Now Mars is where it got interesting as the 120ST did very well actually at full aperture.  Which makes sense as Mars is rather mono-chromatic with its predominantly red color, which is where the best correction of this sample 120ST is.  And it showed at the eyepiece with nice sharpness of the planet's border against space and surface detail.  Syrtis major was obvious and it showed nice texture around its borders as it spanned the globe.  The pole cap was white-ish blue with a red/blue fringe but rather distinct.  The blueish rim to the planet from its atmosphere was smudged out a bit though, especially in comparison with the 120ED which showed it distinctly.  The 120ED was again, the better scope showing even finer gradations in color tint and finer textures in the surface detailing such as the ice cap border and the borders of Syrtis Major.   At 80mm aperture, I was a bit floored by how nice and sharp and pleasing the image was even compared to the 120ED at full aperture.  This was one time I tried to match exit pupils but with the 120ED.  I got ~110-115x with the 80mm stop compared to ~165X with the 120ED and I have to tell you, the differences were there in terms of fine detail resolution, but the differences were by no means stark.  Never underestimate or under-value the abilities of a 3" scope for planetary use.   And the 120ST was a complete hoot on Mars at 52mm aperture as well with the white pole cap and Syrtis major both easily seen.

 

Ok, so a lengthy report from a long but very enjoyable session.  

 

I have to admit that I got this sample because I just had a hard time believing some of the glowing reports (and I don't mean from the CA) concerning the optical quality of this cheap, fast achromat.  I'm a refractor snob, even an achromat snob.  I had a strong, up front expectation that it would be, at best, "serviceable", only usable at low power, with a bad edge and strong zoning with astigmatism on top of it all.   I was wrong.  Yes, it does have a moderate zone covering about 60mm of the center, but it is well defined but blends smoothly with the rest of the figure and does not mess that much with overall figure.  Yes it does have lots of "CA".  BUT, but there was no astigmatism or coma in sight at any aperture or magnification I used.  All of which means I get rather sharp views at full aperture, even with the CA and center zone.  As a bonus, the scope is a complete hoot to use at 80mm aperture as well giving up nothing visually to any 3" achromat I've had (I may just compare it to my 80ED....someday).  

 

So my time with this sample Orion 120ST has made allowed me to become .......a humbled achromat snob.

 

Jeff 


  • Paul Schroeder, tony_spina, Eddgie and 7 others like this

#52 RLK1

RLK1

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 579
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2020

Posted 06 October 2020 - 02:58 PM

I'm glad to know your particular sample did so well in your various tests. I thought 150X might be maximum for this scope but you pushed it beyond that with seemingly good results. 

Enjoy your scope!



#53 tony_spina

tony_spina

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,081
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2004
  • Loc: So. Cal.

Posted 06 October 2020 - 03:39 PM

Jeff,

Great report.   While I was waiting for my 8" reflector to equalize to outside temperature last night, I used my ST120 and TV 3mm-6mm Nagler zoom on Mars. I won't bother to go into details because you described the high powered views of Mars in the ST120 perfectly in your post above. 

 

these scopes may have CA, but the views are sharp.  Like you, I have better scopes, but this scope is by the backdoor always ready to go for a quick fix, or long session either by itself or complementing another scope.

 

I typically use this scope at 20x to 60x, but have no qualms about cranking up the magnification.  I also have some aperture masks that I made from black foam in various sizes that I use once in a while,  but mostly use full aperture 


Edited by tony_spina, 06 October 2020 - 03:40 PM.


#54 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 06 October 2020 - 09:10 PM

Thanks everyone for your comments.

 

Yeah, 150X is about the max I'd ever use, depending on what I'm looking at, at least with this sample.  Now the 11" F12, 6" F6.5 and 8" F9 achromats I use also have "unacceptable" Conrady ratios, boat loads of color and are of a similar color "balance" (more towards the green/yellow/red), yet give even sharper views as they are better corrected spherically.  A good figure matters most.

 

Another thing about last night's experience which continued to impress me during the evening was the SW 120ED.  I'd forgotten just how nice of a package it is, how well my sample performs, and the excellent value it offers. 

 

Jeff

 

BTW, as Yoda said, "There is another".  I've a second sample that I scored, used, making its way to me.  And, of course, it will be tested too. 

 

Jeff



#55 RLK1

RLK1

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 579
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2020

Posted 07 October 2020 - 03:33 PM

I'd like to ask you for a clarification: did you use 120X for your star test at full aperture?



#56 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,217
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 07 October 2020 - 04:12 PM

I've taken my ST120 to 200x and beyond on double stars.

#57 turtle86

turtle86

    Mr. Coffee

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,682
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2006

Posted 08 October 2020 - 07:17 AM

The weather was wonderfully clear last night and the seeing pretty good, certainly good enough to evaluate this sample in real life.....and it did not disappoint, in fact, quite the opposite.

 

I looked at Vega, Jupiter, Saturn, and, later, Mars.  I started with mono-vision then later ditched that in favor of bino-viewing.  I used my AP 2" diagonal, the viewer was an excellent sample Denk II with 1.4x/2.0x/2.8x  (or there about) powerswitch/OCS system.  I evaluated the scope at full (120mm), 80mm, and 52mm apertures.   Eyepieces were my trusty, good old Celestron 10mm, 15mm, 17mm, and 22mm jobbies in pairs for bino viewing and a Silver Top 2X barlow for mono vision.  

 

Mono Vision

 

I did mono vision mostly to do star testing on Vega and quickly settled in with the 10mm plossl w/2x barlow at full aperture, yeah, a little low but enough to do the job.  I did not use a green filter as I wanted an ...unfiltered experience (HAH!).  Vega is a tough test and yup, a bunch of color all around a nice little yellow airy disk surrounded by a couple of colorful diffraction rings.  The center zone was obvious sweeping around focus, showing a "hot spot" outside, close to focus.  But the spherical correction was rather good, with the two outer rings being uniform in thickness and brightness and very similar on each side of focus, with the exception of the overlying CA, which I had to look through.  There was no astigmatism or coma to be seen.  This is all consistent with the DPAC and indoor star testing, except outside, the star test was "cleaner".  At low magnifications, say under 35x, the "CA" was almost invisible on Vega.

 

Stopping the aperture to 80mm, radically improved the "CA" and star test.  At 120x, the airy disk was much whiter with a single diffraction ring with notably less overlying "CA"...but it was still there.  The intra/extra focus diffraction patterns were almost identical and much sharper.  Importantly, as I carefully got really close to focus, the donut pattern simply fell, uniformly, into and then out of the airy disk.  I could detect no real spherical error.  Not a perfect star test at 80mm aperture (could see some zoning way out of focus), so it's just really, really good.    Again, no astigmatism or coma anywhere.  This performance is entirely consistent with the images in DPAC, which shows no really meaningful SA at this aperture but some zoning.  

 

Stopping the aperture to 52mm, with the hole in the dew shield cap, was a lesson in perfect star testing.  At focus...still at 120x (!), the airy disk was white with just the faintest of blue around it.  Moving a little off of focus did show the blue a bit and different tinting in the diffraction rings inside and outside of focus but it all got quickly swallowed by the airy disk at focus.   Just perfect really.

 

Bino-vision

 

I performed a brief star test at higher magnification on Vega (~165x) at full aperture and got the same result so I started in first on Jupiter.  I was surprised just how sharp the image was at full aperture with plenty of surface and belt detail.  The image was however, dominated by the out of focus color, giving the planet a very yellow appearance (note in the DPAC images at full aperture, the red and green are fairly close to each other in focus, this means the yellow is too).  I had to take my time carefully focusing for sharpest belt detail.  The atmospheric dispersion (AD) around the planet seemed much more pronounced as well in comparison to the SW 120ED I had out too.  And yes, there really was no real comparison between the two as the 120ED was obviously the optically superior scope with notably sharper, more finely detailed and color free views (though there was some AD).  But the 120ST didn't suck out loud either, by itself, or in comparison to the 120ED on Jupiter.   If I had to project, I'd say the 120ST would be sharper on Jupiter than my C5 despite the obvious differences in CA as the the 120ST is notably smoother in figure with better SA (at least in yellow/green).  That might be an interesting comparison....someday.

 

At 80 mm aperture, again, the CA and AD was much improved and Jupiter looked really good actually with plenty of belt detail.  It was interesting to just reach up and pull the mask off of the objective as I could get immediate A-B-A comparisons (  yes, the mask is snugged right on top of and touching the glass scared.gif faint.gif   ). Pulling the mask quickly off, I had to retouch the focus a tad, but there was obviously more CA, however, the image was still rather sharp and with more detailing as afforded by the larger aperture with its greater resolving power and brighter image.  I didn't do any aperture comparisons at similar exit pupils, though I did later on Mars with the Denk power switch.   

 

With its predilection for a yellow tint, the 120ST did very nicely on Saturn at full aperture, being nicely sharp with Cassini's division obvious and the AD and CA seemingly more in the background compared to the views of Jupiter.  The 120ED was still the better optic, but the differences were not as pronounced as with Jupiter.  The 120ST was very nice really, again, I was surprised at how nice.   At 80mm aperture, Saturn was first rate for the aperture.  The residual CA was just not bothersome to me and I quickly ignored it as the Image was very sharp and that's what drew my attention.  At 100x I could pick out Cassini's division.  With at 52mm aperture the image was pristine, color free, and very sharp.  Despite the small aperture I was taken aback at the quality of the image.  But I could not pick out the division though there was the gap between the planet and the rings and maybe the planet's shadow on the rings as a really thin black "hair" .  

 

Now Mars is where it got interesting as the 120ST did very well actually at full aperture.  Which makes sense as Mars is rather mono-chromatic with its predominantly red color, which is where the best correction of this sample 120ST is.  And it showed at the eyepiece with nice sharpness of the planet's border against space and surface detail.  Syrtis major was obvious and it showed nice texture around its borders as it spanned the globe.  The pole cap was white-ish blue with a red/blue fringe but rather distinct.  The blueish rim to the planet from its atmosphere was smudged out a bit though, especially in comparison with the 120ED which showed it distinctly.  The 120ED was again, the better scope showing even finer gradations in color tint and finer textures in the surface detailing such as the ice cap border and the borders of Syrtis Major.   At 80mm aperture, I was a bit floored by how nice and sharp and pleasing the image was even compared to the 120ED at full aperture.  This was one time I tried to match exit pupils but with the 120ED.  I got ~110-115x with the 80mm stop compared to ~165X with the 120ED and I have to tell you, the differences were there in terms of fine detail resolution, but the differences were by no means stark.  Never underestimate or under-value the abilities of a 3" scope for planetary use.   And the 120ST was a complete hoot on Mars at 52mm aperture as well with the white pole cap and Syrtis major both easily seen.

 

Ok, so a lengthy report from a long but very enjoyable session.  

 

I have to admit that I got this sample because I just had a hard time believing some of the glowing reports (and I don't mean from the CA) concerning the optical quality of this cheap, fast achromat.  I'm a refractor snob, even an achromat snob.  I had a strong, up front expectation that it would be, at best, "serviceable", only usable at low power, with a bad edge and strong zoning with astigmatism on top of it all.   I was wrong.  Yes, it does have a moderate zone covering about 60mm of the center, but it is well defined but blends smoothly with the rest of the figure and does not mess that much with overall figure.  Yes it does have lots of "CA".  BUT, but there was no astigmatism or coma in sight at any aperture or magnification I used.  All of which means I get rather sharp views at full aperture, even with the CA and center zone.  As a bonus, the scope is a complete hoot to use at 80mm aperture as well giving up nothing visually to any 3" achromat I've had (I may just compare it to my 80ED....someday).  

 

So my time with this sample Orion 120ST has made allowed me to become .......a humbled achromat snob.

 

Jeff 

 

Great report.  I get similar results with my 120 ST, and it sounds like others do as well.  In all likelihood what you received from Orion was a more or less typical sample, though of course it’ll be interesting to see how your second one compares.

 

Orion markets this as a rich-field scope, so to me the fact that it’s also pretty good on planets when stopped down a bit is a very nice bonus.



#58 LDW47

LDW47

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,172
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 08 October 2020 - 08:55 AM

Great report.  I get similar results with my 120 ST, and it sounds like others do as well.  In all likelihood what you received from Orion was a more or less typical sample, though of course it’ll be interesting to see how your second one compares.

 

Orion markets this as a rich-field scope, so to me the fact that it’s also pretty good on planets when stopped down a bit is a very nice bonus.

My SW 120 ST was a great all round performer on any target but then again I am not a nit picky type of astronomer !



#59 Diomedes

Diomedes

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 553
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2020
  • Loc: New York City

Posted 08 October 2020 - 09:06 AM

I had my 120ST at 240x observing mars last night. Everything looked sharp, you could see the achromatic aberration when I was slightly out of focus but that just helped with letting me know when to refocus the scope.


  • tony_spina and Echolight like this

#60 RLK1

RLK1

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 579
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2020

Posted 09 October 2020 - 03:33 PM

I'd like to ask you for a clarification: did you use 120X for your star test at full aperture?

Any comments from the OP on the above?

BTW, Orion does sell a focuser upgrade for this scope, and it appears to be the same one in the Ed Ting video:

https://www.telescop...eyword=focusers



#61 tony_spina

tony_spina

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,081
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2004
  • Loc: So. Cal.

Posted 09 October 2020 - 03:44 PM

I would rather get the GSO 2" dual speed focuser than the Orion version 


  • Binojunky and BFaucett like this

#62 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 09 October 2020 - 03:50 PM

Second Orion ST120 sample is in.

 

This one is used and has been around the block a few times.  I think I'm at least the fourth owner. 

 

A quick, as is, check with the laser showed the beam missing the center by about 6mm and a view through the cheshire eyepiece showed the reflection dots to be slightly mis-centered.  I also noticed a mild haze on the forward and aft lens surfaces and, judging by that faint but distinct smell, I'd say the scope has spent some time with a smoker.  But not to worry as i simply unscrewed the lens cell and cleaned up both surfaces so now they are squeaky clean.  Also, no need to fuss about the focuser alignment either as I swapped out the stock focuser for the Moonlite 2.5" jobbie to get a good fully illimunated FOV (just like with the first sample), and during the reassembly, adjusted the position of the casting that bolts into the main tube so that the laser now fires right through the center hole in the paper mask over the lens.  And the reflections in the cheshire eyepiece now fall right on top of each other too.   Took all of a half hour to do all of that.  It's now "up to code".

 

And in DPAC too.  grin.gif

 

Jeff

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • Sample 2, DPAC.jpg


#63 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,217
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 09 October 2020 - 03:51 PM

Regarding replacement focusere - there are advantages to both. I think the Orion has a finder mount while the GSO does not.

Edited by Mitrovarr, 09 October 2020 - 03:52 PM.


#64 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 09 October 2020 - 03:53 PM

Any comments from the OP on the above?

BTW, Orion does sell a focuser upgrade for this scope, and it appears to be the same one in the Ed Ting video:

https://www.telescop...eyword=focusers

Any comments from the OP on the above?    Yes

 

BTW, Orion does sell a focuser upgrade for this scope, and it appears to be the same one in the Ed Ting video.   That is a mechanical upgrade.  It does not allow for a larger fully illiminated FOV over the original, stock focuser.  Save your money.



#65 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 09 October 2020 - 04:24 PM

Regarding the focuser and any replacement.  

 

In the stock focuser, the baffles in the draw tube are the choke points for the light cone, especially with a 2" diagonal.  When I had this second sample apart, I removed them and the fully Illuminated FOV did indeed go up slightly (maybe a couple of mm's) but was then quickly limited by the I.D of the draw tube.  Just about any 2" replacement focuser, Orion, GSO, ML or other make, will have the same "issue", if it is indeed an issue for you.  It is for me.  

 

The 2.5" ML focuser increases the fully illuminated FOV with this scope to a very nice 16-17mm, using my AP 2" diagonal, but it also has the shorter 3" long draw tube, not the 4.5" long draw tube.  This is important.  With this scope, it's important to have the shortest draw tube length you can get away with.  This places the inlet to the focuser draw tube as far back as possible and maximizes your FIFOV for your chosen brand of replacement focuser.  

 

Jeff


  • Diomedes likes this

#66 Diomedes

Diomedes

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 553
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2020
  • Loc: New York City

Posted 09 October 2020 - 04:25 PM

I replaced the original focuser with a moonlite and could not be happier !


Edited by Diomedes, 09 October 2020 - 04:26 PM.


#67 RLK1

RLK1

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 579
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2020

Posted 09 October 2020 - 04:33 PM

Any comments from the OP on the above?    Yes

 

BTW, Orion does sell a focuser upgrade for this scope, and it appears to be the same one in the Ed Ting video.   That is a mechanical upgrade.  It does not allow for a larger fully illiminated FOV over the original, stock focuser.  Save your money.

Ok, so I take it you star tested the 120 full aperture  at 120x and  you're satisfied with the test.

Thanks for the info on the focuser. BTW, Orion tech would not respond on my query regarding the focuser.



#68 tony_spina

tony_spina

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,081
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2004
  • Loc: So. Cal.

Posted 09 October 2020 - 04:45 PM

Regarding replacement focusere - there are advantages to both. I think the Orion has a finder mount while the GSO does not.

True, but with the GSO focuser I can put 2 vixen shoe mounts, one on each side.  Can't do that with the Orion 


  • BFaucett likes this

#69 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,217
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 09 October 2020 - 04:49 PM

The price of the moonlight focuser is, unfortunately, a pretty compelling downside.

#70 tony_spina

tony_spina

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,081
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2004
  • Loc: So. Cal.

Posted 09 October 2020 - 05:06 PM

Regarding the focuser and any replacement.  

 

In the stock focuser, the baffles in the draw tube are the choke points for the light cone, especially with a 2" diagonal.  When I had this second sample apart, I removed them and the fully Illuminated FOV did indeed go up slightly (maybe a couple of mm's) but was then quickly limited by the I.D of the draw tube.  Just about any 2" replacement focuser, Orion, GSO, ML or other make, will have the same "issue", if it is indeed an issue for you.  It is for me.  

 

The 2.5" ML focuser increases the fully illuminated FOV with this scope to a very nice 16-17mm, using my AP 2" diagonal, but it also has the shorter 3" long draw tube, not the 4.5" long draw tube.  This is important.  With this scope, it's important to have the shortest draw tube length you can get away with.  This places the inlet to the focuser draw tube as far back as possible and maximizes your FIFOV for your chosen brand of replacement focuser.  

 

Jeff

Jeff, out of curiosity since I don't have the original focuser,  how much light is the focus tube cutting out? 



#71 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 09 October 2020 - 06:38 PM

Jeff, out of curiosity since I don't have the original focuser,  how much light is the focus tube cutting out? 

Basically, you get full illumination from the entire aperture for maybe only 1-2mm across the very center of the FOV.  As you move laterally across the FOV, the illumination slowly decreases. See page one for some vey approximate numbers for how much it decreases.

 

Jeff



#72 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 09 October 2020 - 06:48 PM

Ok, so I take it you star tested the 120 full aperture  at 120x and  you're satisfied with the test.

Thanks for the info on the focuser. BTW, Orion tech would not respond on my query regarding the focuser.

Well, I was being a smart ash.  My bad.

 

Yes, with mono-vision, that was the max, a 10mm Plossl with a quality 2X barlow..actually, it was a little more than 2X as I slid the eyepiece out of the holder about a half an inch, but who's counting.

 

Now, as I said in my visual write up, with the bino-viewers, I did briefly push the star test magnification out to ~ 165X  and got basically the same result as mono-vision.  Not perfect, but not bad either, good would be a good (HAH) word.  I personally will almost never go above maybe 60-70x with it at full aperture.

 

Jeff



#73 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 09 October 2020 - 06:50 PM

A peak at DPAC with the second sample.  Position the cursor over the image to read the title.

 

More to follow.

 

Jeff

Attached Thumbnails

  • Sample 2, Inside, Null, Outside, Green LED.jpg


#74 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 09 October 2020 - 07:10 PM

Color comparison montages of the two samples.

 

First, inside of focus.

Attached Thumbnails

  • 120ST, ML, W, B, G, R, Inside.jpg
  • Sample 2, Inside, W, B, G, R..jpg


#75 Jeff B

Jeff B

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,157
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2006

Posted 09 October 2020 - 07:12 PM

Next, outside of focus color montages.

Attached Thumbnails

  • 120ST, 80mm, W, B, G, R, Outside.jpg
  • Sample 2, Outside, W, B, G, R..jpg



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