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

What is the most over rated scope from the 60's and 70's era.

  • Please log in to reply
159 replies to this topic

#76 Kasmos

Kasmos

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,710
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2015
  • Loc: So Cal

Posted 30 April 2021 - 02:24 PM

If you mean by niche companies that put out nothing but top of the line gear I don't think there was anybody in the niche before Roland. Lots of people claimed it but none in my opinion were there. There were times when those companies had the right employees and turned out very good gear, but none were consistent over the lifetimes of their companies.

I personally don't have experience with them, but how about Tele-Vue?


  • Terra Nova likes this

#77 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 22,724
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 30 April 2021 - 07:00 PM

The mount on that scope was not that bad to move around.  It was getting it in and out through the doorway that made it a pain to move.    

I had to do the twist to get the legs out the door.


  • starman876 likes this

#78 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 22,724
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 30 April 2021 - 07:03 PM

Anything by Starliner unless you are one of the chosen lucky ones.

I had them build me a 10" F/8.3 Newt back in 1993 ,one of the last OTA's they made.  It was very good. The 2" shaft mount was like all the others with slop in the clutches at very high powers.



#79 rogue river art

rogue river art

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,618
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2012
  • Loc: Grants Pass,Oregon

Posted 30 April 2021 - 11:14 PM

Yeah, Cave mounts are absolute crap. That is why I could take this with an absolutely stock 1.5" shaft mount and low end 12 year old webcam:

I don't care what you have or other people have,that picture of Jupiter is beautiful.


  • steve t likes this

#80 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,718
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: 39.07°N, 229m AMSL, USA

Posted 01 May 2021 - 12:00 AM

A good percolator makes better coffee than a drip filter machine IMHO. I've actually seen new percolators for sale here and there.

I have three in different sizes. I love percolating coffee!


  • steve t likes this

#81 RichA

RichA

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,599
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Toronto, Canada

Posted 01 May 2021 - 02:50 AM

Dynamax anything.  Runner up is the Edmund Astro-scam, I mean Astro-can,  I mean Astro-trash...ok, I'll get it fright...Astroscan.

Dynamax were never overrated, everyone knew they were bad.



#82 luxo II

luxo II

    Soyuz

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,780
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 01 May 2021 - 03:54 AM

Celestron 8’s - compact, and equipped with a drive, but a horrid compromise re optical and mechanical quality.

Optically most were only so-so, and the mount quivered like a block of jelly thanks to its design based on a Ford front wheel hub, with a hopelessly inadequate axle and alloy castings that were too thin.

#83 bobhen

bobhen

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,238
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2005

Posted 01 May 2021 - 06:27 AM

I can see this might be turning into a Quester thread.

 

IMO, when it comes to a “price/performance value proposition”, the Quester is absolutely overrated.

 

However…

 

Questars are valued for reasons other than on a pure price/performance scale. Questars deliver: portability, an observatory in a box, convenience, the elegance of a beautiful and functional instrument, quality optics, craftsmanship, pride of ownership and many other more intrinsic attributes that Questar owners will, I’m sure, add. And judged on those criterions, Questars are not overrated and are much valued by their happy owners.

 

Back in the day, Questar offered its beautiful compact design as an alternative to the 3 and 4” F15 achromats of the day, which in comparison to the small and compact Q were behemoths. Today, as an alternative to those long FL achromats, the apochromatic refractor, with its versatility and more compact tube, has mitigated Quester’s value proposition.

 

Would I like to own a Questar – you bet! But only if someone left one to me in his or her will. I happen to value other things more than what Questar offers. But many others appreciate what Quester offers as being of value and just right for them.

 

Bob


  • SandyHouTex, Terra Nova, Bomber Bob and 1 other like this

#84 steve t

steve t

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 906
  • Joined: 17 Jun 2009
  • Loc: SW Ohio

Posted 01 May 2021 - 07:44 AM

I have three in different sizes. I love percolating coffee!

The sound of my parent's percolator gurgling away, in the mornings, while we got ready school, brings back memories of my childhoodlol.gif


  • Terra Nova and Bomber Bob like this

#85 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,718
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: 39.07°N, 229m AMSL, USA

Posted 01 May 2021 - 07:46 AM

I can see this might be turning into a Quester thread.

 

IMO, when it comes to a “price/performance value proposition”, the Quester is absolutely overrated.

 

However…

 

Questars are valued for reasons other than on a pure price/performance scale. Questars deliver: portability, an observatory in a box, convenience, the elegance of a beautiful and functional instrument, quality optics, craftsmanship, pride of ownership and many other more intrinsic attributes that Questar owners will, I’m sure, add. And judged on those criterions, Questars are not overrated and are much valued by their happy owners.

 

Back in the day, Questar offered its beautiful compact design as an alternative to the 3 and 4” F15 achromats of the day, which in comparison to the small and compact Q were behemoths. Today, as an alternative to those long FL achromats, the apochromatic refractor, with its versatility and more compact tube, has mitigated Quester’s value proposition.

 

Would I like to own a Questar – you bet! But only if someone left one to me in his or her will. I happen to value other things more than what Questar offers. But many others appreciate what Quester offers as being of value and just right for them.

 

Bob

And many of us happy Questar owners purchased their scopes in the used market, not paying sticker price. A preowned Questar can be had for the same price as a new 90 to 102 mm premium apo and don’t forget, the Questar comes with it’s extremely stable mount and very accurate drive, a solar filter, and a couple of premium eyepieces the premium apo is an OTA.


  • SandyHouTex, steve t, rcwolpert and 3 others like this

#86 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 22,724
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 01 May 2021 - 07:51 AM

And many of us happy Questar owners purchased their scopes in the used market, not paying sticker price. A preowned Questar can be had for the same price as a new 90 to 102 mm premium apo and don’t forget, the Questar comes with it’s extremely stable mount and very accurate drive, a solar filter, and a couple of premium eyepieces the premium apo is an OTA.

I would love to try a Q-3.5 for around $1500 smackers for kicks or just rent one for a month and see what it's all about.



#87 starman876

starman876

    Nihon Seiko

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 23,976
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 01 May 2021 - 08:17 AM

I would love to try a Q-3.5 for around $1500 smackers for kicks or just rent one for a month and see what it's all about.

Everyone here would like a Q for $1500.   If one popped up for $1500 you would have to be very quick to get it.   I have always found it amazing how people bad mouth a scope (not you Chaz) until they show up for a cheap price then they are all over it.


  • steve t, Terra Nova, rcwolpert and 1 other like this

#88 GR1973

GR1973

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 300
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007

Posted 01 May 2021 - 08:41 AM

Apo is not compact and versatile as Questar. It has short f ratio opposite to Questar with long f ratio.

 

In city and suburb skies you need long f ratio for high contrast sky background. 


  • steve t, Terra Nova, rcwolpert and 1 other like this

#89 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,718
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: 39.07°N, 229m AMSL, USA

Posted 01 May 2021 - 08:47 AM

Apo is not compact and versatile as Questar. It has short f ratio opposite to Questar with long f ratio.

 

In city and suburb skies you need long f ratio for high contrast sky background. 

Those are excellent points and I agree. That’s why I think there is room for both. That’s why my Questar and my 101mm F5.4 TV Genesis SDF make such great companions. They play very well together.


  • steve t and rcwolpert like this

#90 Bomber Bob

Bomber Bob

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 19,477
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2013
  • Loc: The Swamp, USA

Posted 01 May 2021 - 08:50 AM

Apo is not compact and versatile as Questar. It has short f ratio opposite to Questar with long f ratio.

 

In city and suburb skies you need long f ratio for high contrast sky background. 

True, but to use that Q for high-power, you're gonna have to have a stable platform -- tripod or pedestal -- rather than the tabletop legs.  IME, a 3" refractor on a decent EQ or AZ is just as capable in the city, and no more of a hassle than a Q + tripod.  And, the frac is almost always the cheaper kit.

 

Questar on Meade 884 Tripod S02.jpg Celestron C-80P S21 - Mizar SP (RS Full).jpg


  • Kasmos and LukaszLu like this

#91 GR1973

GR1973

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 300
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007

Posted 01 May 2021 - 08:51 AM

Sorry, I forgot one more

 

In observing session, sky conditions changes from second to second.

 

I need to go to a higher or lower magnification momentarily. Questar Provide this with it's internal barlow.

 

Apo doesn't.

 

Regards  


  • rcwolpert likes this

#92 davidmcgo

davidmcgo

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,626
  • Joined: 09 Oct 2004
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 01 May 2021 - 09:10 AM

I can see both sides of views on the Astroscan.  I have had 5 and one or two had mirrors that weren’t even close to parabolic where there is a lot of spherical aberration wrecking the image much above 40x.  A couple of others where the secondary attachment to the front window was off by enough to it couldn’t be shimmed, but finally got one a few weeks ago that is collimated after spending a few hours inserting strips of foam through the rear hole with a chop stick until the mirror wasn’t rattling (after a bad attempt on an earlier unit trying to do the remove and replace with the snap ring ended up with a scratched mirror), well corrected, and really sharp.  Can actually see the double double and Porrima with it, and caught the GRS on Jupiter the other morning.

 

The 28mm RKE is a must on these for low power, the eyepiece seems to have been designed specifically the field curvature of the Astroscan so the appearance of the whole field is much better than equivalent Plossls.

 

So like anything mass produced over so many years, we can all have different experiences because quality is variable and manufacturing pressures and backlogs or management drives for more profit can change over a product’s life cycle.

 

Dave
 


  • steve t, Terra Nova and Alex65 like this

#93 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,718
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: 39.07°N, 229m AMSL, USA

Posted 01 May 2021 - 09:53 AM

True, but to use that Q for high-power, you're gonna have to have a stable platform -- tripod or pedestal -- rather than the tabletop legs. 

 

attachicon.gifQuestar on Meade 884 Tripod S02.jpgattachicon.gif

Only a Tri-Stand is more stable than this. (Heavy-duty surveyors tripod + re-purposes classic C8 wedge and self-made adapter plate). In fact I would say my setup IS as stable, and it cost a whole lot less! This is rock steady!

Attached Thumbnails

  • 7C2AA23F-6389-4381-BC04-7E4664609462.jpeg
  • 24AA700A-4838-413C-AFFC-C740A25A4F50.jpeg

Edited by Terra Nova, 01 May 2021 - 09:56 AM.

  • SandyHouTex, steve t, rcwolpert and 3 others like this

#94 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,718
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: 39.07°N, 229m AMSL, USA

Posted 01 May 2021 - 10:03 AM

I can see both sides of views on the Astroscan.  I have had 5 and one or two had mirrors that weren’t even close to parabolic where there is a lot of spherical aberration wrecking the image much above 40x.  A couple of others where the secondary attachment to the front window was off by enough to it couldn’t be shimmed, but finally got one a few weeks ago that is collimated after spending a few hours inserting strips of foam through the rear hole with a chop stick until the mirror wasn’t rattling (after a bad attempt on an earlier unit trying to do the remove and replace with the snap ring ended up with a scratched mirror), well corrected, and really sharp.  Can actually see the double double and Porrima with it, and caught the GRS on Jupiter the other morning.

 

The 28mm RKE is a must on these for low power, the eyepiece seems to have been designed specifically the field curvature of the Astroscan so the appearance of the whole field is much better than equivalent Plossls.

 

So like anything mass produced over so many years, we can all have different experiences because quality is variable and manufacturing pressures and backlogs or management drives for more profit can change over a product’s life cycle.

 

Dave
 

The cute little Astroscan was available for so long and such a good seller that it’s hard to understand why Edmund didn’t make a few quality-control design changes to eliminate these problems and insure better collimation. I’ve never even seen one in person, let alone looked through one. I did like them tho and at times came close to buying one. However, I’ve heard that these cute and nifty little table-top dobs come very close to the Astroscan on its best day.

 

https://www.telescop...60/p/102010.uts


  • Alex65 likes this

#95 starman876

starman876

    Nihon Seiko

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 23,976
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 01 May 2021 - 10:21 AM

I had three astroscans at one time. My kids love to take them camping.  I am down to one now as they never returned two of them.  With all their shortcomings it still is the easiest starsweeper I have ever used and still can show Saturns rings to people. 


  • steve t, mdowns, Terra Nova and 1 other like this

#96 LukaszLu

LukaszLu

    Messenger

  • -----
  • Posts: 489
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2020
  • Loc: Poland

Posted 01 May 2021 - 11:46 AM

Looking from the side: it seems to me that the discussion about the over rating of Questars does not make much sense for a simple reason: the manufacturer has included in - as Bomber Bob put it - "a shoebox" something more than a telescope. It has already been indicated several times in this discussion that there are also prestigious and aesthetic features included in the box, that cannot be objectively rated. For some, they are important and worth any price, and for others, they are of no value. Both have good reasons to defend their arguments, but there is no chance to convince one another, just as there is no point in discussing tastes and preferences. So maybe it's better not to risk that someone will be offended during such a discussion :-)


  • steve t, rcwolpert and Bonco2 like this

#97 Kasmos

Kasmos

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,710
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2015
  • Loc: So Cal

Posted 01 May 2021 - 03:05 PM

True, but to use that Q for high-power, you're gonna have to have a stable platform -- tripod or pedestal -- rather than the tabletop legs.  IME, a 3" refractor on a decent EQ or AZ is just as capable in the city, and no more of a hassle than a Q + tripod.  And, the frac is almost always the cheaper kit.

 

attachicon.gifQuestar on Meade 884 Tripod S02.jpgattachicon.gifCelestron C-80P S21 - Mizar SP (RS Full).jpg

I was thinking the same thing. 

 

I go back and forth on the thought of ever owning one, as they say you can't knock it if you never tried it.

 

On a side note. You really seem to love your C80 as it's been posted and praised quite often lately. I no longer see your list of active scopes but assume you still have some APOs. So why is the C80 getting so much use and no mention of any of the APOs lately?


  • steve t likes this

#98 starman876

starman876

    Nihon Seiko

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 23,976
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 01 May 2021 - 03:17 PM

The Q is a very nice scope that is more beautiful to look at then many scopes. It is the estatics and engineering that went into developing the Q that makes it so different to other simple scopes.  To compare it on how the optics compare to other scopes does not justify what one has when they have a Q.  The Q is an engineering work of art.


Edited by starman876, 01 May 2021 - 03:39 PM.

  • steve t, Terra Nova, rcwolpert and 2 others like this

#99 clamchip

clamchip

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,354
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Seattle

Posted 01 May 2021 - 03:26 PM

I owned  a 1968 Questar standard it was fabulous, so fabulous in fact the thought of

all that magnificence covered in dew was more than I could bear so I sold it.

The best thing was the rotating control box, I really miss that with my plastic maggot, oops I

mean my ETX90.

 

I think most of us classy people don't realize how old the Astroscan is now.

The problems we are seeing with the Astroscan are really age related for the most part.

Collimation of the primary is failing for some amateurs because the foam behind it is decomposing

allowing the mirror to flop around.

Collimation of the optical window/diagonal assy is the ABS structure is being

affected/distorted over time by exposure to UV.

The focuser rubber drive pinion has dried up over the years and is now slipping.

 

Robert


Edited by clamchip, 01 May 2021 - 03:33 PM.

  • steve t, PawPaw and Bonco2 like this

#100 luxo II

luxo II

    Soyuz

  • -----
  • Posts: 3,780
  • Joined: 13 Jan 2017
  • Loc: Sydney, Australia

Posted 01 May 2021 - 11:03 PM

Ah yes... the Tasco scopes... the appalling 4" f/10 on an early EQ mount with spindly wobbly legs... deservedly called "Trashco" here.




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