29 replies to this topic

[ScuseMeWhileIKissTheSky]

Hello All,

 

Getting a little gear hungry after the holidays!  I am looking for a wide field refractor for AP and my priorities are sharpness and round stars across the field (no coma), some vesatility in the FL, and f/5.6 or better.  My current workhorse is the SW120 in my signiture with the .85x reducer.  I love this scope for its clarity, and I think I am pretty much sold on refractors.

 

So... looking at widefield, I started thinking Redcat, but do like the option to add a reducer.  I believe I am between the two scopes below, and hoping for advice.  They seem SO similar, maybe it's negligable.  Also open to additional suggestions in the same-ish FL, aperture, and price range.

 

HPS has the Apertura 75Q including .75x reducer for $1,200.  Gives me 400mm at f/5.4, or 300mm @ f/4.  Nice compliments to my current 900mm @ f/7.5 and 765mm @ f/6.4.

 

or

 

Askar FRA400 for $1,200.  I would have to buy the .7x reducer for another $250, and it gets me a little wider to 280mm @ f/3.9.

 

I'll be using mostly with my APS-C Cooled Camera, but sometimes attach a FF DSLR which I believe would be fine without the reducers.

 

Thoughts?  Other contenders?

 

Thanks all and Clear Skies!  Heading out tonight to my local Bortle 3/4 to freeze my a$$ off cuz I just can't resist some broadband in dark skies!

 

Paul

[maxsid]

"HPS has the Apertura 75Q including .75x reducer for $1,200"

- that's the sale price! Like $750 off.

Very good deal.

 

I have a FRA400 + reducer. Like it very much.

It replaced an AT72EDII doublet and made a huge difference.

[ZX12]

I had the same question a few months ago and decided on the Apertura 75Q because of the included reducer and adapters for visual use.

It also comes with both a D plate and Vixen rail, plus a carry handle.

 

The 75Q turned out to be excellent both visually and photographically. There was a slight image shift when focusing, but it disappeared with an adjustment of the draw tube screws.

 

It switches easily between either configuration, and even with the reducer installed it's sharp to the corners of a Canon APS-C sensor.

There is also a filter thread in the reducer and in the attachment ring if used at F5.4.

 

The only thing it lacks is a carry case, but I found a nice hard case elsewhere that has the correct internal dimensions. 

 

I took this shot of the Veil complex using a Canon 60Da, but recently bought a Player One Poseidon-C Pro that I'm looking forward to trying with the 75Q.

 

Mike

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[TareqPhoto]

I bought my FRA400 with 0.7x reducer long time ago for less than $1200 both and free shipping, i am happy that i can order from China or Chinese sellers, and i am happy with this scope even for very few times i used, i was using 4/3" camera, but i will try to use APS-C with it and see, no plan for FF.

[ScuseMeWhileIKissTheSky]

Thanks to all who have replied so far.  I'm still a bit stuck, but leaning toward the Apertura 75Q simply b/c I can get the reducer included for the same $1,200.  A couple additional thoughts based on your replies:

 

Does the 75Q 0.75x reducer support Full Frame?  I see written specs saying the FRA400 reducer does, but can't verify for the 75Q.  A video says it is "corrected for APS-C sized sensors."

 

Mike, I love your shot of the entire Veil Nebula region!  This is the kind of stuff I want to do with the wide field.  Another target in mind would be M42 with the Horsehead/Flame.

 

Tareq, do you order from AliExpress?  I got my RisingCam through them, but from the "Official RisingCam Store."  Not sure if it's a safe bet from other vendors shipping to USA.

 

Clear Skies!

Paul

[charles.tremblay.darveau]

Have you considered the new SQA85 that just came out? It is a cost premium over the FRA400 but it has much better stars over Full Frame sensor.

[TareqPhoto]

Thanks to all who have replied so far.  I'm still a bit stuck, but leaning toward the Apertura 75Q simply b/c I can get the reducer included for the same $1,200.  A couple additional thoughts based on your replies:

 

Does the 75Q 0.75x reducer support Full Frame?  I see written specs saying the FRA400 reducer does, but can't verify for the 75Q.  A video says it is "corrected for APS-C sized sensors."

 

Mike, I love your shot of the entire Veil Nebula region!  This is the kind of stuff I want to do with the wide field.  Another target in mind would be M42 with the Horsehead/Flame.

 

Tareq, do you order from AliExpress?  I got my RisingCam through them, but from the "Official RisingCam Store."  Not sure if it's a safe bet from other vendors shipping to USA.

 

Clear Skies!

Paul

Hi Paul,

 

Yes, i ordered from AliExpress, and yes, you are right, but sometimes we have to do risks, many don't like to risk, but i was rewarded with many risks so far, also you can always contact sellers, if they reply most likely they are genuine, if they didn't reply at all then avoid, but i ordered my Touptek cameras and telescopes from different sellers and i have them all delivered and i am happy i saved a lot in that, also the thing is that when i order a lot then i got coins and points that will give me great discounts sometimes, i bought a Touptek/Risingcam IMX571 mono for less than $1300 including a filter wheel and LRGB 36mm filters, try to find this camera mono with accessories for less than that and free shipping, to others they are worried of AliExpress, with discounts and offers i will always risk and then ask for refund if it fails.

[JimTheEngineer]

Askar SQA85. Half the price of a Takahashi FSQ85 (in US) with smaller stars. In Japan it’s more expensive than an FSQ85.

Edited by JimTheEngineer, 30 December 2024 - 02:12 AM.

[ScuseMeWhileIKissTheSky]

Thanks for the additional replies.  Oh boy, the Askar SQA85...  Looks incredible, but double the price.  Of course, now I want it!

 

Does that scope have an reducer available?  Couldn't find one after a brief search, and the option to go to 300mm FL is important to me.

 

Paul

[charles.tremblay.darveau]

Thanks for the additional replies. Oh boy, the Askar SQA85... Looks incredible, but double the price. Of course, now I want it!

Does that scope have an reducer available? Couldn't find one after a brief search, and the option to go to 300mm FL is important to me.

Paul

No reducer that I know off, but it’s a flat field astrograph so other solutions on the market may work. It would be pretty limiting for backfocus

[JimTheEngineer]

The SQA55 is 254mm and is only $800. The SQA85 is 408mm and just barely fits Cygnus Loop in the pic above. Stars look nice all the way to the corners of my APS-C sensor. You can also use a full frame sensor to get wider views. Right now you can pre-order a SQA106. Hope they extend this to the 130-150 range with 1-2um star sizes. Using a small pixel camera, you could get a lot of galaxies (maybe with the 585 or 183 on the SQA106).

Edited by JimTheEngineer, 30 December 2024 - 06:35 PM.

[ScuseMeWhileIKissTheSky]

Thanks to all for the comments.  I am pulling the trigger on the Apertura 75Q with reducer from HPS.  It checks the most boxes for me.  I would love the SQA85 but no option to go to 300mm FL and twice the price, I can't swing it atm.  Will report back with images and satisfaction rating 

 

Happy New Year and Happy Imaging!

 

Paul

[NDWUDZ247]

Thanks for the additional replies. Oh boy, the Askar SQA85... Looks incredible, but double the price. Of course, now I want it!

Does that scope have an reducer available? Couldn't find one after a brief search, and the option to go to 300mm FL is important to me.

Paul

I am having the same dilemma regarding the SQA85, including the fact a reducer is not offered....even though I just recently ordered the 75Q w/reducer. I have however returned the 75Q because of cosmetic damaged caused by a faulty part on the scope. The plan is for a replacement to be sent (after declining a $50 discount).

If the SQA85 had a reducer available I'd spring for it since I would essentially have it already halfway paid for with the return of the 75Q 😂

Edited by NDWUDZ247, 10 February 2025 - 12:42 PM.

[NDWUDZ247]

The SQA55 is 254mm and is only $800. The SQA85 is 408mm and just barely fits Cygnus Loop in the pic above. Stars look nice all the way to the corners of my APS-C sensor. You can also use a full frame sensor to get wider views. Right now you can pre-order a SQA106. Hope they extend this to the 130-150 range with 1-2um star sizes. Using a small pixel camera, you could get a lot of galaxies (maybe with the 585 or 183 on the SQA106).

I can vouch for the 585MC Pro for galaxies. It works great on a C8. I just needed a better mount for that combo. Now I have a much better mount and intend to reshoot some galaxies with it.

[charles.tremblay.darveau]

I am having the same dilemma regarding the SQA85, including the fact a reducer is not offered....even though I just recently ordered the 75Q w/reducer. I have however returned the 75Q because of cosmetic damaged caused by a faulty part on the scope. The plan is for a replacement to be sent (after declining a $50 discount).

If the SQA85 had a reducer available I'd spring for it since I would essentially have it already halfway paid for with the return of the 75Q

Anything that is faster than the SQA85 (f/4.8) would probably come with significant trade-offs in the star quality and would not support full frame. The only refractor that I know that is faster and support full frame is the FSQ106.  For that price you can get the SQA85 and a full-frame mono setup.

[NDWUDZ247]

Anything that is faster than the SQA85 (f/4.8) would probably come with significant trade-offs in the star quality and would not support full frame. The only refractor that I know that is faster and support full frame is the FSQ106. For that price you can get the SQA85 and a full-frame mono setup.

Speed isn't a significant factor to me. The 75Q is supposed to support a full frame camera but even that is not of significant importance to me either. I intend to use nothing bigger than APS-C. Although that camera will spend "most" of its time on the C8. The 75Q with the reducer installed comes in at f/4, but that wasn't a deciding factor either. It was the targets fitting on the 585 sensor that was important to me.

[charles.tremblay.darveau]

Speed isn't a significant factor to me. The 75Q is supposed to support a full frame camera but even that is not of significant importance to me either. I intend to use nothing bigger than APS-C. Although that camera will spend "most" of its time on the C8. The 75Q with the reducer installed comes in at f/4, but that wasn't a deciding factor either. It was the targets fitting on the 585 sensor that was important to me.

The you may want to compare the RMS difference in the spot diagram.  For the SQA85 the RMS is under 2.47microns up to full frame. Even if you have a nice fine sampling, the point-point-function of the scope will blur that so the resolution may not be as high as you think. 

[NDWUDZ247]

The you may want to compare the RMS difference in the spot diagram. For the SQA85 the RMS is under 2.47microns up to full frame. Even if you have a nice fine sampling, the point-point-function of the scope will blur that so the resolution may not be as high as you think.

All that stuff is beyond my experience level at this point...lol. Also, keep in mind, I already purchased the 75Q. Which is being used to compliment targets that are a bit more difficult for my C8...i.e. targets will not fit satisfactorily in the FOV. I did initially purchase a SV503 80ED and in and of itself is a great scope. It has a much better build quality than the 75Q but suffers from CA. All in all though it did/does take nice images and provides round stars to this beginner's eyes. Still however it couldn't quite fit M31 in the FOV of the 585MC Pro. The 75Q w/reducer fits it in good enough. If I want a wider FOV I'll throw the 2600MC Pro on it, but most likely won't. I really like the resolution the 585 pulls out.

[NDWUDZ247]

I see the Askar SQA line is now going to have a 70mm added, but doesn't seem to include SD glass but rather ED. Like JimTheEngineer said, I want to see an addition of something in the 130 to 150mm range. I would however like to see image quality of the 85 in the larger objectives and with focal length somewhere between 800 to 980 to use on galaxies or get in tight on certain Nebula for the next month or two.

Unfortunately at this stage after receive the replacement 75Q a few weeks ago I have not had the skies to get first light with it. Unfortunately at this point of the year there really aren't any targets it is going to be useful on from my location. It is SCT (Galaxy season)

[NDWUDZ247]

Ok, I found some test images I took with the 75Q back in February that I thought I lost in a file transfer. They were taken at its native focal length of 405mm with an Antlia quad band filter and a 2600MC Pro. I am well pleased with the optical performance of this scope. I find it to be quite good. I did see the slightest CA in the far edges. Star shapes were a bit elongate in the corners but that could also have been the AVX mount, hard to say for sure.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[NDWUDZ247]

One other thing about the 75Q. It's a petzval design and doesn't require back focus as long as you can achieve focus, and that's it. I however could not achieve focus without spacers on a 2600 or 585MC Pro. So I slapped on 55mm and I could then achieve focus with both...just an FYI.

Edited by NDWUDZ247, 13 April 2025 - 01:33 PM.

[TareqPhoto]

One other thing about the 75Q. It's a petzval design and doesn't require back focus as long as you can achieve focus, and that's it. I however could not achieve focus without spacers on a 2600 or 585MC Pro. So I slapped on 55mm and I could then active focus with both...just an FYI.

The main or important question is, "Are all Petzval-design scopes in the world really nice giving proper shape of stars to the edge" without back focus calculation? 

[NDWUDZ247]

The main or important question is, "Are all Petzval-design scopes in the world really nice giving proper shape of stars to the edge" without back focus calculation?

I have no idea...lol. In my case with the 75Q, there was no calculation of back focus. I simply grabbed the spacers I removed from the camera and put them back on after failing to achieve focus. I did not bother trying a shorter or longer length of spacers. Mainly because 55mm put the focal point almost right in the middle of the 3cm of travel distance the 75Q's focuser has.

[TareqPhoto]

I have no idea...lol. In my case with the 75Q, there was no calculation of back focus. I simply grabbed the spacers I removed from the camera and put them back on after failing to achieve focus. I did not bother trying a shorter or longer length of spacers. Mainly because 55mm put the focal point almost right in the middle of the 3cm of travel distance the 75Q's focuser has.

The results can tell, depends on the sensor size of camera being use with any Petzval scope.

[NDWUDZ247]

The results can tell, depends on the sensor size of camera being use with any Petzval scope.

So what do you think it is in this petzval's case? Considering there is a significant difference between a 585 and 571 sensor, I am curious what your thoughts are as to what the results are.