55 replies to this topic

[Jeff B]

Scott, regarding focuser pinion adjustments on those older AP focusers:

 

https://astro-physic...foc-pin-adj.pdf

 

Pretty straight forward.

 

Nice catch!

 

Jeff

[Scott in NC]

Thanks for finding that, Jeff!

[Markh5]

Hi Scott, I'm happy you're enjoying the scope. And It looks like it went to a good home. I hope you enjoy it for years to come.

 

Mark

[Tyson M]

Somehow it escaped the “new scope” curse, and I was able to observe with it the same night that I bought it. Seeing was below average that night and there was a full Moon, but none of that really bothered me, as I was just happy that the weather was finally warm enough to observe without a jacket. I won’t bore you with my whole observing list, but do want to mention that I got a fantastic view of Jupiter. The only Jovian views that I’ve seen better have been on nights with above average seeing, using larger triplets or a premium Newt. The belts looked like they were etched onto the planetary disc, and I was quite impressed.

The focuser is the traditional AP quality, and even though I prefer dual-speed focusers, for an f/8.5 scope, single-speed was really just fine for me. The only thing that I didn’t like about the focuser was that it would tend to slip when the scope was pointed toward the zenith while using a 2” diagonal and Pentax XW eyepiece, unless I fully tightened the tension knob. I don’t think there’s actually anything wrong with the focuser though, as the movements were very smooth and precise, and the rack appeared to be in perfect shape. I’m reasonably sure that I can tweak it to perfection, but I was too absorbed in observing to worry about that, and that project can await another day.

Today I took the scope out to for some white light solar observing with a Herschel wedge. Never mind the fact that we’re experiencing 30+ mph wind gusts and seeing was poor, I was still treated to some very nice sunspot views with a 22mm Vixen LVW and 27mm Panoptic.

Beautiful scope! Jealous

Those older ap focusers are like that. Mine on my 9" achro would do the same until I tensioned the knob down. Not a big deal but I've certainly used better.

I definitely have a soft spot for the AP120. It would be perfect on my SVM2C mount haha

Edited by Tyson M, 17 March 2025 - 05:41 AM.

[t.r.]

Thanks for the DPAC Scott, always wondered how good these STAR 12 EDs were figured, never saw a DPAC for one…
confirms what I see every time I use mine, typical AP quality for its day! Yours was a steal at the asking price with the accessories included!

[peleuba]

Chas, don’t worry—I didn’t pay anywhere even close to that. And as much as I like it, had it been listed for $4000 then I would have passed. 

 

No, Scott, Chaz was offering to buy it from you at $4k once your ready to sell.

 

[RichA]

4K SCOPE USED.  Never see any pop up.

I got one in the mid-1990s for around $1500.  Was a good refractor, nice views of Saturn at the time.

[saemark30]

No, Scott, Chaz was offering to buy it from you at $4k once your ready to sell.

 

I'd expect people on this forum to pay top dollar.

[Look at the sky 101]

I have several offers for my Star 12, one for $5,000.
No, it's not for sale.

[Scott in NC]

I have several offers for my Star 12, one for $5,000.
No, it's not for sale.

If someone offered me $5000 today (not that anyone would) I might actually have to turn it down. Maybe in a few years, but not today!

[Jeff Morgan]

Nice find Scott!

 

I had one of these scopes for six or seven years, during that time I may have used it more than my 16" Dob. Fantastic performer.

 

Every now and again one pops up in the Classifieds, I always find myself tempted to bite. The one I sold turned up in nearby Tucson - that was super tempting but I held that nostalgic feeling in check. 

 

After purchasing the scope I called AP and spoke with both George and Marge trying to learn more about the history of the scope. Unfortunately, in those early days not many records were kept (at least, not ones they would share with owners LOL). All I really learned was my copy was a late second run scope. Roland also did not make many comments on the UG with respect to the doublets, but there are a few things there.

 

The knowledge, or lack thereof, had no effect on my enjoyment of the scope.

[Jeff B]

"...but I held that nostalgic feeling in check."

 

And that can be a real challenge sometimes.  

[Mike Spooner]

"...but I held that nostalgic feeling in check."

 

And that can be a real challenge sometimes.  

As I get older “The future ain’t what it used to be!”

[Scott in NC]

I had another opportunity to use this fine scope before the clouds rolled in around 9 p.m. Seeing conditions were below average, but that didn’t damper my enjoyment one bit. This Star12 has very nice optics. It helped that prior to observing I tuned up the focuser with a 2.5mm hex wrench so that it no longer slips under a heavy load, yet still focuses quite smoothly. I also dressed it up with a nicer set of rings that I removed from another scope, and added a multi-reticle RDF.

 

Tonight the Trapezium E & F stars were easily visible with a 10mm Ethos (102x), as was the GRS and a wealth of banding on Jupiter. The Jovian moons were all nice discs with 6-8mm eyepieces (128-170x). I looked at quite a few other objects, but these were just some of the highlights. 

[Scott in NC]

[Don W]

So pretty!

[sw196060]

Handsome scope

[Scott99]

Congrats on the new scope!!  Although I no longer have it, the Star12ED is the telescope I've used more than any other.  The light weight makes it useable on the same mount which would hold the typical FS102, while giving you a near 5-inch size apo.  I used mine for years on a Tak Teegul mount/UNI and did the H400 with it.  I loved the length and it sold me on longer f-ratio and now my flagship is f/9 and so is my grab-n-go 100mm. 

 

Not only did it "blow away" my FS102 but it also handily defeated my TEC110, which had sharper images but could not overcome the 10mm advantage of the Star12.  Much more visible on Mars and DSO's. 

 

I only let it go when I acquired its bigger brother the f/8 Star130ED which is even more rare.  It's funny, I had always thought the Star12 was a FPL51 doublet based on something RC posted years ago.  However, I just checked my files, and there's a post where RC said it was the same ED glass as the EDT series which would mean FPL52.

In another post, he mentions the mating element as well, I have that:

 

>>KzF2 or KzFN2 is the traditional short flint material which was used in
the TAK FC series of fluorite doublets (not used in the FS series).
This glass is not available anymore from Schott as far as I know due to
environmental problems. It was quite a nice glass to use, and I used it
in our Star12 series of refractors some 20 years ago. When Meade came
out with their doublets, they used KF3 as the mate, but again this
material is not available any more. KF3 does not produce as good color
correction as KzF2, but it's not bad.

Nowadays, there are a number of glasses that can be used to produce a
doublet, but none of them produce the same high corrections as KzF2.

-RC

[Scott in NC]

Thanks for that info, Scott!

[Scott99]

Thanks for that info, Scott!

I just read my notes again, not sure if he was actually referring to the Star12 ED w/ the EDT glass comment.  I think the Star 12 was FPL51, I just can't find the documentation for it.  Not all the old messages made the transition to groups.io, or they don't show up under the search engine.  At any rate....it doesn't matter 

[Scott in NC]

I just read my notes again, not sure if he was actually referring to the Star12 ED w/ the EDT glass comment.  I think the Star 12 was FPL51, I just can't find the documentation for it.  Not all the old messages made the transition to groups.io, or they don't show up under the search engine.  At any rate....it doesn't matter 

I’d like to know just out of curiosity, but honestly it doesn’t really matter. Roland used the best glass available at the time, and 35 years later I’m really enjoying his craftsmanship.

[Scott99]

I’d like to know just out of curiosity, but honestly it doesn’t really matter. Roland used the best glass available at the time, and 35 years later I’m really enjoying his craftsmanship.

I've got a feeling that even AP does not know exactly what was used...I know the whole time I owned it I was 100% sure it was FPL51.  RC has made some contradictory posts about which ED glass was used in the early 90's in various scopes over the years.

[Wildetelescope]

As I get older “The future ain’t what it used to be!”

As i get older the future begins to look more like the past….  But the old AP scopes remain excellent!

 

JMD

[RichA]

Congrats on the new scope!!  Although I no longer have it, the Star12ED is the telescope I've used more than any other.  The light weight makes it useable on the same mount which would hold the typical FS102, while giving you a near 5-inch size apo.  I used mine for years on a Tak Teegul mount/UNI and did the H400 with it.  I loved the length and it sold me on longer f-ratio and now my flagship is f/9 and so is my grab-n-go 100mm. 

 

Not only did it "blow away" my FS102 but it also handily defeated my TEC110, which had sharper images but could not overcome the 10mm advantage of the Star12.  Much more visible on Mars and DSO's. 

 

I only let it go when I acquired its bigger brother the f/8 Star130ED which is even more rare.  It's funny, I had always thought the Star12 was a FPL51 doublet based on something RC posted years ago.  However, I just checked my files, and there's a post where RC said it was the same ED glass as the EDT series which would mean FPL52.

In another post, he mentions the mating element as well, I have that:

 

>>KzF2 or KzFN2 is the traditional short flint material which was used in
the TAK FC series of fluorite doublets (not used in the FS series).
This glass is not available anymore from Schott as far as I know due to
environmental problems. It was quite a nice glass to use, and I used it
in our Star12 series of refractors some 20 years ago. When Meade came
out with their doublets, they used KF3 as the mate, but again this
material is not available any more. KF3 does not produce as good color
correction as KzF2, but it's not bad.

Nowadays, there are a number of glasses that can be used to produce a
doublet, but none of them produce the same high corrections as KzF2.

-RC

Well, in reality, a lowly 120mm f/8.3 standard achromat will blow away a FS102 on deepsky (I had both scopes at the same time) because it doesn't have much colour and aperture is considerably larger (44%).  But on planets, it's a toss-up on a good night.  The FS views are very pure, no colour error to wash out fine contrasts, but the 120mm kind of makes up  for it by showing a wider "tonal palette" on planets owing to greater light throughput.  If the 120mm were an apo, it would be no-contest.

[CHASLX200]

Well, in reality, a lowly 120mm f/8.3 standard achromat will blow away a FS102 on deepsky (I had both scopes at the same time) because it doesn't have much colour and aperture is considerably larger (44%).  But on planets, it's a toss-up on a good night.  The FS views are very pure, no colour error to wash out fine contrasts, but the 120mm kind of makes up  for it by showing a wider "tonal palette" on planets owing to greater light throughput.  If the 120mm were an apo, it would be no-contest.

My 120mm F/8.3 had way too much color for planets for my taste.