51 replies to this topic

[Chris Lindsay]

C102 = made by Vixen (Japan).  C102HD = made in China.  Also, a Vixen A102sf = made in China, but branded Vixen...

 

The vintage Vixen (JP) refractors are far superior.

From what the AI said corrected image says it's  a  C102-AF . Unless that's some freak show I have not been able to find anything on it.  The first letter is definitely an A though.  IF it's the C102F  that would be fantastic but it doesn't appear to be.

[Polyphemos]

C102 = made by Vixen (Japan).  C102HD = made in China.  Also, a Vixen A102sf = made in China, but branded Vixen...

 

The vintage Vixen (JP) refractors are far superior.

Finding a Vixen made Celestron or Orion scope would be hitting the jackpot, and my own Vixen made C-80 has given me the best views of the moon I have ever had, but given the op’s budget and as a scope to test the waters any C102 or 102AZ, for that matter, isn’t a bad place to start if the price is right.

[Polyphemos]

From what the AI said corrected image says it's  a  C102-AF . Unless that's some freak show I have not been able to find anything on it.  The first letter is definitely an A though.  IF it's the C102F  that would be fantastic but it doesn't appear to be.

An “H” and an “A” can be pretty similar in a fuzzy image, and so can an “F”. If you post the images someone here, probably Bob, will likely know what it is.

[Chris Lindsay]

Here it is don't know if  you can see anything.

 

 

[Polyphemos]

I’ll speculate until someone more knowledge comes along:

 

Judging by the aluminum tripod, Synta style finder shoe, and finish on the focuser, I don’t think it’s made by Vixen.

 

My C80 has the same style mount and once you become familiar with it’s operation it’s perfectly acceptable and better than what most inexpensive scopes come with today.

 

Given it’s high focal ratio it probably gives sharp images but has a limited field of view in comparison to faster scopes.

 

If it’s in good shape, which it looks like it is, and it’s reasonably priced, it’s probably worth trying out. If you grow tired of it you can always resell it as there’s a welcome market for C102 scopes.

[Spinwiz]

I'd highly suggest looking around for something used.

 

That includes thrift stores.   The big problem with thrift stores is that is where the vast majority of junk scopes get dropped when people realize they are total crap.   However I eventually got lucky and nailed an 80mm x 400 GSkyer for $49 which while not a very high end scope is a whole lot better than the department store scopes seen most of the time.   In my mind it is better to invest in good eyepieces at this point than a high end scope as "budget" sucks.   This especially when the skys have been over cast here for months.

 

Other options for used are estate sales and auctions.   You can either get lucky here or end up asking yourself why did I pay so much.   In all cases related to used, inspect the scope before laying down cash!!!

 

As for a refactor, frankly I went this route over a large reflector simply for convenience.   That may be against normal suggestions here, but I wanted Something easy to put in the car and setup for a first scope.   Sure there are lots of disadvantages to a refractor, relatively poor light collecting being a big one.   So I'm not going to argue reflector too much here other than the fact that you can get a lot of scope cheap on the used market and have more flexibility.

 

Frankly when going cheap, which is what I've done so far, brand name isn't a huge factor as long as it isn't department store quality.   Instead keep in mind what you will be doing with the scope and which will best suit your primary interests.   A lot of that comes down to F ratios and aperture.

[LDW47]

C102 = made by Vixen (Japan).  C102HD = made in China.  Also, a Vixen A102sf = made in China, but branded Vixen...

 

The vintage Vixen (JP) refractors are far superior.

The Japanese models like my C80 were top line, the C102HD was reviewed and highly recommended by a respected astronomer, it was kind of a transition scope between Japan / Taiwan / China for a year or two. As I recall it was a 1996 model year. Anyway I found one out on the Canadian east coast, I bought it and it was in a close league with the Japanese models from 1995 and previously as far as build and capability. It had even been upgraded with a Crayford focuser. It was a great scope to look through but I didn't need it so I sold to a fellow astronomer who lived a short distance from me, about a dozen years ago, for what I paid for it, maybe $150 C. Anyone who finds the HD model won't go wrong, IMHO. Just my experience !  PS:  I always wanted the Japanese C102 model but I could never find one up here in Canada, I turned one down in Ottawa for $500 C later I found out that was the selling price for that model, the C80's went for $100 C, lol, eh.

Edited by LDW47, 23 March 2025 - 09:19 PM.

[dnrmilspec]

I'm looking at your former  equipment and you have had some pretty expensive and capable kit.  3 - 8" scopes.  A 12" Dob.  5 and 6" Maks?  Not trying to be contrary but I am concerned that you will be happy with any of the inexpensive achromats that we are discussing. 

 

What made you give up those wonderful scopes?  I see your explanations for selling them but what makes you believe that you could be happy with an ST-80 (ish) scope after owning all of those?  Nothing you are considering will hold a candle to any of them. 

[PJBilotta]

Your best bet for $150 isn't a refractor. For that small price, you can buy just about any used 130mm or 4.5" Newtonian on a basic mount. They are lighter and as sharp as any decent 3-4" refractor, gather more light, and are very portable.

I had an old Celestron/Vixen C-4.5 for many years, and it consistently kicked butt on almost every 90-100mm refractor or Mak I compared it to.

[LDW47]

Your best bet for $150 isn't a refractor. For that small price, you can buy just about any used 130mm or 4.5" Newtonian on a basic mount. They are lighter and as sharp as any decent 3-4" refractor, gather more light, and are very portable.

I had an old Celestron/Vixen C-4.5 for many years, and it consistently kicked butt on almost every 90-100mm refractor or Mak I compared it to.

To kick butt on a decent refractor they must have been top end reflectors from my many comparisons, to each his own I would say. Now I am reflectorless.

[Terra Nova]

Here it is don't know if  you can see anything.

 

  Capture.JPG

Did you get it? If so, how much did you have to pay? It looks to me like a late 90s, Chinese-made C102. Probably an F9.8 achromat. Assuming the objective is in good shape and it’s collimated, add a true 90° prism star diagonal and a two or three Plossl eyepieces (32 or 25mm, 20 or 17mm, a 7.5mm) and maybe a 2X barlow, and you're in business to do some astro viewing. It’s definitely not a bad starter scope. It should be a good introduction to the hobby.

[Chris Lindsay]

I'm looking at your former  equipment and you have had some pretty expensive and capable kit.  3 - 8" scopes.  A 12" Dob.  5 and 6" Maks?  Not trying to be contrary but I am concerned that you will be happy with any of the inexpensive achromats that we are discussing. 

 

What made you give up those wonderful scopes?  I see your explanations for selling them but what makes you believe that you could be happy with an ST-80 (ish) scope after owning all of those?  Nothing you are considering will hold a candle to any of them. 

Had to pay some bills and I'm more about trying different things out. Don't get me wrong I loved the Maks but they were older and wide field not so good.  I had some 20x80 Celestron quite a while ago loved the views.  I'm hoping to get back to that wide field views.  As far as being satisfied I'm know going into it what to expect and I can let my kids handle it an not worry.

 

 

Did you get it? If so, how much did you have to pay? It looks to me like a late 90s, Chinese-made C102. Probably an F9.8 achromat. Assuming the objective is in good shape and it’s collimated, add a true 90° prism star diagonal and a two or three Plossl eyepieces (32 or 25mm, 20 or 17mm, a 7.5mm) and maybe a 2X barlow, and you're in business to do some astro viewing. It’s definitely not a bad starter scope. It should be a good introduction to the hobby.

No they want $250  so out of range.  There is a local CN member that reached out to me with a 102AZ with some small upgrades. He has tube rings and a dia added. I will be heading up to check it out in the next few weeks when I am visiting that area . If it works out it will make it possible for some decent ep.  I'm still looking so who knows but I'm definitely on the refractor path this time. I think I can get pretty good fov. The suggestion was 32mm 50deg   and could get 2.4 TFOV. In this scope if I can find a reasonable ep.  So that's kinda where I want to go on this little journey.

[LDW47]

If you have something come up that fits, grab it quick, real quick or it will be gone in the blink of your eyes.

[Bomber Bob]

Here it is don't know if  you can see anything.

 

  Capture.JPG

C102HD F10...

[LDW47]

C102HD F10...

As I mentioned above the HD that I owned was no slouch, not in the least.

[Chris Lindsay]

They got back to me C102-AZ  F/10 1000mm. He also sent these pictures.   Still thinking the Omni 102AZ.

 

 

[Polyphemos]

They got back to me C102-AZ  F/10 1000mm. He also sent these pictures.   Still thinking the Omni 102AZ.

 

post-50896-0-68918100-1619539618_thumb.jpg

 

post-50896-0-49876700-1619539554_thumb.jpg

This has a better mount and tripod than the 102 AZ. Just because they’re “asking” for $250 doesn’t mean it will sell for that. Negotiate 

[Chris Lindsay]

If it was an HD I would, also it's a F10.  I don't want to dig too deep yet.

[Chris Lindsay]

This has a better mount and tripod than the 102 AZ. Just because they’re “asking” for $250 doesn’t mean it will sell for that. Negotiate 

How would the optics compare C102 VZ. Omni AZ102?  The C102 is made in China, well they both are but wondering if there would be big difference in FOV and optics. Still looking, these two are my options currently.

[John R.]

If the C102 is an f10 then that works out to 1020mm focal length. So, if using 1.25 visual then a 32mm plossl will give a maximum field of about 1.7 degrees at almost 32x. 

The current Celestron Omni XLT is a 102mm x 1000mm and is closest to the C102 (they could very well have the same objective).

The Omni 102 that was sold by Costco is an f6.5 with 660mm FL. With the same 32mm eyepiece it would be at 20x with a 2.5 degree field. 

The XLT only seems to be offered by Celestron bundled with a CG4, manual equatorial mount and tripod for $660. At f10 it would have less false color at the expense of wider fields. Should be better for planets though as you won't need as short an eyepiece for a given magnification.  

Edited by John R., 28 March 2025 - 03:15 PM.

[Polyphemos]

How would the optics compare C102 VZ. Omni AZ102?  The C102 is made in China, well they both are but wondering if there would be big difference in FOV and optics. Still looking, these two are my options currently.

I haven’t looked through a C102 so I wouldn’t know, but being it’s an F10 it will likely have less chromatic aberration and it will certainly have a much smaller field of view.

[Chris Lindsay]

.  

 

If the C102 is an f10 then that works out to 1020mm focal length. So, if using 1.25 visual then a 32mm plossl will give a maximum field of about 1.7 degrees at almost 32x. 

The current Celestron Omni XLT is a 102mm x 1000mm and is closest to the C102 (they could very well have the same objective).

The Omni 102 that was sold by Costco is an f6.5 with 660mm FL. With the same 32mm eyepiece it would be at 20x with a 2.5 degree field. 

The XLT only seems to be offered by Celestron bundled with a CG4, manual equatorial mount and tripod for $660. At f10 it would have less false color at the expense of wider fields. Should be better for planets though as you won't need as short an eyepiece for a given magnification.  

 

Haven't seen too many XLT at all just AZ102 with F/6.5 . With my last 152 MAK i think it was a F/12  so not really any wide field views.  

 

 

I haven’t looked through a C102 so I wouldn’t know, but being it’s an F10 it will likely have less chromatic aberration and it will certainly have a much smaller field of view.

I'm sure there probably little difference in the optics but as far as chromatic aberration I think I can deal with that.  I have seen some optical mask for planetary to get that down so probably have to look into that.  Again no C102HD around here I could find but again trying not to get too dug in with my first refractor.   Appreciate the comments everyone as I'm trying not to rush into this.

Edited by Chris Lindsay, 28 March 2025 - 05:18 PM.

[Chris Lindsay]

I just got back from looking at a LXD75 SN-10 and I think I dodged a bullet.   It's was I'll kept and no eyepieces dead batteries and no finder.  Dust and stuff inside of the optical tube from no eyepiece. I figured the mount would be worth $100 so offered and they refused it.  I don't think they actually used it because they were trying to put the OTA on backwards.   Anyways is there a sweet spot for wide field views but also high power?  I have been going back and forth for few weeks trying not to rush into anything. I'm going to look at an Celestron AZ 102 with tube rings,dia and 26mm ep next week hopefully from previous  post. The thought is the 102 would give me an idea if I want to go down this rabbit hole.  As mentioned before the Celestron C102-AZ  F/10  is still for sale @$200.   Thanks for all the info and insights.

[gnowellsct]

It all depends on what you call a wide field of view. The vixen SD81S is in excellent scope 81 mm f 7.7. It does pretty well on planets particularly in comparison to something like an ST80. But nowhere near the performance of an 8-in Newtonian or SCT.

And it costs over a grand and that's not including the mount. But it does combine the possibility of 4.5° fields of view with the ability to go up to about 160 or 170x magnification.

In the $100 range you're going to be looking at mostly ST80 type things and they're going to deliver wide fields of view but I would expect a planet performance to be inferior to your former Mac.

If the kids like astronomy as you seem to indicate I would suggest a joint family project to get a 6 or 8-in Newtonian where everyone chips in 200 bucks. For the kids this means mowing lawns in the neighborhood. Or washing and waxing cars. That kind of thing.

If the warchest is bigger you will have more choices.

Greg N

Edited by gnowellsct, 18 April 2025 - 08:25 PM.

[gnowellsct]

Yes there are scopes which deliver a full range of performance from about 20x to about 300x. They are 5-in refractors in the f/6 range. Sometimes you can get them as fast as f/ 5.5. They are not cheap and it is anybody's guess what is going to happen to this market since most of them come from China.

There are a lot of meads floating around in the used market most, or at least very many, have bad electronics and Meade is out of business until somebody buys the brand name so I don't think there's much support for the old classics.

In the used market a used Newtonian is a good deal. If you are in a reasonably large city sooner or later someone will put a 6-in criterion up for sale for two or 300 bucks and that would be a humdinger for you. The very simple electronics might still work.

I don't want to put too fine a point on to it But a lot of people who have acquired a lot of equipment are getting older and passing into the great beyond. I've been involved in half a dozen old guy astronomer estates. And a lot of the young guys don't want the old gear it's not fancy enough.

So there are reasonable chances of finding something good on the used market.

Greg N