282 replies to this topic

[imtl]

Question for those with technical knowledge;
What is the difference between APOCHROMAT and SUPERACHROMAT?
.
Vahe

For the visible range which we all are interested in, the difference is small.

[vahe]

https://en.wikipedia...i/Superachromat

 

 

Thanks for your quick reply, I am not in the market for these but very interested in the level of correction achieved in these new refractors.

 

The last sentence in your referenced wikipedia writeup reads;

 

Due to the limited selection of optical glasses and partial dispersion properties, superachromats must be manufactured with costly fluorite glass and to very tight tolerances.

.

Vahe

[SandyHouTex]

And don’t forget the AP190 CS f/6! Very interesting and I wonder how much they will cost.

Good luck on living long enough to get one, or the other.  I wonder if we'll have a lottery, or a decades long waiting list, or some other nonsense.

[Jeff B]

I agree. No one on that list is young anymore (no offense to those on it…), and undoubtedly at or nearing retirement. I’m sure that will change everyone’s calculation on if it’s worth a purchase vs when originally signing up.

And to be blunt, some are probably dead.

 

But still waiting, so don't get your hopes up.

[SandyHouTex]

Here's a novel idea for A-P, why not ramp up production to meet demand.

[CHASLX200]

Just to stir up some controversy with the hallowed AP brand and their nonsensical business morals lets just say its a ludicrous paradigm...let me get this straight now so no misconceptions are floating about; IF I wanted to buy this shiny bauble i'm PROBABLY never EVER going to get it because some poor shlub had the foresight to get on a DECADE(S) long list PLUS i'm going to pay a bloody fortune for the opportunity ??? Got that right ?

Nope not for me...if i have to wait a year, fine, that i can handle, but 5 or 10 or hey maybe its 15YEARS.

I'm laughing me arse off. Hire a cadre of young opticians willing to learn and crank these out at a more reasonable rate as it stands i don't even bother.

Rant Over.

Don't flame me too harshly OR go right ahead i'm bored...


CSS
Lance

2 many other good scopes in the sea to wait 25 years.

[Dean J.]

Here's a novel idea for A-P, why not ramp up production to meet demand.

There’s a lot more people wanting, and able to write a check for, one of the new Ferrari F80s than will actually be invited to purchase one by Ferrari.  It’s a limited production car.  We could try to convince Ferrari to ramp up production to meet demand.  Maybe it’ll work.

 

Just think of Astro-Physics scopes as limited edition luxury items.  They've never mass produced produced their scopes.  THey have produced a fair number of the new Stowaways though... maybe because the production of those scopes is less time intensive.

Edited by Dean J., 06 April 2025 - 07:00 PM.

[gkevinw]

And to be blunt, some are probably dead.

 

But still waiting, so don't get your hopes up.

This is actually been going on an astronomy for quite some time. The famous instrument and telescope maker, Jesse Ramsden (yes, the eyepiece guy, 1735-1800) was notorious for decades long wait times for his instruments. But he was so good that people waited:

 

"Father Giuseppe Piazzi, a Theatine monk in Palermo. Discoverer of the first known asteroid and himself a member of the burgeoning fraternity of failed parallax hunters... His Palermo circle, as it became known, was the brainchild of master craftsman Jesse Ramsden of London. Piazzi had been well aware of Ramsden’s reputation for quality. And for delay... the unfortunate astronomer waited twenty-three years for their Ramsden telescope, which was completed by an assistant after Ramsden died." 

 

From the excellent book 'Parallax: The Race to Measure the Cosmos". Just finished reading it. 

[Jeff B]

Here's a novel idea for A-P, why not ramp up production to meet demand.

And how exactly would you do that Sandy?

[turtle86]

You make good points. It is a bit ridiculous.


Still I want one. Alas I’m not richy rich at the moment and don’t have 30k to plot down for a scope.

 

I want one too but wasn't on the old list so I sure don't like my chances.  Though I benefited from the Stowaway lottery, I do think that AP is doing the right thing by going to the old list for this instead of a lottery.

[Spikey131]

Thanks for your quick reply, I am not in the market for these but very interested in the level of correction achieved in these new refractors.

 

The last sentence in your referenced wikipedia writeup reads;

 

Due to the limited selection of optical glasses and partial dispersion properties, superachromats must be manufactured with costly fluorite glass and to very tight tolerances.

.

Vahe

But the Christen Superachromats are not made with fluorite.

 

Apparently, they are made with something better.

 

Roland, commenting on the CS scopes:

 

”Imaging wise there is no equal, not even Fluorite triplets can produce such high resolution over the entire spectrum.”

[Enyo]

I recall at least 20 years ago or so there was a very vocal person on SAA or Egroups who kept slamming Roland to up production and adopt Meade's business model. In fact he is a frequent poster to this day but has become more moderate. 

 

In almost any hobby or profession there are years long waits for artisan products. AP 's business is not unusual in that sense and is very sustainable for them.

[Lagrange]

But the Christen Superachromats are not made with fluorite.

 

Apparently, they are made with something better.

 

Roland, commenting on the CS scopes:

 

”Imaging wise there is no equal, not even Fluorite triplets can produce such high resolution over the entire spectrum.”

Fluorite glass isn't fluorite because fluorite isn't a glass. Usually "fluorite glass" is referring to fluoro-crown glass or fluorophosphate-crown glass.

 

It's probably less about the fluorite or ED glass element and more about the availability of good mating glass. Based on Abbe number I don't think there is any ED glass better than fluorite, but the difference in Abbe number between fluorite and the best ED glasses is small.

 

It doesn't sound like the lens design itself is particularly unusual, which suggests that the stated performance is probably down to Roland finding an ideal combination of three glass types that enable very high performance out of a standard triplet with narrow air spaces.

[Peter Natscher]

Yes, as I recall, there were not too many made and not for very long, maybe a year or so.  I think that AP got as far as November 1999 on the 155/160 notification list.  

 

Query:  When was the 160 made and sold?  What was the price?

I've got a last run 155EDF produced in 2003.  That was it for the 155's.  A couple of 140EDF runs were produced from the remaining 155 glass that was reduced to 140mm to eliminate the optically unsatisfactory edges on those glass blanks.  I think the ~100 160EDFs were produced during 2004-2006 period. They were listed at around $8k.
 

Edited by Peter Natscher, 06 April 2025 - 08:35 PM.

[Dean J.]

The 155 notification list goes back to 1999, according to Astro-Physics, so who got the 155EDF's made in 2003?

The people who signed up in 1998.

[Heywood]

The people who signed up in 1998.

 

My apologies!!  After I posted my question, I realized it made no sense.  LOL.  Sigh.  It's been a long day.  I just now got the chance to get back here to delete it.

Edited by Heywood, 06 April 2025 - 09:23 PM.

[Marcelofig]

There’s a lot more people wanting, and able to write a check for, one of the new Ferrari F80s than will actually be invited to purchase one by Ferrari.  It’s a limited production car.  We could try to convince Ferrari to ramp up production to meet demand.  Maybe it’ll work.

 

Just think of Astro-Physics scopes as limited edition luxury items.  They've never mass produced produced their scopes.  THey have produced a fair number of the new Stowaways though... maybe because the production of those scopes is less time intensive.

I like the analogy of AP telescopes as fine musical instruments handcrafted by the most prestigious of craftsmen. He makes only a few a year, more concerned with quality than quantity.

[Dean J.]

My apologies!!  After I posted my question, I realized it made no sense.  LOL.  Sigh.  It's been a long day.  I just now got the chance to get back here to delete it.

Too late.  

 

Back in the old days there weren’t very many options if you wanted an imaging refractor.  The Tak. FCT-150 was even more expensive than buying a used AP 155.  Some were using the FS-128 or FS-152.  The FSQ-106 was just out and I wish that I had saved myself some trouble and had bought one 20 years ago.  I have one now though.  I just bought reflectors and went about my business. 
 

Now I have a super nice TEC 140FL.  So I won’t die if Roland doesn’t make enough new 155s to get to me.

Edited by Dean J., 06 April 2025 - 11:36 PM.

[nicknacknock]

Dear all,

 

Some words of advice:

 

1. Don't post aggressively just for the sake of it. Make reasoned arguments that comply with the basics of the TOS and your responses will stay, otherwise, as moderator, I will make everything that is non TOS compliant disappear. You can't win this game, and admins may get involved, which means the consequences may be more severe.

 

2. I do NOT like RC for some specific reasons. But it does not mean I have to bash the man or his business model. All of you, accept that he builds scopes just for fun, as the mounts business is his main business model. You can either wait in line to buy new, or buy pre-owned where available. But berating the man for making and selling scopes at his own pace is pointless. Supply and demand. You want it, wait. You don't, buy something else. 

 

3. Post in a topic if you have something to say which is TOS compliant. Can't do that? Go someplace else / avoid this topic.

 

 

I am posting this here, because I am sure I will have to intervene again, just so that we are all clear on how we proceed from now, as AP topics and supply and demand is always a hot topic.

 

Thank you all.

[Jay_Reynolds_Freeman]

My personal policy about acquiring Astro-Physics equipment has been to sign up for everything as soon as possible, wait and see how I and my bank account feel about a purchase when and if I get the opportunity to make one, and make good use of other equipment in the meantime. I started doing that at approximately the time Astro-Physics started using wait lists, and have continued with their lottery mechanism. So far -- knock on wood -- I have had good luck. I say this not to boast about my good fortune, but to suggest to those who fear they will never be able to afford such a purchase, or will not live long enough to be notified, that it doesn't hurt to be optimistic, and that pessimism in this matter is not likely to get you a telescope.

 

Clear sky ...

[bobhen]

Here's a novel idea for A-P, why not ramp up production to meet demand.

Maybe you would like to express those same sentiments to Ferrari or Porsche, etc. 

 

Ferrari and Porsche, etc. are not Toyota or Ford. They have different business models in the same way that AP is not Synta and those two companies also have different business models.

 

It's just not that easy to ramp up production. You have to find very highly qualified people in this specialized field (not easy), train them (expensive) and pay them a really good wage to keep them (expensive). And then, if the very small, high-quality and expensive telescope market falls, you have to let them go and watch all that money and time you spent walk out the door.    

 

The last time I looked, TEC and CFF also had long waiting periods. There are plenty of off-the-shelf telescopes to order. And if anyone really wants an AP telescope, just place an ad in the classifieds and I'm sure you will get one.

 

Bob

[nicknacknock]

Just to get this out of the way re supply and demand:

 

The vendor, produces as much as they want, as they feel, when they are not sensitive to demand or to needing extra bucks. As RC has stated over and over again over the years, he just does this to please himself and has no interest in making it into a production line a-la Ford or whatever.

 

Therefore, please let's set aside the issue of why RC does not produces scopes at an insane rate and stay on topic which is the specific scope and discussions only on the specific scope.

[Jay_Reynolds_Freeman]

I am curious how the interest in the 155CS will split between imaging and visual use. There are plenty of images around that testify that Astro-Physics telescopes make great cameras, but there are a lot of folks -- including me -- who use them solely for visual work. (We don't get much press because we don't post pretty pictures.) It has been a while since Astro-Physics has produced anything with more aperture than 130 mm, and at f/6, the 155CS should be very portable, easy to set up, and would not tax a Losmandy G-11 or even a lighter mount.

 

 Any thoughts?

 

Clear sky ...

[Enyo]

For me it will be visual only assuming he makes enough to get to my spot on the list (mid January 2000). I did dabble with imaging in the early 00's and decided I would just enjoy the photos of those who take it to the high levels. If I get a 155 at some point I will need to decide if I should keep my AP130 I got in 1999. Time and age will tell.

[drprovi57]

For me it will be visual only assuming he makes enough to get to my spot on the list (mid January 2000). I did dabble with imaging in the early 00's and decided I would just enjoy the photos of those who take it to the high levels. If I get a 155 at some point I will need to decide if I should keep my AP130 I got in 1999. Time and age will tell.

The AP 155CS appears to have been "tuned" for imaging and less for visual (my personal assumption only), similar to the CFF200 f/6.5 APO (I own serial number #01).  These large and relatively fast APO's perform extremely well imaging, however, I have noticed the color correction at high-power during visual work is "interesting".  Also note these large APO's come with dedicated field correctors - these add additional optics to further fine-tune and control aberrations/color.  One reason I added an CFF230 f/9 as a "super planetary" APO scope - when comparing (no field corrector involved) the CFF200 f/6 with the CFF230 f/9 you can see the difference at high power and under good seeing.  Pal Gyulai (CFF Head Optical Designer of refractive optics) has an excellent write-up on designing "large and fast" APO's - https://cfftelescope.../optical-design.  Even though the AP 155CS is air-spaced and the CFF APO's are oil-spaced, the design concepts are similar.  I suspect Rolland was able to "push the envelope" on focal length to f/6 using the extra degrees of freedom of additional air-spaced design combined with ED glass.  I plan to add my name to the AP 190CS list, and if its a lottery and I am fortunate to acquire such a scope - it would make to be a fun companion with the CFF200 f/6 APO.  I would plan to keep the better performing scope - focused on imaging and visual