Tal 100 RS Vs Bresser AR127L

[Dave1]

So come on then, lets have your opinions and experience of these two scopes. I am having a hard time choosing between the two.

I understand that both these scopes are good. I know the AR127L will reveal more dimly lit objects in the night sky to me, and reveal more details on planets, because of the larger aperture. I wonder though which one will have worse CA? Which will have better contrast? Ideally this scope will be the only scope I will have for the rest of my life. I wonder if a 2015 Tal is better than a 2015 Bresser? 

I will be mainly viewing the planets, moon, then stars. I do want to learn the constellations, which I'm continuing with my Bino's. I will also try and view the messier objects, but that is really last on my list.

[John]

I've owned them both and the differences are pretty much as you suspect. The TAL shows less CA as it should with it's smaller aperture and slower focal ratio. The Bresser's additional aperture overcomes the additional CA for contrast and resolution. The Bresser needs a somewhat sturdier mount because it's quite a bit longer and heavier.

I don't know if there are any 2015 TAL 100's because I'm not sure they are still being made.

Both good examples of achromatic refractors of their given specifications.

[Dave1]

Thanks for the reply John, I thought you might answer, I have read a lot of your previous comments on both. From a conversation I had with Harrison Telescopes, the Tal 100 RS are currently out of stock in the UK, the next batch of Tal 100 RS, are due in with the importer in September, which to me would indicate they are still being made. Harrison did say he tested 6 tal 100 rs on a machine he has for testing optics, and said there can be differences on there performance, but it is minor. He went on to say that he thought a modern Synta scope is every bit as good optically, but if you went back about 10 years ago then the Tal 100 is definitely the better scope over Chinese refractors.

Now I have read loads of opinions from owners of the Tal 100 RS that would go against the above from observers. This is the dilemma I face.

[nightfisher]

If you want a scope for life, think 100ED as a good contender but a nice TAL will give it a proper run for its money, there is the starwave 102 f11 as a very good scope, as John says, the bresser will need a bit more of a mount

[JED-E3]

If you made a 100mm aperture mask for the Bresser you'd have a 100mm f/12 scope that should show less CA than the Tal 100 RS at f/10. 

I made one for my Bresser 127L and it does clean the view up on Venus and Jupiter and the moon, Saturn doesn't show much CA at full aperture.

Regarding having one of the two scopes as your only scope for good, you might find you want something with a wider field of view to complement it and to use as a travel scope.

James.

[damnut]

Having owned the 127, it was a very nice scope, bought a brace to make a pair of binos and failed!! the hurdle was the £2.7k dual gimballed ep path combiner. Earth Titan bought one of them and his review is here :-- http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/114507-bresser-messier-127mm-achromat/?hl=earth+titan#entry1135918

I thought it was exceptionally well made, great carrying handles, illuminated 8*50 finder and very little ca,

[John]

Thanks for the reply John, I thought you might answer, I have read a lot of your previous comments on both. From a conversation I had with Harrison Telescopes, the Tal 100 RS are currently out of stock in the UK, the next batch of Tal 100 RS, are due in with the importer in September, which to me would indicate they are still being made. Harrison did say he tested 6 tal 100 rs on a machine he has for testing optics, and said there can be differences on there performance, but it is minor. He went on to say that he thought a modern Synta scope is every bit as good optically, but if you went back about 10 years ago then the Tal 100 is definitely the better scope over Chinese refractors.

Now I have read loads of opinions from owners of the Tal 100 RS that would go against the above from observers. This is the dilemma I face.

I think there is variation in the Synta scopes too

Jules suggestion of an ED100 is great - superb scopes as is the ED120 (which I currently have) but thats pushing your budget too far I guess.

[Dave1]

Just got in from Star gazing with the bino's, been teaching myself some more star constellations. Wish I could afford an ED100, even on the secondhand market they are asking £350. 

The way I see things is.

I could get a new Tal 100 RS with Skywatcher EQ5 steel tripod for £475

I could get a new Bresser AR127L with Exos 2 steel tripod for £498

I can get a secondhand Berlebach Report 4072 tripod, a new giro mini wr, and a Tal 100 RS for £522..

I want to try and stay away from EQ mounts if possible because I don't want to bother with the setting up, and I would rather have something intuitive. But that happens to be the most expensive option, unless you guys can recommend an affordable Alt Az mount and tripod. Harrison said in his opinion the AZ4 with steel legs is good with a Tal 100 RS. Both together would cost £404. The maximum load capacity on the AZ 4 is 15 lbs, which worries me slightly, do you think this worry is warranted?

[nightfisher]

I used to have my 100rs on the AZ4, it was pretty good, very good at low to medium power, but i noticed a bit of vibration at higher power, still a good set up, the Bresser would be to much for the AZ

[Stu]

There's a Celestron 100ED on ABS for £285 currently

http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=101158

Bear in mind you will want a mount which is stable at high mag if you are going to be doing mainly lunar and planetary observing. I would suggest at least a 1.75", preferably 2" stainless steel tripod. The AZ4 gets good reviews generally, though I've not used one, not sure how they are at higher powers.

[nightfisher]

Yes that Celestron 100ED would be a good choice, and would work well on the AZ4

[spaceboy]

Personally Dave if you still have the 150PL I would just get a GIRO III and tripod to suit as it will far out perform both the 100RS and Bresser on most nights. You could always sell the EQ3-2 to help fund the change in mount.

[Dave1]

Thanks for the information guys. So do you guys think an 100ED is going to reveal more of the night sky than a AR127l? I have done quite a lot or research, here and other places. I have also read Neil English take on refractors. Yes I am aware an ED will help get rid of some CA, but does it totally get rid of CA? I think as I don't have the experience yet, that the extra aperture of the AR127L is going to reveal more.

No I don't have the SW 150 PL still. I had to sell that at the time for money, as it wasn't getting used as much as I'd like, the mount being an annoying issue. It was only supposed to have been temporary. I sold it in 2011-2012 ish. There has been plenty of moments where I thought, I need to look at getting another telescope, that this time it would be a refractor. Then I searched here learned it had been nearly 5 years..

[Dave1]

I have just thought of another option, I'd be interested to get your guys take on this. What if I was to fit a Giro Mini WR to a Skywatcher Steel tripod? I can get a new SW steel tripod for £92. Would this be a better setup than the Berlebach 4072 and Giro Mini WR? 

[John]

Thanks for the information guys. So do you guys think an 100ED is going to reveal more of the night sky than a AR127l? I have done quite a lot or research, here and other places. I have also read Neil English take on refractors. Yes I am aware an ED will help get rid of some CA, but does it totally get rid of CA? I think as I don't have the experience yet, that the extra aperture of the AR127L is going to reveal more.

No I don't have the SW 150 PL still. I had to sell that at the time for money, as it wasn't getting used as much as I'd like, the mount being an annoying issue. It was only supposed to have been temporary. I sold it in 2011-2012 ish. There has been plenty of moments where I thought, I need to look at getting another telescope, that this time it would be a refractor. Then I searched here learned it had been nearly 5 years..

I've owned an ED100 (one of the original blue tube versions). It shows virtually no CA visually, at least to my eyes, even on bright objects.

I don't think the ED100 would outperform the AR127L (of which I've owned a couple) all round though and I'm not sure that anyone is claiming that. The ED100 will be close on the planets and the moon. The additional aperture of the 127 will show deep sky objects better and will split closer binary stars.

If you don't like CA the ED100's views will seem "nicer" and CA does smear planetary and lunar detail a bit but F/9.4 in an achromat keeps it within tolerable levels for most observers I feel.

If you are looking for a scope to last many years and sustain your interest I think you need some aperture. There is so much more to see in the Universe than our moon and the brighter planets

[Stu]

Dave, I would expect the 2" Steel tripods to be more rigid than that particular Berlebach model. The SW tripods come up used for £50 or £60 every now and then.

One problem you may have with either option is the fact that the Giro-WR is short, and the arm quite short. This can mean you have issue with the scope hitting the tripod when at the zenith, plus it bing awkward to reach the eyepiece or finder.

I've just posted this image in another thread but it's relevant here. I made a narrow extension pillar from Ali tube to solve the issue.

[Dave1]

Thanks for the informative replies guys. Sumorian what scope are you using on your set up above? Do you think it would handle a AR127L with counter balance weights? As the Giro WR is rated to 10kg with counter balance weights. As far as I can tell the Skywatcher steel tripod has 1.75 inch legs, is there more than one version?

[Stu]

Thanks for the informative replies guys. Sumorian what scope are you using on your set up above? Do you think it would handle a AR127L with counter balance weights? As the Giro WR is rated to 10kg with counter balance weights. As far as I can tell the Skywatcher steel tripod has 1.75 inch legs, is there more than one version?

The most I normally have on it is a 120ED either counterweighted or with the Tak FC100 on the other side. It seems to cope with these no problem as long as the balance is correct.

I had the Edge 8" on it last night and it would have been fine if I had bothered to counterweight it properly.

I think the 100ED would be fine, but the 127 is longer and heavier so may be more of a challenge, it's hard to say without trying. I suspect that you may find it takes a little while for vibration to damp out, particularly at high mag.

Another option is a Giro II or III if you can pick one up used, or even and Ercole which are not bad value currently given the weakness of the Euro.

[Dave1]

Thanks Sumorian, I have found both the SW 1.75 and 2.00 inch steel tripods. The 1.75 inch has a load capacity of 30kg. So I have pulled out of the sale of the Berlebach tripod. I could get a Giro III head to go on it, or for £20 more from Germany I can get the SW 1.75 steel tripod with a Skytee. Which would handle either scopes easily and I would think would be a combination that should last me the rest of my life. 

[John]

Wood tripods dampen vibrations better than steel ones. The 2" steel tripods are a quite a bit more sturdy than the 1.75" ones than the 1/4" difference would suggest and are a bit taller too, which helps with refractors

[nightfisher]

if it helps, i use a skytee 2 on a CG5 2" tripod, for when i am doing visual (EQ5 for imaging) and i rather like the skytee, but they are a bit like marmite, you like them or you dont

[F15Rules]

From one Dave to another (:-)), go for the AR127L. Get an EQ5 mount (or one of the altaz options mentioned) and a good 2" steel tripod or build/ buy a wooden one.

I'vd had at least half a dozen Tals and 2 AR127s. I've concluded that (for refractor fans like me), a decent 5" can be a great all around scope ( although I should say that most of us get aperture fever at some point and the pull of viewing DSOs etc has lured many over to the RDS (Reflector Dark Side, lol)..and a lot of amateurs have both. But as an only scope for now, the AR127L can keep you busy for years. I had mine out last night for a good session and was again amazed how good these scopes are for the money.

Mine is completely unchanged, no upgrades etc and I used it with a range if eyepieces from 5mm Burgess/TMB planetary to a 23mm Luminos (really big "hand grenade EPs) to an Explore Scientific 34mm (another big ep) and I was just enthralled for 2 hours til 2am..I viewed among others M13, M57,Mizar, Vega (CA slight and not to me at all an issue,its mag 10 optical companion clear with direct vision in a way the Tal just couldn't do), the Pleiades, and Double Cluster in Perseus, Albireo in Cygnus, (great colour rendition, CA non existent) and some general cruising around the Milky Way (which I could see from my garden for the first time for months), and each view was so pleasing.

I really like Tal100s (and ED100s) but the extra aperture of the AR127 really counts.

In passing I must just mention the ES eyepieces which are relatively new to me- amazing views, amazing edge sharpness and contrast and I've just ordered the Maxvision 20mm to fill a gap. Very impressed.

Good luck Dave, whichever way you go:-)

Dave

[Dave1]

Thanks for even more feedback and information guys, yes I know about the damping difference between wood and steel, thanks for the reminder though. I will probably go with http://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p4537_TS-AZ5-Azimutale-Montierung-mit-Stativ-und-Feinverstellung.html. Which is basically the 1.75" SW steel tripod with skytee mount. I might send an email and see if he will do a deal on changing out the 1.75" for a 2.00" tripod. I will get an AR127L, to go on top of it.  Thanks again for all of your persistence.

[JED-E3]

You might need to budget for a better star diagonal, the one that come with my Bresser was a really poor plastic 1.25" one.

James.

[Starcluster]

Hi Dave, I have a Optic Star 127 mill Refrac mounted on a skytee mount as I am mostly a visual observer. I can say that I have very much enjoyed using this scope and have not regretted buying it. This is the same scope as all the outher branded achromat 127mill refractors , comming from the same factory in China, but costing much less due to OpticStar's own branding. I would agree with some outher comments on this topic that the extra inch aperature is helpfull over the Tal. I have recently made a Baader solar filter for the scope ( see pic) . Cheers Mark.