John

1 hour ago, At dusk said:

......They outperform my zoom nagler 3-6 in contrast and light scatter. 

 

Similar to the Fujiyama and Astro Hutech orthos then. Thanks.

Lovely set.

The Tak Abbe Orthos have been interesting to me since their launch. All the reports I've read on them suggest that they are either the same (optically) or very very similar to the Fujiyama and Astro Hutech abbe orthos including their performance. Is that a reasonable conclusion ?

1 hour ago, Charic said:

..... That said, I'm lead to  believe there would be a marked difference between the image sharpness across the field  if used  on a faster non tracking telescope ( this was my intention, to get a faster, larger 10" or 12" scope, but the EP's came first )  but for now ( when I have a chance ) I'll  just see a wider field of view.

I don't know if there will be a difference that will matter to you Charic in all honesty.

The noticable differences, if there, will be in the outer 20% of the field of view, maybe further out than that. The majority of eyepieces work pretty well in the central part of the field of view, close to the central optical axis of the scope.

Your search for marked differences may well be in vain.

Interesting how many of the cases in this thread are heavily populated by Tele Vue eyepieces. Not all, but very many of them.

Seems a good plan Derek

Great collection Derek

I've moved on my Radians now though. I liked them (4mm and 3mm) but noticed that the XW's were better each time I swapped between them and I found that I was starting to avoid using the Radians.

They are very good eyepieces though for what you pay for them on the used market.

8 minutes ago, iPeace said:

That's good enough for me . Are the barrel extensions themselves by TeleVue, or another brand?

Baader 28mm Fine Tuning Rings. Less expensive than TV barrel extensions but they do exactly the same job and are threaded for 2" filters, which is the main point of having them on there for me.

17 minutes ago, iPeace said:

Thanks - I've started using a barrel extender on the 8mm Ethos, and will probably get another for the 6mm. I notice you use them on these Ethos EPs as well, along with 2" caps. Do you keep the 1.25" caps on them when not in use? I can't get to the 1.25" cap in order to remove it with the barrel extender on (not extremely fat fingers, but there you have it), so that requires removing the extender, etc. Not using the 1.25" cap in favour of relying on the extender/2" cap combination to keep that end of the eyepiece protected in the case would seem adequate; the only thing I can think of is fine matter entering through the notch in the bottom of the EP's own 2" barrel and sloshing around inside the extender until it found its mark...

I've got a set of 2" caps (non-TV mostly) which I use on the 2" barrel extensions. I've not had a problem with stuff getting in through the little notch and onto the lower lenses. My eyepieces are kept in the case and capped unless they are in a scope though.

Lovely set

Great report Dave !

I've read lots of reports on these 152mm F/5.9 scopes since they were introduced - I think Ed Tings was the 1st but there have been a fair few more.

It sounds like the Altair branded version is just as good as the others and they almost universally get very postive feedback.

Nice scope !

8 minutes ago, AstroAdam said:

I bought one of Stu's TALs last week, and have to say I'm really impressed. I'm really enjoying it the pin sharp views and am glad I grabbed it when I did going by the availability forecast!  

I also have a Starwave 102ED, which is excellent but only f/7. The f/10 of the TAL really makes a big difference, and I can't say the CA is an issue at all for me.  Not noticeable in most situations. Maybe I'm just not very sensitive to it...!

Does the TAL 100 show less CA than the 102 ED F/7 ?

I'd be suprised if it did. Even the most basic ED glass (FPL-51 or equivalent) paired with a suitable mating element should show around 75% less CA than a crown / flint achromat of the same specs. Even allowing for the focal ratio difference I'd expect an ED102 F/7 to beat a 100mm F/10 achromat on that aspect.

2 hours ago, spaceboy said:

.... TAL are not immune from QC issues either....

Thats an understatement !

One thing that I've found with scopes that range from F/5.3 to F/7.5 is that gaps in the medium to longer focal length eyepiece range are quite Ok but I do like to "crowd" the focal lengths below 8mm to have a number of high power options.

For example I find the step from a 21mm Ethos to a 13mm Ethos quite natural. I did have a 17mm Ethos for a short while and it was a lovely eyepiece but I could see straightaway that it would not get a lot of use because I'd simply "step over" it and go straight to the 13mm most of the time.

It's only really by trying different combinations that you find this sort of thing out though and I can see that others with longer focal length scopes and maybe different viewing priorities might make different choices.

I've recently owned one of the Skywatcher refractor crayford focusers as well and it was a pretty good focuser. I used it on a 150mm F/8 Skywatcher. The only thing you need to bear in mind is that it does not come with an integral finder shoe like the stock focuser has.

Thats v.nice Stu - whats the aperture ?

Mine have changed a bit since I last posted here.

Box 1 is a Tele Vue collection: 31mm Nagler, 21mm, 13mm, 8mm, 6mm and 4.7mm Ethos and the 2mm-4mm Nagler zoom. My 2" Lumicon O-III and Omega DGM NBP filters are in there as well.

Box 2 is a short FL Pentax set: 10mm, 7mm, 5mm and 3.5mm Pentax XW's.

Box 3 is my "outreach" set: 24mm Maxvision 68, 12mm Pentax XF, 6.7mm Meade 4000 UWA. All chosen as being relatively low cost, decent performers and, importantly, easy to look through.

I was wondering if I would sell my 31 Nagler when I got the 21 Ethos but the Nagler does things that the Ethos can't (like show the whole of the Veil with some room to spare) so I've kept it and I'm glad I did.

If yours is not getting any use though it might as well go somewhere where it will get used.

What a nice selection Piero

(can't believe that this long running thread had slipped to the 3rd page of this section !)

I'm 100% confident in the ability of everyone on this forum to excercise restraint and common sense, as we always do.

1 minute ago, Davey-T said:

Yes John, don't want to have to report you to the mods for encouraging folk to get into debt

Dave

I'm not encouraging anyone to do anything .........

Some lovely refractors in this thread

And of course true frac fans will not have missed a certain scope that has been listed on e.bay today (not by me)

Great review Matthew !

I thought about one of these when I had my 6" F/12 Istar refractor. Unfortunately the mount costs about 50% more than the scope had cost me and my budget would not stretch that far.

I wonder how the Maxload would compare with the new Losmandy AZ8 alt-az mount ?:

http://www.losmandy.com/AZ8.html

It looks like the Maxload has a higher weight capacity for a starter.

What a great setup

I've seen a few T-Rex mounts but I've never had the pleasure of using one. A real "Rolls Royce" alt-azimuth !

11 minutes ago, Alan64 said:

I read somewhere, recently, someone saying not to let Sky-Watcher know just how wonderful the 100ED really is.

I've owned a couple of the Synta ED80's, one of the early ED100's and currently an ED120 and they have optically all been really good scopes. The glass used in the objective lenses is Japanese apparently and it's rumoured that Vixen were involved in the optical design. There may be something in that because a little while back Vixen included 80mm and 100mm ED doublets in their range that were basically re-branded versions of the Skywatcher / Synta ED80 and ED100.

I guess the TAL 100's will develop a sort of legendary / mythical status if they no longer available 

Having owned a couple (I've still got one in a cupboard somewhere) I think they are good 4" F/10 achromats. Probably optically a bit better than most of the chinese 4" F/10's and very similar in performance to the Japanese Vixen SP102's (one of which I owned before I got my 1st TAL 100). For the original cost and current used costs, good buys. If their price rockets then they won't make so much sense IMHO.

The reviews I've read comparing the 102mm F/11 achromats (such as the Lyra Optical one) seem to show that the F/11's are slightly better in optical performance and the build is nicer. You pay somewhat more for the F/11's though.