Chris

I put in a cheeky low offer of £135 on the Vixen 80mm f/11.4 refactor before work. Well I say cheeky but if this was any other Synta style 80mm achromat then £135 would be a good price for it. I know the RRP on these is surprisingly high for an Achro, something like £269 which is about double what you'd expect a similar SW or Celestron achromat would cost! From what I can tell from asking Opticron (who are basically Vixen UK) the extra money goes into better QC and a better figure for the glass lens or mirror. Maybe more importantly to me at this precise moment is that the Vixen scope has metal rings! well, plus 910mm focal length wont totally kill the EQ3, but will probably still push it! Anyway, I came back from work expecting a counter offer but they accepted the £135 to my surprise so Vixen A80mf it is for the time being At least I've kept with the long focus achromat theme of the thread! I still want the 102/1350 monster Bresser at some point, but it can wait for now. Someone else can review it in the meantime. I think it will be a better quality prospect than the 90/1200....that was a shame... I would have kept it if it wasn't for that pesky plastic clamshell!

£189 is the buy it now price, I put an offer of £130 in and they countered with £150 so think it would go at £140. ex display not second hand. Other wise they are both made in the Synta factory, but the key difference is that Vixen oversee QC on their version, plus they specify a higher spec mirror which would be noticeable on nights of good seeing. The 130pds is an option, if I bought another it would either be my 3rd or my 4th, I can't remember such is my illness of buying and selling scopes! Is a Crayford a good thing? I prefer R&P if it's a semi decent one

Haha thanks Rob, and not at all, your comments are always very much appreciated I think an 80mm frac would probably be ok because I do have the 6" f/8 Dob for more resolution when the seeing allows. It feels a bit odd having the eq3 sitting around with no OTA I can use with it. I considered buying some rings and a dovetail for the 6" f/8 Dob OTA, so I can use that with the EQ3 (getting motor drives when funds allow), but I think that would be too much for the EQ3 as will the Bresser 102/1350 if I'm honest. The Vixen 130 Newt would a pretty flexible OTA and easy mountable on the EQ3, so will the Vixen 80mm f/11.4 frac. Occasionally I like to image stuff, Moon, planets, and a bit of light hearted DSO imaging, so I do want to get an EQ3 driven mount up and running. Otherwise, I should probably be frugal and just solely have the 6" Dob. It's hard to stop wanting things I find

That makes a lot of sense, John, so I added it to my basket but by the time you add postage it's £53, then it needs a dovetail plus P&P for that so it's going to be about £70. I think I can get the vixen 130 for about £140 delivered with all the extras such as eyepieces and finder, rings and dovetail. It would have a high grade mirror (I checked with Opticron and they Said it's produced in a Synta factory, but Vixen specify a much higher grade mirror than SW or Celestron) Considering the above, what would you do? Or I think I could get the Vixen 80 frac for about 140 too. The reason I think this is I put an offer on the 130 yesterday of 130, and they counter offered 150.

Sensible part of brain says, put an offer on one of these until I can sort out a more heavy duty mount head and the counter weights needed for the Bresseer 102/1350. Fun part of brain still says get the 102/1350 and worry about the mount later http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/252895931488?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/252893971354?_trksid=p2055119.m1438.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT They do look like the good fit for the eq3, and I don't have that much more than the £140 I spent on 90mm f/13 if being sensible., so the 102/1350 might be a bit of a stretch at the moment, hmmm? I could just spend £40 quid on an Astroboot scope for the time being even.

That's a blissful look on your face there, Mike

Still waiting on a reply to emails, I just wantto check they received the Bresser 90mm f/13 back ok, and when they are going to return my money?

Shall we rename the Fun star to the Weird Star then? It's not as we all had hoped, but a worth while experiment and very interesting to see the effects of the very fast spherical mirror!

Thank you for doing this comparison Freestar looks to be on the unusable side of things by the looks of it.

Hi, just a quick update. I sent off two more emails to Bresser yesterday and received a reply today giving me instruction on how to return the scope free of charge. The 90/1200 is now on it's way back to Germany and they said they will refund me when it lands with them. Much appreciated Bresser.de This should give me time to decide on what to exchange it with. The 'fun' part of my brain says order the monster 102/1350, and the logical side of my brain is saying should you mix 1350mm of focal length with an upgraded eq3!? So maybe I'll settle for something shorter and less fun. Any suggestions?

I weigh 63kg, will I do

I might get one of those enormous Dob's for my EQ3

Fingers crossed for first light Shane, that setup looks awesome!

I miss my obsy, built it at my old house by converting a 6x10' shed to have a roof that rolls over a small warm room onto large angle brackets. I really enjoyed the process of building it too! I had plenty of help from SGL Techinically I still have the obsy as we rent the old house out. It's not worth building another one hear as the garden is very small with little in the way of an horizon, so I just have a small 5x3' scope shed to pull kit out of...works with the space available. I know we're going off topic, but maybe you could build something like a fixed pier in the garden with a small shed that rolls off it?

Sounds like good reasoning to me, Rob. I too thought SA would only effect off axis towards the edges, but if this isn't the case then some acceptance of a less than perfect image will definitely be needed. The proof is in the pudding, so looking forward to seeing the pudding...I mean images

Not from my experience, it's purely f/ratio rather than image scale isn't it? If you found a cheap SCT due to a crack/cracks in the corrector for example, maybe you could thinly tape up the cracks to seal them and use the broken corrector to support the secondary holder. Yes this would introduce diff spikes but you could run the wires from the camera along the tape to limit the impact. That's the kind of thing I had in mind. Not that you see that many cheap SCT's with broken correctors for sale, so just thinking out loud really

I'll follow this with interest, maybe there's a chip out there small enough not to be too badly effected by the SA? If it does work ok, it might be worth looking out for spare or repar SCT's with broken corrector plates. This would make for a cheap fast system

Hi John, that makes a lot of sense, it could well have been the case. If so I feel they probably just took it a bit too far. Very interesting info on the C5 verses C8 costs, I had no idea.

I do need to read up on coatings I bit more I feel, thanks for the info

Oh yeah, there is that, erm? probably too late then as you say I've emailed TH the other day, and plan on mentioning this to Steve @FLO.....there we go good end point, they can't ignore the retailers, that is if they agree with me on this? I guess what is acceptable is subjective, I don't think I'm that fussy am I? I would be interested to hear what Steve thinks of a plastic clamshell on a 1200mm long scope?

I've bought a few Bresser products in recent years and have been surprised how good their kit is for the money. I know we're lucky to have such scopes so cheap so don't get me wrong, I'm only complaining within the context of their standards. If I'd purchased the scope from Toys R Us I would have definitely expected this level of finish. The fit and finish of the 90/1200 isn't up to their usual standard in my opinion, or that of similar priced Synta scopes because at least they have mainly metal components. Plastic just doesn't do it for me, it's nothing to do with the price I don't think, I would very happily pay a bit more for a metal clamshell/rings which would be fit for purpose. Bresser make good lenses, from the quick test so far this scope is no exception and put a smile on my face even though i was observing through thin cloud! Interesting stuff, I don't really mind the large back focus, I see the benefit in making the tube a bit more storeable, it's no problem if there isn't any sag I guess. I just don't like the combo of plastic focuser and large back focus, it doesn't strike me as the best combo. If it was metal and strong it might be awesome, binoviewing without a glass path corrector anyone! I think it's a good lens, partly by virtue of it being f/13.3 where a good poly Strehl is more easily achieved. Good suggestion but I think it would be cheaper to swap for the 102/1350 where the errors of this scope seem to already be sorted. I have a good tripod from an HEQ5, and a 16" solid lump of a pier extenstion, I just grabbed the ali tripod for the quick test as it was already setup in that configuration. This is a good idea, thanks Bored = yes, unhappy = some of the time yes, unskilled = As an Ex CNC machinist I can't agree with you there I don't want to come across as ungrateful, I know we live in very good times when it comes to astro kit and scopes. As said, it's mainly the plastic clamshell I would love Bresser to change on these. I don't think it would be a costly change for a big difference to the finish and quality of the scope. I guess I just don't get their thinking behind it. I could ATM it, I've done some ATM over the years, but it would be cheaper to upgrade to their 102/1350, and I do have 3 young kids so my ATM time is short now days!

Hi this is my point really, I had the AR127L for not that much more than this 90L (probably 100 quid more, think I paid 249 or something), and it was utterly great for the money - great lens, sturdy tube with solid metal rings and good metal focuser. When I looked at the 90L it looked proportional price wise, so I expected it to at least have a metal cradle, and kind of thought it would have a metal focuser too. They have basically took the plastic clamshell from their 90/500 and stuck it on their new 90/1200! Now that's just not thinking it through properly if you ask me, it just doesn't feel safe to use! If I keep it I'm going to fork out for rings and a long dovetail...all made of metal! I should have spent the extra 85 quid and gone for the 102/1350 which is much much better made as you've noticed, Derek, same rings and handle as the AR127L and like you say at least as good focuser if not better for not much more at all. My feedback for Bresser is to please put metal rings and a dovetail on such a looong scope, the plastic clamshell might work for the short tube version but not one nearly 3x longer! Please Bresser add the extra cost to the product, if this scope had metal rings and focuser I would happily pay more. If I do that to this scope with third party components it will cost me a fair bit more than the 102/1350 though, so now knowing how plastic this scope is i wish I'd bought the 102/1350 and (again) upgraded my mount head. I already have a steel tripod and a 16" solid pier extension (bought from you Derek )

Yep! Also they are out the office from the 14th...but it's the 13th now so why not answer my question before the 14th? I'm trying a few different people at Bresser email wise, hopefully one will help

Well I've got a response of sorts...I'll try another route! Dear valued customer,I am out of office from April 14th until April 17th 2017. This email will not be forwarded. Thank you for your attention.Best regards

Thanks Paul, yes the Bresser's AR127L is quite some scope for the money, and I think Bresser have some great products, but this 90/1200 isn't up there in my opinion. I totally agree the plastic clam shell is a bad move on a 1200mm scope, others may disagree and they are entitled to their opinion. I hope Bresser answer their emails so I can start the process of sending it back, nothing yet. Their super light weight plastic scope just isn't for me, they should really put this in their marketing specs so folks know! I think I'll change it for a conventionally made scope where the plastic doesn't perish and flex and the scope doesn't come crashing to the ground one day, these are my thoughts too! The Bresser fracs are lovely in their clean white tubes, but the little tikes cars match this particular one in term of plastic