Sunshine

A beautiful image,  the electric blue is just eye candy!

On 28/10/2021 at 08:30, Telescope40 said:

Hello all. Been a very good boy these last few months with a complete lack of purchasing. 
However - fancied this kit for my Stellarvue 102frac. Already had Primaluce tube rings on my SW 150.  Think it’s quality kit. 
From FLO and Widescreen Centre. 
105 tube rings and Stellamira handle. Already had the Primaluce dovetail bar. Does nothing to look thru the scope but a bit of bling is good on the eye. 
John 

A beautiful OTA, those rings are smashing!

Welcome to the forum! have fun looking around and enjoying SGL.

24 minutes ago, Rich1980 said:

Technically just before night but waiting for it. 

Now you've done it, the moderators are dispatching the SGL henchmen, HIDE!

It seems I have the opportunity to purchase an 8SE mount/tripod, this made me wonder about mounting a Lunt LS60 on it for tracking/imaging purposes. Has anyone used this mount for H-alpha? I figure I would have it as a dedicated mount for solar, would there by any reason why I shouldn’t consider this mount? It seems like a good choice for a solar scope unless I am missing something.

This is interesting as I have seen this brand on Amazon but avoided them like the plague (figured they were junk) but it seems I may have been wrong and they have some winners.

These are some wonderfully sharp and contrasted images, beautiful!

It is clearly there, nice first go!

oh you mean they cancelled the supernova for fear of gathering crowds?  this Covid thing is getting out of hand!

Nice report! pizza, wine and observing, that sounds like a proper session to me.

On 01/11/2011 at 07:02, rightguard said:

This.

Also remember that in astronomy, no matter what those 'frac guys tell you.. aperture is king

An 8 inch dob will blow away a 5 or 6 inch newt or 'frac, EVERYTIME.

This may be true but I won’t trade my 4” frac for an 8” dob, I’ll gladly buy one  but trade, nope, uh uh no way. There’s something about how stars look in a good refractor. Having said that, I am waiting for an 8” Orion dob 😂

Nice report, next time have a look at the Owl cluster, I too was in the exact same region last night, the double cluster is just wonderful and the owl is striking too.

I would rather have Brian Cox throw fluff at me than end up catatonic with the endless stream of reality garbage on every channel.

This is great, so often we see just Jupiter and maybe a token moon, seeing them in a wide image is always great!

This is a stupendous image! the detail and contrast is simply beautiful.

This is the Ion canon from Star Wars! amazing rig.

A wonderful cluster image, thanks for the info!

Welcome to SGL!

Not when Elon musk says so.

Those manufacturers numbers assume absolute ideal conditions which chances are you’ll never encounter, there are so many variables involved it can be dizzying. Accessories, temperature, collimation, seeing conditions, stray light, optical quality (not all scopes of a given aperture and design are equals) etc. Sometimes I can use 70x per inch while the very next night I struggle with 30 on the same object.

Beautiful, look at all those stars!

A beautiful image!

36 minutes ago, Dr Strange said:

I did a comparison between the ES AR 152 and the APO 127 FCD1 CF. 

My experience with these two scopes from a non-scientific/engineering (even though I was an engineer before I was shoved kicking and screaming into administration) merits standpoint since I see questions come up on line all the time asking which is better to get a 5" Apo or 6" Achro that many times end up in "discussions" about very esoteric and complex subjects like unobstructed vs. obstructed systems, Japanese FPL-53 vs. Chinese FPL-51 glass, Modulation Transfer Function, Schlieren tests, and times to reach thermal equilibrium between reflectors and refractors. 

For the record I will so stipulate that the best value for dollars spent will always be with a reflector like a Newt or Dob. You just can't beat the light gathering ability of these platforms at their given price point. While many times I will publicly profess that “Mirrors are for shaving!” I do also own reflectors. And the views from them are amazing as well as stomp all over my refractor’s on small targets and planets when they are properly cooled down. I still love my refractors though…

Please note when I quote sizes of objects that is the size it looked to me. It may not have been that actual size were one to measure it in the EP but I am writing this from the working schlub perspective not a scientific/engineering accurate to the 5th decimal point one.

The problem I was trying to solve was that I wanted something I could use on nights (like when I had to be up at 0530 the next morning for work) when I wanted to take a quick view of whatever might have been up and visible but would still give me views that were comparable (or better) to  a 203mm reflector from my Bortle 8/9 Light Polluted front driveway skies. This would mean that I wanted to be observing in under 15 minutes start to finish of shlepping gear out, leveling the mount, balancing the OTA, and aligning.

At the time based on the views I was getting out of my 102mm ES ED Apo FCD1 refractor I knew that a larger 127-152mm refractor was the best choice for me. However at the time of this shootout my budget of under $2,500 USD eliminated pretty much everything in the high end refractor range like Takahashi, AstroPhysics, Tec, and the like. This left Canadian Telescopes, Explore Scientific, Meade, Celestron, and Orion.

My next criteria took all but Canadian Telescopes and ES out of the mix. That criteria being I didn't want something that looked like it came off of the Battleship Missouri's gun deck in terms of size and I could use for AP if I wanted to aka a "short fast tube".

Because of my breath taking experiences (and by that I actually mean gasping out loud) viewing with the 102 ED, the great customer service experiences I have had with them, their attention to detail, quality, and because the ES line comes with a 2" diagonal, dual speed focuser, Vixen dovetail bar, illuminated cross hair finder scope, and scope rings included I decided that I would stay with that line.

Again for the record CT, Celestron, Meade, and Orion make great OTA's but with them I would have had to purchase much if not all the kit that came with the ES line as extra's so value for money for me really was in the ES line.

This had me looking at the ES AR 152, 127 ED, and 127 ED Carbon Fiber OTA's as my choices. I picked these because I could mount them easily on a mount that wouldn’t break the bank for that quick nights viewing.

I was very fortunate in that Farrah from Woodland Hills Telescope and Camera was kind enough to offer me the use of an AR 152 and an 127 ED to see which one I liked viewing from better then purchase the one I decided to stay with.

Down to brass tacks. What I saw and what I used.

My targets for the comparison were Mars, Saturn, Spica, Messier 31 (Andromeda Galaxy), and Messier 5 globular cluster. I picked these because they all were moderately low on the West facing horizon for me so I wouldn't have to be laying down to see them based on where the mount I was using would place the EP, they would provide a fair diversity of objects to look at combining planets, bright DSO's, and bright point light sources (stars). Lastly they would provide "messy" air and light pollution conditions to best reflect what I would be seeing on an average night out. By the way I picked “work nights” because my primary use for this was going to be the times when I didn't want to bring out or had time to cool off a reflector.

Setup time for each OTA was under 15 minutes including setup of the tripod, getting it pointed North, getting the OTA balanced, getting the OTA level, and alignment. The mount was a Celestron Advanced VX mount. 

The EP's used were the Celestron 40mm 1 1/4", the ES 82 degree 14mm, 11mm, 8.8mm and 4.7mm line.

First up, the ES AR152.

It wasn't anywhere close to the monster I thought it was going to be in terms of size and it was very manageable to mount and balance which surprised me. After hearing stories about this size of OTA I was expecting something much bigger than it was. As has been true for me and reported by others the ES folks check their gear before it goes out the door and this OTA was no exception. After balancing it I popped in the 40mm and pointed it towards a radio/microwave tower that was a good 45 km from me on top of a mountain and it was in perfect focus right out of the box! The mount I was using handled the large OTA with zero issue and it didn't' feel to me like it weighed 10.5 like it says it does.

Side Note: I didn't (and rarely do) use the included finder scope on either OTA. With that 40mm and doing a gunsight aiming I can pretty quickly get the alignment stars in the FOV so I find the extra step of the finder scope alignment useless.

A word about the dreaded purple haze aka Chromatic Aberration (CA) that everyone tends to bring up when talking about Achro's. In the case of the ES AR152 at a relatively fast f/6.5 it was barely there at all. The only time it was really noticeable was during alignment where I saw it on Arcturus and on Spica. The purple halo was there but it wasn't annoyingly bright and I would expect that a filter designed for Achro's would take care of it rather handily. Of note I did not see any of it on Saturn or Mars and saw it very faintly on Spica which really surprised me and reaffirmed my belief that ES makes darn fine quality scopes.

Based on the EP's listed and the 988mm focal length of the OTA divided by EP mm I was going from 24.7 magnification with the 40mm to a mid range of 70.57-89.81 with the 14 and 11mm's to the 112.27-210.21 range in the 8.8 and 4.7mm EP's.

Saturn in the 40mm was a bright yellow spec of light and I could just make out the rings with no detail. At 14 and 11mm it was a clearly defined crisp bright yellow and muddy yellow planet. No CA at all and not much difference in sizing. Jumping to the 8.8 it jumped up in apparent size with more detail visible keeping the same clarity and crispness of view and color. Though I was starting to see it "wiggle" a bit from atmospheric disturbance. At 4.7mm it got the overall best views. It was somewhat dimmer but with good detail accounting for those moments when atmosphere settles down and was stunning to look at. I could see bands of color and the Cassini divide was very clearly present. It presented on a dark black background and two moons were clearly visible. Again no CA at all.

Mars was… Well it was Mars. That means that at 40mm it was a spec of dust. Clearly orange but still a spec. At 14 and 11 it was a bigger spec of dust. At 8.8 it started to look like a planet and at 4.7 was still small but very clearly orange with some hints of the black/brown mountain regions. Still no CA.

Spica was… A star. A bright one and with a bit of CA to it but not too annoying or distracting at all. Again a filter would knock this down without problem I am sure. It had good clarity and while I had to focus each time I changed EP's the focuser worked very well giving good views.

On to M5. In the 40mm it was a very faint puff of smoke with no definition or details. In the 14 and 11 it was a defined puff of smoke with some hints of individual stars with averted vision. There was little difference between the 8.8 and 4.7mm with it being “bigger” in size and more hints of stars when looking directly at it. It was still faint but not as faint as before and clearly visible and noticeable.

I finished off by hunting for M31 the Andromeda Galaxy. I started with the 40mm but didn't see anything. The LP was just too strong. I didn't start to see anything even with averted vision until I plopped in the 11mm and only then I was able to catch it as a very faint puff with averted vision. It didn't become apparent until I was up to 4.7 and then it was still a very undefined puff of smoke. 

The ES 127 ED CF FCD1 glass scope.

I didn't notice much weight difference between the two and including the CF one. None of them were all that heavy though there is a 2.5kg difference between the 152 at 10.5 lbs and the CF at 8.1 kg. It mounted up quickly and with the removable dew shield it did make for a smaller feeling scope. Once again the Pro's From Dover at ES really showed their stuff. Looking at the same mountain top antenna gave brilliant views though since I do like the removable dew shield and metal lens cap on this OTA better than the plastic one and non-removable one on the 152.

Since this was an Apo there was zero CA at all on anything. And to be fair the views were overall more crisp, clean, and clear by a noticeable margin compared to the 152. But then at close to triple the price of the 152 I would expect it to be such.

Based on the EP's listed I was going from 23.8x magnification with the 40mm to a mid range of 68-86.54x with the 14 and 11mm's to the 108.18-202.55x range in the 8.8 and 4.7mm EP's. This is compared to the 152 which was 24.7x magnification with the 40mm to a mid range of 70.57-89.81x with the 14 and 11mm's to the 112.27-210.21x range in the 8.8 and 4.7mm EP's.

Of noteworthy mention here was that to my eyes there was no real appreciable difference in magnification between the 127 and the 152 even though the numbers say otherwise. However overall the clarity, contrast, and crispness was apparent moving from the 152 Achro to the 127 Apo.

I am not going to spend much time talking about Saturn, Spica, and Mars because in terms of overall size of object and brightness the views were very close. Close enough that I really couldn't see a difference between them. But as I mention above the clarity, contrast, and crispness were for sure apparent.

What was of interest was M5 and M31. In the 127 M5 resolved with more detail at a lower magnification with the individual stars becoming more visible and clear. This was the same with M31. it was much more readily apparent at a much lower magnification and stood out much better than in the 152 which was a surprise. Up until seeing this I really did think that all that mattered was aperture. After looking at it in the 127 I still think that aperture does matter because seeing it in one of my reflectors at thermal equilibrium is much better than either the 127 or 152 because of the total light gathering difference between the two BUT in an Apo even at 1" overall smaller size the view was better than the Achro and I could see more detail. I attribute this to the clarity and contrast given by the triplet design in terms of focusing the light and that said light is unobstructed.

Conclusions:
Both the Explore Scientific AR 152 and 127 ED FC1 are fantastic scopes for the price and for all the extra's they come with. Both performed surprisingly well from my urban light polluted skies. Both were easy to handle and not cumbersome or heavy or hard to get onto the mount and balance.

The adage about the best scope for you is the one you use applies very well here. Both gave really great views of DSO's, planets, and stars with time between setup to viewing really good for a working schlub who just wants to look at something before going to bed because they have to work in the morning. In both cases and at both price points if you are looking for that OTA that will keep you coming back for views of the stars instead of sitting on the couch watching Dancing with the Stars then these scopes are a option to strongly consider.

If you are on a budget and you are looking for a very well made refractor at a very fair price for all of the kit included I strongly urge you to consider the AR 152. The value for the money really is there. For visual only this OTA will work on a HEQ5 with very good balance but just barely and I wouldn't recommend it. Plus any wind is going to be a problem and the vibrations could drive you up the wall. Better to put it on a EQ6-R and you can take photos with it as well. Just expect to have to deal with the purple and blue fringe in post processing.

If you have the extra budget, want to have that extra bit of oomph and sharp intake of breath when you look through the EP, or even the slightest hint of CA bothers you then for the price the 127 ED is the way to go. For visual use only this OTA will work on a HEQ5 with good balance. However you would be better off putting it on a EQ6-R or AZ-EQ6 (a mount I really like because I like to do visual and AP and visual works best in alt/az mode) where it will perform well as an AP scope as well as a visual one with the added bonus of less time in post processing removing of the purple/blue fringe or star bloat that can and will happen with an Achro.

I mention AP because I also did a comparison between the 127 and a AP 130. The AP 130 was noticeably better but at a much higher cost. Plus the AP uses FPL-53 matched with the other two elements by a well known very experienced master optician vs a mass produced scope using FCD1 glass mated by an optician with an unknown skill level. I should also note the AP 155 EDFS and TOA 150 comparison I did had the TOA remarkably and noticeably better in terms of colour and contrast. A surprising finding that lead to much hand waving, bellowing and cursing by AP fanboi's since AP is held out as the gold standard of best refractors of all time and that they walk on water and play a harp. 

I should also note that the new ES FCD100 scopes perform very well.  For those of you who are all about glass, remember that RC of AP is now using FCD100 glass because FPL-53 is expensive and hard to find. 

Personally at the end of this I went with the the Carbon Fiber version of the 127 ED. It was worth it to me to spend the extra on the CF one  because at the end of the day it gives those views that get you off the couch and under the stars and will do quite nicely for Astrophotography on a moderately priced equatorial mount like the HEQ5 or EQ-6R. The 127 was the most used scope of all of my scopes. I logged more hours with it than all my other scopes combined.

In your use case if you want the aperture the 152 will do nicely for you at a good price point. However if you want the best quality for the price and a smaller less bulky scope that is similar in focal length I would strongly encourage you to get the new FCD100 ES 127.

 

This has to be the longest post in the history of posted posts 😂

very informative, though.

Get an 8" dob and be done with analysis paralysis which can be awful, it is a fantastic starter scope.

Well going to a TSA 120 would certainly be an upgrade but the question is, is it really necessary? it is a fair bit heavier and will require longer to reach temperature. If you are achieving great results

with the FC100 then why change? in that regard you are correct.