Roy Foreman

16 hours ago, lpalbou said:

Hi Roy, I am very intrigued by this little scope. When you look at the spot diagram, it seems to perform even better than the 65PHQ.. and this is possible since it's a slower focal ratio. Could you share some test images in full frame ?

Once thing that I don't quite get however is.. what will be the interest of the 65PHQ ? The 71F also has the flattener.. there may be one ED glass difference.. but if the first ED glass is good, differences would be minimal, while the price difference isn't

I've attached a test image taken with the 71F and a Nikon D810a full frame astro DSLR, on a Star Adventurer GTi.  Three x 60sec at ISO 6400, stacked manually in photoshop.  Bear in mind that this is a test image, only three frames, no autoguiding, and rough polar alignment.  Stars ae good and on the original there are even hints of IFN dust.  Not sure why there is an artifact on the bright star at the bottom - think it may be because only half of it was in the frame !  I have included a severe crop of the top left hand corner so you can judge star quality.  I think it is very good and has real potential.  Watch this space !

15 hours ago, lpalbou said:

Hi Roy, I am very intrigued by this little scope. When you look at the spot diagram, it seems to perform even better than the 65PHQ.. and this is possible since it's a slower focal ratio. Could you share some test images in full frame ?

Once thing that I don't quite get however is.. what will be the interest of the 65PHQ ? The 71F also has the flattener.. there may be one ED glass difference.. but if the first ED glass is good, differences would be minimal, while the price difference isn't

I will try and post a test image later on.

Yes, I wondered about the similarities / differences between 71F and 65PHQ. The latter has an extra ED element and is faster, and has a dedicated reducer available which is supposed to enable it to still cover full frame. This is probably where the price difference lies.  For me the 71F seems much better value, and covers full frame, so why pay extra for the 65 unless you want to use it with a reducer ?

Askar 71F Review

This is now the smallest telescope I own, beating my Skywatcher 72ED by just 1mm !  Like my other Askar telescopes the 71F is a high quality instrument, the deep blue accents making a welcome change to the red, gold, and green offerings that seem to have become so popular.  The fit and finish is first class, and once again Askar appear to have put a lot of thought into the design of both the telescope and the accessories that come with it.

I purchased the 71F to use as a high quality spotting scope as well as for astronomical use, and indeed Askar are promoting the terrestrial capabilities of this scope both in their promotional material, and by including an erect image diagonal and a couple of eyepieces in the package. As far as I know this is the only Askar scope that has this.

This is a handsome looking scope and includes such luxuries as a retracting dew shield, twin finder mounting shoes, a carry handle that can also hold additional accessories, a sensible length 230mm vixen style dovetail bar, CNC machined tube rings, and a rotating duel speed 2.4" focuser.

The included eyepieces are 8mm and 20mm plossls which seem to be of good quality if a little restrictive in their apparent field of view.  The erecting diagonal is a bit of a let down in that it is made of plastic - very un-askar-like - but it seems to do the job adequately.

A camera adaptor is also provided. It screws into the focuser in place of the eyepiece holder and terminates in a 48mm thread onto which you can attach a camera T-ring, or the barrel of a dedicated astro camera.  The 48mm threaded ring unscrews to reveal a larger 54mm thread, and the facility for mounting a single filter if required.  This arrangement is pretty standard for Askar scopes. Back spacing is not an issue, if you are in focus you are good to go.

Now to the optics, the heart of any telescope.  This is a four element flat field instrument that follows the same layout as in the more illustrious PHQ series, that is a triplet up front with a single field flattening element further back, the significant difference being that in the 71F there is only one ED element (of unspecified type) rather than two.  Having four lenses certainly adds the the weight of the system, and the OTA with its accessories weighs 3kg as compared to 2kg for Skywatcher's 72ED.

So how does the 71F perform? In a word, excellent.  In several words, very impressive indeed.  Using a 2" 40mm focal length wide angle eyepiece, details were sharp pretty much to the extremities, any minor aberrations probably due to my 25 year old eyepiece rather than the telescope.  Attaching a full frame DSLR and taking a series of short exposures in the region around Polaris showed nice round stars right across the frame and into the extreme corners.  And no nasty purple or red halos around bright stars, at least in the test images that I took.  This is indeed a flat field telescope doing exactly what it claims to do.  Nice.

Askar didn't quite get it all right though. The small screw that locks the focuser in position is not attached when the scope arrives, but is in a little bag packed away with the instructions and quality control certificate. When I tried to attach it to the underside of the focuser I found that I couldn't because the dovetail plate was in the way. Sliding the tube backwards in the rings cured this, but resulted in the dew shield not being able to retract fully, and with a heavy DSLR attached the balance point was off the rear end of the dovetail plate.  Raising blocks under the tube rings would cure this, but to be honest the focuser works so well without the little locking bolt in place that I just removed it.

Next point, the carry handle cannot be used as a carry handle. It it too short, at least for my stubby male hands, and there is not enough room between it and the tube to fit your fingers underneath it. More raising blocks required, perhaps.  To be honest though, the 71F is so good in every other way that I can forgive it these minor misdemeanours. It is a lovely little scope, well equipped, and very good value for money. An absolute winner in my book.

You might well compare the 71F to Skywatcher's ED72 which, at around £300, is half the price.  But factor in the cost of a flattener, two eyepieces, diagonal, carry handle, longer dovetail bar etc. and the cost difference diminishes.

Bottom line, the 71F comes highly recommended.

The persistent cloudy weather has certainly knocked my mojo for six.  Well done for getting off your backside and having a go, and getting a decent result for your efforts !

If we ever get a clear night again I must force myself to do the same !

Roy

Excellent. The slimmer the crescent the more difficult it becomes to get any sort of image. You have done really well 

4 hours ago, LukeTheNuke said:

Wow, lovely! Do you use your MN190 Mak-Newt mainly for lunar, or for other things too? Have you had a crack at close to new moon as well?

Hi and thanks. I use the MN190 mostly for deep sky, but used it for the moon on this occasion as it was already set up in the observatory.  It is one of those scopes that seems to do well at everything- refractor like image quality with the speed of a reflector.

I have had many attempts at very thin crescents with some success, but not used rh MN for this as yet . 

On 29/03/2024 at 02:37, neiil phillips said:

Love your processing on these Roy. Slightly understated. Very natural. with no bloating or artifacts. 

Thanks Neil.  As you will know, the worse the conditions the more difficult it is to process and get decent results.

Not bad considering what you were up against. Bodes well for excellent results when and if clear dark skies return. 

Nice detail in those close-ups. Great set of images.

Nice images and detail.  I bet it feels good to be imaging after months of cloudy skies !

Thank you Mike, I suppose it is some small consolation to know that the current extended spell of rubbish weather is universal !  Hope you've made the most of those clear evenings and that you get some results you can share with us.

Cheers

Roy

I only use my C9.25 for lunar and planetary imaging, and for this it excels. Beats Skywatcher's 150ED and 180 Mak hands down.  Can't speak for visual.

Damien Peach has a review of it on his website, and recons it is a real GEM.  Again only considering imaging, but I guess if it does this well, then it is definately not going to be mushy visually.

For me the lunar imaging season usually starts sometime in January.  This year, due to continuing bad weather, it is a mid March start, but not a particularly good one.

A brief window of opportunity last night enabled me to grab a few shots.  No time to set up one of my usual lunar imaging scopes, so I just used what was already set up in the observatory - an Askar 130 PHQ

The scope has done ok, but doesn't really gather enough light to allow short integration times, so maybe not as sharp as with my larger scopes.

Anyway for what its worth, here they are :-

15% of 1500 frames - prime focus

15% of 500 frames - with Baader FFC at 3x

Proplanet 642 IR filter.

Very nice.

Very pretty !

Very nice, great colour and subtlety. Is that a tiny distant galaxy I can see just to the left of the pn ?

1 hour ago, Zummerzet_Leveller said:

Thanks Roy.  I think I've only had 4 nights over the same timeframe, I don't bother hauling the rig out unless two clear nights are forecast in a row.  I had to dump nearly 4hrs of data from this set due to patchy cloud.  I think I need some faster scopes...  From the images I've seen on here the MN190 is a great scope for galaxies.

Ouch, 4hrs dumped. That's gotta hurt. Most of my images are taken between clouds, pressing the pause button until the next break appears !  Crazy isn't it.

Yes the MN190 is a great scope for everything.  The star quality of a refractor with the speed of a reflector. And covers full frame with no coma corrector or field flattener required. Should have got one years ago.

Good luck with the ongoing cloud war !

Nice capture. I'm in West Somerset and have had only 3 clear nights in the last 9 months. Diabolical as you rightly say.  I tried the same capture as your with my MN190 but it didn't stay clear enough for long enough to get a result as good as yours. Well done.

It was from 2001 a space odicy when astronout Dave Bowman uttered the words  'My god its full of stars'.  A very old film now, but something of a cult I think.

Yes, Holland Hill Deep Field seems very fitting !

My god its full of galaxies, to sort of quote a famous movie line. Excellent result, nice work.

Great image and nice subtle colours.  Well done.

Great first set of images. With lunar imaging you are at the mercy of the atmosphere so cannot always get the sharpness you desire. Best not to oversharpen.  I ofter image just before it gets dark as the air can be more steady at that time.

19 hours ago, h107 said:

That first image is captivating. What time of day did you take them? 

From memory I think it was around 3pm, so mid afternoon.  The 807 IR filter helped to darken the blue sky considerably. Glad you like my images.

Thank you. Knowing that my images give enjoyment to those who look at them is the main inspiration for taking them in the first place !

57 minutes ago, Planetary Observer said:

Good set of images. Very nice.

Thank you, glad you like them.