Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

spaceboy

Members
  • Posts

    8,379
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by spaceboy

  1. Truly superb collection of scopes Matt There is something about refractors that I love and the view I feel are by far the best offered by any scope design, ALTHOUGH I have to say the pics posted disappoint me somewhat. The 180 looks right on the edge of manageable and certainly demands a mount of substantial load capacity. Then you see the 254 and it game over unless your in the prime of your life. It's just a shame that the one scope design that offers the jewel in the crown for night sky views goes from a practical grab and go Evostar ED120 or TMB 115 to your back ain't got a prayer in only an additional 130mm aperture. By the time you get to a 16" dob it could be considered quite the handful but a 12" can be managed by most with a little effort. Eyepiece position remains comfortable and in the case of dobs no concerns for expensive mounts to become the make or break. Sorry if this is going a little off topic. It's just I like me fraks and it's a shame that I can never own one what would in a practical sense equal the resolution / light grasp on my 8" newt. I do agree that a good quality refractor can out perform a larger newt in the quality of view even if it is a slightly less bright in comparison.
  2. @John are you going to SGL star party? I can't really do the whole camping thing due to conflicting term holidays but always enjoy popping along for the day. I'd love to see and maybe look through the ED150 if FLO still have it on loan. A bargain no doubt but still a lot of saving for me to gamble on a scope I have only seen on a web page.
  3. Can you loosen off the objective and give it the old gentle tap all the way around to re-seat everything? Hypothetically talking of course as this is a loaner.
  4. I know on this occasion the courier should get 40 lashes but it's a shame they don't follow Bresser's thinking with their collimateable cells on refractors. Admittedly I'm not 100% sure their new 152 ED has a collimateable cell but I'm positive they do on the 127 ED. Thinking about it I am sure the APM 152ED has a collimateable cell. I guess cost has a lot to do with it and SW wanted to offer a 6"ED to us poor folk but personally when it comes to collimation in refractors I'd rather save that bit longer and pay that bit more and know I can correct for these little alignment issues that inevitably happen over time rather than forking out for a pro to do it or even worse just settling for a slight slip in performance.
  5. I'm showing 300g on my scales. That's a homebrew dew tape and dew shield so may differ a bit from commercially available tapes/ shields. Thanks again mate.
  6. Sorry to be a pain John but I can't recall you ever saying you needed dew prevention despite having plenty fraks. Could you do the same pic with some thing like dew tape weight wrapped around the objective or even a camping mat extending the dew shield? Not sure if you have these ? If they put their logo in near the same place as the older fraks then it does seem to sit far better in the rings than my collimateable EVO150 did.
  7. OMG those camera mounts really are more hassle than they are worth. If they aren't working loose and scraping through the finish on a scope they are poking holes through flight cases. I wouldn't mind but how many people actually use the dam things???. First thing I do when ever I buy a scope is take them off! Have to say while others may see it as a plus I'm not particularly a fan of metal dew shields. With a huge lump of glass and a tube of steel extending past that I have always found scopes to sit right back on rings to balance and in doing so putting the observer on their knees for the best part of the night searching for night sky objects. With my EVO150 I stuck a lump of lead focuser end to help center that balance. Having a tall UNI-28 tripod really helped. Also disappointed to hear the objective cover is a single piece. Having the advantage to stop down the aperture can come in handy at times. No deal breaker as it is possible to make an aperture mask but surprising that it is included on most other scopes SW offer yet in this case they chose not to. Is the focuser rotateable by any chance John? I see they haven't employed their usual ota/ focuser adapter despite retaining their usual white DS focuser.
  8. While I have re-greased my AZ4 so it's probably a tad smoother than out the box, I can't say I have any sticktion issues. I admit I did when I first had it as it is kind of intuitive to think, the less tight the clutches are, the smoother it will move, but I actually found too loose and that's where issues arise. If the clutch is slightly tighter you may need a slight bit more force to move it over say a giro mount, but the action is dampened nicely and so it isn't sticky. I agree balance is key to any friction AZ mount and this isn't always easy accomplished with smaller scopes. I have to say I always enjoyed using my AZ3 albeit for daytime solar (hopeless for night time observing above 55-60°) so I have no doubting the flexibility of slow motion control would win over many a manual mount, and if the AZ5 performs well on a beefier tripod then there is no competition. Sky watcher do seem to take customers comments on board so maybe there may be a version II come out with a better tripod or even M10 thread in replacement of the 3/8" in the future ?? Is there anyway to tap the thread out to M10 so it can drop straight on to a 1.75" tripod or are the bases hollow cast and there is a lack of meat on the threaded part ??
  9. This is an interesting thread. When the AZ5 came out used prices seems to fall off on the AZ4 yet it would appear the AZ4 remains the heftier mount of the two. I've certainly never had any problems using my ST120 on my AZ4 at higher mags and I even used a 150P for some time with no issues. Granted it doesn't have slow motion controls but when it's well balanced I've never felt the need for them anyway. I guess it is always assumed a later version number means they are a better mount. I have no doubt it brings a far better capability to the table over the AZ3 which would in all fairness be it's direct competition regards the use of slow motion controls and lightweight portability. As for a comparison to the AZ4 it's probably not in the same bracket. An AZ4 would probably be better compared to a Giro II, mini or similar I guess?? Did you not have an AZ4 @nightfisher
  10. That's a great setup you have there now Shane but I have to ask what made you go for the equinox when you already had the ED120? I was lead to believe they both possess the same glass and it was the fit and finish of the equinox that demanded the higher price tag? Knowing how stubby my ED120 was I'm guessing those equinox pack down nice and compact with the extendable dew shield retracted? I think is sure is safe to safe you've well and truly caught the refractor bug mate I have to say I'm liking the whole white / black theme going on. I know scopes are for looking through and not at but I don't think it's a bad thing to have a set up that looks as good as it performs.
  11. You'll have to work with me on this. I sort of know what I want to ask but I'm reading it and I can't get in a limited amount of text the question I think I'm trying to ask.
  12. I get what you are saying but leading on from my last post, would a 10" APO be simply unrealistic price wise when you consider what you could achieve with an achromat for similar money. All totally hypothetical of course. I guess what I mean is at what size would the benefits of an APO outweigh the cost ??
  13. Mounting and other issues aside, I assume there comes a point where achromats start to come in to their own? or are bespoke larger refractors just expensive no matter what glass is in them? I see some "budget" 152 mm ED refractors for £3k so surely you'd get a lot of achromat for that money ??
  14. PERFECT!! Just doesn't get much more grab and go that that ! Only shame is I can't see where you could squeeze a 9x30 in there.
  15. I have an ED120 mate. I admit I'm after an achro but for a solar mod so already know which I want due to the specific focal length. This thread was more for interest (and to hopefully help those in the market) not to say I wouldn't be interested if I ever came across the crown jewel in achros if there was one??
  16. I think someone on the lounge has had a poor first experience with the bresser 102/1000. I think it was poor build quality why they felt the need to return the scope. I'm not sure if they did an optical review or not?
  17. I should have pointed out I'm not in the market for one. It's more a curiosity thing given most ED refractors are out of financial reach of many. I just wondered if there was one that really shone. Thinking about it now the Tal should have sprung to mind as I was typing the title. I've had an AR127L and I agree they are a very nice scope around if not a little on the heavy side.
  18. I was just thinking, as you do. Is there a highly praised achromatic refractor out there ? With ED and APO refractors so far out the reach of the modest earning folk I would have thought there must be one high spec achromatic refractor that gives as good as it gets ? Or does the result of all that refinement to make an achromat well corrected and tolerant of CA end up with a cheap ED refractor like Celestron's C100ED. I like the look of the Altair 152 but at £800+ again your getting very close to Chinese ED budget. I appreciate your not going to get the same aperture in an ED as you can a well corrected achromat but even so good glass does seem to compete very well often giving equal if not better planetary views than a larger achro. From what I gather acromats can be just as good as ED refractors but at the expense of rather long focal lengths? I'm sure even if you could pick up a long frak at a fair price it would still end up fringing on Chinese ED due to mounting issues occurring from wielding such long refractors ??
  19. Is there a pitch guide yet Grant? Just wondering who's going.
  20. Did you not recently have issues with your quark? Maybe this is a result of your erf combination ?? As you say thought if your happy.
  21. @DRT in my mind the fact Daystar had a configuration wizard http://www.daystarfilters.com/Wizard/ would strongly suggest to me there is an upper limit to the use of a 2" UV/IR filter before an ERF is required. If you do contact them it would be interesting to get some clarification on this.
  22. To some degree I agree but we all have an obligation to offer safe and informed advice when it comes to looking at the sun. Solar observing is dangerous and SGL is an open forum. While your KG3 may work fine it is best to point out the pros and con's of absorption filters over rejection filters as someone may not buy one that rattles in its cell and it goes pop. In the same way I questioned your point about never removing ITF filters in case moonshane had overlooked something and I was going to give him the heads up before he damaged his eyesight. I think when it comes to solar observing and if not done with respect the damage it could bring to your life, not just your eyesight, I don't always think "people can do what ever they want" is the best advice!
  23. I know its one competitor against another but Baader's site says the trouble with the kg3 filters are they can fail due to absorbing the heat and expansion where Baader UV/IR reflects the heat.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.