Travel refractors

[LDUNN1]

.......not ready to buy yet, but I've been wondering what the best options would be for travel refractors.

Can I have some suggestions for scopes that are small enough to handcarry on an airlines, & yet give the largest aperture possible.

Just looking for ideas for the future.

[virtualpilot45]

I'm thinking of getting a grab and go for around £50, and I keep seeing the Celestron Travelscope 70, the Skywatcher Startravel 80 and the Heritage 76 Dob. I'm more attracted to the first of these, although the stability of a dob base is tempting

[LDUNN1]

....I have a WO ZS 66 ED Petzval, but at only 66mm aperture, I've been wondering what bigger aperture 'grab n go' options are available.....

I have an ST80 which I use as a guidescope - & I have to say, that I was surprised how good optically it was as it only cost £90 new. The castings on the scope don't look/feel particuarly good though, & the accessories (2x barlow, 10mm & 25mm EP's) are not very good really, but the scope tube & optics seem a bit out of place on such an affordable scope.

The WO 66 however is in a different league build wise.

[virtualpilot45]

I take it that even though the WO has a smaller aperture it lets in more light due to the ED glass?

[MjrTom]

My travel (only current) scope is the one listed below.

It's perfect Carry on size for airline travel and a reasonable enough aperture to see quite a bit from a dark site.

[virtualpilot45]

My only telescope is a newtonian, and I don't really understand the obsession with ED refractors. For example, looking at the SW Startravel 80 and the SW Evostar 80ED. The first is £95 and the second is £475! What on earth is causing the mammoth jump in price?

[PETENAUD]

This week i bought a SW Caprocorn 70mm for this reason.

I only live 20 mins from the south coast where its nice an dark, but didnt want to take my 130mm newt for fear of dust and damage.

Have not had the chance to test it yet but it looks pretty good, easily portable and at around £99 didnt break the bank.

Comes with everything you need, although the 90 degree diagonal isnt the best its ok.

[Capricorn]

James, the ED glass simply enables the different wavelengths to come to a narrower focal plane so the colour abberation is reduced.

The light collected is simply governed by the aperture. Most glasses transmit much the same through them in percentage terms.

My preference would be the WO Meg 72, comes with a carry bag these days so self contained in one bag. Cost might be the drawback. The Meg 72 has a foot for tripod attachment.

Problem is everyone wants a small, light scope with a big aperture, and you don't get those, even at high costs. I would also appreciate the fact that unless you are gong somewhere suitably dark, or say southern hemisphere (different) is it worth taking a scope as you need a mount of some sort and then the baggage gets significant for what is one item. Mount, scope, diagonal, eyepieces all add up.

[virtualpilot45]

Thanks for the explanation

[great_bear]

Consider the Sky-Watcher Skymax 102.

- a very handy little scope with lots of magnification.

Not a refractor I know - but the aperture-to-bulk ratio makes it worth considering.

If you don't need high mags, a spotter scope is another interesting option for travelling. Typically waterproof and a lot less faff than an astro scope and very useful for various daytime purposes whilst travelling.

[ollypenrice]

I bought a TeleVue Pronto on here for about 200 pounds. Built like a tank, classy optics, cost about a grand in the nineties... and certainly not for sale! Certainly worth considering. I also have a ZS66 which is lighter - in every sense of the word. I bet I could get more for the ZS66, which is quite simply nuts.

Olly

[LDUNN1]

Great input guys!

I was wondering if there is anything out there pushing the 4"/100mm mark that is still airline carry on friendly (& not too heavy).

Tak FSQ106 / Sky 90 - that kind of thing - or are these all going to be too big & heavy at this aperture?.....& James if you thought the price hike was step in your two skywatcher examples - just take a look at these two! ;-)

......The WO ZS 66 is a gem though - it just oozes quality, but I'm thinking that in the future I might be in a position to upgrade it to something nearly as compact & as beautifully built but with a larger aperture......I'm guessing the jump to the 72's is probably not worth the trip.....

[Moonshane]

if I ever buy a small travel / wide field scope it will be a used 72 Megrez. I just have a bee in my bonnet to own and try one for a while - unless a Pronto comes up for £200!

I never got on with bins for astro and the 72 Megrez seems easily mounted on something lightweight if you use a 1.25" diagonal and lighter eyepieces and especially at lower powers.

[ollypenrice]

Well, if you are in FSQ106 territory price-wise then why not the new TEC which is designed for airline transport? Just under 19 inches long. Telescope Engineering Company

The 106 weighs a ton and attracts lots of questions at airports! Why is it so heavy? Why can't we look through it, etc. One of my guests flies here with his from time to time.

I had an early F5 TV Genesis (4 inch) which could be carried on. I made a special ply case to hold it without diagonal.

Olly

[LDUNN1]

......that TEC looks interesting......& the FSQ106 sounds like it might be an issue at the airports, but I guess you guest is finding that he is able to get through the airport security with it at least.

......I have not really got a price in mind currently - I'm in the process of buying a bigger 'scope, so funds will be depleated for a while anyway, just thought I'd start the research early.......I figure one day I may replace the WO ZS 66 with a larger grab n go - & the largest aperture you can hand carry on a plane seems like a good target to aim for.....not expecting to air travel for a year or so, but a year + is defineately on the cards, would be good to have a suitable scope (& tracking mount) for that at some point.

[ollypenrice]

The 106 is an imaging scope. It is overkill for visual use and may not even be quite as good as a dedicated triplet for visual. I don't know. Our FSQ85 is stunning with an EP but it doesn't often get the chance to prove it! Too popular with the imagers... The 106 would also need quite a mount. It looks like a sawn off 6 inch.

You could expect to pay less than £1000 for an older Genesis and they really are very, very good indeed.

Olly

[LDUNN1]

.......I'd be wanting to use it for imaging too ;-) ......aswell as visual. I'd also like a large image circle as I'll be using a big chip DSLR with it.

[mag10]

My two cents:

If it's a travel grab n' go, I would'nt want a fancy and expensive scope that might get damaged, lost or stolen. So why not just get something like the Orion 80mm short tube.

I know it's used mainly as a guide-scope, but it's 15" long and weighs 2.4 lbs and it costs around 90£...

Stick it on a camera tripod and off you go.

[ollypenrice]

Or if you are feeling rich, the FSQ85ED. It is the best bit of optical engineering I've ever used and as close to perfect as I'm ever likely to get! It tends to be overshadowed by big brother but it has the best colour correction of any refractor in the Tak line up (according to Tak) and doesn't have any focus drift issues. I absolutely love it. The price is insane but it is worth every penny.

As for security, I think you need to insure it and keep it by you. Personally I never want to let fear of thievery deter me from doing anything I want to do. Stealing my liberty would be worse than stealing my telescope. I've been all over the world with costly stuff and never lost anything much.

Olly

[quattrorings]

It is always going to be a trade off between portability/price/aperture. My preference for transporting scopes would be in a long thin "rifle" bag you just sling over your shoulder.

I personally like the ikharos 102mm Apo - which at the moment comes with a combined flattener and reducer for £575 from Ian King. It has had some cracking reviews. If you want something shorter with similar aperture then teleskop service offer a 100mm F6 refractor.

[LDUNN1]

"rile bag" sounds like it might be interesting to get through airport security ;-)

I'll take a look at the ikharos suggestions thx.

.....Olly, I hear what you are saying ref the baby fsq......I just wonder if I may not always wish I'd gone with the 106.

[Scoot]

....Stealing my liberty would be worse than stealing my telescope....

+1

That really is a lesson for us all IMHO

[ollypenrice]

"rile bag" sounds like it might be interesting to get through airport security ;-)

I'll take a look at the ikharos suggestions thx.

.....Olly, I hear what you are saying ref the baby fsq......I just wonder if I may not always wish I'd gone with the 106.

I wondered if I'd feel that, too, but I certainly don't. I'm happy with these results;

http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Photography/Widefield-images-including/NAN-FINISHED/1140503434_oQfB2-X3.jpg

http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Photography/Widefield-images-including/HARTLEY-HEART/1039776082_JZuEH-X3.jpg

http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Nebulae-and-clusters/M42CCBOV2010/1100345185_HHd4m-X3.jpg

If physical size is an issue then the two scopes are not comparable, the 106 being in an entirely different category by bulk. You wouldn't put a 106 on an HEQ5, for instance.

Olly

[studio1one]

I was thinking about this for my holidays in a couple of weeks and ended up buying some 15x70 bins instead of a travel scope.

[pete_l]

"rile bag" sounds like it might be interesting to get through airport security ;-)

If you take a golf bag is there any obligation to actually have golf clubs inside. Would it still count as "sporting goods" for the sake of airline luggage policies?

Failing that, how about sticking a mouthpiece on the end and claiming it was a musical instrument?