Can of worms opened: What APO?

[Dodge]

Thanks all.

I'd rather do it 'right' the first time, rather than progressively upgrade to the point that I end up with the scope I should have started with. I'm a little nervous about buying used - unlike Olly, I don't have the experience to accurately evaluate a used high-end scope so my gut feeling is to buy something with the support of a shop in case of any difficulties.

I'm leaning towards one of the following - both have decent focusers, I've included the cost of field flattening where appropriate and I hope will still be suitable as and when I start considering CCD equipment:

Altair Wave F6 80mm Triplet with Planostar flattener @ £788

TS 80mm F6 Triplet with flattener @ £797

TS 80mm F6.5 Quad @ £782

The Altair and TS F6 scopes appear to be very similar and I suspect may come from the same manufacturer. The TS F6.5 only has a 2" Crayford (the others have 3" Crayfords) but the flattener is built into the tube rather than attached to the focuser. I did ask it earlier, but chip to flattener distance appears to be critical and I don't understand whether a flattener built into the tube (therefore the chip to flattener distance will change with any focus adjustment) is a good thing or not.

Can anyone chime in?

[swag72]

At the moment there is a TakFS78 on ABS for £750. I'd buy that if I was in the market for an ED80 type scope.

[Dodge]

At the moment there is a TakFS78 on ABS for £750. I'd buy that if I was in the market for an ED80 type scope.

I saw that, dew spots put me off plus the seller won't sell the OTA until the mount is gone.

[Islander]

Cheers, Bukko. I'm dipping a toe into imaging and don't want to spend fortunes on triplet refractors at the moment. I thought the Equinox looked like a sound proposition.

[3ggman]

I saw that, dew spots put me off plus the seller won't sell the OTA until the mount is gone.

That FS78 looks like a gorgeous scope and I can't imagine the dew spots would be cause for concern.

I have a TS90 which I can't speak highly enough about, the weight of the carbon fibre tube was a big selling point for me putting it on a HEQ5 (not an issue for you with the EQ6). However I would probably go down the route of second had with a good tak or such if one came available.

I have dealt with TS on various occasions and found them to be very helpful, although I realise not everybody can say the same thing and some of their scopes have been pure duds.

[John]

.....I'd rather do it 'right' the first time, rather than progressively upgrade to the point that I end up with the scope I should have started with. I'm a little nervous about buying used - unlike Olly, I don't have the experience to accurately evaluate a used high-end scope so my gut feeling is to buy something with the support of a shop in case of any difficulties.

I'm leaning towards one of the following - both have decent focusers, I've included the cost of field flattening where appropriate and I hope will still be suitable as and when I start considering CCD equipment:

Altair Wave F6 80mm Triplet with Planostar flattener @ £788

TS 80mm F6 Triplet with flattener @ £797

TS 80mm F6.5 Quad @ £782

The Altair and TS F6 scopes appear to be very similar and I suspect may come from the same manufacturer. The TS F6.5 only has a 2" Crayford (the others have 3" Crayfords) but the flattener is built into the tube rather than attached to the focuser. I did ask it earlier, but chip to flattener distance appears to be critical and I don't understand whether a flattener built into the tube (therefore the chip to flattener distance will change with any focus adjustment) is a good thing or not.

Can anyone chime in?

If I was going to do it "right first time" then I not sure I'd consider any of the above to be honest with you. I'm not in the market for a scope of this type, being purely a visual astronomer, but I've read enough reports on them over the months and years to realise that there is some variation in quality possible with them, ie: there are glowing reports and much less positive ones too. Assuming that both types of feedback are given in good faith, then that seems to be evidence of variable quality to me.

Are you going to be able to i) spot a dud if you get one and ii) convince the supplier to do something about it ?.

In your shoes I'd probably go for a lower cost, lower risk solution like an ED80 and hone my skills with that while saving for a premium brand upgrade like a Takahashi.

But it's not my money so good luck in whatever you choose

[Dodge]

If I was going to do it "right first time" then I not sure I'd consider any of the above to be honest with you. I'm not in the market for a scope of this type, being purely a visual astronomer, but I've read enough reports on them over the months and years to realise that there is some variation in quality possible with them, ie: there are glowing reports and much less positive ones too. Assuming that both types of feedback are given in good faith, then that seems to be evidence of variable quality to me.

Are you going to be able to i) spot a dud if you get one and ii) convince the supplier to do something about it ?.

In your shoes I'd probably go for a lower cost, lower risk solution like an ED80 and hone my skills with that while saving for a premium brand upgrade like a Takahashi.

But it's not my money so good luck in whatever you choose

Hi John and thanks for your thoughts.

To be fair, I'd not come across any negative reviews of the Altair stuff - but if they do come from the same manufacturer as the TS stuff then it's a fair point.

It's certainly a minefield out there!

[Rossco72]

with an 80mm ish scope and f6-7 ish speed, you will have to spend a lot of money to do better than an ED80.

Will a Tak or TV be better, yes, but not as significantly as the price difference would suggest. The price/performance curve is exponential wit the last few percentage points of performance costing a lot of money.

For my tuppenceworth, either buy a premium scope for a lot of money (used if you can find one) or get an ED80....

Cheers

Stuart

[Dodge]

Just so I know, when people talk about the 80ED are they referring to the Evostar or Equinox models?

ta

[swag72]

You say about wanting to get it right - You can not go wrong with a premium scope. There are a number of people on here who started off with ED80's for example, that have finally gone for a premium scope.

It is a difficult call, it's your ££'s, personally I'd spend it on a TV or Tak - Just my opinion !!

Here's a few more of my ramblings ........ I have what I would now consider to be a decent scope, perhaps up there with the TV's. I recently passed my data to someone who is on here and is a fantastic imager, his images are consistentlty awesome - He appreciates good data to work with and said that my data was excellent. My little scope was churning out cracking data. Had I been using an ED80 (of any of the more budget brands) would I have been told that about my data? Optically does it make that much difference? I think that it does make a difference, and certainly mechanically there is a huge difference. Perhaps it is more how WE feel about our scopes. I had a Skywatcher and I disliked it immensely. Was there anything wrong with it? I don't know, but I do know that with that scope I could never produce decent data - Was it me or the scope? Who knows?

[swag72]

Just so I know, when people talk about the 80ED are they referring to the Evostar or Equinox models?

ED80 as I understand it is more of a generic term for an 'extra low dispersion glass' - Many companies make an ED80 scope, such as Orion, Revelation, Skywatcher to name but three.

[Rossco72]

ED80 as I understand it is more of a generic term for an 'extra low dispersion glass' - Many companies make an ED80 scope, such as Orion, Revelation, Skywatcher to name but three.

I would say in general most people saying ed80 are talking about the skywatcher. It punches well above its weight.

[John]

I would say in general most people saying ed80 are talking about the skywatcher. It punches well above its weight.

Thats the one I was referring to. Branded Skywatcher, Orion (USA), Celestron (different tube diameter / focuser but same optics), Vixen, Saxon, etc. F/7.5 doublet with one FPL-53 element.

[Dodge]

I would say in general most people saying ed80 are talking about the skywatcher. It punches well above its weight.

Yep, both the Equinox and Evostar are SW products:

Equinox 80 F6.25 is £520 (would require a flattener @ £

Evostar 80 F7.5 is £349 (plus a reducer / flattener that takes it down to F6.5 for £509 inclusive)

[Dodge]

Oops - doesn't appear to be an edit post feature. SW flattener for the Equinox is £66.

[Rossco72]

Yep, both the Equinox and Evostar are SW products:

Equinox 80 F6.25 is £520 (would require a flattener @ £

Evostar 80 F7.5 is £349 (plus a reducer / flattener that takes it down to F6.5 for £509 inclusive)

Bear in mind these aren't the same scope. The equinox is native f6.25 where the DS pro is f7.5

[Dodge]

Bear in mind these aren't the same scope. The equinox is native f6.25 where the DS pro is f7.5

Yep, that's why I asked which one folks were referrng to.

[Rossco72]

Yep, that's why I asked which one folks were referrng to.

Mostly hankering back to the blue and gold tube versions. The most direct equivalent is the ds-pro version.

The equinox is a fine scope for the money as well. My TV85 would cost 4 times as much new for 5mm more aperture and a better focusser. The optics will be better but not 400%

[Tim]

......... Had I been using an ED80 (of any of the more budget brands) would I have been told that about my data? Optically does it make that much difference?

The most obvious differences between expensive and cheaper optics is usually in star point size, image contrast, image flatness, and quality of the colour correction.

The premium scopes offer not only these aspects as standard, but also the means of achieving that quality time after time, no matter what changes in temperature or atmospherics etc occur, not to mention the smoothness and mechanical integrity of the focuser.