Affordable Triplet Refractors?

[PARTY MARTY]

Thanks FLO! will do!!

[PARTY MARTY]

I must admit being a strong Newtonian imager, I quite like the TS 115mm Triplet (Photo line) more being much easier to set-up, with collimation issues! I seem to enjoy astro-imaging more with APO than my Quattro!! I just simply love the sharpness of the images, but the APO is not as fast as my F4 Quattro!! Again there is no such thing as a perfect scope, each scope as it's advantages and disadvantages??? So I decided keep both scopes!!

[John]

I know you know this John but an FPL53 element is not the same as a 'fluorite' element. I think the copywriters got a little carried away when writing that product description ....

Indeed Steve. Skywatcher are not the only ones to relate / interchange the terms "flourite" and "FPL-53" rather liberally either

[Davey-T]

So can I assume that Taks have the best Japanese glass.

Dave

[ollypenrice]

Yes, the Esprit series are significantly better than budget Chinese triplets.

My address is...

(Please limit your despatches to four instruments in any one week...)

Optimistic Olly. xxx

[ollypenrice]

I have been reading this with interest - I am intrigued by how you determine an 'affordable' triplet? Under £500, under £1000?

Get serious. C'mon, let's hear it for under 6000 dollars?!?! We can't let CLoudy Nights have it all their own way. :grin:

Olly

[FLO]

So can I assume that Taks have the best Japanese glass.

We are not Takahashi dealers but I reckon they must do. Borg telescopes certainly do. And top-end Vixen models like the Vixen AX103S and ED 115S.

[E621Keith]

Incidentally, the optics for Takahashi refractors are made by Canon, so are Borg 71FL's and 50FL's. Canon grow their own CaF2 crystals, but sources glass from Ohara and Hoya.

[FLO]

Incidentally, the optics for Takahashi refractors are made by Canon, so are Borg 71FL's and 50FL's. Canon grow their own CaF2 crystals, but sources glass from Ohara and Hoya.

You are probably thinking of Takahashi's fluorite optics. My understanding is 'all' genuine fluorite telescope optics are manufactured by Canon, regardless of the telescope brand. Canon developed the manufacturing techniques necessary to produce large aperture fluorite glass (prior to this fluorite lenses were only available in small sizes so were mostly found in microscope objectives) so they are the only company producing them. Takahashi were the first to put a Canon fluorite objective into a telescope but that was a long time ago and they are not the only ones doing so today.

[Naemeth]

Stop it... you're all making me want a frac

[ollypenrice]

I can't speak for the whole range but Tak FSQ scopes are no longer fluorite but ED. At the moment I'm using an older Fluorite 106. It is not as well corrected as the newer ED FSQs (no slouch, though) but it holds focus far better. And this is a classic example of glass types etc versus reality. I personally am not the sort of person who wants to try to set up an auto refocus-between-subs system. You may be and that's great. My bad, but there it is, so I found myself an old fluorite - with another coming next week.

Olly

[FLO]

Stop it... you're all making me want a frac

[Naemeth]

Well, I was already saving for an ED80... perhaps it'll have to come sooner .

[FLO]

... I found myself an old fluorite - with another coming next week. :grin:

That sounds fun

James uses two f4.3 Borg 77ED telescopes.

He's pondering a third!

[FLO]

And here's what he is doing under UK skies with Japanese optics

North American Nebula (click on the image for full size).

[Naemeth]

And here's what he is doing under UK skies with Japanese optics

North American Nebula (click on the image for full size).

Can't deny the results , stunning image James (thanks for posting Steve ). Choosing between premium refractors isn't going to be easy when I get there, is it?

[Tim]

Very interesting reading. I was so convinced for a long time of the value of reflectors for imaging that I didn't bother looking at refractors, but I have to say that using the esprit 150ed has been a most enlightening experience. While they are not exactly at the low end of the price range, what you get for your hard earned money seems to represent very good value when weighed against the alternatives.

[Gina]

The Borgs look lovely - wish I could afford a pair of them - wish I could afford even one It'll be interesting to see how the Esprit 80ED turns out

[Davey-T]

Similarly not all FPL51 or FPL53 glass is equal. The Japanese Ohara company have three manufacturing facilities. One in China, for the Chinese market, one in Taiwan, for the Taiwanese market, and one in Japan predominantly for their Japanese home market. Guess which one produces the highest quality FPL51/53 glass...

Steve

All my TVues have Taiwan ROC on them .

Dave

[FLO]

Yes, some of TeleVue's products are manufactured in Taiwan

[kirkster501]

The Borg 77ED II are doublets though.... ? That implies to me "not as good" as a triplet? Or have I go this all wrong? End f year i am thinking of a FSQ85 or possibly the Borg. The Borg is more realistic.

[swag72]

I understand that a good doublet is far better than a poor triplet. I would not consider anything other than a quality product for a triplet. Having owned and used a quality doublet, in the form of my Pentax 75SDHF, I can absolutely say that a quality doublet is an excellent product. As a quality doublet I would recommend a Pentax (like Hens teeth when they do come up) or a Televue. That's what I'd be spending my money on in the doublet stakes.

[FLO]

The Borg 77ED II are doublets though.... ? That implies to me "not as good" as a triplet? Or have I go this all wrong? End f year i am thinking of a FSQ85 or possibly the Borg. The Borg is more realistic.

I would expect a well-made Japanese doublet to outperform a budget Chinese triplet. It isn't the design that matters most, it is the quality of materials and manufacture.

The Takahashi FSQ85 is an f5.3 Modified Petzval quadruplet (4 elements). The Borg 77 configured at f4.7 has five elements (doublet objective with triplet reducer/flattener). Both are wholly Japanese-made (Borg tend to use Pentax or Canon optics, I don't know what Takahashi use). The Borg costs £1,659 and the Takahashi £3,449 (at Harrisons) so I would expect the Tak' to win. But, considering the results James achieves with his Borg 77ED... It would certainly be an interesting shootout

HTH,

Steve

[kirkster501]

Thanks guys. Interesting. The Borgs do look good....

[ollypenrice]

In narrowband I doubt that the Tak 85 (well known to be my favourite scope!) would be significantly different from the Borg. What can you say about James' images? They are spot on.

Where the Tak will be hard to beat is at F3.9 with its reducer on a field with lots of hot blue stars. But, yikes, look at the price.

I'm so jealous of James being able to use the little SW tilt-pan device for aligning his scopes. Mine are too big for anything but the Cassady equivalent and that means you need an enormous mount because the Cassady thing alone would crush most portable mounts!

Olly