16" of aperture for £1,172

[crashtestdummy]

The thing is have you wondered why it started off at nearly £2000 and has tumbled in price so much?

A small amount of tinkering is acceptable but if the scope is profoundly out of collimation easily it would wear massively thin with me very quickly.

[scarp15]

If I was interested in purchasing this scope, then I would go onto the Sky at Night Magazine website and order a back copy of the October 2013 Magazine, which is available for purchase. This has a full and up to date review on the current model. I read this review at the time though it was a borrowed copy so do not have it to hand. 

[Ptarmigan]

I had a look round the S@N website and they have quite a few various reviews online but sadly this isnt one of them.

My cynical side wonders why TH have not negotiated a publishing deal with S@N to put it online !

On the other hand I have never rated magazine reviews, much rather hear from the grass roots.

Ordering a copy will not ofcourse be any good for this 10% deal (emoticon for shedload of tears)

Oh well I suppose it is only a mere 100orso

My cynical side also wonders why there are not hoards of satisfied owners egging us on to buy, buy now !!

[scarp15]

Certainly glean as much information as possible from various sources as at the end of the day, it is still an expensive purchase to commit to . Unfortunately with this scope there isn't a great deal of accounts. The magazine review provided one such strand for this and as I recall was generally favorable in terms of build and performance. If you are an existing customer with Telescope House, then there are more bank holidays on the horizon and so just perhaps more in the way of discount codes. I have to say though that it would be good for someone on the forum to get hold of one of these and provide a full review - so maybe go for it! 

[John]

A review isn't going to tell you much apart from how that particular example performed, broadly. I think there will be variation between units at this price. Mechanicals I'm happy to tinker with and mod but I'd not want to have to get the primary re-figured if it was less than 1/4 wave PV. I wonder if TH would agree to a purchase "subject to satisfactory optical test" ?. I'd be prepared to pay for the test but I'm not sure TH would be to happy with the arrangement !

[Joves]

I have a digital copy of the review. If anyone would like a copy to perhaps help with a purchase decision, let me know and I can IM you.

[Ptarmigan]

someone on the forum to get hold of one of these and provide a full review - so maybe go for it! 

Good man ! Quickly now, look sharp !LOL!

My un-cynical ( what is the opposite ?) SWMBO is saying " go on buy it , at least you'll have something to look through whilst you plan that ultimate 'scope "   (using a mirror from a well known member of this parish)

Many have rightly said that in this price bracket there are bound to be some tweaks needed and I would add - compromises, especially in the matter of optics quality (deffo not a little tweak !) .

Now, if the importer/distr/vendor would tone down the sugar-coated blurb put out by Revalation, which actually says very little and means nothing without further clarification/specification ( eg. the 1/12 bit could easily be clarified as ok for DSO ) they would do themselves a reputational service.

But pigs might start flying then !

[Ptarmigan]

I might be over analysing this but :-
the CN2008 review says "The eyepiece was sharp in the center, but the outer 40% was almost useless."
The S@N review is not as complementary about the centre and doesnt even mention the outer !

The CN review suppses that better eyepieces may improve things. (considering the Fratio, that is reasonable)
The S@N review does not make any suggestions in that regard.
Considering that a magazine should have the resources and where-with-all to make such an investigation one wonders if they did but dare not say !
Perhaps better eyepieces did not improve things and it was the primary optics that were no good ? But again, perhaps they could not do down the optics on the basis of someone elses eyepieces ?

Considering the length of the review I was surprised at the few words they had to say on the esential primary thing, the view at the business end !!

As I do not yet have any eyepieces at all (apart from some 9/16 about 40y old!) nor the experience to judge if it were them wot woz the prob,
I thank Joves and you all for your input but for the time being,
in the words of the Dragons
 - I am out
 

I think :)

back to thinking about flextubes and portables , , ,

[nitram100]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/170986654/Sky-at-Night-2013-10

Review down towards the bottom, page 90 to be exact.

Also has a link to a cool 360 view of the scope. 

http://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/360/1013-revdob/index.html

I would get this in an instant but my 10" has so much more life left in her! 

[Rustysplit]

Assorted quotes from the CN review..

"Switching over to Nagler eyepieces gave the scope a new life. At 60X with the 31mm Nagler, the scope delivered the wide, sharp views you expect. At 370X with a 5mm Nagler, the scope was near the limit of the seeing for the night. Sliding along the Moon"s terminator there were moments of clarity that showed nice, high contrast images."

BALANCE

"OK, I admit, I saved the best for last. The AT16 balances perfectly with no counterweights. Yep, you read that correctly. Go ahead and read it again.

Every Far East Dob usually has a bunch of magnets hanging off it, or gym weights or lead shot. Sometimes they don"t even balance with the lightest, included eyepiece. Not this baby. I could go from the 5mm Nagler all the way to the monster 31mm Nagler and all I had to do was crank down the ALT bearings. Cranking down the ALT bearings did not make the scope movement sticky at all. It was smooth and silky.

After I moved the adjustment back on the ALT bearing, I could even use the Denk II Binoviewers with no counterweight! To say I was impressed would be an understatement."

"I know this was another of my lengthy reviews, so many of you just skipped down to the summary wanting to see if the scope is worth $400 more than the 16" Lightbridge. The answer to that would be - YES. The innovative ALT bearing resistance system is worth the money all by itself. To just simply observe without having to toy with counterweights every time you change eyepieces is one step closer to that elusive perfect scope."

And now it is around £800 Cheaper than the LB on this offer!!!!! C'mon chaps. I think the pv/rms whatever issue has just bogged this down. It is a GSO mirror so is likely to be just fine. A star test or a ronchi eyepiece will give a good indication of it's finish, if not the actual wave error we are all so hung up on. If it is poor, talk to TH. Chances are it will be just fine.

[Mike73]

Brilliant Alan, couldnt put it better myself!

[Ptarmigan]

Assorted quotes from the CN review..

"Switching over to Nagler eyepieces gave the scope a new life.

Oooops , thank you,

I stopped reading at the line "Plan on buying some better eyepieces to get your money"s worth out of this scope."

which, at the end of the section I quoted, seemed pretty final ! My mistake, sorry.

[crashtestdummy]

Maybe its so cheap to allow for upgrading your eyepieces?

[Ptarmigan]

I have been looking at Naglers, ouch ! my plastic has just had a heart attack !

What other eyepieces, if any,  would be suitable for this scope ?

(or is that a 'length of piece of string' question !? )

[Dreadz]

The explore scientific 82° and 100° ranges are by all accounts very close to their televue counterparts in terms of performance and quality but not in price thankfully. They're the ranges I'm aiming for as I'm unlikely to be able to afford the televue's anytime soon!

http://www.explorescientific.co.uk/en/Eyepieces/?cur=1&ldtype=grid&_artperpage=24&listorderby=oxtitle&listorder=desc&pgNr=0&?cur=1〈=1&cl=alist&searchparam=&cnid=f89cfa7531bb9b9f889937b14e002fcd

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

[faulksy]

the sky watcher nirvan or william optics eye pieces are the next step down from tv, very close in performance

[AlexB67]

The explore scientific 82° and 100° ranges are by all accounts very close to their televue counterparts in terms of performance and quality but not in price thankfully. They're the ranges I'm aiming for as I'm unlikely to be able to afford the televue's anytime soon!

http://www.explorescientific.co.uk/en/Eyepieces/?cur=1&ldtype=grid&_artperpage=24&listorderby=oxtitle&listorder=desc&pgNr=0&?cur=1〈=1&cl=alist&searchparam=&cnid=f89cfa7531bb9b9f889937b14e002fcd

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

If you are going to buy a 4.5 Dob and wide angle eyepieces in that 82 FOV+ range I would budget for a coma corrector also personally. Visible coma will start to affect appreciable parts of the FOV, something that may or may not bother you so much depending what you are looking at, but if you are going to have nice optically corrected eyepieces and fully enjoy that FOV, a coma corrector would be a good investment to allow for.  

You could try without one to begin with, not that it would not be useable without one, and buy one after trying if you feel you need it. At f4.5 many will say/agree you are really getting into that cutoff territory where they do become really essential though.   I can go by my 4.7 and find the 68 degree eyepieces 28mm fine to use, but coma does affect the views. I don't need to have looked through one to know that an 82 degree eyepiece and especially a 100 degree with a faster scope the issue will only get worse.  Some are okay with that, some not.  Personally it would begin to annoy me no doubt in that wide FOV range in such a scope.

Investing in some ES eyepieces with something like a GSO CC or the Baader Mk3 perhaps would be not that expensive ( in the scheme of things ) and clean up the off axis views a lot.   

[Dreadz]

@AlexB67 I am looking at a bigger dob in the next few months (aperture fever has claimed another victim!) and a decent CC is definitely on the shopping list both for use in my current 250px and whichever giant dob I end up with (am dreaming of a sumerian, but then aren't we all!)

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

[gooseholla]

My 12" dob shows coma in anything above 70 degrees. Anyone recommend a good coma correct to look at getting?

[Ptarmigan]

Thanks for all your suggestions guys.

AlexB67 >

My reason for asking about eyepieces came from my interpretation of the S@N review and from the CN2008 review

recap:

the CN2008 review says "The eyepiece was sharp in the center, but the outer 40% was almost useless."
The S@N review is not as complementary about the centre and doesnt even mention the outer !

Which was pretty grim and offputting I thought !

It would seem that Naglers or something not quite as expansive as per Dreadz and Faulksy would be required to recover the situation.

On the other hand :-

How about me asking a similar question but from the opposite end :

What would be the next step up from the supplied eyepieces, ie. "you would need at least a ....  "

to make this scope work ?

In otherwords instead of peering down the supplied eyepieces and thinking "oh what a lemon" on the basis of the reviews

If you see what I mean.

[John]

£1,172 for the scope + £1,172 for a set of eyepieces and a coma corrector

If you decide to do without wide views the Tele Vue plossls will work well down to F/4. You could probably get away without a coma corrector with them as you are not seeing so much off axis field, which is where most of the coma lurks.

[Ptarmigan]

^^ like it John !

I think they are trying to under cut the Nagler range

[faulksy]

my scope is f4.6 and i dont find coma a issue it is there but i think you get used to it. my widest fov ep is my 31mm nagler its there but you notice it more when your moving the scope around whilst stationary not to bad. buy your scope first and go from there

[crashtestdummy]

My 16" f4.5 showed coma but tbh it didn't spoil the view and you could definately get away without a coma corrector.I did buy a televue paracorr but part of the reason was to compare, another was that it was on sale and the other was due to the planned 22" f3.6 that WILL need a coma corrector.I sold it and bought a feathertoucj with the SIPS integrated system.

[AlexB67]

@AlexB67 I am looking at a bigger dob in the next few months (aperture fever has claimed another victim!) and a decent CC is definitely on the shopping list both for use in my current 250px and whichever giant dob I end up with (am dreaming of a sumerian, but then aren't we all!)

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

Since I added more eyepieces I suffered form revere aperture fever. The 5 inch is getting as much use as ever. Couple of nights ago was perfect example, it was clear but looked like it might not have remained that way, as it happened it did, and had a good long session with it, doubles, planets, lovely for high mag views in a scope that is well cooled in 20 - 25 mins and well settled/optimised for the high power in a short time. Amazing how clean the splits were on that night in the dinky little heritage, good seeing helping out.

These little gaps in the clouds  session have happened quite a bit recently and the 5 inch is perfect for that when I am not sure how it will pan out and sneak in a nice session 

I must suffer from the rare reverse aperture fever condition and  just be weird  

I wonder how often I would use such a big beast, not that much I feel over a year, aside from the fact it would split my car in half fitting it in   Plenty life in the 10 inch to gather enough photons for my liking for time to come.  I'll see if I still sing the same tune a year from now  but clearly aperture fever strikes some a lot more than others, it would be a boring world  if we all the same