100ED frac

[mikeDnight]

Some time in the early 80's I bought a book that contained a black and white photograph of a British amateur called J Hooke. He was stood next to his 4" refractor in a domed observatory, and from that moment on, all I ever really wanted was a 4" refractor. By the mid 80's I was the very proud owner of a beautiful 102mm F13 Vixen achromat and was very happy. It was a great all round performer! Stupidly I sold it so i could afford a couple of university text books and almost immediately regretted doing so. Though I had access to various other telescopes throughout the following years, owning a few so so reflectors, nothing came close to my Vixen either in performance or in offering the same contentment factor.

One day in 1999 while wandering through town during my lunch break, (I was a college lecturer), I noticed a small black refractor in the window of a camera shop. It was a 102mm Helios achromat. I passed that shop again and again over the next couple of months, but didn't bite, because on the side of the tube there was a label "Made in China". One day an astro friend was visiting me when i happened to mention this little frac. His ears pricked up and the next thing i knew we were stood in the camera shop checking out the scope. I was very curious, and because im a true friend, I talked him into buying it. That night a few of us gathered a few miles out of town to check out this Chinese scope half expecting it to be rubbish, which if it had have been, we would have walked away quite happy as we'd spent nothing, apart from my friend of course. What I expected was bags of false colour and poor optics.What i saw was a genuinely good little scope with very little CA. The morning after I ordered myself a 120mm Helios. 

The day the scope arrived, I finished college around 4pm. I arrived home and my wife stuck a plate of food in front of me. Half way through my meal she casually told me the camera shop had phoned at lunch time to say the scope had arrived. I nearly choked! I was down at the camera shop in very short time still chewing my food. I grabbed the large box and was home again in no time. On opening the box I saw for the first time my new telescope and it was beautiful. It came with a very capable eq3 mount, which most people today would turn their nose up at, but considering the junk I'd been using, it was heaven!

That night there was a crescent moon in the west, so i set the scope up ready for first light. Two of my observing buddies turned up as I was setting up, one of whom brought a 6" SCT ( he ran a telescope making company that produced these SCT's). I took my first look at the moon through my new scope then changed places and looked through the 6" SCT. The refractor was beautifully sharp and to my releif, very well colour corrected. I was overjoyed! My friend on the other hand was fuming, as by comparison, his 6"SCT gave a view of the moon that I can only describe as looking through a dirty port hole window. He threw his scope in his car and left at speed!

There's much more to this story that I won't bore you with, other than to say that I'd finally arrived back at the place I was most content. I owned a fine refractor. And I was truly content. That is until I got my first look through a Vixen fluorite. The difference between the Helios and the Vixen was on the same scale as that between the 6" SCT and the Achromat. They were worlds apart in performance. Over the years I've spent thousands to bridge that performance gap. Today however, that gap can be bridged by spending hundreds rather than thousands, simply by choosing a SW ED. They really are excellent! ( Though my scope is not a SW ED its essentially the same thing!)

Knowing I've a scope that works almost instantly and delivers textbook star images, makes me content. Also, knowing my scope is so user friendly compared to the F15 of Mr Hooke's adds to that contentment as it gives me a measure of freedom and versatility that those old refractors never had. The freedom comes from the small physical size of my portable scope, and the versatility from its range of uses, rich wide field low power views and extreme high power capability all in one small package. I'm certain Mr Hooke would approve! 

A very content Mike ???

 

 

[Peter Drew]

He looks like he's rolling a Hookes joint. 

[John]

Would that have been a Cosmotron SCT or an Opticraft by any chance Mike ?

Not really fair to compare those to the modern Celestron or Meade SCT is it ?

 

 

 

[mikeDnight]

42 minutes ago, John said:

Would that have been a Cosmotron SCT or an Opticraft by any chance Mike ?

Not really fair to compare those to the modern Celestron or Meade SCT is it ?

 

 

 

Originally Cosmotron then Photon Optics and finally Opticraft. I used to call it Optic Raft because it could barely stay afloat. None of the Schmidts ever produced came close to Celestron.

Did you have one John? ?

Mike

[swamp thing]

 

[John]

3 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

Did you have one John? ?

 

No Mike. I was warned off them by someone who knew his stuff back when they used to advertise in the back of "Astronomy Now".

I believe they made decent newtonians but it seems that their SCT design was not a success. 

[mikeDnight]

6 minutes ago, John said:

No Mike. I was warned off them by someone who knew his stuff back when they used to advertise in the back of "Astronomy Now".

I believe they made decent newtonians but it seems that their SCT design was not a success. 

There were some impressive Newtonians on impressive mounts produced. They sold like hot cakes! If Phil had concentrated on those he would have made a killing. People wanted them but he was obsessed with SCTs which he never quite mastered, though I'm sure He'd deny that. He'd try and talk the enquirer into buying a SCT and often succeeded. Later, he concentrated on Maksutov Cassegrains which were less problematic and few were returned, but the SCT's came back almost as fast as they went out. Much of the problem was that the optics were rushed and skimped over. The Schmidt lenses were, with very few exceptions, made using float glass, and the mirrors were made to a deadline rather than to a standard. I know this to be true as i worked for Phil for a time. It was a very stressful environment, especially when I knew optics were being sent out before they had been accurately figured. I made hundreds of Newtonian optics while there and also worked on Maksutov's upto 12" aperture, but the Schmidt's I hated with a passion. I loved making refractor optics as they were far easier to figure than a primary mirror, but Phil hated them, and so he'd send them out mid figure. I never got involved with the Schmidt plate production thankfully, but knowing unfinished optics were being sent out was soul destroying.

Mike

[Peter Drew]

In the interests of balance, I also know Phil's work well and much of the optical shortcomings described by Mike were evident when Phil occasionally brought instruments to my workshop for a second opinion on my optical bench. I'm not an optical worker but had for many years worked alongside some of the best so I had a good appreciation of optical quality and what it took to produce it. Phil used good designs and good materials and excellent facilities capable of producing good optics, the shortcomings of his product were the result of lack of attention to detail and as Mike said, rushed to meet deadlines exacerbated by overdiversification. Although ultimately unsuccessfull, few would have the nerve to attempt the concurrent production of Newtonians, refractors, Maksutovs and Schmidt-Cassegrains.