71mm scope recommendation

[souls33k3r]

Hi guys, 

I've been thinking on getting the 71mm quad scope and there are three variances of them and i'm not sure which one if better and much wiser decision to buy

1) William Optics Star 71 v2 (£1274) (ES Reid Test)

2) TS Optics Imaging Star 71 (£1060, getting a bit of discount on that. Good will gesture if you may say) (Not tested)

3) Tecnosky 70Q (£999) (Tested by Astrograph)

Ideally i would like to save money on this purchase purely because i am going way above my initial budget. The reason was the i initially was looking at the 65mm quad but that's a f/6.5 and i wanted something faster so that i can capture more data and secondly i will be buying an motorised focuser but i would not want to buy something that i will be bashing my head against the wall.

Please help

 

[Alien 13]

If it was me I would pay the extra for peace of mind with the WO scope, the resale value should be better too with the ES Reid seal of approval.

Alan

[ronin]

You are not going to like me for this:

WO have released a new set of scopes for their 20th anniversary, had heard they were planning on a July 4th release, or something like that. In there is a new GT-71 scope, FPL-53 triplet as you would expect. The "standard" cost is $958 so lets say £1000 after shipping and VAT, but they also have a Ex-Demo one they used at a star party for $600. If they state "Used" on it do you have to pay VAT, expect so these days.

It is up on the WO website.

Their facebook site may have more detail however: https://www.facebook.com/pg/William-Optics-464754920382/posts/

[swag72]

I think that customer service is the key here and with the Es Reid tested one from FLO you will get very good service should it not perform. For me, that extra test and piece of mind that I would not be left high and dry with a lemon would be worth every extra £. There are WO lemons out there and these people didn't buy from FLO - They are paying the price in the long run. For me it would be a no-brainer. 

[ronin]

It was an option that I was made aware of, and it is a 71mm exactly as mentioned - very convenient and I thought amusingly annoying to souls33k3r to throw in an unexpected one at this late stage.

The only reason I was aware of it is that I had my name down for one of the others and WO sent me the notification overnight of it/them now being available. They seem to be preorder only and it looks like they will not appear for sale in the UK, another of their Limited Edition runs (annoying). In effect if the GT-71 appealed then it would have to be from WO as  I suspect FLO will not have any available to offer. Or if they do it will be at some undefined future date.

Just placed to order for the one I want. Now have I a mount substantial enough for it? 

[souls33k3r]

Sorry for the late reply guys, i agree with the peace of mine and the seal of approval by ES Reid but i don't buy things to sell them. I buy them to use and keep them unless they break. Just one of those things i do

71mm's FL on a quad is a sweet spot for me because the f ration is just right. A bit more than my price range initially but then i should really blame the weak pound  

Customer service is the key but so are the bits that come with the hardware. I know exactly what i want but now wondering how i should deal with the finances because i really need two motorized focusers too. Maybe i should just use Bahtinov mask as long as i can and then buy them at a later stage a.k.a month or two.

 

[knobby]

7 minutes ago, souls33k3r said:

Sorry for the late reply guys, i agree with the peace of mine and the seal of approval by ES Reid but i don't buy things to sell them. I buy them to use and keep them unless they break. Just one of those things i do

71mm's FL on a quad is a sweet spot for me because the f ration is just right. A bit more than my price range initially but then i should really blame the weak pound  

Customer service is the key but so are the bits that come with the hardware. I know exactly what i want but now wondering how i should deal with the finances because i really need two motorized focusers too. Maybe i should just use Bahtinov mask as long as i can and then buy them at a later stage a.k.a month or two.

 

There's no rush, it's not even properly dark yet, take your time and make your choice a good choice .

[souls33k3r]

6 minutes ago, knobby said:

There's no rush, it's not even properly dark yet, take your time and make your choice a good choice .

I know matey and i really wish my fingers can refrain from clicking the buy button too lol ... i'm pretty sure i've nailed the FL side of things. There is this another option of the TS 80mm 6 elements f/4.4 which i might consider for within the same price range but not sure if it's actually "worth" going elements crazy. I just do not want to faff around with the back focus and finding the correct FF/FR and that's why i'm settling on a quad for sure ... more, maybe but definitely not less than a quad.

[souls33k3r]

anyone had any experience with how well the William optics version 2 scopes behaves in the winter? and pinched optics? star diffraction etc

[DaveS]

Be very wary of the TS 80mm f/4.4.

I have one myself and had endless "fun and games" with it as did Ultranova, I think he sent his back eventually. It is *very* sensitive to back focus, and had a devil of a job getting any sensible info from TS, the problem being it came with a rotator rather than the tilter shown on their site, and which they gave the spacing for.

I *think* I have the spacing right now, but even so am still not convinced.

[souls33k3r]

4 hours ago, DaveS said:

Be very wary of the TS 80mm f/4.4.

I have one myself and had endless "fun and games" with it as did Ultranova, I think he sent his back eventually. It is *very* sensitive to back focus, and had a devil of a job getting any sensible info from TS, the problem being it came with a rotator rather than the tilter shown on their site, and which they gave the spacing for.

I *think* I have the spacing right now, but even so am still not convinced.

Thank you DaveS for the great insight on this scope. I will surely ignore this variant