Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_celestial_motion.thumb.jpg.a9e9349c45f96ed7928eb32f1baf76ed.jpg

GavStar

Travel scope - Baader travel companion or AP Stowaway

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Louis D said:

It's much more effective to take the extra money and go the night vision route to tease out dimmer or larger extended objects visually.

To each their own I say and while I do explore the NV option, the views through a telescope and eyepiece give me much satisfaction. Many, many faint objects are there to see if you get things right and so far things are working out. Seeing the Crescent nebula, parts of IC1318 and the Veil (very well) with no filter is very rewarding.

1 hour ago, Louis D said:

Galaxies are the same way if you can just go big enough and have steady enough seeing (as with the Hubble Space Telescope).

In this case image scale is needed (ie Blackwells research) as you indicate but it must be at the proper illumination for the eye (exit pupil)- of course extremely faint, small (in EP) galaxy cores can be a bit different, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/09/2018 at 03:51, GavStar said:

Gerry,

Your question intrigues me. ?

I just assumed that the fluorite was sourced from canon in Japan just like Takahashi. Are there other producers of fluorite for astronomy? Would a German made fluorite lens be any better?

Baader replied promptly but declined to disclose the lens source as they don't want to give manufacturing details away. They assured me it works fine and meets their requirements.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, jetstream said:

Baader replied promptly but declined to disclose the lens source as they don't want to give manufacturing details away. They assured me it works fine and meets their requirements.

Same approach as Skywatcher with their ED150 - they took a lot of flack for that on some forums. I wonder if Baader will get away with it ?

For the price, it would be nice to know the minimal spec that Baader require for each objecitve. APM publish that for their LZOS sourced objectives.

It's interesting that Baader are quite quick to name drop when it suits them eg: Zeiss with their star diagonals and bino viewers so perhaps we can assume that a "famous name" is not involved with this objective (although Baader themselves have a pretty good reputation of course) ?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, John said:

For the price, it would be nice to know the minimal spec that Baader require for each objecitve.

Definitely.

4 hours ago, John said:

It's interesting that Baader are quite quick to name drop when it suits them eg: Zeiss with their star diagonals and bino viewers so perhaps we can assume that a "famous name" is not involved with this objective (although Baader themselves have a pretty good reputation of course) ?

Exactly my thoughts too...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps there's a user manual for the Baader that comes with the scope in which details are listed? I'm not sure Takahashi have ever name dropped about Cannon Optron or advertised the optical specs for lenses. If they have I've missed it so it couldn't have been very loud!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve now got both these scopes

E4619F9B-95F9-4DA5-97D9-5D43C84A906F.thumb.jpeg.2e9ef83e05c5a7236f70b3f48768b9ab.jpeg

I have done a couple of comparisons under the stars. One area I think the Baader possibly has an edge is transmission. On the trapezium the f star is slightly easier to see with the Baader than the Stowaway imo. Back indoors last night I compared the lens’ under internal light and the Stowaway has quite reflective coatings - I could easily see the reflection of my hair in the lens. Whereas the Baader I couldn’t see my hair and the lens looked inky black in comparison.

Would the difference in coating reflectively have an impact on transmission of fainter stars etc?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GavStar said:

I’ve now got both these scopes

How they compare in mechanical refinement?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Louis D said:

How they compare in mechanical refinement?

I would say that the AP edges it mechanically. The Baader diamond steeltrack is very nice and smooth but the feathertouch on the AP is just lovely. So smooth, great feel and solid.

The paint job on both is great but again the AP feels a bit more robust - it feels like it could take a knock without being impacted too much (not that I’m going to test it out). The dewshield movement is smoother on the AP, it takes a bit more push on the Baader.

The Baader tube rings are a bit odd but are more sturdy than the APs which are quite thin. 

I’d say that overall the Baader feels a little over engineered and chunky compared to the svelte AP.

Nevertheless super build quality for both scopes.

(Baader fits into my airline compatible travel backpack unlike the AP which is a cm too long).

 

7C9E56A0-7F5F-4815-BC76-FA12F9305BC2.jpeg

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.