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_banner_30_second_exp_2_winners.thumb.jpg.b5430b40547c40d344fd4493776ab99f.jpg

Sign in to follow this  
william123

William Optics FLT 132

Recommended Posts

I am interested in purchasing a William Optics FLT 132 triplet refractor, and I would appreciate hearing opinions from any current or past users of this telescope.  Thank you!!

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/william-optics/william-optics-flt-132-2019-checked-tuned.html

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

that was one of the 2 scopes i looked at

WO132 and the meade 6000 130mm

WO is a triplet 53 weights 19,9 lbs and i like it in the red colour or for that fact that u can choose it in 3 colours which is not like a cookie cutter scope. Altho it costs $4879 plus taxes =$5513

the meade is also a triplet FK61 also weights 17.7 lbs blue colour is fine costs $3829 plus taxes $4326

almost $1200 less for the meade, you can buy a good 80mm apo with that difference.

i ended getting the meade i found it brand new on sale $3159 with tax was $3569 which is amazing less then the reglar price before tax. and again was brand new in box was dealer last one and they wanted to just sell it.so bascally that about $2000 less then if i got the WO model.

i have used it and really like it and it compares very well to my takahasi 120TSA

joejaguar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have an early WO 132.

I like my 132 now I have upgraded the focuser as the original stock focuser was very poor but I believe it is now sorted.

The retractable dew shield is a bit floppy.

Its a WO so its heavy and benefits from a lifting handle.

If you want to use it with bino viewers its ideal.

If you want to image with it you will need extensions ( in my case about 120mm)

It will be back on the mount come galaxy season.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

also i know that the WO132 is 2mm more then the meade BUT you wont be able to tell a 2mm difference at all. In fact i wish WO made their scopes in a 130 instead of 132mm. Being that 53 glass is very expansive if they made it 130 i bet they could shave $200 or more from the price yes iam guessing $100 a mm maybe even bit more.

The WO also has the better 53 glass vs the 61 glass but the meade's is f7.7 verses F7 for the WO so as we know being longer also makes the colour better so being almost a full f stop longer the meade has a sligh advantage or at least that help this scope a tad more.

last the WO has a bigger focuser a 3,5" verses the meades 2.5". again i wished the WO used something a bit less expansive cause the WO focuser is really an imagers focuser for visual u dont a $1200 focuser. The meades focuser is i find very very good and can also be used for imaging. If the WO used a 2.5" like on their other scopes for this model they again could reduce the price maybe by $500.

for all the visual people out there we dont need a huge expensive focuser mabe have 2 models one with a 2.5" dual speed at a reduced cost, and for the people that want the 3.5 one another cost.

I bet you doing the focuser and shaving off 3mm would put this scope in the same bracket of the meade and other similar scopes and then it would probally be no brainer to buy the WO over the rest. BUT its not and i choose the meade over the WO

according to my figure thats only puts the WO $350 more then the meade's, i probally would have got the triplet 53.

i hope this info helps you

joejaguar

Edited by joe aguiar

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Ibbo! said:

I have an early WO 132.

I like my 132 now I have upgraded the focuser as the original stock focuser was very poor but I believe it is now sorted.

The retractable dew shield is a bit floppy.

Its a WO so its heavy and benefits from a lifting handle.

If you want to use it with bino viewers its ideal.

If you want to image with it you will need extensions ( in my case about 120mm)

It will be back on the mount come galaxy season.

 

 

Steve:

Let me make sure I understand:  You believe the focusers on new FLT132's are alright?  Are the retractable dew shields on new 132's still a bit floppy?

I'm not finding much information about the 132's on the web.

Thank you.

William

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, william123 said:

 

Steve:

Let me make sure I understand:  You believe the focusers on new FLT132's are alright?  Are the retractable dew shields on new 132's still a bit floppy?

I'm not finding much information about the 132's on the web.

Thank you.

William

Hi William Yes I believe that is correct.

The dew shield on mine does not slip back down the tube it just sags a bit.

Drop an e-mail to FLO I am positive they will set your mind at rest.

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.

Sign in to follow this  

  • 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.