If you had a plan for a bigger Refactor, did you do it?

[Alan White]

Simple question, far longer explanation:

If you had a plan for a bigger Refactor, did you do it?

I have a very fine Vixen ED103s f7.8 scope, I enjoy using it a great deal and will continue to do so for a long time.
However  having had larger reflectors, the additional aperture has shown me more on some targets.
The problem I have is that my interests are broad.

So a ponder for the future, but which effects the present as well.....
If I have larger refractor in a few years time, it will need a hefty mount as I want a 5-6".
The present is I am looking at adding a new mount to my newly fitted pier, that mount will need to service the bigger scope.

So the underlying issue is, am I having a aperture fever moment and it is costing in advance? or
should I just do a heavier mount and future resist, not proof my set up.

This as per my signature is Visual kit.
 

[John]

I've owned a few refractors at 150mm of aperture. The mount requirements escalate quickly when you exceed 120mm I've found. 

At one time my dream scope was a 150mm F/12 and I did own one for a while but that pushed the mounting requirements even further. Even the Rowan AZ100 would have been swamped by that scope

I've owned my TMB/LZOS 130mm F/9.2 for 4 years now. It was only in February of this year that I got a mount that really copes with it - the T-Rex. Now I can fully exploit the potential that the scope has at last

Aperture fever afflicts refractor enthusiasts just as much as with other scope designs but that additional inch or so has big implications which need to be taken seriously if the instrument is to deliver to it's potential I think.

It can also be a little deflating when you go to all that expense and effort and then realise that a somewhat less expensive and less awkward 10 inch F/6.3 Orion Optics dob (for example) can outperform your dream quite easily on many targets

I suppose it's about going in with your eyes fully open, as it were

Sorry for the rather rambling reply !

 

[mikeDnight]

Hi Alan,

My first apo was a Tak FS128 and it was a fantastic scope. A few years after buying it an opportunity I couldn't turn down arose and I ended up with a Tak FS152, which was stunning. The trouble was that the 152 was massive and required a much heftier mount. At first I bought an EQ6 but it wasn't up to the task. I eventually mounted it on a Losmandy G11 which itself was permanently mounted on a garden pier at a height of around 7 feet. ( I had a stupid thing about looking directly through the scope rather than using a diagonal). If you're looking at a high end refractor such as a second hand FS 152 or a TOA,  you're going to need a similar mount to a Losmandy G11. If a FS128 then a GM8 would handle it well. 

The FS152 before it was mounted on a G11. The scope was a monster and had i bought it from new, it would have cost around £10,000.00. Today the equivalents Tak would be around £13,000.00.

Edited June 18, 2020 by mikeDnight

[JeremyS]

Hello Alan, I’ve found that a good quality 4-inch refractor with a C9.25 as backup for fainter targets provides the best of both worlds. So you’d just need to select a mount that could carry either (or both?) and you are future proofed!

Personally, I can’t see going much bigger than my Tak TSA-120. That’s easily handled.

[DaveS]

Sort of yes and no. I had a hankering after a bigger 'frac than my Megrez 90 and ended up with a TS Photoline 130 f/7 but have stopped there, even though at one point I seriously considered a 180mm triplet, either CFF or TEC. In the end I went for an ODK12 to satisfy my aperture fever. The 130mm is mounted on an ASA DDM60, the ODK12 is on an ASA DDM85.

[Alien 13]

Oh dear I am going in the opposite direction for minimum magnification i.e 4-8 X as a maximum which limits things somewhat.

Alan

[garryblueboy]

5 hours ago, Alan White said:

Simple question, far longer explanation:

If you had a plan for a bigger Refactor, did you do it?

I have a very fine Vixen ED103s f7.8 scope, I enjoy using it a great deal and will continue to do so for a long time.
However  having had larger reflectors, the additional aperture has shown me more on some targets.
The problem I have is that my interests are broad.

So a ponder for the future, but which effects the present as well.....
If I have larger refractor in a few years time, it will need a hefty mount as I want a 5-6".
The present is I am looking at adding a new mount to my newly fitted pier, that mount will need to service the bigger scope.

So the underlying issue is, am I having a aperture fever moment and it is costing in advance? or
should I just do a heavier mount and future resist, not proof my set up.

This as per my signature is Visual kit.
 

So Alan yes I did it and both the mounts your considering will handle that fine 

[John]

A "bigger refractor"

 

[Rob]

Always wanted a 5/6" Refractor. Funds are just not there for ED/APO of that size!. However, my 127L has satisfied this. I just love the contrast & inky black back drop.

The mount side of things is absolutely correct. Its not just the scope your purchasing! (well in my case the scope was a Christmas gift) Then had to buy an HEQ5 to carry it!

Rob

[cloudsweeper]

Like @Rob ^^^ I have a Bresser AR127L.  It's pretty big, but surprisingly manageable.  It is easy to use on the Skytee II mount with the AZ4's tripod.  I didn't see any need for an apo for my requirements, especially with the extra weight and of course cost.

It's a great all-rounder on account of the aperture and longish focal ratio.  And much of the viewing can be done comfortably from an ordinary stool (see pic)!

Doug.

[wookie1965]

I got a Tal 100rs for my first refractor with a extension for my tripod this was easily held on my EQ5 Mount. 

I then saw a Meade LXD55 127 emc for sale £120 I thought a bargain and a good 5" Refractor. 

Sadly I was wrong first the front lens where not in correctly thanks to @Peter Drew who swapped them for me and did a star test.

The focuser was terrible a very good friend gave me a Skywatcher dual speed focuser but then I needed a adapter. 

Over to moonraker telescopes I sent my old focuser the Skywatcher one and plenty of diagrams and measurements. 

The Skywatcher was a bit ropey Mark fixed that took it apart replaced nsome bearings now it's like new. He made a custom adapter and stuck the Skywatcher in it I think with araldite I cannot take it out put it that way, he said was the original focuser out of a lucky bag. £130 for the adaptor. 

Sent it back to me put it on the EQ5 but had to put a weight from the spreader plate so I needed a bigger mount. 

Then someone said get a EQ6 Tripod with a adapter my EQ5 will fit then, most of you will know how much trouble I have had with that. 

Briefly bought EQ6 tripod second hand turned out it wasn't no centre bolt I have had to use 10mm stud bar but that is being sorted at the moment. £50 for tripod £60  for the adaptor so a lot of money saved. 

Now with the 2" legs on the tripod and my EQ5 the 5" is solid I have had two nights of great viewing where every object was dead on. 

I have gone through a lot but I have a a cracking 5" now. 

[wookie1965]

14 minutes ago, cloudsweeper said:

Like @Rob ^^^ I have a Bresser AR127L.  It's pretty big, but surprisingly manageable.  It is easy to use on the Skytee II mount with the AZ4's tripod.  I didn't see any need for an apo for my requirements, especially with the extra weight and of course cost.

It's a great all-rounder on account of the aperture and longish focal ratio.  And much of the viewing can be done comfortably from an ordinary stool (see pic)!

Doug.

Doug what's the focal length on that Bresser looks a lot like my Meade which is F9. 3 

[Rob]

@cloudsweeper Its a joy of scope isn't it!

@wookie1965 What a journey for you, so glad your getting pay back for all your troubles. Yes the Meade AR127 you have there is one of the same.

Enjoy!

Rob

[wookie1965]

Rob, 

   I thought it was thanks once I have a new centre bolt ( being made for me) I will post a picture of it set up on the tripod and adapter only need some paint then to smarten everything up. 

Paul 

[Chaz2b]

Last year I sold my lovely Televue 102 to a friend who lives just found the corner, so I could still view with it when he gets it out. Earlier this year I bought a TS-Optics 130 APO as a replacement, boy! What a weight! You read the weight but it’s only when you get it you really find out what a problem it can be.

Funds only allowed me to fit it onto a EQ6, that, in itself is heavy and having to carry everything up and down a flight of stairs is challenging , so, I might have to consider down sizing, I cannot set it up permanently, it’s communial gardens here.

I might even go down to a 90mm triplet! Going up in size? The weight then becomes astronomical!! Lol.

chaz

[John]

Meade did two versions of their AR5 - one with collimation facilities on the objective cell and one without. The Bresser 127L has the latter and is a clone of the Meade AR5 LXD75 tubes. I've actually owned both the Meade and the Bresser versions.

If you want a "big" refractor experience I agree that these 127mm F/9ish achromats deliver that. Strangely, in a way that a 120mm doesn't quite manage ?

The earlier 127's could do with longer dew shields though which it looks as if Bresser have sorted now.

150mm F/8 - 127mm F/9.3 - 102mm F/6.5

 

[Solar B]

3 hours ago, cloudsweeper said:

Like @Rob ^^^ I have a Bresser AR127L.  It's pretty big, but surprisingly manageable.  It is easy to use on the Skytee II mount with the AZ4's tripod.  I didn't see any need for an apo for my requirements, especially with the extra weight and of course cost.

It's a great all-rounder on account of the aperture and longish focal ratio.  And much of the viewing can be done comfortably from an ordinary stool (see pic)!

Doug.

Ingenious counterweight system 👍 when I've used my 127L (v rarely) I've mounted 

it on the top SkyTee saddle with the counterweight underneath 

I reckon I'll keep my 127L for the time being until I can have a look at the reddish 

thing that's making a return  and no ones got a bad word to say about them 😃

 

Brian 

[dweller25]

I have always wanted a 6” APO but when I bought my FS128 I changed my mind as I realised how much weight I would have to move in and out for an observing session.

The FS128 sits well on a Vixen GPDX and Berlebach UNI28 tripod, but it is a relatively light doublet with a FL of 1080mm, anything larger and longer would not work well on that mount setup.

As John says, a good 10” Newt will cost much less than a 6” APO and will show more detail on the planets when seeing allows. It’s a shame my bad back does not like Newts 😕

 

Edited June 20, 2020 by dweller25

[cloudsweeper]

Paul @wookie1965 - the FL is 1200mm, f/9.45 - so it's good for mag, FOV, and depth of focus, etc..

Rob @Rob - Not exactly grab 'n' go, but when I do put it to use, Yes, it is a joy!

Brian @Solar B - good point about using the 'scope in the top saddle, although my top one is short and only has one securing screw, so I go for the side.  The counterweight is a nifty arrangement with thick steel plates screwed underneath, and detachable steel bars in a sort of frame on the top.

Doug.

[wookie1965]

2 hours ago, John said:

Meade did two versions of their AR5 - one with collimation facilities on the objective cell and one without. The Bresser 127L has the latter and is a clone of the Meade AR5 LXD75 tubes. I've actually owned both the Meade and the Bresser versions.

If you want a "big" refractor experience I agree that these 127mm F/9ish achromats deliver that. Strangely, in a way that a 120mm doesn't quite manage ?

The earlier 127's could do with longer dew shields though which it looks as if Bresser have sorted now.

150mm F/8 - 127mm F/9.3 - 102mm F/6.5

 

What did you think of the focuser in the Meade 127mm and I'm pretty sure mine is not collimateable saying that I have checked it and it's very near spot on. 

[John]

8 hours ago, wookie1965 said:

What did you think of the focuser in the Meade 127mm and I'm pretty sure mine is not collimateable saying that I have checked it and it's very near spot on. 

The Meade focuser was basic but did the job OK.

To be honest I'm not all that fussy about focusers. If they move the eyepiece in and out reasonably smoothly and then hold it nice and steady where you want it to be, that will do for me

If yours is in good collimation then you won't need the collimation adjustments. As you can see, of these 3, only the Bresser 127L had them. I did find that I needed to collimate a Meade AR6 that I had later. That scope was a bit of a monster as well:

 

[wookie1965]

John

       The focuser on mine was not smooth at all I took it apart it had two pieces of Teflon one down each side, when I did focus it the star or planet would jump around in the FOV it was terrible. 

I think I have been lucky with it in the respect of it having good collimation. 

[cutepetgroomer]

I haven’t yet. I did go from a 50 mm /600mm refractor to a 114mm/450mm reflector. I use both telescopes and I am planning on bigger refractor soon I think.

[chiltonstar]

My main scope was a 102mm f13 Vixen objective refractor for 20+ years, and I always dreamed of a bigger one until I visited a professional observatory in the Alps and saw some pretty huge refractors, which were not actually that big in aperture terms....... 

At that point, I decided that Maks were probably the way to go (for me) and bought a 127 and then 180. A compromise, but nearly refractor like viewing, but without the back problems!

Chris

[Grayskies]

Hmm... I've always wanted a larger refractor, currently I have the RedCat 51 and much older ZenithStar 80ED II. They are good wide-field scopes but if I'm going to go bigger (5-6") I'd want a similar fast short tube for imaging rather than the more traditional slower refractors for visual of faint fuzzies. I've looked through some larger observatory refractors in my travels but ultimately I think wind + my mount would quickly get overwhelmed by a larger beast.