Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_4.gif.6a323659519d12fc7cafc409440c9dbf.gif

Refractor


Recommended Posts

I have seen that one on Marketplace and in the picture there are no rings. I don't know, it may have them. They are really nice achromats but I think the asking price is too high. Also at 1.2m and 7.5kg they are long, heavy scopes and need to be mounted well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is my Bresser 102

post-26321-0-72743400-1409701909_thumb.j

 

That photo definitely looks more like a 102 than a 127. Also comparing the 2" fitting at the eyepiece and the overall diameter it does not look large enough to have a 127mm lens cell.

 

Edited by jnb
typos
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The scope on marketplace for £270 is a bad deal, especially if it has no rings, but being on Facebook with a lot of astro beginners someone will probably pay it. My own experience of selling things on Facebook is to think of an asking price and double it, as everyone always messages and offers half of what you're asking anyway! Seems to be some sort of unwritten rule?! 

Also your VX8L will pee all over it on any target, and it won't be any easier to use being just as long and about as heavy. 

The ad on UKABS is fishy as it clearly shows two different scopes! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the above, the poster has a point about a 127mm f/10 achromat being a beast, but I have to disagree as to the first part, for it is a refractor, and a 200mm instrument would be ££££, and for an achromat even; not to mention the debilitating expenditure in acquiring a mount just to support it, to get it off of the ground.  It is also interesting to note that the gentleman above has no refractor listed within his signature; an oversight perhaps, or not.

But it's not about the aperture of a refractor competing with the aperture of a mirrored telescope.  Quite frankly, mirrored telescopes spend their days attempting to emulate the level of sharpness and contrast that only a fine refractor can provide, for a refractor uses lenses instead of mirrors, is 100% unobstructed, and generally requires no maintenance.  It is the very first and oldest design of telescope.  "The Original & Best", like a bowl of Kellogg's corn flakes, albeit for the lack of a better analogy. 

Then, we have Mother Nature.  Our own eyes, which utilise lenses by which we may see, and most clearly in youth.  If that were not enough, there are far-away galaxies that act as telescopes themselves, which are known as lensing galaxies.

Peering into my crystal ball, albeit cracked, I see, in the OP, a desire to see with his own eyes what a refractor is really like.  I suggest that an 80mm f/8 or f/11 is capable of demonstrating that.  But no need to worry, for even though a mirrored behemoth, relatively, may beckon with its brighter reflections, the refractor will always be there, waiting, and beckoning in its own not-so modest might and right.

Edited by Alan64
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does not feel right to you in one way or the other, otherwise you would not ask the forum...
That is a (not so) subtle sign to stay away from it.
Besides that the Vixen mounting bar on the scope  in your picture is damaged by two screws, so not that new...
I also think a 10 years warranty is more than worth the difference in price with a new one... 

Adding up all the answers in this thread, the sum is a definite 'don't do it' !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would double check with FLO as the 127L is showing 4 to 6 days availabilty.whereas they normaly give 1 to 2 days if it is stock in their warehouse.

365astronomy is showing it as in stock

https://www.365astronomy.com/bresser-messier-ar-127l-1200-127mm-refractor-telescope-ota.html

Edited by johninderby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Neil H said:

Had email back from astro buy and sell the telescope has diagonal but no extension tubes . So wont be getting that one so bavk to new then 

That one has the old focuser so never had extenstion tubes.

Edited by johninderby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Neil H said:

Just OTA he wont drop price he knows its worth 309 to 322

I do understand what you guys are saying if i get it new i will have to find 30 more not normally a problem but just paid out 6k so money is tight right now

Sorry but I would never buy a second hand scope when I could buy new for so little more, its worth paying the extra. As for saying he knows its worth 309 to 322....lol

Edit: Just seen there is a second page to this thread and am very glad that you did not go for it. 

Adam

Edited by Adam J
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Neil H said:

John is there much difference between the 102/1000 and the 127/1200 as to how well it does visual 

The 127L will give a much brighter image and better resolution but the 102 will still be good. CA will be similar but not too bad in either.

Purely on performance the 127L will show a bit more but bigger and heaver and will take a bit longer to cool down.

Edited by johninderby
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me too thats why i talk to you members 

Just waiting for John to answer my next question  102/1000 and 127/1200 is thete much difference  in viewing in the 2 telescopes 

I keep swing between the 2 its going to mostly visual but may pop my asl224 camera to image planets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Neil H said:

Me too thats why i talk to you members 

Just waiting for John to answer my next question  102/1000 and 127/1200 is thete much difference  in viewing in the 2 telescopes 

I keep swing between the 2 its going to mostly visual but may pop my asl224 camera to image planets

The 127mm will be better across the board with the only exceptions being portability and cool down time. I would say that DSO will be significantly brighter and planets will look much better too. 

Adam

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Neil H said:

JOHN can i put you on the spot which one would you buy for HEQ5 pro mount 

For visual would be the 127L but for imaging the 102’s lighter weight would be an advantage. So if it is mostly visual with the occasional bit of planetary photography then I would choose the 127L. 🙂

Edited by johninderby
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read once where two friends compared their telescopes one night.  The visitor brought their 127mm refractor, albeit an apochromat possibly.  The host brought out their 200mm Schmidt-Cassegrain.  The host had a sidekick for the 200mm, an 80mm refractor.  But the 80mm, apparently, wasn't that much of a competitor to its perhaps unsuspecting owner, and to their 200mm reflector.

After the session was over, the host sold the 200mm reflector shortly thereafter.  It is not known, however, if it was replaced with a 127mm, or even a 150mm refractor.

I found that result rather interesting.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.