Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_annual.thumb.jpg.3fc34f695a81b16210333189a3162ac7.jpg

Recommended Posts

I have succumbed finally. Too much reading of too many posts about exotic glass has finally sent me over the edge. So here is the object of my desire, the telescope I have been dreaming of since I first read about them.

It arrived well-protected and well-packaged. Rupert at Astrograph was excellent with his advice and communication. This one has an aluminium tube, with a 3.7" stock focusser. Came with a losmandy plate, cnc rings and carry handle. I love the deep green tinge to the coating of the lens, serial number 133 (and the clouds are rolling over the skies of York right on cue, so I don't know when the first light will be....). Much more front-end heavy compared to my SW150ED doublet, and I think about the same weight (if not more) with rings etc. fitted. Feels like a nice piece of equipment, really nicely made.

Mine is badged as an APM APO Super ED 130-1200. Although, the focal length is given as 1170 to get to f/9. Not sure if earlier versions were longer (like f9.23 and really 1200mm in length)? And I'm not sure whether the serial number refers to the newer production run for 1170 f/9 only?

Anyway, obligatory unboxing photos below:

01Package.jpg

02Inbox.jpg

03ShieldExtend.jpg

04Branding.jpg

BusinessEnd01.jpg

BusinessEnd02.jpg

Cert01.jpg

Cert02.jpg

Cert03.jpg

  • Like 15
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 35
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I have succumbed finally. Too much reading of too many posts about exotic glass has finally sent me over the edge. So here is the object of my desire, the telescope I have been dreaming of since I fir

A few observations on my LZOS. I find the dew shield cover a bit of a pain; its one of those screw-in  types (how do you call them?) and is surprisingly noisey at 2am when packing up.... :). The scope

So, the clouds have parted and the scope has been out an hour. I'll post a proper first light report later, but for now all I'll say is, I get it. I now get it. I really finally get it. I get why a pr

Posted Images

Looks real nice.

Wishing a wonderful experience with it (are you planning to use for imaging or observation mostly?)

N.F.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks N.F. Mostly visual with this, which is why I went for f9 rather than the f6 version. I think there is a reducer available for the f9, but I have other options for imaging (a nice little teleskop-service 80mm ed to practice with :)).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow !

Fantastic scope Mark, absolutely fantastic :thumbright:

Mine is #020 and dates from 2006. The lens bezel ring on mine says F/9 like yours does but the concensus on the CN forum is that these are 1,200mm focal length so F/9.23.

Markus told me in late 2016 that they had made 114 of these up to that point so we are up to #133 3 years on so a production of around 8 per year ? 

Apart from saying TMB rather than APM the objective cell on mine is identical to yours.

I'll look forward to reading your reports on how your LZOS 130 performs and maybe comparing notes ?

Many congratulations !!!!

 

 

Edited by John
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Really nice @Marki

I'm sure some beautiful views await you.

I have the smaller brother (105/650 : No.509)  same tube / rings, handle etc, but with the smaller 2.5" focuser.

It will shortly be undergoing 'modification'.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Beautiful indeed! This is right up my most desired scope list, look forward to hearing all about how it performs. You won’t be disappointed I’m sure!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Space Hopper said:

Really nice @Marki

I'm sure some beautiful views await you.

I have the smaller brother (105/650 : No.509)  same tube / rings, handle etc, but with the smaller 2.5" focuser.

It will shortly be undergoing 'modification'.

 

 

Thanks :). What modifications do you have in mind? I must admit I was tempted to add an FT .... ;).

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Very nice purchase.  You say it's front end heavier than the ED150?  Thats heavy!  The ED150 could do with a composite hood instead of the metal one to reduce that issue. Enjoy.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Marki said:

Thanks :). What modifications do you have in mind? I must admit I was tempted to add an FT .... ;).

 

Well......it may sound slightly crazy, but i've decided to retube it and fit the large 3.5" FT focuser.

I want to image with it in the near future and have a full frame camera, so plan to use a large type reducer.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Space Hopper said:

Well......it may sound slightly crazy, but i've decided to retube it and fit the large 3.5" FT focuser.

I want to image with it in the near future and have a full frame camera, so plan to use a large type reducer.

 

 

I have the 115mm TMB LZOS and was looking to change to a 3.5" ST focuser to fit the Riccardi reducer/flattener, I have been in  touch with Markus at APM and Wayne at Starlight and it seems those old tubes are slightly the wrong size to fit the new ST focusers without an adapter, unfortunately they wanted me to ship the scope out to Germany or US to fit a bespoke adapter 😬

If I do replace the tube I may go the moonraker route, I can get a shiny silver 3.5" ST to match the tube 😄

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, billhinge said:

I have the 115mm TMB LZOS and was looking to change to a 3.5" ST focuser to fit the Riccardi reducer/flattener, I have been in  touch with Markus at APM and Wayne at Starlight and it seems those old tubes are slightly the wrong size to fit the new ST focusers without an adapter, unfortunately they wanted me to ship the scope out to Germany or US to fit a bespoke adapter 😬

If I do replace the tube I may go the moonraker route, I can get a shiny silver 3.5" ST to match the tube 😄

I ordered mine with the 3.5 FT, if you take the base model add the 3.5 " FT its about £500 off the mark II models. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

I ordered mine with the 3.5 FT, if you take the base model add the 3.5 " FT its about £500 off the mark II models. 

Would be nice but mine is second hand dating back  to about 2005 or earlier, it seems to have a custom made 2.5" ST, trouble is I want to fit the 82mm  Riccardi. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, billhinge said:

I have the 115mm TMB LZOS and was looking to change to a 3.5" ST focuser to fit the Riccardi reducer/flattener, I have been in  touch with Markus at APM and Wayne at Starlight and it seems those old tubes are slightly the wrong size to fit the new ST focusers without an adapter, unfortunately they wanted me to ship the scope out to Germany or US to fit a bespoke adapter 😬

 

I'm not required to send the scope back to APM ; there are making the tube there (Phenolic Kruppax) which will then be shipped to me with the 3.5"FT on it.

I then need to carry out a transplant operation with  the optic 🤯 but Markus has assured me that its easy.  What could possibly go wrong.....? 😃

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Blimey - braver man than me, Space Hopper! A kruppax tube would be well worth it though!

I'm hoping that there might be some breaks in the cloud over York tomorrow, so I might be able to get a first light in. I'm curious to see how long the scope needs to cool down too -  I imagine it might take a little longer than the doublets I'm used to... . John, how long does yours take?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My 130 F/9.2 has the Kruppax 50 tube. I think the model is the 130/1200 LW. I believe the tube material is the reason that the scope optics do not seem to dew up at all. Even when the outside of the tube is running with it.

It is quite hard to track the model history and specs of the TMB/LZOS/APM triplets. Quite a lot were made to bespoke specifications or have been later modified by owners.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks John.

33 minutes ago, John said:

 

It is quite hard to track the model history and specs of the TMB/LZOS/APM triplets. Quite a lot were made to bespoke specifications or have been later modified by owners.

 

 

You're not kidding. Just been reading up some of the very long, convoluted, tortuous and even heated threads about the evolution of the 130 f/9 (ish) design, cool-down times and actual focal lengths over on CN..... . Informative, but exhausting in equal measure ;). After all that, at this point all I want is a clear night to try mine out... ;).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, John said:

I believe the tube material is the reason that the scope optics do not seem to dew up at all. Even when the outside of the tube is running with it.

I just learned something here- the Kruepax- phenolic impregnated paper that makes superior tubes. Always wondered what the stuff is- it sounds top notch for scope tubes.

https://www.krueger-und-sohn.de/en/tubes-made-of-kruepax/round-tubes/

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The phenolic tube gets more complicated. The original tubes from APM had flocking inside them, at some point in the past APM had to find a new tube maker (someone retired) and the new phenolic tubes do not have the flocking inside.

Astrograph have phenolic tubes with the flocking for LZOS lens cells, plus they added a collimating flange for easier access to the lens cell.

Not sure why APM does not have access to the same tube fabricator as Astrograph.

The APM ‘CNC-LW / LW-II’ series is the original range of tubes that used to be offered for any LZOS lens. These are phenolic tubes and our AG tube follows on from these. The original builder of these tubes no longer works with APM. An alternative builder offered a version which is not flocked internally. APM now focus sales of LZOS on the aluminium tube versions which are turn key tubes. As I mentioned these can be fitted with the Starlight Focuser.

 

Strictly speaking the CNC-LW tube can still be offered as it’s a custom build. It has a 4-6 week lead time (not 2-4 as suggested). The original LW tube does not have a collimation flange and has to be collimated internally which is a pain. I am an advocate of the phenolic tube because its better. However the original tube shows its age. As such we don’t offer this old tube as the AG is frankly a lot better.

Edited by Deadlake
  • Like 3
Link to post
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
  • 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.