Starfield 102 F7 or StellaLyra 12" f/5 Dobsonian ?

[Greymouser]

Well, they are about the same price, but offer very different things. One is going to be bought shortly, but which one?

The Starfield just looks so good, seems to ooze quality, but I have an issue with it: Can I justify it when I already have a very good 102, the Bresser AR-102L, which at F13.2 shows no CA at all? It also has a very good focuser and is a very much underrated scope.  The only problem with it that it is very long ( ! ) and means I really need to use the extension for my Sky Tee. It is very good though and except for portability, I am not sure how the Starfield will improve on it? I also have a very good C5, which is even more portable than the Starfield. 

As for the light bucket, whilst it will show a lot more than my C9.25, it is very bulky and heavy, which as I get older is going to be a huge problem I suspect. My health now, tells me it could be a problem from the get go. Realistically I would have to store it the shed full time, which would just make me so nervous, what with damp etc.. Then there is the problem of justifying that scope too, considering my Bortle 6 skies.

Which way do you clever people think I should go? Or maybe some other alternative I have no considered? I had been considering a Meade LX 200 8" OTA, but as that has just gone up in price, ( a lot, ) that is a no go now.

Thank you in anticipation.

 

[mikeDnight]

Starfield 102!!!!

It's lightweight,  short and easy to mount, will give you a significantly wider field than your other scopes, and will give you textbook perfect star images at 300X  and some. Sharper than your C5, and I doubt you'd use your F13 much once the apo arrives, and I'd also be surprised if it didn't soon become your most used scope ever. Comet seeker/ RFT to high power visual lunar, planetary, & double star scope all in one easy to handle package. It would leave you speachless when studying the Moon through a binoviewer. However,  don't let me try to influence you.☺

[Carbon Brush]

Handling a 12" dob will involve you in a bit more than just shed storage.

My 12" dob tips the scales at almost 35Kg (assembled) from memory. It stands about 1.6M/5ft tall and the base is about 650mm or a little over 2ft round.
Transport involves a wheeled base (home build ££) and ramps (££) to handle steps. Though I do have the space indoors.
Splitting doesn't help much with handling as the huge OTA is about 21Kg.

But the views are tremendous and worth the effort. If you want to catch faint objects, size matters.

I have owned 8" & 10" reflectors. Most recently SW250 flextube.
My thoughts on upsizing 8" to 10" are that it is more about the mount than handling the OTA
A 10" to 12" is a much bigger step up in handling than is implied by 2" extra mirror.

A refractor can be stored in a broom cupboard, leaving space for brooms. A 12" scope will expect its own room😲
But 4" of lens vs 12" or mirror........

HTH, David.

 

[Sunshine]

This is such a difficult question to answer as these telescopes could not possibly be further from each other in every aspect. Are you ready and willing to deal with the weight, mobility, storage, collimating, cooling etc that comes with a large dob? if so then the decision isn't any easier. On the other hand, you say you have a 102 which you are happy with already, I could sooner explain E=Mc2 than help you with this dilemma. 😲

[RobertI]

An interesting conundrum! I bought the Starfield equivalent (AA 102ED-R) even though I have a Tal100RS and have not looked back. As @mikeDnight said, it’s a superb all rounder, particularly good with doubles and coupled with binoviewers is remarkable on solar system. My F10 Tal100RS is unwieldy by comparison and never gets used now, and I imagine an F13 4” scope would seem even more unwieldy. I often use the 102ED side by side with the C8 on my Skytee, the C8 providing the light grasp for those fainter DSOs I imagine your C9.25 would complement it even better. Often though it’s just the 102ED-R on its own as it’s so quick to set up and use (cools down very quickly too).  I do ultimately want a 12” dob, but with my average skies, limited storage and most importantly limited TIME, I just can’t justify it at the moment. The 102ED is a winner for me. 

[Dave scutt]

Both 😁

[Mr Spock]

Just... drool...

[F15Rules]

10 hours ago, Greymouser said:

Well, they are about the same price, but offer very different things. One is going to be bought shortly, but which one?

The Starfield just looks so good, seems to ooze quality, but I have an issue with it: Can I justify it when I already have a very good 102, the Bresser AR-102L, which at F13.2 shows no CA at all? It also has a very good focuser and is a very much underrated scope.  The only problem with it that it is very long ( ! ) and means I really need to use the extension for my Sky Tee. It is very good though and except for portability, I am not sure how the Starfield will improve on it? I also have a very good C5, which is even more portable than the Starfield. 

As for the light bucket, whilst it will show a lot more than my C9.25, it is very bulky and heavy, which as I get older is going to be a huge problem I suspect. My health now, tells me it could be a problem from the get go. Realistically I would have to store it the shed full time, which would just make me so nervous, what with damp etc.. Then there is the problem of justifying that scope too, considering my Bortle 6 skies.

Which way do you clever people think I should go? Or maybe some other alternative I have no considered? I had been considering a Meade LX 200 8" OTA, but as that has just gone up in price, ( a lot, ) that is a no go now.

Thank you in anticipation.

 

I think you've already provided not only the very good question, but also the most sensible answers..

Getting older and/or frailer is not much fun, to be sure, but it does force us to be realistic. Also, space limitations do have to be faced, and good optics and possible damp conditions don't mix at all well.

"The scope you will use most is best scope for you" is often quoted for a good reason..also, so is "The scope that's easiest to use is the scope you will use the most"!

So, all logic points to the Starfield 4". If you really also crave views of faint fuzzies from time to time, and other dimmer objects, see if there is an astro club or group within reach of you, where you could look through someone else's Dob, and maybe also take your Starfield with you and thrill someone else once in a while as well👍😊.

Good luck with your decision, but don't take for ever, those Starfields  seem to be selling rather quickly!

Dave

Edited December 8, 2021 by F15Rules

[Bodkin]

Hi, I have the 12 inch StellaLyra and can give some early impressions of it.  Overall it is a sound scope and excellent value for money.  Under my dark mid-Wales skies it performs very well on deep sky objects and is a step up from my much loved 10 inch.  Not a huge step though and if I was starting from scratch I would be very happy with just a ten inch dobsonian and a few higher quality eyepieces, plus a filter or two.  Under dark skies a smaller dobsonian can show wonders; my 8.5 inch F7.5 Fullerscopes on an Orion dob mount gave me one of the best views I have ever had of the Flame nebula about a week ago.

The 12 inch is a bit tricky for me to move around.  The base is easy enough, but the tube is a little too wide to make carrying it by the altitude bearings a simple matter.  I am six foot and still relatively strong, though no spring chicken. This scope is towards the top end of my limits unless I can find a way to add a handle to the tube to aid carrying.  It doesn't have to move far, which is lucky because I can't see myself lugging it up and down many stairs in safety.

The choice is a difficult one of course.  I would say that I first owned a 12 inch in the eighties, but under pretty poor urban skies.  In retrospect it was a waste of effort and I would have had more fun and time under the skies with a compact refractor; not that they were really available back then.  If you can get the 12 inch under dark skies occasionally the equation may start to swing, but I wouldn't rule out getting the 8 or 10 inch StellaLyra instead.

Having said all that, I am contemplating the purchase of the Starfield too. 

 

Jonathan.

[Saganite]

I would get the Starfield 102 , for the same reasons that have already been suggested and for how you feel yourself.  I have a 12" Dob which sees nowhere near as much use as it used to, not because it is particularly heavy, but more often because I do not feel up to it for age and health reasons.

I have four refractors, but two arrived unintentionally,  by ' accident '.  The Vixen ED103 F7.7 is by far my most used scope and is going to remain so for as long as I want to view the stars, it almost is a one scope option for someone who loves Lunar and planetary first.

So, I too am looking to simplify things and top of the list is the Vixen followed by, if anything, one of my long focus refractors.

The Starfield looks to be a superb scope.

Good luck with your decision.

 

[John]

Get the refractor AND a nice dob

 

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

Individually we all have different interests, circumstances and disposable income, however, faced with the same predicament, I would buy the Starfield, sell the Bresser and for now keep the C9.25.

The f7 Starfield will be easier to manage and is more versatile than the f13 Bresser. 

[Greymouser]

Thank you for all the input, certainly lots extra to think about. 🤔

It seems most seem to think the Starfield is the way to go, but I just cannot help thinking it is just duplicating what I already have. Especially when you consider that I would have to get another mount, to get the most out of it as it will just not fit on my AZGTi. My current intended travel combo is my F6 72mm EDF with a very high Strehl and my C5, which appears to be a good example of that sort of scope. Together they weigh about the same as the Starfield 102 and both go well on the AZGTi. Then I can mount them together if I got a little Castor or the mini Ercole. They cover quite a wide range of targets, which leaves me wondering what the Starfield would give me extra? Especially when I consider the Bresser F13.2, which is just so good ( amazing value too! ) and surprisingly easy to handle, certainly much more so than its big brother the 127L. The only problem there is the size of the Skytee with extension. I will check, but the image given from that may well be better than the EDF 72, cleaner with perhaps less CA, even though one is an acro and the other is high Stehl FPL53! ( Neither show any noticeable CA in focus, but the EDF has such a narrow range of focus... )

However, as Mr. Spock says: Drool! The Starfield is just such a nice, available, new shiny! I am struggling to stop my self from ordering one! I am obviously very bad.

Then again as Carbon Brush says: " But 4" of lens vs 12" mirror....... "

That has been so much in my mind, as a 12" is probably about the maximum I could manage, though not without issues. But could I persuade my wife that it would look good in the corner of the living room? It could be an interesting talking point after all ! Also, I very much doubt I could get it away to a proper dark site, as things stand at the moment, so another mark against its justification. As is the future and my inevitable deterioration in health. The C9.25 is at the limit for my fitness and nerves...

I also guess there is a third way, I could just get a few more good eyepieces, maybe a top of the range diagonal, because if I don't, the temptation may well be just too great and I may well end purchasing something I will later regret. Again. 

As ScouseSpaceCadet implies though, this is definitely a first world problem, after all I don't really need any scopes, never mind the too may I do have! 

( But me wantssss a precious, many of them. Anyone got a Tak they no longer really need? )

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

Ahhh... Greymouser not mentioning the f6 ed72 in the opening post was a trap!

My rationale was based on owning two... Thinking the f7 ED would manage decent quality views at higher mags while also about 2x the fov of the f13 so better for for widefield. Plus as prevously mentioned, easier to manage, mount and store.

Adding the f6 ed72 along with the f13 that you're happy with suggests you don't need another. 😀 Maybe treat yourself to some Pentax XW eps on sale at FLO before there's none left in the country? 😉

 

[Deadlake]

The ED76 is not a trap, looking at how many refractors to own I can see 76 mm class of scope as an idea travel scope.

However for normal use in the back garden or travel to a dark site by car a 76 mm would not offer enough aperture compared to a 100 mm scope for me.  I have a 130 mm frac and the 100 mm has not been used for months.

The one question I would have is how much more would you see over the C9.25 and the 12"? Extra aperture for sure, but if you have a bright sky then the level of contrast at your site I suspect the extra aperture will not help out.

C9.25 is going to be a hard scope to match, given its the pick of the Celestron SCT range for visual.

If you has an AZ100 mount as well, the 4" frac and C9.25 side-by-side would have most scenarios covered. 

 

Edited December 9, 2021 by Deadlake

[Greymouser]

14 hours ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Ahhh... Greymouser not mentioning the f6 ed72 in the opening post was a trap!

My rationale was based on owning two... Thinking the f7 ED would manage decent quality views at higher mags while also about 2x the fov of the f13 so better for for widefield. Plus as prevously mentioned, easier to manage, mount and store.

Adding the f6 ed72 along with the f13 that you're happy with suggests you don't need another. 😀 Maybe treat yourself to some Pentax XW eps on sale at FLO before there's none left in the country? 😉

 

Not an intended trap, sorry. You are also right, accessories would be a better idea. I had not noticed the Pentax sale... At least talking it through here has been very helpful, thank you all.

My back just breathed a sigh of relief!

[rl]

A word in favour of the 12" option, as most opinions are going the other way I might just play Devil's Advocate.

I'm at retirement age and live under Bortle 4 skies according to CO. Perhaps one rung above average on the fitness ladder. 

I have a 14" OO dob and several small refractors (GT81, SDHF75, ST120). It takes me the same amount of time to set up the Dob as it does the refractors on a Vixen portamount. Certainly it takes a lot more calories to lift but setting it up is no great inconvenience.  Both are kept in the garage. Some of the refractors are triplets; the cooldown time is just as long as the big dob. And the deep sky views through the 14" are predictably better than the small refractors. Generally planets too. 

I think I accept that there will come a time when I can't handle the 14", and it's probably not that far away. But until then I'll get as much use out of it as I possibly can! 

The other thing about the 14" is that for the same magnification as the refractor, the exit pupil is a lot bigger which helps with floaters. 

Common sense has to apply; no way is it worth a hernia, but if you can hump the thing around I'd go for aperture while you can! And an observing chair is a very good accessory. And a 10" might be a good compromise. A more valid question might be ..can you lift it without knocking the collimation out of kilter? Maybe that's the real convenience argument for refractors

Good luck either way.

Edited December 9, 2021 by rl

[Greymouser]

4 hours ago, rl said:

Common sense has to apply; no way is it worth a hernia,

To late I am afraid, I already have a small hernia and a screwed back from caring for my wife, which sometimes includes the joy of lifting her up off the floor! 🤣

I think I may well be certifiable, even considering a 12"!

I do not get any pain or discomfort from the hernia though and am avoiding a repair for now, because of Covid and me being unwilling to put my wife in a care home, which are all just in an awful situation, at the moment.

I think a 12" could still be manageable with ramps/trolley and very great care! 🤪

[John]

5 hours ago, rl said:

A word in favour of the 12" option, as most opinions are going the other way I might just play Devil's Advocate.

I'm at retirement age and live under Bortle 4 skies according to CO. Perhaps one rung above average on the fitness ladder. 

I have a 14" OO dob and several small refractors (GT81, SDHF75, ST120). It takes me the same amount of time to set up the Dob as it does the refractors on a Vixen portamount. Certainly it takes a lot more calories to lift but setting it up is no great inconvenience.  Both are kept in the garage. Some of the refractors are triplets; the cooldown time is just as long as the big dob. And the deep sky views through the 14" are predictably better than the small refractors. Generally planets too. 

I think I accept that there will come a time when I can't handle the 14", and it's probably not that far away. But until then I'll get as much use out of it as I possibly can! 

The other thing about the 14" is that for the same magnification as the refractor, the exit pupil is a lot bigger which helps with floaters. 

Common sense has to apply; no way is it worth a hernia, but if you can hump the thing around I'd go for aperture while you can! And an observing chair is a very good accessory. And a 10" might be a good compromise. A more valid question might be ..can you lift it without knocking the collimation out of kilter? Maybe that's the real convenience argument for refractors

Good luck either way.

I'm with you on this. While I have 4 really excellent refractors from 100mm to 130mm in aperture, it is my 12 inch dobsonian that has given me the most "wow !" moments and the most "firsts" during the decade that I've owned it.

And my 12 inch dob (also an OO) is as quick to setup as the refractors as well

 

[mikeDnight]

On 08/12/2021 at 22:00, Greymouser said:

(But me wantssss a precious, many of them. Anyone got a Tak they no longer really need? )

I have a beautiful Tak FC100DZ  that I dont really need! £1500 plus a brand new Starfield 102 will secure it. 😈

Edited December 9, 2021 by mikeDnight

[jjohnson3803]

For me, portability and fast set-up are most important.  And while I have an F5 120mm achro refractor, I am considering a Starfield 102.  It's about the same length and weight as the 102, but there's that ED thing...

Edited December 14, 2021 by jjohnson3803