ASKAR 185 APO U-TUBE REVIEW ADDED 18 HOURS AGO.

[paulastro]

Just spotted this.  Note, this is a photo from the TV ,not an actual link.

[The Admiral]

It's here:

Ia 

[mikeDnight]

Its a pity he waffled on about imaging as its all gobbledygook to me. However I'm pretty sure it would make a killer visual scope, which is all that matters.

[Louis D]

Yes, but if you're going to go visual for that money plus the cost of a mount, I'd go with a 12.5" Obsession Dob or similar.

[Telescope40]

So. Begs ze 64000 $ question.  First SGL member to buy or even get a look thru one.  As per Dragons Den - I'm out !! on the ownership front but a look thru at a gazillion magnification has to be epic, surely. 

John 

[Mr Spock]

With that lack of false colour I'm thinking this would be a great double star scope.

[bosun21]

It’s indeed a great scope but personally I would wait for an independent review of the scope as Niko is actually sponsored by Askar.

[mikeDnight]

Resolution is limited by atmosphere and a refractor is a far more versatile visual instrument than a reflector, so other than light grasp, a 12.5" Obsession would have nothing to offer over a 7" apo under UK skies. Star images and planetary definition as well as aesthetics would all be better through the refractor than anything else. Of course this is only my unashamed and totally biased opinion. 

[SamAndrew]

Looks good, could see myself getting one of these, but it also looks like a bit of a beast to mount! the 140 is probably the more sensible option.

[Louis D]

Under our generally steady Texas skies, aperture rules.  The only time they're unsteady while clear is in the first 24 hours after a front passes through.  This is because we're generally well south of the Jet Stream.  With my 15" Tectron Dob, I could regularly use 350x to 400x with ease when I still able to hoist its 65 pound mirror box.  I need to swap it for one of the newer lightweight models or build a permanent outdoor enclosure for it.  I don't know if trying to haul out and setup the 185 APO and mount would be any easier.  I have a hard enough time trying to get my KUO 152 achromat onto my alt-az mount's dovetail mount due to the height of the mount and ungainly bulk of the OTA.  The only thing high on the Dob to be assembled is the secondary cage which isn't all that heavy.

[900SL]

On 20/01/2024 at 14:46, mikeDnight said:

Its a pity he waffled on about imaging as its all gobbledygook to me. However I'm pretty sure it would make a killer visual scope, which is all that matters.

There's no mention of glass type, so at that price it has to be, at best, FK-61? 

Single ED element and at f7 it has to be bloated spot size to mask aberrations and unlikely to be diffraction limited? 

I wouldn't expect high resolution, will likely be OK in use with poor to average seeing? 

It's very cheap, so compromises have to be made. Maybe also a loss leader for Askar, who know how to market at the lower end of the pond. 

Too big and heavy to be a contender for me, I'd go for a ONTC Newtonian instead with farkles.

[900SL]

On 20/01/2024 at 17:57, bosun21 said:

It’s indeed a great scope but personally I would wait for an independent review of the scope as Niko is actually sponsored by Askar.

Do you have a source for that? He does review a few Askar scopes but I thought he was independent (not that you can trust most of these influencers:)  )

[Elp]

I was wondering this also. It'd not comply with YT terms of use and also not comply with FTC rules.

[bosun21]

1 hour ago, 900SL said:

Do you have a source for that? He does review a few Askar scopes but I thought he was independent (not that you can trust most of these influencers:)  )

He has stated this on many of his videos that he is sponsored by Askar.

[Icesheet]

2 hours ago, bosun21 said:

He has stated this on many of his videos that he is sponsored by Askar.

Does he say he is sponsored? I have heard him say Askar sent scopes to review but sponsored is a completely different thing. That would definitely compromise objectivity when reviewing. Having said that I’ve always felt he’s impartial when I’ve watched any of his reviews. 

[DaveS]

I saw that video, it's all about NB imaging of fuzzy diffuse nebulae, so not a true test. I would like to see how it stacks up against small faint galaxies with fine detail. M65 and M66 would do as a start.

[bosun21]

3 hours ago, Icesheet said:

Does he say he is sponsored? I have heard him say Askar sent scopes to review but sponsored is a completely different thing. That would definitely compromise objectivity when reviewing. Having said that I’ve always felt he’s impartial when I’ve watched any of his reviews. 

Definitely stated that he was sponsored.