Choosing between 4" ED Refractors for visual

[quasar117]

12 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

Should be good but pricey. A tubular steel SW tripod would be solid too, or an older aluminium Vixen tripod. Many of the cheap Chinese aluminium tripods have plastic guides through which the lower leg section slides, and that flex, are weak, and at times break.

If I was sensible I should have gone with a 1.75" steel tripod but I know in time I would lust after the Berlebach! 😅

[lvan]

I find my ED80 the ideal companion to my 10” dob. It’s excellent on lunar and planetary and comfortably rides a lightweight goto mount for tracking. When the skies clear up on a school night I never think twice about observing. I often consider upgrading to a 4inch but the additional mounting requirements limit me to my heavier non tracking mounts…currently gathering dust in the shed. YMMV but going lightweight with tracking was the best decision for me. Then I bring out the big dog for DSO’s on special occasions.

[quasar117]

1 minute ago, lvan said:

I find my ED80 the ideal companion to my 10” dob. It’s excellent on lunar and planetary and comfortably rides a lightweight goto mount for tracking. When the skies clear up on a school night I never think twice about observing. I often consider upgrading to a 4inch but the additional mounting requirements limit me to my heavier non tracking mounts…currently gathering dust in the shed. YMMV but going lightweight with tracking was the best decision for me. Then I bring out the big dog for DSO’s on special occasions.

I appreciate your insight. I've been down the Goto route before but for me personally I want to take more of a luddite approach. 

[Elp]

11 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

If I was sensible I should have gone with a 1.75" steel tripod but I know in time I would lust after the Berlebach! 😅

You will always have that what if feeling unfortunately. The SW thick leg steel tripod is solid, a Berlebach is a thing of beauty and will genuinely bring a smile to your face when opening the box. My thick leg carbon fibre tripods offer similar performance to the BB. All are good, depends on your budget.

[Mr Spock]

I had goto on an EQ6 but never really used it. I went back to basics for my 4" - an EQ5 with drives. Takes away all the faff.

 

[lvan]

26 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

I appreciate your insight. I've been down the Goto route before but for me personally I want to take more of a luddite approach. 

Goto/tracking neither here nor there. Heavy mounts get used less. Whichever way you go, don’t get an EQ6 for a 4” frac!

[quasar117]

23 minutes ago, lvan said:

Goto/tracking neither here nor there. Heavy mounts get used less. Whichever way you go, don’t get an EQ6 for a 4” frac!

I used to own an EQ6R-PRO, my back still remembers the pain of lugging it around 😭

[RobertI]

My 102ED spends most time on the AZ4 with the 1.75” tripod as it’s much lighter to set up than the Skytee on the 2” tripod. It’s actually rock solid, even at high powers with that scope. The lack of slow motion controls really doesn’t bother me these days as there is no stiction and it pans very smoothly.  The main advantage of the Skytee for me is that it requires less balancing when loading up with heavy eyepieces, binoviewers, etc, and you can lock the axes. I should mention I am a relatively recent convert to 4” refractors and absolutely love mine for visual. 

[Elp]

I get the same with my Tecnosky Cubo, thought I'd miss slowmo but I don't.

[quasar117]

1 minute ago, RobertI said:

My 102ED spends most time on the AZ4 with the 1.75” tripod as it’s much lighter to set up than the Skytee on the 2” tripod. It’s actually rock solid, even at high powers with that scope. The lack of slow motion controls really doesn’t bother me these days as there is no stiction and it pans very smoothly.  The main advantage of the Skytee for me is that it requires less balancing when loading up with heavy eyepieces, binoviewers, etc, and you can lock the axes. I should mention I am a relatively recent convert to 4” refractors and absolutely love mine for visual. 

Think I'll give RVO a visit to test the AZ4 and Skytee out if they have both. It's not too far as I'm in Derby.

[bosun21]

1 hour ago, quasar117 said:

I'm aware I'd be losing the slomo control on the AZ4

What slow mo on the AZ4? The ones I've owned just had a pan handle. The Starfield 102 is a fantastic scope at a good price. I would also buy new from FLO and have total peace of mind with your purchase.

[quasar117]

7 minutes ago, bosun21 said:

What slow mo on the AZ4? The ones I've owned just had a pan handle. The Starfield 102 is a fantastic scope at a good price. I would also buy new from FLO and have total peace of mind with your purchase.

Apologies I didn't word it very well, I meant there is no slo mo on the AZ4.

[quasar117]

Would the Altair Starwave Ascent 102 F/11 be a good alternative option? I don't think the optics are as premium but I think it  would be better for solar system work. 

Has anyone had experience with this scope?

Doesn't look like there are any in stock though for now. 

[mikeDnight]

1 hour ago, quasar117 said:

If I was sensible I should have gone with a 1.75" steel tripod but I know in time I would lust after the Berlebach! 😅

Go where your heart leads you, - providing your wallet agrees! 😁

[Mr Spock]

3 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

I don't think the optics are as premium but I think it  would be better for solar system work. 

Why do you think that? For planetary you want the best optics you can get.

[John]

An F/11 4 inch would rule out the AZ-4 - it just would not cope with the forces that the long tube exerts.

 

 

[bosun21]

4 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

Would the Altair Starwave Ascent 102 F/11 be a good alternative option? I don't think the optics are as premium but I think it  would be better for solar system work. 

Has anyone had experience with this scope?

Doesn't look like there are any in stock though for now. 

I got some of my sharpest views of the planets with my Starfield. With my 4.5mm Morpheus eyepiece it gave me 158x which is about optimal for Jupiter from UK skies. For Saturn I used a 2x barlow or extender with my 6.5mm giving 220x. The focal length of the Starfield is only slightly less than a 6" reflector.

[quasar117]

7 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

Why do you think that? For planetary you want the best optics you can get.

I just gathered the longer the tube the better for getting good magnification on the planets. But I suppose you can only magnify as much as the seeing will allow.

[Mr Spock]

2 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

I just gathered the longer the tube the better for getting good magnification on the planets.

Just use a different focal length eyepiece. Better optics will always give the better view.

[mikeDnight]

In the past I've owned a Vixen 102mm F13 and a Antares 105mm F14, and I can tell you that those scopes, although being great scopes, had nothing over a modern apo or ED other than being long and needing heavier mounts. What I remember most, especially regarding the Antares, is that I found it uncomfortable to use because of the varying observing angle the focuser made. To observe the zenith I had to observe on my knees. On the positive side, they looked awesome as an ornament and turned heads in the field. Comfort when observing can mean the difference between seeing finer or fainter detail, or not seeing it.

[Mr Spock]

With my f7.4 scope and 2.5mm eyepiece with Powermate I can get x1184... Not that I'd ever use it 

[mikeDnight]

21 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

I just gathered the longer the tube the better for getting good magnification on the planets. But I suppose you can only magnify as much as the seeing will allow.

You can always use a 2X barlow and turn your F7 into an F14. Often I will use a 2X barlow on my binoviewer, but because of the extended light path the amplification factor is closer to 4X, which means I can get high powers while still using long focal length eyepieces. I rarely ever use anything shorter than 16.8mm in my binoviewer.

[John]

The Altair 102ED F/11 does come "binoviewer ready" with a removable section of the tube to allow for the additional inward focus movement that binoviewers provide.

Using binoviewers might be a way to further bridge the planetary performance gap between 102mm and your current 10 inch dob, if you find they suit you. 

The F/11 approach will need a much sturdier mount than the AZ-4 though and may undermine some of your ease of use / portability objectives in going for a 4 inch refractor.

 

Edited February 18 by John

[quasar117]

Yes taking all that info consideration it would prove counterintuitive to the way I want to observe.

Starfield it is! Thanks guys.

[cajen2]

46 minutes ago, bosun21 said:

I got some of my sharpest views of the planets with my Starfield. With my 4.5mm Morpheus eyepiece it gave me 158x which is about optimal for Jupiter from UK skies. For Saturn I used a 2x barlow or extender with my 6.5mm giving 220x. The focal length of the Starfield is only slightly less than a 6" reflector.

Likewise: same scope, same Morph 4.5mil. These two seem to be made for each other.

 

23 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

Yes taking all that info consideration it would prove counterintuitive to the way I want to observe.

Starfield it is! Thanks guys.

You won't regret it - fabulous scope. Mine's on a Berlebach tripod too, though it's a Report 312.