Choosing between 4" ED Refractors for visual

[quasar117]

To stop the analysis paralysis before it totally consumes me I've ordered the Starfield 102 F/7 on FLO 😁.

I was going to wait but knowing my luck the inevitable price hike would have come into effect with this scope when they come back in stock.

Now to decide on a suitable diagonal....

[dweller25]

1 minute ago, quasar117 said:

To stop the analysis paralysis before it totally consumes me I've ordered the Starfield 102 F/7 on FLO 😁.

I was going to wait but knowing my luck the inevitable price hike would have come into effect with this scope when they come back in stock.

Now to decide on a suitable diagonal....

Good decision 👍

[Mr Spock]

2 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

To stop the analysis paralysis before it totally consumes me I've ordered the Starfield 102 F/7 on FLO

Excellent choice!

4 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

Now to decide on a suitable diagonal....

A couple I have and can recommend:
https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/baader-clicklock-2-dielectric-star-diagonal.html
On the Starfield:

Oh, and I replaced the twist grip on the Starfield with a Baader Clicklock  Not necessary, but I am a big Baader Clicklock fan 

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/baader-t-2-prism-stardiagonal-zeiss.html
On the Tak:

Brilliant for planetary detail but only wide enough for the 2" 30mm UFF - something like the Nagler 31mm would vignette, as does my 42mm LVW. A very short focal path though, ideal for binoviewers.

[bosun21]

Lovely focuser on your Tak Michael. How long did you have to wait for delivery? I heard that the man that started the company sadly passed away and that they encountered some manufacturing problems due to this. .Looks to me that they are back on track.

[mikeDnight]

9 hours ago, quasar117 said:

Just been looking on FLO and noticed the Stellamira 80ED F10 for the same price as the Starfield?

I know it's a smaller aperture but with it being a slower scope would it perform better on planetary and lunar?

 

No!

[Mr Spock]

58 minutes ago, bosun21 said:

Lovely focuser on your Tak Michael. How long did you have to wait for delivery?

A couple of months. FLO quoted up to four but to my surprise it was half that. Well worth the wait though 👍

[inedible_hulk]

+1 for the Baader ClickLock 2" DiElectric and I notice that @Mr Spock attempted some subliminal messaging there; the 30mm UFF is an absolute delight with the Starfield 😊

[Ratlet]

14 minutes ago, inedible_hulk said:

+1 for the Baader ClickLock 2" DiElectric and I notice that @Mr Spock attempted some subliminal messaging there; the 30mm UFF is an absolute delight with the Starfield 😊

He's usually very liminal with his praise for that eyepiece too!

[quasar117]

5 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

Excellent choice!

A couple I have and can recommend:
https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/baader-clicklock-2-dielectric-star-diagonal.html
On the Starfield:

Oh, and I replaced the twist grip on the Starfield with a Baader Clicklock  Not necessary, but I am a big Baader Clicklock fan 

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/baader-t-2-prism-stardiagonal-zeiss.html
On the Tak:

Brilliant for planetary detail but only wide enough for the 2" 30mm UFF - something like the Nagler 31mm would vignette, as does my 42mm LVW. A very short focal path though, ideal for binoviewers.

Loving the look and convenience of the Baader clicklock diagonal. However at £304 with the 2-1.25" adapter that's a fair chunk of change!

What are your thoughts on the Stellamira or William Optics 2" diagonals, are they adequate?

[cajen2]

27 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

Loving the look and convenience of the Baader clicklock diagonal. However at £304 with the 2-1.25" adapter that's a fair chunk of change!

What are your thoughts on the Stellamira or William Optics 2" diagonals, are they adequate?

I have the WO 2" and the Takahashi 1.25" prism - both excellent.

[bosun21]

2 hours ago, quasar117 said:

Loving the look and convenience of the Baader clicklock diagonal. However at £304 with the 2-1.25" adapter that's a fair chunk of change!

What are your thoughts on the Stellamira or William Optics 2" diagonals, are they adequate?

If you have 2" low power eyepieces with large field stops then be careful that the field stops of your eyepieces fit inside the restricted eyepiece holder of the WO diagonal. All my eyepieces were fine and I fought the diagonal to be excellent. With its 1/12th wave lambda mirror it's nice and sharp.

[quasar117]

What would be reasonably priced wide field eyepiece?  I only have kit lens Plossls for the dob. 

Are the BST Starguiders any good?

[Mr Spock]

4 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

Are the BST Starguiders any good?

Very good, and popular.
If you have £85 to spend, have a look at the Nirvanas - 82° and very sharp.

[Ratlet]

44 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

Very good, and popular.
If you have £85 to spend, have a look at the Nirvanas - 82° and very sharp.

But not the 16mm Nirvana.  It pretty gnarly on the edges.  I'm pretty tolerant of eyepieces but the 16mm Nirvana taught me I have limits.  In the middle is good though, but the edges are a bit woof.

BST's are great.  Very comfortable to use (without glasses).  You get a smaller FOV with the Starguiders than the Nirvana's.

Edited February 22 by Ratlet

[Ratlet]

Ah well.

Going to bite the bullet and order one too I think.  Was humming and hawing because of mounting concerns but @paulastro's review of the askar 103 triplet suggests the AZ5 will be good with the 103 up to x100 and since I usually tap out at my 8mm BST (x90) for quick viewing sessions i think this will be about perfect.

For longer sessions it'll be going on the gem28 orused for imaging on the gem28.

Now to tell the wife.

Edit:  will add that it's an az5 on the beefy 1.75" stainless tripod.  Sky watcher used to claim it increased the capacity to 9kg, which is a complete fabrication imho, but it did improve stability a good bit compared to my carbon fibre one.  Also going to get the ADM dual saddle for it as I'm convinced that the stock saddle is pants at dampening vibrations.

Edited February 22 by Ratlet

[inedible_hulk]

16 hours ago, quasar117 said:

Loving the look and convenience of the Baader clicklock diagonal. However at £304 with the 2-1.25" adapter that's a fair chunk of change!

To be fair, the convenience of the clicklock was my main reason for buying it. The 2” Revelation Astro diagonal it replaced was also (to my eyes) very good and substantially cheaper.  I’m not sure if they’re still made under another name.

[ScouseSpaceCadet]

1 hour ago, Ratlet said:

Ah well.

Going to bite the bullet and order one too I think.  Was humming and hawing because of mounting concerns but @paulastro's review of the askar 103 triplet suggests the AZ5 will be good with the 103 up to x100 and since I usually tap out at my 8mm BST (x90) for quick viewing sessions i think this will be about perfect.

For longer sessions it'll be going on the gem28 orused for imaging on the gem28.

Now to tell the wife.

Edit:  will add that it's an az5 on the beefy 1.75" stainless tripod.  Sky watcher used to claim it increased the capacity to 9kg, which is a complete fabrication imho, but it did improve stability a good bit compared to my carbon fibre one.  Also going to get the ADM dual saddle for it as I'm convinced that the stock saddle is pants at dampening vibrations.

Don't count on the AZ5 and steel tripod especially with a heavier triplet. It's that bad with my 4" doublet I don't use the mount.

[Franklin]

5 minutes ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Don't count on the AZ5 and steel tripod especially with a heavier triplet. It's that bad with my 4" doublet I don't use the mount.

Agree, the AZ5 like the Twilight and the Porta is best with an 80mm class refractor, something weighing around 3.5kg max. They will handle up to 5kg but being a single fork arm design things will start to get a bit wobbly. It boils down to whether or not that wobble bothers you, if there's a breeze in the air forget it.

[Moonlit Night]

1 hour ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Don't count on the AZ5 and steel tripod especially with a heavier triplet. It's that bad with my 4" doublet I don't use the mount.

Yeah, I wouldn’t touch one for a 4 inch. The AZ4 would be rock solid. 

[Mr Spock]

80ED on a Vixen Porta. The word 'jelly' doesn't do it justice...

It was meant to be low power, wide field only. It couldn't even do that!

[Tiny Clanger]

3 hours ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

Don't count on the AZ5 and steel tripod especially with a heavier triplet. It's that bad with my 4" doublet I don't use the mount.

⬆️ What he said.

Fine with a nice, short tubed 127 mak though !

[Ratlet]

Edit: reread my comment above.  I'm going to get the star field 102 ed not the triplet.  D'oh. It was just the review of the triplet on the mount (which highlighted the limitations and issues) which made me decide to pull the trigger.

Weight and length of the doublet is similar to the 130pds I've already used on the combo, and found acceptable at lower powers.  Its more of a stop gap till I figure out what visual mount will work best for how I use it, or find that I don't get frustrated with goto on the gem28 and just use that mount.

But yeah, for anything over x100 I'll be sticking it on the gem28 because of zee wobbles.

Edited February 22 by Ratlet

[Elp]

This is one of the reasons I bought my Tecnosky Cubo, it's a solid block of zinc (I think), no ability to flex, no wobble, saddle is on the outside so the scope can point at zenith if you've pier extension mounted it, you can also add a CW to the opposite side to better balance and stabilise it. On my CF tripod or Berlebach it's great with the Starfield. The Stellavue M2C was also on the shortlist but the added import costs cut it off the list.

Edited February 22 by Elp

[quasar117]

I will be going for a Skytee2 mount. 

[Elp]

1 hour ago, Ratlet said:

find that I don't get frustrated with goto on the gem28 and just use that mount

I don't see how you can, finding targets pretty much straight away and you can spend more time observing, the initial PA time is worth it.