This Refractor Is Lovely - But Pricey

[Alkaid]

This is gorgeous, but the price tag is rather high for an achromat. Why? The lenses aren't any different and only the tube length has altered from say an F10 frac.

Like a lot though.....

Antares 105mm Refractor OTA | Telescopes | Rother Valley Optics

Anyone any comments on the price? Or is Antares gear generally priced through the roof?

[Capricorn]

That seems a lot of pennies.

The description would seem to be saying it is an achro.

So for an f/14.2 it seems a bit much.

May as well buy an ED 105 and save on the weight and length.

Will have to visit a Canadian site or two and see what they sell it for. I think Antares are Canadian.

[Capricorn]

Vancouver telescopes have it at 995, as they add GST afterwards it will probably match 1021 at RVO.

But at an exchange rate of about 1.6:1 that still means a high price.

If you translate say C$1100 to £690 that is a hell of a mark up.

[AlexB]

I wouldn't, but then I don't know that much. Yeah focal length might be 'king' but that works OK terrestrially in the day time, for Astronomy, you need to grab as much light as you can, so in essence focal length versus focal ratio is the play-off to be looking at. 1500mm, surely it would need to be between 150mm and 180mm to be a true performer?

I'm probably way off with this, so forgive me if that is the case.

[AlexB]

Actually thinking about this, looking at DSO specifically, you want more light, but bright planets is another thing, so this may be quite good for that.

[The Sailor]

I am caught in this situation, I have a 6" SCT and am now only going to use it for planetry work and a new scope for DS and AP but am lost as to what to get because of the focal length v focal ratio problem, anyone help me

Jim

[Alkaid]

Yep, I would imagine this would be very good on the moon & planets. But bad for DSO.

C.A. could possibly be reduced to nowt - but it is far more expensive than a 100mm ED refractor - so why would anyone buy it other than for it's good looks?

What are you doing here Antares I wonder.....

[nightfisher]

I am caught in this situation, I have a 6" SCT and am now only going to use it for planetry work and a new scope for DS and AP but am lost as to what to get because of the focal length v focal ratio problem, anyone help me

Jim

for AP refractor you are best getting a short focal length, with an 80-90mm ed lens.

The antares scope will be a right planet killer with such a long focal length with very good optics but not at that price, have a f15 77mm classic that is awesome on planets

[brianb]

The antares scope will be a right planet killer with such a long focal length with very good optics but not at that price

Fact of the matter is, once you get near the top end, you pay increasingly large amounts of money for increasingly small increments in performance.

If this scope has guaranteed superb quality optics (1/10 wave PV or better) then the price is very reasonable. If it's a run-of-the-mill 1/4 wave Chinese optics scope that just happens to be f/15, it is indeed expensive.

Don't forget that a world class focuser costs pretty much the same as this does as a whole scope.

[Ad Astra]

Hi Mountainman,

This 105 looks like a beauty! I have a 133mm f/12 Apomax and it is absolutely the best planetary and lunar scope I've ever used - nothing comes close! With a well baffled refractor - you should get amazing contrast and wonderful views - the detail will just floor you.

The flip side is that long refractors are difficult to mount well. Even if your 'frac is well within the mount's weight limits - the moment arm (essentially the torque required to turn the scope on the mount) may overwhelm the mount's clutches and strain both motors and cause premature wear.... Unless that is you have enough mount underneath it!

Whatever mount will hold the weight of your scope - forget it. Go for the next larger mount for sure. For a scope this long - cut the mounts capacity in half at least, and you should be in great shape. Less than that and you are asking for a problem. For instance - my 20 Kg refractor was well within the weight limit for my Celestron CGEM mount - but the darn thing never held my scope properly. Lots of tracking error and vibration problems. (I have the CGE Pro mount now! )

Final analysis - if you can mount it properly, ABSOLUTELY GET ONE! If you like the Moon, planets, clusters, doubles, etc, you will not be disappointed. If you are a deep-sky man, then this isn't the instrument for you at all.

Me? I'll NEVER give up my big Apomax!!!!!

Dan

[Alkaid]

Cheers Dan, nice answer ta.

[ollypenrice]

Not expensive by refractor standards, really. Over three thousand pounds for a Tak FSQ85... We are all insane...

Olly

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

I have seen 110mm ED F/7 scopes from Astro-professional for 1070 EURO rather than pounds. These would be far more all-round instruments. Even assuming the F/15 is a bit better on planets, the extra torque on the mount means that the F/15 requires a much heavier mount, is more difficult to store, etc.

[philj]

Yep its an F15 achromat, a very nice planetary, lunar and double star scope. I can vouch for 4" F15 on these subjects because I have one:) I also have an 80mm F15 and a 60mm F15:)

They are limited on DSO, dont get me wrong you will still see M13 etc but they wont be very bright in the ep. I can resolve quite a good deal of stars in M13 with mine but an 8" F12-15 Mak would be brighter and give better resolution

Dont let that put you off though, I have had stunning views of Jupiter and the moon is absolutely gob smacking through one of these scopes.

Philj