Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Megrez 102 where are you?

Expand Messages
  • dowen0@att.com
    OK, I ll be the one to disagree. I think that there is a huge gap between the cheap Chinese import 4 scopes at $375 and the TV/Tak 4 scopes for $2,100
    Message 1 of 20 , Sep 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      OK, I'll be the one to disagree.

      I think that there is a huge gap between the cheap Chinese import 4"
      scopes at $375 and the TV/Tak 4" scopes for $2,100 (stripped down).
      There is a market for a $995 - $1,000 scope that CONSISTANTLY
      provides better optical performance (chrom. aber, astigmatism, zonal,
      color control, etc) combined with upgraded mechanics (focuser) than
      the cheap imports.

      I disagree with the comment that people expect APO performance at the
      $995 price range. Sure, it'd be great to achieve. One problem, I
      would suggest, is calling this scope a "semi-APO". That leads one to
      expect something that the scope can't deliver. The other problem,
      from what I can gather, is that the manufacturer couldn't produce
      this particular model with the level of consistancy that the consumer
      expected. I wouldn't be happy either if I'd paid over $1,000 for a
      scope that a)had to be returned to get it fixed the day after I had
      received it or b) performed optically no better than a Celestron
      102HD.

      All this seems obvious to me....but then I may be a minority of one.

      David

      --- In William-Optics@y..., "Robert Schmall" <mbschmall@c...> wrote:
      > Eric:
      >
      > Regardless of our individual viewpoints, it appears that all of us
      agree that the marketplace was not ready for this scope at more than
      $1000.
      >
      > Bob
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: Eric Faust
      > To: William-Optics@y...
      > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 11:27 PM
      > Subject: [William-Optics] Re: Megrez 102 where are you?
      >
      >
      > For what it's worth, as one of the few that purchased and
      returned
      > the Megrez 102, it was not color correction that was the reason
      for
      > return. It was a consideration though. I did not expect an APO,
      but a
      > semi-APO. If you accept the definition from "Telescope Optics" by
      > Rutten and Venrooij, that should mean similar to a 4" f/13.6
      achromat
      > for the Megrez 102. My minimum expectation for the Megrez was
      color
      > correction equal to an f/10 achromat, and that is approximately
      how
      > the Megrez performed. The bigger issues for me were contrast and
      light
      > scatter. The mechanics were superb and it was tough to send it
      back. A
      > week after I returned the scope, I was camping at 10,000 feet in
      Utah
      > and wished the little scope was with me. If I had paid the
      > introductory $1,000 price instead of $1,150, and not got stuck
      paying
      > CA 8% tax, I probably would have kept it.
      >
      >
      > Eric
      >
      >
      > --- In William-Optics@y..., "Herb York" <ztrmann@f...> wrote:
      > > Beg to differ.
      > > People spending $1000 + for a 4" scope want it to perform like
      an
      > Tak 102 or TV 102.
      > > This is our experience. Not blaming anyone and not referencing
      your
      > experience. Collimation is one thing - color correction
      expectations
      > are another.
      > > Thanks
      > > Herb
      > > Anacortes Telescope
      > > www.BuyTelescopes.com
      > > www.AstroMart.com
      > > 360-588-9000
      > > 800-850-2001
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: Robert Schmall
      > > To: William-Optics@y...
      > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 10:58 AM
      > > Subject: Re: [William-Optics] Megrez 102 where are you?
      > >
      > >
      > > Herb:
      > > With all good feeling for Anacortes, which has been most
      helpful
      > to me, the implication that the consumer is responsible for the
      > failure of a product is going to be hard to sustain. As proof,
      the 80
      > is still selling, and the public's expectations for it are no
      > different than for the 102--that it perform at its price level.
      > >
      > > Bob
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: Herb York
      > > To: William-Optics@y...
      > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 9:20 PM
      > > Subject: Re: [William-Optics] Megrez 102 where are you?
      > >
      > >
      > > Our feeling was that expectations of performance
      outstripped
      > reality of the
      > > price.
      > > In other words we felt that it was expected to perform at
      APO
      > levels for
      > > achromatic prices. We asked William to not provide it here
      any
      > longer.
      > > Herb York
      > > Anacortes Telescope
      > > www.BuyTelescopes.com
      > > www.AstroMart.com
      > > 360-588-9000
      > > 800-850-2001
      > > ----- Original Message -----
      > > From: <kjackson@g...>
      > > To: <William-Optics@y...>
      > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 7:03 PM
      > > Subject: [William-Optics] Megrez 102 where are you?
      > >
      > >
      > > > Hi,
      > > >
      > > > I just noticed that the Megrez 102 appears to be
      discontinued.
      > All
      > > > mention of it is missing from the WO and Anacortes web
      sites.
      > > >
      > > > Anyone (William and Herb in particular) have the scoop?
      > > >
      > > > I certainly hope it is not lost for good!
      > > >
      > > > Keith
      > >
      > >
      > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > > William-Optics-unsubscribe@y...
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
      > Service.
      >
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      > ADVERTISEMENT
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > William-Optics-unsubscribe@y...
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
      Service.
    • kjackson@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca
      I entirely agree. For $1000, I expect very good quality and consistency. For the price of a Stellarvue, you get consistency, but lack-luster quality. Perhaps
      Message 2 of 20 , Sep 2, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        I entirely agree. For $1000, I expect very good quality and
        consistency.

        For the price of a Stellarvue, you get consistency, but lack-luster
        quality. Perhaps the M102 should have been priced the same as the
        Stellarvue, since it is lacking in the other direction;)

        Either that, or improve consistency and charge $1000.

        $0.02, Keith


        --- In William-Optics@y..., dowen0@a... wrote:
        > OK, I'll be the one to disagree.
        >
        > I think that there is a huge gap between the cheap Chinese import
        4"
        > scopes at $375 and the TV/Tak 4" scopes for $2,100 (stripped down).
        > There is a market for a $995 - $1,000 scope that CONSISTANTLY
        > provides better optical performance (chrom. aber, astigmatism,
        zonal,
        > color control, etc) combined with upgraded mechanics (focuser) than
        > the cheap imports.
        >
        > I disagree with the comment that people expect APO performance at
        the
        > $995 price range. Sure, it'd be great to achieve. One problem, I
        > would suggest, is calling this scope a "semi-APO". That leads one
        to
        > expect something that the scope can't deliver. The other problem,
        > from what I can gather, is that the manufacturer couldn't produce
        > this particular model with the level of consistancy that the
        consumer
        > expected. I wouldn't be happy either if I'd paid over $1,000 for a
        > scope that a)had to be returned to get it fixed the day after I had
        > received it or b) performed optically no better than a Celestron
        > 102HD.
        >
        > All this seems obvious to me....but then I may be a minority of one.
        >
        > David
        >
        > --- In William-Optics@y..., "Robert Schmall" <mbschmall@c...> wrote:
        > > Eric:
        > >
        > > Regardless of our individual viewpoints, it appears that all of
        us
        > agree that the marketplace was not ready for this scope at more
        than
        > $1000.
        > >
        > > Bob
        > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > From: Eric Faust
        > > To: William-Optics@y...
        > > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 11:27 PM
        > > Subject: [William-Optics] Re: Megrez 102 where are you?
        > >
        > >
        > > For what it's worth, as one of the few that purchased and
        > returned
        > > the Megrez 102, it was not color correction that was the reason
        > for
        > > return. It was a consideration though. I did not expect an
        APO,
        > but a
        > > semi-APO. If you accept the definition from "Telescope Optics"
        by
        > > Rutten and Venrooij, that should mean similar to a 4" f/13.6
        > achromat
        > > for the Megrez 102. My minimum expectation for the Megrez was
        > color
        > > correction equal to an f/10 achromat, and that is approximately
        > how
        > > the Megrez performed. The bigger issues for me were contrast
        and
        > light
        > > scatter. The mechanics were superb and it was tough to send it
        > back. A
        > > week after I returned the scope, I was camping at 10,000 feet
        in
        > Utah
        > > and wished the little scope was with me. If I had paid the
        > > introductory $1,000 price instead of $1,150, and not got stuck
        > paying
        > > CA 8% tax, I probably would have kept it.
        > >
        > >
        > > Eric
        > >
        > >
        > > --- In William-Optics@y..., "Herb York" <ztrmann@f...> wrote:
        > > > Beg to differ.
        > > > People spending $1000 + for a 4" scope want it to perform
        like
        > an
        > > Tak 102 or TV 102.
        > > > This is our experience. Not blaming anyone and not
        referencing
        > your
        > > experience. Collimation is one thing - color correction
        > expectations
        > > are another.
        > > > Thanks
        > > > Herb
        > > > Anacortes Telescope
        > > > www.BuyTelescopes.com
        > > > www.AstroMart.com
        > > > 360-588-9000
        > > > 800-850-2001
        > > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > > From: Robert Schmall
        > > > To: William-Optics@y...
        > > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 10:58 AM
        > > > Subject: Re: [William-Optics] Megrez 102 where are you?
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Herb:
        > > > With all good feeling for Anacortes, which has been most
        > helpful
        > > to me, the implication that the consumer is responsible for the
        > > failure of a product is going to be hard to sustain. As proof,
        > the 80
        > > is still selling, and the public's expectations for it are no
        > > different than for the 102--that it perform at its price level.
        > > >
        > > > Bob
        > > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > > From: Herb York
        > > > To: William-Optics@y...
        > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 9:20 PM
        > > > Subject: Re: [William-Optics] Megrez 102 where are you?
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Our feeling was that expectations of performance
        > outstripped
        > > reality of the
        > > > price.
        > > > In other words we felt that it was expected to perform at
        > APO
        > > levels for
        > > > achromatic prices. We asked William to not provide it
        here
        > any
        > > longer.
        > > > Herb York
        > > > Anacortes Telescope
        > > > www.BuyTelescopes.com
        > > > www.AstroMart.com
        > > > 360-588-9000
        > > > 800-850-2001
        > > > ----- Original Message -----
        > > > From: <kjackson@g...>
        > > > To: <William-Optics@y...>
        > > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 7:03 PM
        > > > Subject: [William-Optics] Megrez 102 where are you?
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > > Hi,
        > > > >
        > > > > I just noticed that the Megrez 102 appears to be
        > discontinued.
        > > All
        > > > > mention of it is missing from the WO and Anacortes web
        > sites.
        > > > >
        > > > > Anyone (William and Herb in particular) have the scoop?
        > > > >
        > > > > I certainly hope it is not lost for good!
        > > > >
        > > > > Keith
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > > > William-Optics-unsubscribe@y...
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        > > Service.
        > >
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
        > > ADVERTISEMENT
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > > William-Optics-unsubscribe@y...
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > >
        > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        > Service.
      • gp100doc@aol.com
        ... quality. Perhaps the M102 should have been priced the same as the Stellarvue, since it is lacking in the other direction;)
        Message 3 of 20 , Sep 2, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          >>>>>For the price of a Stellarvue, you get consistency, but lack-luster
          quality. Perhaps the M102 should have been priced the same as the
          Stellarvue, since it is lacking in the other direction;)<<<<<


          Keith,

          I think you are incorrect about the stellarvue quality, and am quite sure you
          will hear so from more than me :-)

          Doc
        • Kent Gittings
          I agree also. Problem is there is a perception that you have either scopes with a lot of chromatic aberration, like standard short achromats, and APO scopes
          Message 4 of 20 , Sep 4, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            I agree also. Problem is there is a perception that you have either scopes
            with a lot of chromatic aberration, like standard short achromats, and APO
            scopes which come close to perfection in that area in most cases. The
            problem arises from the vague definition of the term "semi-APO". If you mean
            the term from today's usage it can mean any observable reduction of color
            errors that is less than an F10 achromat, which seems to be today's
            standard. By that definition any good F12-F15+ achromat from the 50-70's
            would meet that definition. But current scopes aren't made in those ratios
            much anymore. If you compare a Vixen F10 to a Sinta F10 you may find the
            Vixen has noticeably less color than a Sinta, but the detail level between
            them might be pretty close.
            Or you can say a scope sold as ED is possibly a "semi-APO". If made at
            F8-F10+ it can often rival a shorter focus true APO that is in the F6-F7
            range, at least visually (QC issues aside look through a good example of a
            Meade APO). But what happens is that the makers are so enamored over the
            improved optics they shorten the F-ratio (that is what people want) and end
            up increasing the level of color errors. Extremely low dispersion glass can
            only do so much and when you shorten the F-ratio the light cone gets steeper
            and harder to fully correct. That's why most true APO scopes have either 3-4
            elements or one of which is a non-glass fluorite crystal (current champ for
            Abbe distortion index) as opposed to ED scopes which generally use a
            fluoro-crown element.
            Problem is actually one of definition. Definition of APO (term is
            apochromatic) is at least 3 of the primary optical colors are brought to a
            common focus. Not all, just 3. Achromatic means 2. By the true definition
            most ED scopes would meet the definition of apochromatic. However now people
            use the term to mean all visible wavelengths, which only the highest
            quality APO scopes can approach. So now the term "semi-APO" might mean the
            same thing as the definition of APO where the 3 primary visual colors focus
            at a common spot and the rest give it a little color.
            But the term itself is so vague that people tend to at least hope that their
            "semi-APO" is close to a true APO and when it isn't they get disappointed.
            Basically they have unrealistic goals. What they really want is a cheap APO,
            which by today's standards is not realistic.
            Basically they would be just as well off buying a Sinta 6" F8 and a light
            violet filter to eliminate the purple halo. And at that price range it is
            hard for a "semi-APO" 100mm scope to compete. Especially against a 6" F5 or
            120mm F5 for portability and performance for the dollar.
            Kent Gittings

            -----Original Message-----
            From: dowen0@... [mailto:dowen0@...]
            Sent: Saturday, September 01, 2001 9:31 PM
            To: William-Optics@yahoogroups.com
            Subject: [William-Optics] Re: Megrez 102 where are you?


            OK, I'll be the one to disagree.

            I think that there is a huge gap between the cheap Chinese import 4"
            scopes at $375 and the TV/Tak 4" scopes for $2,100 (stripped down).
            There is a market for a $995 - $1,000 scope that CONSISTANTLY
            provides better optical performance (chrom. aber, astigmatism, zonal,
            color control, etc) combined with upgraded mechanics (focuser) than
            the cheap imports.

            I disagree with the comment that people expect APO performance at the
            $995 price range. Sure, it'd be great to achieve. One problem, I
            would suggest, is calling this scope a "semi-APO". That leads one to
            expect something that the scope can't deliver. The other problem,
            from what I can gather, is that the manufacturer couldn't produce
            this particular model with the level of consistancy that the consumer
            expected. I wouldn't be happy either if I'd paid over $1,000 for a
            scope that a)had to be returned to get it fixed the day after I had
            received it or b) performed optically no better than a Celestron
            102HD.

            All this seems obvious to me....but then I may be a minority of one.

            David

            --- In William-Optics@y..., "Robert Schmall" <mbschmall@c...> wrote:
            > Eric:
            >
            > Regardless of our individual viewpoints, it appears that all of us
            agree that the marketplace was not ready for this scope at more than
            $1000.
            >
            > Bob
            > ----- Original Message -----
            > From: Eric Faust
            > To: William-Optics@y...
            > Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 11:27 PM
            > Subject: [William-Optics] Re: Megrez 102 where are you?
            >
            >
            > For what it's worth, as one of the few that purchased and
            returned
            > the Megrez 102, it was not color correction that was the reason
            for
            > return. It was a consideration though. I did not expect an APO,
            but a
            > semi-APO. If you accept the definition from "Telescope Optics" by
            > Rutten and Venrooij, that should mean similar to a 4" f/13.6
            achromat
            > for the Megrez 102. My minimum expectation for the Megrez was
            color
            > correction equal to an f/10 achromat, and that is approximately
            how
            > the Megrez performed. The bigger issues for me were contrast and
            light
            > scatter. The mechanics were superb and it was tough to send it
            back. A
            > week after I returned the scope, I was camping at 10,000 feet in
            Utah
            > and wished the little scope was with me. If I had paid the
            > introductory $1,000 price instead of $1,150, and not got stuck
            paying
            > CA 8% tax, I probably would have kept it.
            >
            >
            > Eric
            >
            >
            > --- In William-Optics@y..., "Herb York" <ztrmann@f...> wrote:
            > > Beg to differ.
            > > People spending $1000 + for a 4" scope want it to perform like
            an
            > Tak 102 or TV 102.
            > > This is our experience. Not blaming anyone and not referencing
            your
            > experience. Collimation is one thing - color correction
            expectations
            > are another.
            > > Thanks
            > > Herb
            > > Anacortes Telescope
            > > www.BuyTelescopes.com
            > > www.AstroMart.com
            > > 360-588-9000
            > > 800-850-2001
            > > ----- Original Message -----
            > > From: Robert Schmall
            > > To: William-Optics@y...
            > > Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2001 10:58 AM
            > > Subject: Re: [William-Optics] Megrez 102 where are you?
            > >
            > >
            > > Herb:
            > > With all good feeling for Anacortes, which has been most
            helpful
            > to me, the implication that the consumer is responsible for the
            > failure of a product is going to be hard to sustain. As proof,
            the 80
            > is still selling, and the public's expectations for it are no
            > different than for the 102--that it perform at its price level.
            > >
            > > Bob
            > > ----- Original Message -----
            > > From: Herb York
            > > To: William-Optics@y...
            > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 9:20 PM
            > > Subject: Re: [William-Optics] Megrez 102 where are you?
            > >
            > >
            > > Our feeling was that expectations of performance
            outstripped
            > reality of the
            > > price.
            > > In other words we felt that it was expected to perform at
            APO
            > levels for
            > > achromatic prices. We asked William to not provide it here
            any
            > longer.
            > > Herb York
            > > Anacortes Telescope
            > > www.BuyTelescopes.com
            > > www.AstroMart.com
            > > 360-588-9000
            > > 800-850-2001
            > > ----- Original Message -----
            > > From: <kjackson@g...>
            > > To: <William-Optics@y...>
            > > Sent: Tuesday, August 14, 2001 7:03 PM
            > > Subject: [William-Optics] Megrez 102 where are you?
            > >
            > >
            > > > Hi,
            > > >
            > > > I just noticed that the Megrez 102 appears to be
            discontinued.
            > All
            > > > mention of it is missing from the WO and Anacortes web
            sites.
            > > >
            > > > Anyone (William and Herb in particular) have the scoop?
            > > >
            > > > I certainly hope it is not lost for good!
            > > >
            > > > Keith
            > >
            > >
            > > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > > William-Optics-unsubscribe@y...
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > >
            > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            > Service.
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            > ADVERTISEMENT
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            > William-Optics-unsubscribe@y...
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
            Service.



            To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            William-Optics-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com




            Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/



            **********************************************************************
            This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
            intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
            are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
            the system manager.

            This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
            MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

            www.mimesweeper.com
            **********************************************************************
          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.