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

Re: Which is better 105ed or 110 fluorite?

Expand Messages
  • Barry Carter
    Well, the 105mm has VG color correction. I have not seen any star halos on this telescope using a DSLR for imaging. The 105mm has the ability to show smaller
    Message 1 of 16 , Mar 9, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Well, the 105mm has VG color correction. I have not seen any star
      halos on this telescope using a DSLR for imaging. The 105mm has the
      ability to show smaller stars, probe deeper, and show more detail
      because of the larger aperture; photographically or visually.

      http://www.barrie-tao.com/wotriplet.html

      Ciao...Barry


      --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, David Moorhouse <climber@...>
      wrote:
      >
      > Thanks Tom
      >
      > I think what you say is right about the 105mm being a solid
      performer.
      > I don't really care about visual use as I'm only thinking about
      > mounting it alongside a larger OTA on a solid good tracking mount
      for
      > (RGBC ST-2000) photographic use.
      >
      > What I don't have is the experience to know just how perfect a OTA
      > needs to sensibly be, to be capabile of stunning images with stars
      that
      > don't show blue halo's etc.
      >
      > As a stop gap measure I'm now looking at the 80mm Zenithstar
      Fluorite
      > Doublet Limited edition, to get me into the swing of things with a
      > lower price. Then after some more advice buy a top end refractor
      at a
      > later date. Is this a good idea???
      >
      > BTW have a look at my 16" binocular visual instrument at my
      webpage,
      > you may be surprised!
      >
      > David Moorhouse
      > Auckland
      > New Zealand
      >
      > http://www.binoscope.co.nz
      >
      >
      >
      > Quoting Tom Trusock <tomt@...>:
      >
      > > David,
      > >
      > > I've used both. My review of the FLT in on CN in the CN reports
      > > section. I'm working on a review of the 105.
      > >
      > > If price is an object, the 105 is a nice scope, and I'm seeing
      some
      > > very nice images coming out of it. If price is no object - the
      > > FLT-110 takes no prisoners. Seriously - the sample I was
      shipped for
      > > review had absolutly supurb optics, and competes with anything -
      > > *anything* else on the market for visual use.
      > >
      > > Tom T.
      > >
      > > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "David Moorhouse"
      > > <climber@>
      > > wrote:
      > >>
      > >> I'm thinking of buying a WO ZS 105mm Triplet APO for use ONLY in
      > >> astrophotography. I want to use a SBIG ST-2000 with a ten way
      > > filter
      > >> wheel I'm thinking of the Astrodon filter set. I was thinking of
      > > using
      > >> the 0.8x focal reducer to get the exposure times that bit lower
      as
      > >> well. I will definetly be doing colour and false colour imaging.
      > >>
      > >> I have a dome housed mount at a fairly dark sky. It will be
      used as
      > > a
      > >> piggyback on a C-14 fork mount as a second telescope. I have two
      > > top
      > >> quality telescopes for visual use so don't really care about
      this
      > >> aspect.
      > >>
      > >> Then I see this 110 fluorite APO at about twice the price.
      > >>
      > >> Am I going to actually see any improvement by spending twice the
      > > amount
      > >> of money?
      > >>
      > >> Anyone who has played with both I really want to hear what you
      > > think.
      > >> Either that or links to pics taken on both.
      > >>
      > >> Dave Moorhouse
      > >>
    • Tom Trusock
      David, If I were you I d be looking for images from each telescope. I know there are some from the 105 over on the CN forums, and they look very good. While I
      Message 2 of 16 , Mar 10, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        David,

        If I were you I'd be looking for images from each telescope. I know
        there are some from the 105 over on the CN forums, and they look
        very good.

        While I use it visually, I'm told the 80mm fluorite is a very solid
        performer photographically. You might ask John Crilly (jrcrilly)
        over on the CN forums his opinion of the telescope. I know he's
        done some photographic work with it - as have many of the members of
        this forum.

        If I were planning multiple scopes for astrophotography, I'd
        probably want to ensure that my focal lengths were fairly different -
        assuming I planned on keeping both of them.

        Tom T.

        --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, David Moorhouse <climber@...>
        wrote:
        >
        > Thanks Tom
        >
        > I think what you say is right about the 105mm being a solid
        performer.
        > I don't really care about visual use as I'm only thinking about
        > mounting it alongside a larger OTA on a solid good tracking mount
        for
        > (RGBC ST-2000) photographic use.
        >
        > What I don't have is the experience to know just how perfect a OTA
        > needs to sensibly be, to be capabile of stunning images with stars
        that
        > don't show blue halo's etc.
        >
        > As a stop gap measure I'm now looking at the 80mm Zenithstar
        Fluorite
        > Doublet Limited edition, to get me into the swing of things with a
        > lower price. Then after some more advice buy a top end refractor
        at a
        > later date. Is this a good idea???
        >
        > BTW have a look at my 16" binocular visual instrument at my
        webpage,
        > you may be surprised!
        >
        > David Moorhouse
        > Auckland
        > New Zealand
        >
        > http://www.binoscope.co.nz
        >
        >
        >
        > Quoting Tom Trusock <tomt@...>:
        >
        > > David,
        > >
        > > I've used both. My review of the FLT in on CN in the CN reports
        > > section. I'm working on a review of the 105.
        > >
        > > If price is an object, the 105 is a nice scope, and I'm seeing
        some
        > > very nice images coming out of it. If price is no object - the
        > > FLT-110 takes no prisoners. Seriously - the sample I was
        shipped for
        > > review had absolutly supurb optics, and competes with anything -
        > > *anything* else on the market for visual use.
        > >
        > > Tom T.
        > >
        > > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "David Moorhouse"
        > > <climber@>
        > > wrote:
        > >>
        > >> I'm thinking of buying a WO ZS 105mm Triplet APO for use ONLY in
        > >> astrophotography. I want to use a SBIG ST-2000 with a ten way
        > > filter
        > >> wheel I'm thinking of the Astrodon filter set. I was thinking of
        > > using
        > >> the 0.8x focal reducer to get the exposure times that bit lower
        as
        > >> well. I will definetly be doing colour and false colour imaging.
        > >>
        > >> I have a dome housed mount at a fairly dark sky. It will be
        used as
        > > a
        > >> piggyback on a C-14 fork mount as a second telescope. I have two
        > > top
        > >> quality telescopes for visual use so don't really care about
        this
        > >> aspect.
        > >>
        > >> Then I see this 110 fluorite APO at about twice the price.
        > >>
        > >> Am I going to actually see any improvement by spending twice the
        > > amount
        > >> of money?
        > >>
        > >> Anyone who has played with both I really want to hear what you
        > > think.
        > >> Either that or links to pics taken on both.
        > >>
        > >> Dave Moorhouse
        > >>
        > >
        > > SPONSORED LINKS
        > >
        > > Astronomy telescope[1] Fun[2]
        Telescope[3]
        > >
        > > -------------------------
        > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
        > >
        > > * Visit your group "William-Optics[4]" on the web.
        > >
        > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
        > > William-Optics-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com[5]
        > >
        > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
        > > Service[6].
        > >
        > > -------------------------
        > >
        > >
        > > Links:
        > > ------
        > > [1]
        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
        t=ms&k=Astronomy+telescope&w1=Astronomy+telescope&w2=Fun&w3=Telescope
        &c=3&s=49&.sig=syKMXNixDs0j1roHrGSFJw
        > > [2]
        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
        t=ms&k=Fun&w1=Astronomy+telescope&w2=Fun&w3=Telescope&c=3&s=49&.sig=n
        9n2MCWvsoVzrAJqVYEODg
        > > [3]
        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?
        t=ms&k=Telescope&w1=Astronomy+telescope&w2=Fun&w3=Telescope&c=3&s=49&
        .sig=rPLphHzymNbywca3_P8-5w
        > > [4] http://groups.yahoo.com/group/William-Optics
        > > [5] mailto:William-Optics-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?
        subject=Unsubscribe
        > > [6] http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
        > >
        >
      • Tom Trusock
        Some VERY nice photos Barry. T ... the ... mount ... OTA ... stars ... a ... reports ... anything - ... in ... of ... lower ... imaging. ... two ... the
        Message 3 of 16 , Mar 10, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Some VERY nice photos Barry.

          T

          --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "Barry Carter"
          <chiron666@...> wrote:
          >
          > Well, the 105mm has VG color correction. I have not seen any star
          > halos on this telescope using a DSLR for imaging. The 105mm has
          the
          > ability to show smaller stars, probe deeper, and show more detail
          > because of the larger aperture; photographically or visually.
          >
          > http://www.barrie-tao.com/wotriplet.html
          >
          > Ciao...Barry
          >
          >
          > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, David Moorhouse <climber@>
          > wrote:
          > >
          > > Thanks Tom
          > >
          > > I think what you say is right about the 105mm being a solid
          > performer.
          > > I don't really care about visual use as I'm only thinking about
          > > mounting it alongside a larger OTA on a solid good tracking
          mount
          > for
          > > (RGBC ST-2000) photographic use.
          > >
          > > What I don't have is the experience to know just how perfect a
          OTA
          > > needs to sensibly be, to be capabile of stunning images with
          stars
          > that
          > > don't show blue halo's etc.
          > >
          > > As a stop gap measure I'm now looking at the 80mm Zenithstar
          > Fluorite
          > > Doublet Limited edition, to get me into the swing of things with
          a
          > > lower price. Then after some more advice buy a top end refractor
          > at a
          > > later date. Is this a good idea???
          > >
          > > BTW have a look at my 16" binocular visual instrument at my
          > webpage,
          > > you may be surprised!
          > >
          > > David Moorhouse
          > > Auckland
          > > New Zealand
          > >
          > > http://www.binoscope.co.nz
          > >
          > >
          > >
          > > Quoting Tom Trusock <tomt@>:
          > >
          > > > David,
          > > >
          > > > I've used both. My review of the FLT in on CN in the CN
          reports
          > > > section. I'm working on a review of the 105.
          > > >
          > > > If price is an object, the 105 is a nice scope, and I'm seeing
          > some
          > > > very nice images coming out of it. If price is no object - the
          > > > FLT-110 takes no prisoners. Seriously - the sample I was
          > shipped for
          > > > review had absolutly supurb optics, and competes with
          anything -
          > > > *anything* else on the market for visual use.
          > > >
          > > > Tom T.
          > > >
          > > > --- In William-Optics@yahoogroups.com, "David Moorhouse"
          > > > <climber@>
          > > > wrote:
          > > >>
          > > >> I'm thinking of buying a WO ZS 105mm Triplet APO for use ONLY
          in
          > > >> astrophotography. I want to use a SBIG ST-2000 with a ten way
          > > > filter
          > > >> wheel I'm thinking of the Astrodon filter set. I was thinking
          of
          > > > using
          > > >> the 0.8x focal reducer to get the exposure times that bit
          lower
          > as
          > > >> well. I will definetly be doing colour and false colour
          imaging.
          > > >>
          > > >> I have a dome housed mount at a fairly dark sky. It will be
          > used as
          > > > a
          > > >> piggyback on a C-14 fork mount as a second telescope. I have
          two
          > > > top
          > > >> quality telescopes for visual use so don't really care about
          > this
          > > >> aspect.
          > > >>
          > > >> Then I see this 110 fluorite APO at about twice the price.
          > > >>
          > > >> Am I going to actually see any improvement by spending twice
          the
          > > > amount
          > > >> of money?
          > > >>
          > > >> Anyone who has played with both I really want to hear what you
          > > > think.
          > > >> Either that or links to pics taken on both.
          > > >>
          > > >> Dave Moorhouse
          > > >>
          >
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.