0.90
#...
·
 |
|---|
|
Hi all, I decided to purchase new telescope in 2023/2024. Currently I am having a lot of fun with my old C8 SCT but I'd also like to go wider field and to have travel setup so I started to look in the range of 85-100mm 'fast' refractors. I am not very budget limited so I'd like to go with 'premium' scope to have 'for life' (I am looking for good optics and something that would work out of box and is high % telescope would be in top shape when I buy it). Currently I am having asi294mm camera & accessories but in the future I will upgrade to APS-C or full-frame (not fully decided yet). I was already sure that I'd go for Takahashi FSQ-85ED, but I've read there are some potential issues with focuser and also with quality control lately. I am not sure if I'd want to risk it so I am really changing my mind about it all the time  Another candidate was Astro-Physics Stowaway but of course one can't get it in 'normal' time (they even wrote the waiting list for next batch is already closed ).So I wrote to Baader for Travel Companion and place an order (put myself on waiting list). They mentioned they plan another production round in 2024 so this might go well in line with my plans. Problem is that it's not a lot written on this telescope and there aren't so many images and reviews (especially for astrophotography). I'd like to ask people who has it or had were handling it at some time: - What is your opinion on optics and on quality control? - Are stars nice and round on corners? I assume for full-frame one needs a flattener that is available from Baader? - I read and assume that mechanics is really good, did you experience any problems with stock focuser or any other mechanical shortcomings? - Do the oil-spaced lenses needs any special treatment or are there any other shortcomings of it? - Would you for any reason discourage buying this telescope? - If it would be possible to get some raw data of APS-C or even full-frame that would be awesome - Are there any other alternatives I've missed? - I checked the Askar FRA400/FRA500 but it didn't convince me (it's not very cheap and some example images weren't so good), Askar 107PHQ has better optics but it's slower Thanks for any info, suggestions and general discussion about Travel Companion! CS, Jure |
3.81
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
I went through a similar search recently. My first target was also the FSQ-85ED, but I had heard similar concerns. At that price point, you can really only accept perfection. I looked hard at the PHQ and FRA lines from Sharpstar/Askar. I've had the FRA400 before and I was pretty happy with it, but ultimately I wanted more aperture than it can offer. After some fairly long review process, I settled on the Sharpstar Z4. the 80PHQ w/ reducer was close as well, but I opted for the increased aperture. I hear great things about the Esprit line, but hard to find quantitative data on them. (it's usually qualitative review) I looked at lot of reviews and specs and it came down to a few specifics for me.
There are 2 shortcomings I have come to know with the Z4 though. It's 36mm image circle won't cover full frame. (don't even try) I was ok with that and it does a great job illuminating the APS-c sized sensor. (very little vignetting in the corners on lum filter) The action on the focuser is pretty crap. Maybe I've gotten spoiled by some really smooth focusers (A televue 85 I had briefly was the smoothest ever) but the Z4 focuser is rough. I even broke it down a bit to see if there was a overtightened screw or something (nope). Ultimately, that wasn't the biggest deal for me since I slapped a ZWO EAF on it quickly. Good for others to know though. Optically the Z4 has been solid. The corner stars have been great. At F5.5 it collects quite well in 5-10min subs. If you are interested, just let me know. I'm happy to share some subs to check out. I've only finished 1 image so far, but I can't find any reason to be unhappy with it yet. https://www.astrobin.com/nc1bkd/ Good Luck on scouring the market If you happen to find an F4 Quadruplet @ 110mm FL that weighs < 6lbs with optics like the TOA-130, I'll take one as well :-) |
|
0.90
#...
·
|
|---|
|
Hi Nick, Thanks for your view on this! Indeed the Z4 seems quite nice scope, I was alreadying reading about it a while ago (before I was making real selection for new one). I might check it - your image & stars is indeed very nice! I am just not sure yet whether in the future I want to go over all the trouble for full-frame or ASP-C is good enough - maybe I need to decide for this sooner then I anticipated I might want to check again the 80PHQ + reducer.
|
7.83
#...
·
·
4
likes
|
|---|
|
Jure, I was in a similar situation. The field on my 130mm was just too narrow and the scope too heavy and balky. I looked at a lot of scopes and decided on a William Optics GT81. No, not what you would probably call a "top tier" telescope. It is a FPL-53 triplet. It has a large image circle for use with an APS-C or full frame sensor. It has an integrated 360 degree camera rotator. The overall quality is excellent. It comes with a good focuser that has handled anything I put on it. I do use an EAF. It's reasonably priced and readily available. You do have to buy the reducer/flattener separately. The 81mm provides a good amount of light gathering ability and the focal length of 382mm with the reducer is a fairly wide field. It's lightweight and compact. https://williamoptics.com/products/telescope/gran-turismo/gran-turismo-81-iv Mike |
1.20
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Hi Jure, I received my Travel Companion a few weeks ago. I was looking for a lightweight (!) high end APO and had the Baader on my list for some time but did not plan to buy a new APO, since they had their list closed. I am sure that I was one of the early ones that luckily saw that they opened their list again and I ordered on the next day. For me the lightweight aspect was one of the most importan ones since I want to be mobile and want to stay with my (lightwight) equipment. Since I use a tuned HEQ5 I did not want to buy a telescope of a weight of 6kg or more. Right now I am using only an APS-C camera but want to switch to full frame in future. For that reason I bought the M68 Flattener and the complete adapters and stuff from Baader. They told me that for APS-C the stars are ok without the flattener, but for full frame it is mandatory. I did not test fullframe yet. For me the focuser is more than ok. I 3D-designed and printed an adapter for a Pegasus Astro Auto-Focus and it works pretty well. The Pegasus Astro Indigo OAG also fits perfect in my EOS setup. 95mm are quite nice for less than 4kg and I would buy it again. Thomas |
|
0.90
#...
·
|
|---|
Mike H: Hi Mike, Thanks for feedback! I often overlook WO as I've read that Redcats are not ideal for mono imaging. I will check the gran toourismo and flourstar 91! CS, Jure |
10.79
#...
·
|
|---|
Jure Menart: Hi Jure, What’s wrong with RedCats regarding mono? Björn |
|
0.90
#...
·
|
|---|
Björn:Jure Menart: Hi Björn, I had this at the back of my mind from reading various reviews. I went again and check on google and there is indeed one review that mentions this but the rationale behind is not very clear, so probably the statement I did above is not true. It wasn't the issue with weight on the focuser for example (which one would expect to be valid reason) but rather that (quote from that review): "The placement of the RedCat 71’s flattener doesn’t really lend itself well to providing optimal flattening with a filter wheel and monochrome camera – and you may have trouble reaching focus – so the scope works best with color cameras.". In Cons in the same review mention 'Not designed for monochrome cameras' But as mention, after reading some more and also saw some mono images here, this is probably not true. One image I have found on AB from @Steen Knarberg Redcat 71 + monochrome doesn't have very flattering review (albeit not because of mono I assume): https://www.astrobin.com/t1hh2z/ |
|
10.79
#...
·
·
3
likes
|
|---|
Jure Menart: To me this quoted review sounds completely nonsensical! The RedCats are Petzval designs (no reducer or flattener required) and you don't attach anything to the focuser changing load on the focuser mechanism or drawtube. There's no issue with back spacing as the whole optical assembly is moving and once you reach focus, you reach optimal field correction (assuming that manufacturing quality is proper). In addition, as the optics is moved and not the camera while focusing means that the focuser is basically independent of load and actually the idea of the new WO scopes with the inner focuser seems pretty smart. They don't focus by moving the camera assembly but the optics which always has the same mass and so you can optimise the focusing mechanism for this very specific weight without having to fear overload. The cons I would add to the RedCat's with the helical focusing mechanism is indeed the focusing mechanism w.r.t. to attaching an autofocus. But there are solution to this. If they truly support full frame (based on the manufacturing quality) is something I cannot tell but I successfully used it with APS-C:  I also used it with my mono camera. Björn PS: Fair enough w.r.t. the review: if the required back spacing of your OAG + EFW + camera is larger than 55mm you can run into trouble indeed. But I've also met flatteners which don't allow more. If I recall correctly the SkyWatcher Esprit Reducers have a fairly short back spacing. |
|
0.90
#...
·
|
|---|
|
It's great and thanks for feedback! I didn't mean to 'attack' this telescope which is quite famous for being great anyhow I just typed what I had at the back of my head and after reviewing the review I fully agree with you. But I am also not sure how comfortable I'd be with helical focuser (something new) but TBH I was only dealing with SCT focuser until now so every focuser on my new refractor will be new for me |
|
10.79
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Jure Menart: There's a new RedCat with a classical focuser attachment: https://williamoptics.com/products/telescope/cat/redcat-61-buy As far as I can tell for my RedCat51II, I can lock down the focuser and the temperature stability is quite astounding, despite the f/4.9. I'd say that if you're coming from an SCT, nearly (!) everything will be easier Björn |
|
0.90
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Thomas Hanrath: Hi Thomas, Thanks for your feedback, I've seen your pictures done with Travel Companion and they are indeed nice! It's also good to hear you are satisfied with the telescope... can't look forward for new production batch CS, Jure |
|
3.81
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
I actually have a redcat71 as well that I used with a full frame (asi6200mm). Other than an issue that seemed to happen with pinched stars when I used it with ny Baader filters, I can't really complain about it. There's really good illumination at the corners of the full frame. It's certainly nice not to have backfocus counting issues. The helical focuser is different, but the ZWO EAF + bracket/belt worked easily. I definitely had to tune the AF settings in Nina and the last time out I was was pretty paranoid about a missed AF run. For the moderate price tag, it's very competent. I definitely favor the Z4 now though with the extra aperture and lovely round stars. I'm probably happier without the full frame headaches as well. (tilt is the devil) I think i'd likely only move on from the Z4 if an FSQ-106 somehow fell into my lap. |
7.67
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
Petzval designs can have a drawback in that by getting the simplicity of no backfocus issues, you trade the ability to entirely correct the field. Speaking from experience, you can eliminate tilt but you might be forced to eat any remaining chromatic aberrations or elongated stars. I say "can" because sometimes you get the luck of the draw, or if your aperture is big enough the flattening element does not have to work as hard to flatten the field. Thus, you are more likely to see this on a RedCat51 than say a 90mm petzval. |
|
0.90
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
=16px I think i'd likely only move on from the Z4 if an FSQ-106 somehow fell into my lap. Haha Nick, when I was buying my mount (used Vixen SXP2) that shop had at the same time also used FSQ-106EDX4 for half price! As my plan was to update only mount ai ignored the FSQ which was sold quickly after that. Another used Vixen SXP2 came (and is still available) and I am daily refreshing if some FSQ would also be available, but without luck for now. But I agree this would be best thing to get right now (and wait a little bit with travelling setup). |
|
3.81
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Jure Menart: while the FSQ would be great, I'm pretty sure that was the right choice. Ask anyone on here, a subpar mount will derail any of the best scopes |
|
0.90
#...
·
|
|---|
while the FSQ would be great, I'm pretty sure that was the right choice. Ask anyone on here, a subpar mount will derail any of the best scopes Yes I know, that was also my plan - to upgrade to better mount and only later upgrade the scope but still it hurts :-D
|
