Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Hi,
I’ve happily used my non-ED Starwave 102 on my EQ5 for a number of years for lunar observation, and planetary when I could still see them from my garden. Due to the long tube there’s some settling time on focusing but it’s of the order of a few of seconds and quite acceptable to me. It’s even fine with binoviewers adding to the mass at the end of that long lever.
I’ve used it on an alt-az mount (Altair Sabre) and I prefer an EQ for this type of observing. This scope would need a pretty substantial alt-az mount, though the Sabre is rather over the top.
But with either be prepared to use a tall tripod, or as I do, a pillar on top of the stock Skywatcher tripod https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-mount-accessories/skywatcher-eq5heq5-extension-tube.html . I find that this is necessary if you want to avoid sitting on the floor to observe: a downside of the long achromat, or this new ED.
With the pillar added the combined mass of this setup it isn’t something I’d want to carry far or in a confined space, as that long tube has a tendency to get caught on things and the mount+tripod is now very long. I do it in two trips: one for the mount and the other for the OTA.
However, if you’re set on an Starwave achromat I’d bet that this scope is basically the same as mine https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p1958_TS-Optics-Optics-Planetary-Refractor-102-1100mm-F-11—2–Crayford-Dual-Speed.html though for not much less than the new ED version. I’ve seen some of the originals come up secondhand at very good prices since nobody seemed all that interested!
The only feedback on the new ED I’ve seen has been from a CloudyNights member in Denmark who bought one on the strength of this https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/646132-starwave-102ed-f11-yes-ed/ . He seems relatively pleased with the results. I believe it’s size and weight are about the same as the non-ED.
I’d be tempted except I’m happy enough with the version I’ve already got.
James
