Can a 4” ED be everything you need? 

Funny but true.

but FIRST a pair of 11x80 binoculars!

@mikemuha7537 That's great! Let me know how you like the new telescope and how it compares to the ACF.

@vampolascott36 Thank you! I'll have to try out the 4mm Tak then. It sounds like it's a very good eyepiece.

@toodvanbeekster2461 Thanks for your input! I'm glad to read that your experience with the SV503 is in line with mine. I didn't know about the focussing issues with the TV31T5, that's good to know. It might help others with the same setup. It's also very interesting to see that it works better than the 14" Meade under Bortle 8 skies.

Your still satisfied? I’m thinking of buying the 102ED instead of a 203/800 GSO 8“ f4 Newton as first scope. I live under 8“ skys as well. What do you recommend? Is the quality difference of 8“ newton and 102ED under bortle 8 worth the portability trade off?

@@BogdanDamianwould love to hear your opinion as well!

​@@BogdanDamianthe 14" scope underperfoming to a 4" scope was likely due to poor seeing rather than light pollution, and the target was likely a planet. Point them both at a globular cluster or planetary nebula under any conditions and the game changes

I agree. But there is also some light loss going through a refractor. I also have the Starmax 102 and an Explore Scientific AR02 refractor, in which the slight CA is acceptable for visual use on planets and is not an issue with deep sky. I rarely view the moon, so CA is not much of an issue. Using Televue or Explorer Scientific eyepieces, both give excellent views from my backyard and at our clubs dark site. The refractor does give a wider FOV due to the shorter focal length with minimal CA. I like both telescopes.

@@billducas I didn't include the light loss from the refractor or the meniscus on the Mak as I couldn't find values on either. I'd expect they'd be similar though

@MountainFisher That 102 ES triplet seems to be an excellent instrument. Glad you are enjoying it so much. I have an UHC filter from astronomik that I still have to test in combination with the sv503. I'm curious how it will perform on some DSOs. Clear skies!

@AmateureAstronomer Congrats on the new telescope! I'm sure that's a great telescope as well. Clear skies!

Have you tried out the Bresser refractor yet?? I think I was chatting to you about it on my channel....

@rickdurham264 No, it wasn't me and I haven't had the chance to test the Bresser refractor yet. But I did put it on the list of telescopes to review.

@@rickdurham264 asked about the Bresser. Yes, I took it out last night for the second time. Weather has been cloudy and I have not been out much. The tube Bresser sent me was missing the screws to hold the spotting scope in the holder. Okay, because I always use a 90 degree angle spotting scope due to bad back and knees. The spotting scope holder was held by two screws which did not line up with my universal dove tail base, but I did find two holes in the optical tube I could use, though I had to shim one side to properly align my spotting scope. Turns out I really didn't need the 9x50 spotting scope, because with 2" 25mm eyepiece I had just about the same field of view with the optical tube as with the spotting scope. Very broad. The dispersion glass (FPL 51?) helped with the achromatic aberration, but the focal length is so short that a tiny bit appeared on Jupiter. None on Saturn or dimmer objects, so I did not have had to use my Baader Planetarium Yellow 495nm Long-Pass Filter, which removes the purple fringe and leaves a yellow cast that you have to remove in post, if photographing. Was very pleased with the quality of the lens, with nice pinpoint stars. Looked at Jupiter and Saturn. A 10mm eyepiece and a x5 Barlow lens brought the magnification to x230, a bit over the x204 recommended, but no distortion or blurriness. Could see the bands on Jupiter and the rings on Saturn clearly. But, this scope was designed for broad views and planetary close ups not possible. M92 and M34 were party obscured by clouds and could only see a few stars in each. Did reaffirm my distrust of small aperture refractors. Should I grow stronger, I will buy a nice 8" Newtonian to grasp more light. I would recommend scope to any who want a very broad field view at low magnification and the cheapest 102mm almost semi ED APO 6 pound scope on the market. Hope this helps.

​@@AmatureAstronomer I bought this exact OTA a month ago and I totally agree. I tried planetary photography and the results surprised me a lot. I had to use a Barlow which increased the back focus beyond the available focuser travel but with some creativity I was able to take some beautiful images

Try a yellow/green filter to get rid of blue fringe on that AR refractor. I had the 1000mm focal length one and it wasn't bad, but still needed a light yellow for bright objects. My son bought me a 102 triplet and I sold the AR asap.

@MrCornweda That is very interesting! Now I have to give the SA401 a try.

@@BogdanDamian The SA401 is a good grab and go all purpose scope. It is rugged, waterproof and very portable. It's main disadvantage is you can't use wide field of view 2 inch eyepieces. The second problem is for astronomical viewing it has a 45 degree angle. This makes it harder to align on the object. You also need to be positioned seated or use a telescopic tripod for easy viewing. I normally just sit on the terrace on top of my building for stable views and comfortable head position. To find the target I use the widest field of view eyepiece I have then quickly switch eyepieces once I found the target. It is as fast as aligning my AR102 this way. I will never take out my SCT without first checking the seeing conditions with my spotting scope first.

@jeansamson4079 Hi Jean! Glad you enjoy my videos. The SV503 is definitely worth considering as an upgrade. Let me know how you like it should you end up getting it.

Where?

Agree and they are a great value !

@MrVintageValues Thanks! I'm glad you are enjoying the videos. In the video I'm using the AZ Pronto mount from Skywatcher, but lately upgraded to the SV225 from Svbony. Check out that review as well if you want: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-CH8cpwGb4I8.html Clear skies!

Thank you Bogdan! I will check them out.

@marcusa3177 Thanks! The sv188p works great in combination with the sv215 zoom. When comparing the sv188p to the Baader prism, it is slightly less bright and also a little less sharper. It's definitely not by much, but still noticeable. The sv215 is capable of offering very nice views. It's only flaw being the short eye relief. I believe both will work very well with the sv550. No other accessories are going to be needed. Hope this helps.

Oh, almost forgot. The SVbony Field Flattener is amazing. You will need it to make deep sky photos of big nebulas.

What HA filters/etelon do you have for it?

@k-d-n This sounds great! Thanks for your feedback. I have an o3 filter and the flattener on my shopping list and will be ordering them soon. As for the camera I just got a decent one for planets and will be trying it out soon. What guiding software do you use?

@@mikemuha7537 I am using the Astronomik H-alpha 6nm Filter. The O3 and S2 I've got from svbony.

@@BogdanDamian The HA filter will give you the most data, but you really need all 3 filters for narrowband imaging. I am using a Celestron Advanced VX mount, so I am using the Celestron CPWI software for telescope control. I use PHD2 for tracking and ASI studio for image capturing.

@3dfxvoodoocards6 In terms of resolution both telescopes (your Bresser 102 and SV503) deliver similar results because of the identical aperture. Compared to the Evostar 90, the SV503 offers a slightly better resolution. The improvements if upgrading to the SV503 are going to be better contrast and brightness and a better corrected image. This means that there will be less chromatic aberrations visible. If you already own a 102mm achromat, than it's not worth getting the SV503 in my opinion. The difference in image quality won't be that big. Better look for a 5" refractor as an upgrade. Hope this helps.

​@@BogdanDamian Thank you a lot :)

@Pakoki1 In terms of overall look and feel, I would say yes. The difference in build quality is significant. But if you are looking only at optical performance, then no. I mean you will get a better image with the sv503, but it's not twice as good, like the price would suggest. If I were to upgrade from the Evostar 90, I would go much bigger like the 5" APO or something similar.

@@BogdanDamian Thank you!!

@user-qe5xh5ne2x Hi! Congrats on the new telescope! Glad you are enjoying it. I haven't tried it out with a 2" diagonal yet so I don't know for sure if you will run into focus problems, but I honestly don't think that you will. The light path might be a couple of cm longer than with a 1.25" diagonal and that should be well within the limit for the back focus.

@M0unta1n777 It depends on what you want to do with the telescope. If your focus is on serious astrophotography than the SV550 122mm + mount is worth the money. For visual observations and casual astrophotography I would go with the SV503 102mm.

​@@BogdanDamian Thanks! After having the infamous Celestron Astromaster 114EQ for 8 years I'm itching for an upgrade so I can start doing a bit of proper astrophotography in both planetary and deep space. I did some beginner planetary imaging with the 114EQ but found myself to be mostly limited by its poor optics so the SV503 will be a major upgrade in every way. According to other reviews the SV503 performs admirably for wide field imaging but I wonder if it would be hindered by chromatic aberration for planetary imaging, after all it's a relatively fast F7 ED doublet. Can't wait to see your imaging results on this scope 😁

@joseluisvilches7592. Congratulations on your new telescope. You can use a 2x Barlow to obtain higher magnifications, but make sure not to go above 200x - 220x. This won't eliminate the chromatic aberrations, though.

@limebulls Yes, I'm still enjoy the 102ED very much and I would pick it over the f/4 reflector. The reason being the very fast focal ratio of the GSO. It will be very demanding on the eyepieces. You would need some premium ones. The 8" of aperture would however be very good in Bortle 8 skies. If you have access to an f/6 or even an f/5 8" reflector, than get that one over the 102ED. It will be better for your skies.

@alexikzekee8769 Salut! Am pus pe lista 🙂

@Paul__ Salut! The TS Optics 102/714 WD looks to be basically the same telescope as the SV503 102ED, but I can't say for sure. I ordered my telescope on amazon.de as well and I didn't have any issues whatsoever. If the return policy on products delivered to Romania is okay, then you could give it a try. Another alternative would be the Skywatcher Evostar 102/1000 on the eq3-2 mount. It doesn't have an ED element, but for visual observations it is very good. Should you get only the OTA, then I would recommend getting something like the eq3 go-to from Skywatcher as a mount. As for eyepieces and accessories plan another 2-300 Euros. You will need at least one high power eyepiece (3-5mm) and a medium/low power one (17-24mm). A mirror diagonal like the sv188p from Svbony should do just fine in the beginning. You will also need a finder. Here I recommend a red dot finder. They don't cost a lot and work very well. Hope this helps

@@BogdanDamian thank you for the answer Bogdan, regarding the mount I read the some use for 102ED's (only visual so no finder, camera etc) they use it on AZ GTI (5kg), or maybe AZ GTIX (6kg or 10kg for double scopes) do you seen those mounts? Azimutal ones look uncomplicated, I notice you have a nice lightweight one rated for only 3kg? without experience I thought motorized will be easier (but pricier also)

@PauI__ Only for visual observations the GTi should be enough for the 102ED. If you plan on loading the telescope up in the future with additional items, then maybe go for the gtix version for future proofing. And yes, a motorized mount that can search and track objects automatically is indeed very easy to use, making a lot of sense for beginners. Even though the AZ Pronto mount is rated for 3kg in reality it can handle 5kg without a problem. Most mounts can handle more than what they are rated for.

@@BogdanDamian as you ware in front of the 80ed vs 102ed decision and you went the 102ed way, can you please let know what I will be missing if I go the 80Ed route (just to favor portability), you said you will be loosing more stuff than you want with 80ed. I mean with good eyepieces, the ones you reviewed, 80ED is able to "see" decently some DSOs? what about planets? Is 80ED only suitable only for astrophotography as I will do only visual Lastly let me congratulate you for the videos you make, I did checked some of them, objective and clean communication, bravo

@Paul__ Thank you! Glad you enjoy my videos. The main aspect that pushed me towards the 102 was the aperture size. For planets, moon, sun and astrophotography the difference between the two isn't that big. But I wanted a chance to observe some fainter DSOs as well with the telescope. The 80 will mostly be limited to the brighter ones like M42 or M45. The increase in terms of maximum theoretical magnification for the 102 was also something I found very interesting.

@alasdairmacdonald6730 Yes, not a problem for the mount including eyepieces and accessories/camera. The limit for this mount is somewhere around 7-8kg. I would say that the sv550 122mm + eyepieces/ accessories was the maximum this mount could handle.

@@BogdanDamian thanks for the reply. Interesting to know that if I were to upgrade my scope I might get to keep my mount. Good luck with the astrophotography. I'm looking forward to seeing how you get on.

@constantinelind I often times observe with it at 238x without loosing too much of image quality. I haven't tried it beyond that.

@@BogdanDamian Do you use a Barlow for such a high magnification or just a 3 mm eyepiece ?

@supermario8416 No Barlow, just their 3-8mm zoom eyepieces set to 3mm.

@Stephen-gp8yi No worries. You want for the laser to hit exactly in the middle of the target. The better aligned the mirrors are, the better the views. I know that the first times collimating the telescope can be a bit difficult, but it gets easier with practice. In your case I would loosen all three screws a bit and try again. You did good by not over tighten the screws. Things can break if you do.

@@BogdanDamian ok bogdan I will loosen all three and try again thanks!

The Dob will still be much better for planetary observation. Just because of the larger aperture.

I`m a owner of 10'' and binoviewer WO. And the combo is very efficient for planetary observation. Don't sell the dob, just buy additional telescope. 90/900 for instance

@toliscy A dob with a longer focal length and a larger aperture, like the 10" dob you have, will allow for much higher magnifications up to the limit imposed by the local atmospheric conditions. At the same magnification levels there isn't a big difference between the two in terms of brightness/contrast. Planets like Saturn and Jupiter are very bright objects and a small aperture is more than enough to capture a lot of light. For DSOs that are very faint noting can touch the light gathering capacity of a dob. Where the refractor offers better optical performance is sharpness. If you can keep the dob and buy a smaller refractor for planets. I own a 12" dob and I prefer observing planets with the smaller 4" refractor as long as I'm satisfied keeping the magnification below 200x.

@BogdanDamian I love my dob but dso look like a smudge for me it's only worth for planets. Thanks for the reply!

@@toliscy DSO are going to look that way through any type of telescope you use. The only way to clearly see DSOs is through long exposure photos. And even then a lot of them are very faint and require stacking in order to see fine detail and definition. A bigger aperture, with a fast focal ratio (16” Dob at F/4) would improve your views more than a refractor for visual observation.

@MichalKatrik Hi! Yes I measured the OTA including the rings, dovetail bar, finder socket, dust cover and the 1.25" adapter. Basically the OTA like it's being delivered by Svbony.

So a Bresser 127/1200 mm achromat is better than the Svbony 102/714 mm FPL51 ?

Maybe but the 102 ED FPL51 most probably has a similar image quality to a 150 mm MAK.

@@3dfxvoodoocards6 don't think so. I've generally read that the refractor vs. mak is +1 in inches, meaning 4" refractor similar image quality to 5" Maj, not 6" Mak as you propose.

You will *not* see any object, that looks like any photograph, in that telescope. Go to a local astronomy club and ask to look through a tiny scope. Then look through a larger scope.

@palmereldrich I heard that the 100ED Evostar is supposed to be very good. I'll have to try it out too. Thanks for your input. Clear skies!

Refractors definitely give better views of the planets when they have a longer focal ratio. Also cheaper eyepieces can become almost as good as the most expensive eyepieces in and F12. But you give up on portability and wide field of views. It is hard to have a one scope fits all and even harder if you are doing both astrophotography and visual observing. Throw in terrestrial viewing and you really have to compromise or buy 3 scopes.

@ericbarnett6771 Both are indeed very similar if not identical. The only difference I can see is that the Astro-Tech uses one objective element made to the FK-61 standard where the SV503 uses the SFPL-51 standard. However, both standards are very similar.

The F/9 Skywatcher Evostar ED 100 would presumably have significantly better chromatic aberration but it costs a lot more. What about the TS Optics 102 ED f/11? Too long?

@omerturk9462 Hello, it's the AZ Pronto mount from Skywatcher.