First Impressions and discussion of the NEW William Optics REDCAT 71! 

Thank you for your support as always! They've done a great job with this new 71.

Thank you! I think a lot of people are excited for this. I hope people can get their hands on it soon!!!

Thanks for your support!

I don't know how the used market is in the UK, but... In the US, people aren't losing much value on their GT81. Juuuuuust saying 😉. So you could maybe sell your GT81 and get a Redcat 71 and not take much of a hit? Haha

@@nocturneastro2539 I love my tuned triplet, wouldn’t change it.

@@AstroPixUK I don't blame you 😉

Thank you! Hope this video was helpful to you on whether or not the new Redcat 71 is for you! :)

I think that's the general opinion of it thus far. If we go with focal length/dollar, or aperture/dollar, yeah it's kind of up there. I think it really depends on how much one values the benefits and convenience of a Petzval design.

Thank you! Thanks for the support!

Oh sorry about that! I wonder if my headphones are improperly calibrated because they sounded "the same" to me. But obviously that's not the case for you. Thanks for letting me know, appreciate that feedback! They addressed a lot of quality of life/user experience concerns. I didn't even get to all of them. For example, the bag/case it comes with, it now fits a full sized, fully assembled Redcat 71. Unlike the original 51, you had to disassemble the guide scope saddle and maybe even the dovetail plate for storage.

@@nocturneastro2539 Oh, nice on the case! That's been my complaint with their cases so far. I have a RC51 and a Z73, and both cases are useless for an assembled scope. They were good for shipping, but that was it. Plus, with a proper set of rings with thumbscrews now, it should be much easier to disassemble the RC71 and put the OTA in its own case for travel.

@@Psychlist1972 Yeah I really didn't want to include that part in the video, it's already damn near 30 minutes long. In subsequent videos, I'll show the case. The Redcat 71 case fits a fully assembled telescope.

That's obviously their plan, but I think the 71 will have far stiffer competition. There are a lot of quality 300-400mm refractors out there.

I've just looked at the prices. A comparable triplet that would give you a similar focal length would be an 80mm refractor + a focal reducer. And I think a Redcat 71 would cost as much as an 80mm triplet + reducer. So it's really up to you. Pure aperture of an 80mm range, vs the quality and convenience of a Petzval.

I think I did? I think... I could wrong, but I remember they come shipped tight like that...

Keep using that setup you've got there. Even when you are ready for an "upgrade", there's always a good reason to use a simple star tracker and a lightweight refractor like the Redcat 51!

@@nocturneastro2539 But I really want a better mount. I have no North view, so I can't polar align with the Star Adventurer: I do it manually pointing it somewhere around where an App tells me Polaris is. Surprisingly, with 30" exposure, I have decent looking stars. So, now that I know about that 3-stars polar align plug-in in NINA, I want that goto mount - and then I can also add bigger telescope. It's like a drug :)

@@flexable9256 in a soon to be uploaded video, I will actually go over how to do a blind-polar alignment using NINA.

@@nocturneastro2539 Great! Looking forward for it!

Thanks for watching! Yes, the 71 will accept a filter wheel just like the 51 would as well. Sounds like you're considering 51 vs 71. Despite having done a review of the 71, I'll be honest and would recommend you the 51 instead. Because there's nothing this sharp, this well made, and at this price range for the uniquely wide field of 250mm. I love the 71, but at 350mm, you have choices.

@@nocturneastro2539 I like how you framed your view of the 71 vs the 51, as having “choices”. That really helps and goes to what my gut was telling me, that I might not be able to fit an entire nebula into the frame with the 71. I also have a nice full frame DSLR, in addition to the crop. Do you think if I am in a situation where I have this “choice” of all or part of a nebula in the frame, that switching to the full frame DSLR I can fit the nebula and reduce the potential number of “choices”? My next research is to go to Telescopius and/or Stellarium and look at many nebula and how they fit with the two sensor sizes. That might help me, but I thought I’d try asking you. I’m enjoying your other videos. Just watched the one about the iOptronCEM mount. I’m not there yet (I have the SWSA like you had) but I’m looking down the path!

@@markmuller3086 even if you pick the 71, at 350mm focal length, it's a great focal length for so many nebulae. You're still wide enough to fit even some of the larger nebulae. So, regardless if you pick 51 or the 71, either will be great for nebulae. But the 51 is special for me because I can zoom out even further to fit two nebulae in the same frame (for example: Orion + horsehead). And, there's nothing out there similar, and of the quality of the 51. The Radian 61 is close, but that one... ehh well you can watch my video on it. Haha

@@markmuller3086 Hi! I was wondering what you picked in the end and if you were satisfied? I’ve got a mirror less camera with a 1.5 crop factor and I wonder if I should get the red cat 51 or 71 or even the gran turismo 71 as my budget is still limited. I’d also like to do visual observations with the scope… what is your experience with the one you got? :)

@@kombinarde570 hi there. I have not yet bought a refractor! Still undecided on what focal length. When I do I want to get a bigger mount, dedicated camera, and a guide scope as well, so I’m saving money.

I know this video is about the Kitteh 71, and I obviously enjoy it. But there is absolutely nothing wrong with Z61 or Z73. Both are exceptional refractors that honestly, will produce pictures that the $1000+ range refractor would.

@@nocturneastro2539 I have a question I can't seem to get a consistent answer on regarding guide scopes for the Z61/73. I'm trying to decide between the WO UniGuide 32mm and 50mm guide scope, but I'm wondering if the 50mm would be a little too much on top of a Z61. I feel like if I get a Z61, then I couple it with the 32mm UniGuide. If I get the Z73, then get the 50mm UniGuide. Would that be a fair assessment?

@@RazorChrist for either Z61 and Z73, even the smaller 32mm guide scope would be more than sufficient. The 50mm will be more future proof for if you want more main scope focal length down the road. But either 32mm or the 50mm is more than sufficient for the Z61/Z73.

@@nocturneastro2539 Okay thanks, that's super helpful. Also saves me a bit of cash as well! Thanks for all the advice, and keep the great content coming! Subbed!

Thank you, yes it was the 2inch Optolong L-eXtreme filter.

Thank you… I just received the telescope but it’s a Christmas present. Haven’t opened the box yet!

It's a Petzval design, back focus distance does not apply.

ahhh... so sorry!!! I really wonder what happened here. But thank you for telling me that, otherwise, I wouldn't know! I will try to fix it in the next video!

@@nocturneastro2539 would you recommend newbies to go for this or the older redcat?

@@CrescentUmmi Would you mind telling me the experience level of this newbie? If s/he is just getting into astrophotography, and looking for his/her first scope, then I would STILL recommend the original 51: 1) It'll for sure be less expensive 2) It's lighter and more portable 3) The original 51 can go on the smaller, lightweight star trackers (more money saving there because the mount is less expensive) 4) Less likely to get lost at 250mm focal length of the original 51

Because a lot of camera lenses have astigmatism and chromatic aberrations. And none of them are ready to accept astrophotography filters. Or have a lens hood designed around the need for a dew heater band.

There are zero camera lenses with better performance for astrophotography. Lenses are not designed to focus to infinity, they are not designed to focus pinpoints of lights such as stars and they have far too many pieces of glass that distort the stars and also as the temperature changes outside all those pipes of glass change your focus significantly. You can get decent results with some lenses but none are better than a dedicated telescope. I've been using lenses for auto for a while and after getting a real telescope it's almost laughable how bad even my extremely expensive lenses are when using them for astro.

??

@@shrekshrek Radian RAPTOR 61 - DESTROYED [debunked and deconstructed]