If I only had one telescope.

I have been thinking about what the best general purpose astronomy telescope is under $3,000. Two of my lifetime favorites have been the Tak FS 102 and the TEC 6. I no longer own either and am in the market for the perfect general purpose scope. Any thoughts?

After many years of trying different scopes, I am still convinced that if I could own only one scope it would be the 12.5" Portaball. It really does everything well. Oh yes, and a Roundtable equatorial platform. It exceeds the $3,000 limit new but they come up used for great prices.

If I had to buy new and hold to the $3,000 I'd look at Mark's (Teton Telescopes) Rapier line of optimized Newtonians in the 8" size range on a DOB base.

My vote is for something like a high end 12" dob also.
Just because my 13" non-high end dob has more miles on it then all my other scopes combined, by a considerable margin.

In our club one of my favorite telescopes started out as a 12XTi Dob. Over the past two years the owner had the mirror refigured, replaced the secondary with a Protostar and replaced the focuser with a feathertouch. All of this cost about two grand and I have to say it is a very easy telescope to use and the viewing is excellent. Of course it would have been nice to just buy a telescope of this quality from the beginning and I'm open to hearing some vendors that may fit the bill. I think the same optics and focuser in a truss system would be ideal, then all I would have to do is save up for the tracking.

Jack Bruneau said:

I have been thinking about what the best general purpose astronomy telescope is under $3,000. Two of my lifetime favorites have been the Tak FS 102 and the TEC 6. I no longer own either and am in the market for the perfect general purpose scope. Any thoughts?

The ultimate general purpose scope? After all these long years, it is STILL the good, old C8. A few accessories and it can tackle almost anything and do at least a credible job with almost anything.

Can not really make up my mind as to what my choice would be if I had to decide on only one scope, but I do know for sure what I would not get and that is any scope with eyepiece at the wrong end, that pretty much eliminates Newts, Mak Newts and several other types all with eyepiece position at the wrong end.

Vahe

I've given some thought to this. I don't know about "the perfect scope" because there are so many different applications. Most of the people endorsing Newts, for example, seem not to do photography.

Rod is right about the SCT being able to do most anything. Lot of punch in those coffee cans and you stick one on a Super Polaris.

I guess what I'm getting at is that the "best scope" I've found is actually a combination of a light bucket and a refractor.

The FS128 is wonderful enough that I can envision what life would be like if it were my sole scope. I can't imagine saying "I'm not a dso guy" with an FS128 or TEC140 or other quality refractor (not to mention a 6"). There are many thousands of dsos one can look at. Anyhow life with the FS128 by itself would probably be not that much different from life with a TEC 140 by itself. I wouldn't want a six inch refractor, I think, because it would be a difficult gymnastic with the eyepiece going too high and too low. The nights with the FS128 have always been good. One of the things I like about it is that I don't bother pushing for dim stuff. I tend to "try for dim" in the c14 whereas in the FS128 I just cruise for what appeals.

But in terms of flexibility the c14+102mm refractor is a very powerful combination for visual applications. I have side by sided the FS128 and C14 on Saturn and Jupiter and while the FS128 is very impressive the C14 brings in things the FS128 can't, particularly colors on Jupiter, etc. The FS128 blows away the c14 on those gorgeous wide star fields. But it doesn't blow away the c14 + 102mm. I seem to have a genetic preference for a GEM so whatever it is would be my ideal combination it would have to be on a GEM and would be a combo scope. I do prefer rear exit for the light path so I guess I'd be looking at some kind of Mak, Cassegrain, or SCT as the "ultimate."

When I am truly old and feeble I will probably settle in with a 4" refractor, or maybe a 110mm like the one TEC has announced. Meantime the rig I have does much much more than I have time to take advantage of, and there's this "whole other rig," the Losmandy-mounted FS128, which also can do more than I have time for, so I guess I'm pretty lucky.

I did get a chance to observe through my old 9.25 which I sold to a club friend a few years ago. Man now I remember why it took me two years to get around selling that thing. I'm very reluctant to say that it was "giving up" anything to the C14 at powers of 350 to 550x although certainly the moons were brighter in the c14. A 9.25 with the new TEC110mm would probably do it for me and I could get back some cash I have tied up in other stuff. But I'd hate to give up the 14" scope's ability to "go deep."

regards
Greg N

Hi John,

For me, I don't think the ideal <$3K scope has yet been marketed.

I am partial to lightweight, and aperture.

I would need some kind of carbon fiber / aluminum dob-style scope with a thin Quartz mirror ~14" diameter.

I've seen handmade scopes like this last year, and early in the evening Jupiter was showing about 8 bands with details, later we looked at the horsehead nebula with a Hb filter, it was standing out obvious.

The upper scope assy. without rocker box could be picked up with one hand.

Not sure if this could be built commercially for $3K, but this would be a lifetime scope for most of us I think.

[COLOR="Blue"]

Jack Bruneau said:

I have been thinking about what the best general purpose astronomy telescope is under $3,000. Two of my lifetime favorites have been the Tak FS 102 and the TEC 6. I no longer own either and am in the market for the perfect general purpose scope. Any thoughts?

[/COLOR]

Under 3000.00? General purpose? I agree with Uncle Rod. I had this choice a few months back and went with a Celestron CPC 1100. SCT's are about as "general purpose" as it gets. Large aperture, excellent portability, ease of setup, ease of use, GOTO, tracking, etc.. If you get one with really good optics (all the CPC 1100's I have looked though have them) you will have a ball. IMO, no TEC 6 or FS 102 would beat one no matter what your target. "Optically good" aperture rules. That is my experience after 30+ years of telescope making/use.


Keith

Attached Image: