Yet another person weakening...

Started by Astroimage2002, 04/23/2004 12:19AM
Posted 04/23/2004 12:19AM Opening Post
Is the FSQ a _huge_ leap forward over the FS-102?
Will it be stable for photography on a GM-8?
Let me know what you think.
Brian
Posted 04/23/2004 11:27AM #1
I believe the intent of the FSQ model is mainly as a widefield astrograph (field flattener and camera angle adjuster both standard, IIRC) even though plenty are happy to use it strictly visually, while the FS102 is equally good for visual and photography (the latter particularly with a focal reducer/flattener and angle adjuster that are add-ons) and at f/8 is a bit better for planetary use.

Also (correct me if I'm wrong, FSQ owners) the FSQ is a triplet to the FS102's doublet.

As for stability on a GM8, I can only guess. The 106 is 13.2 pounds without add-ons; the 102 is 11.7 pounds. Doesn't seem to be all that much of a difference. The 102 does just find on my CG5.

Both scopes have reviews from owners at Anacortes' site.