Feedback on Chinese manufactured refractors Generic equipment discussions · Wanda Conde · 9/12/2023 · 42 · 3256 · 4

Hello everyone!

I am planning to substantially change my current setup and among the changes is buying a refractor with a 150 - 160mm aperture. My equipment is located in a private observatory in Europe, so American manufactured alternatives are ruled out due to the high import cost associated with that equipment. I have a budget of about $7,000 (maybe a bit more) to buy the optical tube, including its flattener and reducer/flattener.  After reading reviews and evaluating the photos published on Astrobin for hours, I have narrowed the list down to three finalists:

1) TS Photoline 140mm Apo https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p11814_TS-Optics-Photoline-140-mm-f-6-5-Super-Triplet- Apo-mit-2-ED-Elementen.html
2) TS-Optics CF-APO 155 mm https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p12211_TS-Optics-CF-APO-155-mm-f-8-Deluxe-Triplet- APO-Refraktor---mit-Testzertifikat.html
3) Skywatcher Esprit-150ED https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p4880_Skywatcher-Esprit-150ED-150-mm-f-7--FPL53-Triplet-APO-Teleskop-OTA .html

During my research I also found these excellent articles:
1) Comparison of a TS Photoline 130 with a Tak 130 by Charles Bracken: https://digitalstars.wordpress.com/2022/05/30/review-ts-optics-photoline-130-and-comparison-with-takahashi- toa-130/
2) Glass quality comparison by Vic Maris, President of Stellarvue: https://www.stellarvue.com/optical-glass-types/#

I am well aware that Chinese-made telescopes do not have the quality controls that premium quality telescopes have. But unfortunately my budget is limited and a Takahashi will always be out of my reach, so I made the decision to "take a risk" and buy a Chinese-made telescope.

I have seen very good results (even IOTD's) with these Chinese-made brands and models. On the other hand, I read stories about premium telescopes that come out of collimation and other issues.  I have also seen very poor results with "premium" telescopes, which makes me think that the result not only depends on the quality of the telescope, but on the knowledge of the person using it.

If you have any of the telescopes I am considering and you can take a few minutes to give me some feedback on the following, it would help me a lot in making a decision.

1) How well the flatteners and reducers/flatteners work?
2) Did you have issues with pinched optics?
3) Do you consider that the telescope has good chromatic correction and little or no spherical aberration?
4) How good (or bad) is the factory focuser?
4) Would you buy the same telescope again?

Thank you in advance for any help you can give me.

Kind regards and clear skies,
Wanda

Let me answer you specific questions.   Should have done that in the above post

1.  The flattener works very well.   I crop anyway, but stars are round at the edges of my images
2.  Can't answer this one......don't know what pinched optics are.   But overall, happy with my images.
3.  A very slight touch of spherical aberration compared to my Stellarvue SVX-130T.  It can be processed out
4.  Factory focuser is smooth and accurate.  It's very sturdy with the imaging train attached. It has a locking feature but I haven't had any issues with slippage since I use a motorized focuser.
5.  I would buy this again, yes.

Hope this helps

Patrick

Hi,

I’ve used the CF series of TS optics, Photoline series and Skywatcher Esprit. 

In my opinion, esprits are far superior compared to photolines/CF series or any TS doublets. The focusers look equally good on all the telescopes, but with Esprits I don’t see any slips, slacks or tilt. 
The dedicated flattener with Esprit is the least painful one to get flat field across the field upto full frame.
This is consistent across their esprit 100, 120 and 150.

I recently came into position of the Sky-Watcher Esprit 150 and it has taken my astrophotography to an entirely new level. Last summer I was using a similarly spec'd refractor from Explore Scientific and it was a real pain to use at almost every possible turn. The focuser was junk and I think the OTA wasn't baffled correctly. Oh, and the dew shield kept coming loose and falling down. And ES's customer service was flat out bad. A $3,500 piece of junk. The Esprit is a joy, by comparison. That flattener that comes with the scope seems to work just as it should. I should also mention that I seriously upgraded my mount as well and that has contributed to my astrophotography advances equally if not more so than the addition of the Esprit.

I have a astro tech 102 ed and it gets better with further viewing with it. I assume it's Chinese optics in it but it gives the best views of the moon of any of the telescopes I have owned. I had an Orion 127mm mak but the refractor is still better on the moon and it can handle full moon or nearly full moon and not lose too much definition on it the way reflectors do
    With these mass manufactured telescopes some versions are going to be better than others with same aperture and brand and model. 
     I seen where even a Takahashi refractor bought by someone was a little over corrected and the guy sent it back and got another model of the same refractor.
     Just make sure when you buy one that you will be able to send it back and get a replacement for it so it will be satisfactory in quality.

In china, we prefer to use Sky Rover 130apo pro.

Matthew Proulx:
You say premium scopes are out of the budget, I am asssuming you mean takahashi. I owned both the Takahashi TSA 120 and the SW Esprit 120 and the Esprit is the superior scope here. I've imaged and observed with both. Comfortably purchase one knowing there's probably not much better out there even at a higher price tag.

Takahashi surely produces good scope here and there, but you have to choose carefully, some are better than others.
Refering to Ed Ting, there are like 3 lineups from certain years of manufacturing that stand out, the rest is often overrated.
Don't want to talk the quality down, they do produce fine scope, but they also know how marketing works and managed to make a majority of Astronerds
believe, that no matter what Taka they will get, it will be the ultimate scope.

There's a reason you will always be able to purchase a Takahashi but you have to wait quite a while to get your hands on the highest tier scopes.
Takahashi ist just known very well in the premium segment, but wouldn't be the first company to come to my mind if we're talking premium.

There's AP, TEC, Stellarvue, CFF just to name a few.

I voted for the Esprit!

Yyou don't hear anything bad about these and I get great results from my Esprit 100, for example here:
https://www.astrobin.com/0jk01n/C/

CS
Chris

I've tried TS Photoline (but not as large) and Esprit 100ED and personally I would go for the Esprit of the scopes you listed here.
The Esprit series is well proved and even if I'm not perfectly happe with the "capatins wheel" I think they are great scopes.
(But I would stay away from the Esprit 80ED because of the lack of proper tube rings but that's not relevant for your question )

From your options I voted on the CF-APO 155mm, just because it has FPL-55 glass which is better than the FPL-53 used on Esprits. But, you did not include the nice PHQ refractors from Askar, something like a 130 PHQ or 151, which are more hassle-free, and would be my own choice.

Could you provide more details on how FPL55 is better than FPL53?

Tommy Blomqvist:

Deepan Vishal:

From your options I voted on the CF-APO 155mm, just because it has FPL-55 glass which is better than the FPL-53 used on Esprits. But, you did not include the nice PHQ refractors from Askar, something like a 130 PHQ or 151, which are more hassle-free, and would be my own choice.

Could you provide more details on how FPL55 is better than FPL53?

To be clear it isn't obvious that FPL-55 is better than FPL-53.
They are very similar in many ways and the difference isn't like between FPL-51 and FPL-53.
FPL-53, 55 and FCD-100 have almost identical Abbe number.

Thanks everyone for your feedback.  In addition to the very similar ABBE numbers between FPL-53, FPL-55, and FCD-100, one of the reasons I included the TS CF 155 in the list I am considering is this quote from a very good article written by Vic Maris, Presiden of Stellarvue:

“Ohara FPL53 versus FPL55.  Investing in optical glass in large sizes is expensive and risky. Ohara is now making a new SD glass, FPL55. Based on the specs the only real difference between FPL53 and FPL55 is the latter can maintain its performance in larger sizes. So I will be making our new SVX180T using FPL55 since it appears to be a safer choice in this size range. ”

In china, we prefer to use Sky Rover 130apo pro.

*** 确实，Sky Rover 130apo pro在我们这里非常流行（Indeed, Sky Rover 130apo pro is very popular in our area）***

Why not Askar? My 130 PHQ is great. They recently released the 151PHQ with built in flattener - link on CN. CS & GB! kip

Several of us are interested in the PHQ scopes.  I’m intrigued by the spot diagrams that show better spots (when using the flattener) than I have with my FSQ106.  

Would you have any sample subs taken with the flattener and a full frame camera?

Thanks!

Kevin