Wide field refractor Generic equipment discussions · Dominic Wijker · ... · 13 · 533 · 0

Is a economic product, many problems and very high CA. I have used it for one month, a big lemon. For the wide field i have the TS optics 70 quadruplet and Takahashi FCT65D, both ecxcellent.

All of the changes seem to be downgrades in my opinion. Variable aperture (something you'll probably never use for astro, especially in a small frac), helical focuser instead of R&P, less stable mounting system compared to rings

Kyle Goodwin:
I love my Takahashi FSQ-85.  Great wide field scope.  I don't recommend using it with a full frame camera necessarily, but with APS-C it's awesome.

That's like someone asking about a Lexus then someone goes and say "you know I love my Rolls Royce Phantom it is so awesome"

@Dominic Wijker
As for my personal experience if the Askar/Sharpstar might bring some CA you could go for the 70mm petzval sold as TS Optics, Sky Rover or William Optics. They are very likely to be very well corrected and will probably use FCD100 or FPL53 glass. WO will charge more for the packaging and being assembled and tested in Taiwain I guess.

None of those are really wide field, which either means really fast or short focal length, so I'd say what are your expected or desired FOV and with what camera and take it from there.

Review spot charts if you can.

Someone brought up the Takahashi FSQ85 ED. It probably tops the list when it comes to minimizing chromatic aberration, giving sharper details and more accurate colors—especially noticeable in the tiny features. But wow, you really pay extra for that kind of performance. (Its famous big brother, the FSQ106, offers similarly excellent optics but covers more medium-wide fields—and, yep, it’s even pricier.

Then there’s the Tak 60, which honestly is the sharpest refractor I’ve ever seen, with amazing color accuracy too. Plus, its price is way easier to swallow. It’ll easily outperform scopes like the RedCat in terms of sharpness and color. The trade-off, though, is that with these smaller scopes you sacrifice a bit of light-gathering power.

All that said, a lot of the less expensive wide-field scopes still match the Tak pretty well in capturing fine details in the green spectrum—the range our eyes notice most. For most astrophotographers, you’d probably not spot the difference in the final image right away. And the savings can be pretty substantial.

Remember, it’s really only on those rare, perfect nights that an optically superior scope can truly show off its advantage. Most of the time, typical conditions level the playing field, making the difference less noticeable.

In terms of optic performance, a ranking might look like
Takahashi—professional research quality
Stellarvue and Televue (different companies, both assembled in the US)—nearly as good as Tak.  Very sharp images.
William Optic and Askar—Very good scopes for developing skills, for budget-conscious users wanting above average performance, and also excellent as travelers.
Explore Scientific—Also very good, assembled in the US, and perhaps the most affordable of all.

William Optic and Askar also make scopes that are rebranded, like those for ZWO, for example.

The quality across all these telescope brands is impressively close—and getting better all the time. Honestly, you’re likely to be thrilled with any one of them. The manufacturing standards and optics nowadays are just amazing. Askar, in particular, has been improving rapidly and keeps raising their game.

I personally have both the Tak 85 and the William Optics Gran Turismo 71. Their performance is actually pretty similar. But as my experience has grown, I’m seeing the Tak edge ahead—enough so that it’s now solidly in my “forever scope” category. I’ll never part with it. Still, the GT71 is really close behind and produces images that are seriously satisfying. The Tak stays set up at Starfront, and the GT71 is my grab-and-go traveler at home.

Bottom line: pick a scope that’s comfortably within your budget and just enjoy the heck out of it. Learn all about its strengths and quirks, do some homework on what’s out there, and maybe save up for something even better down the road. Or, if you’re willing, “cry once,” go big, and get that forever scope—just be prepared that you might not see the difference right away.

Dave Rust:
Explore Scientific—Also very good, assembled in the US, and perhaps the most affordable of all.

Did they move their production?  When I had an ES127 years ago they were made fully in China with Chinese glass and assembly.

Dave Rust:
Recently spoke with a company rep after a star party in Key West. Over the years ES has begun sourcing from several sources and ends up assembling many final products in Arkansas, but not all. Some specific parts are also manufactured there. Certainly, many individual components are made elsewhere, mostly China and Germany. That’s why I avoided using the word “manufactured.”

 A few years ago I bought some ES gear, the value was amazing and even better was their service. People actually answered the phone, called me back and cared about my experience. Two companies I have had exceptional service from have been Astronomics and Explore Scientific.