| Askar V optic quality compares well against its comparable non interchangeable scopes with similar fl | |
|---|---|
| Exactly the same quality for sure | |
| Slightly degraded | |
| I honestly can't see any difference | |
| Doesn't compare and can't compete against dedicated FL scopes | |
| Login to vote and view results. |
1.91
#...
·
 |
|---|
|
Hi, I've been looking on getting a V. But.... Im not convinced on the optical quality yet. So I downloaded the spot diagrams for it, and compared against Askar 65PHQ, Askar 300pro, Askar 400, Askar 600. I combined the total um spread one by one for each, and when you compare, it looks like the attached (see attached) Basically the Askar V at similar focal length to Fra 300 is 20% to 57% more degraded, 65PHQ 33% to 46% more degraded, Askar Fra 400 8% degraded to 0.7% upgraded[b], [/b]FRA 600 - better 18 to 26% upgraded % degrade Performance against Askar Fra 300 Askar V 60 mm 270mm f4.5 reducer use 20.82220094% Askar V 80mm reducer 384mm f4.8 57.6649695% % degrade Performance against Askar 65PHQ Askar V 60mm 360mm f6 Flattener use 33.20396923% Askar V 80mm 495 f6.18 Flattener use 46.72329251% % degrade (%upgraded) Performance against Askar Fra 400 Askar 80mm reducer 384mm f4.8 8.326406207% Askar V 60mm 360mm f6 Flattener -0.736007204% % degrade %(upgraded) Performance against Askar Fra 600 Askar V 60mm 360mm f6 Flattener -26.43723891 Askar V 80mm 495 f6.18 Flattener -18.97110442 So against the 300 you can expect, all things being equal, 20% reduction in optical quality, so on and so forth. I also cant find too many images published in astrobin and elsewhere that would refute the above. Either it is too early to compare due to lack of finished images, or the above numbers paint the picture. Any users here want to correct me that would be very much aprpeciated. This post is intended to bring out the best Askar V discussion so I can literally order one, not to discourage anyone who owns one  |
4.20
#...
·
|
|---|
| (deleted) |
|
1.91
#...
·
|
|---|
| Is there anyone or ? |
3.61
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Hi, I do not own an Askar V, but I have researched them since I find looking for the next telescope is a big part of this hobby for me  .One item I found in my research, was a Cuiv, the Lazy Geek video in which if you look at the description, he linked to a bunch of raw frames in various configurations. These all looked relatively promising to me, and comparable to the 65PHQ which I did previously own. I like looking at raw frames when evaluating optics vs. finished images. Thanks for posting your calculations! Chris |
|
1.91
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Hi, *** Chris I downloaded the fits and, yes, they look fine to me also! So I jsut ordered the Askar V! thanks for your reply ... I just noticed two really good images posted on Astrobin from the Askar V that look incredible so that also swayed me finally!*** |
|
3.61
#...
·
|
|---|
|
That's great! Enjoy the scope! -Chris |
1.20
#...
·
|
|---|
|
I was skeptical, at first, but is it really any different than putting a field flattener/reducer on the back of most refractors, or adding a HyperStar to an SCT? I’m sure there is a slight drop-off in quality compared to a closed system, but is that reduction in quality worth buying 2 separate scopes? I don’t have the V (and I don’t plan on buying it) but I’m intrigued by the design. I’m glad SharpStar and William Optics (WIFD design) are continuing to try new things. |
|
1.91
#...
·
·
4
likes
|
|---|
Well first light and I must say I'm happy.  A break in the clouds and got 4.4 hours on seagull nebula. A few things... the image quality is excellent. The quality of stars both for ca and shape is almost perfect. This was using the worst performing theoretical stat's 60mm with reducer. What I noticed was the stat's are purist assuming good seeing etc etc. So almost never would you get the stat's in the field. For 4 hours I was surprised at the amount of data and clarity which comes down to the fast fl coupled with triplet clarity of optics. I had to rethink my processing because of the fine detail loss using my old pixinsight steps. A much lighter touch required as the native image was much better quality. With the 6 different fl at disposal and based of the stat's and this image this works for me nicely.
|
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
| Just getting into this hobby and hoping to have the budget for my first setup towards the end of '24. Have my eyes on the Askar V, keep the images coming! |
|
1.91
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Just getting into this hobby and hoping to have the budget for my first setup towards the end of '24. Have my eyes on the Askar V, keep the images coming! *** I'm so glad I purchased one. The quality is perfect. Took this the other night  ***
|
0.00
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
I am new to the hobby as of last October, and did a bunch of research and landed on the Askar V as my first telescope, as it would lend me flexibility as I learned what I liked (target size, etc). I've been really pleased with it (although I don't, in practice, have anything to compare it to). I've most frequently been using it in the 600mm configuration, and am getting good (to my novice eye) results: https://www.astrobin.com/mwtkqy/ |
