11.57
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Peter Bresler: I don't want to sound like I am complaining about the camera manufacture. I think it is the problem of the Kodak CCD itself, not the camera. 15 to 20 years ago the CCD would be very adequate, and now it's the era of CMOS. My purchase sat right between. 10 years ago there weren't any cooled cameras with Sony CMOS in the market, while CCD was already in the sunset phase. I think it was just bad timing. |
|
11.57
#...
·
|
|---|
For me, the worst investment is, unfortunately, the RST-135. I bought it at retail price in December 2021 and since then it has plummeted in value, perhaps because of the flux of new, much cheaper strainwave mounts. I generally like the RST-135 but it's painful to think I lost so much on it. Very interesting comment. I also have RST-135 and I think it's a solid performer for its price. And you are absolutely right that now the market is full of much cheaper alternatives. Given the difference in build quality, even if I am making the purchase again now, I would still go for an RST. The problem is just that if one day I am going to sell it, I can hardly sell at a price that's reasonable to me. So I figure the only way to make this investment worthwhile is to keep using the mount for very long time. Can an RST last very long like a TAK or an Astro-Physics? We will know the answer after 10 years. |
1.43
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Christian Koll: I agree. I will never by baader filter ever again. |
2.71
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Wei-Hao Wang:For me, the worst investment is, unfortunately, the RST-135. I bought it at retail price in December 2021 and since then it has plummeted in value, perhaps because of the flux of new, much cheaper strainwave mounts. I generally like the RST-135 but it's painful to think I lost so much on it. I guess I mainly wish I had just spent the extra money for the 135E. The regular 135 doesn’t seem justified by the price anymore. |
|
2.71
#...
·
|
|---|
Karl Theberge:Christian Koll: I like their new f/3 filters for my Takahashi Epsilon. Perfect match IMO. Their RGB filters also perform well with my particular setup. |
22.40
#...
·
·
4
likes
|
|---|
|
FLI ML16200 CCD camera. That thing was quite expensive and I think that I might have used it for maybe less than 10 days and it worked well. However, the sensor is too small and now it just sits on my shelf worth virtually nothing. After that I bought an outrageously expensive ML16803 just as the chip was discontinued (and just before the large CMOS chip cameras came to market. Again, I used it to produce a couple of really good images before retiring it to install a QHY600MM-ph. In my view, 16803 was at the peak of CCD development and it’s still quite a good camera, but there it sits unused, worth a tiny fraction of what I paid for it. I’ve been thinking of selling this stuff but frankly, it makes sick to even think about how much I spent on all this now nearly worthless stuff so I keep avoiding the moving forward with it. John |
3.81
#...
·
|
|---|
Karl Theberge:Christian Koll: Could one of you guys explain a bit on the baader filter complaints? Any specifics? |
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
| Bad halos on OIII. |
|
1.43
#...
·
|
|---|
|
William Optic flattener/Reducer Flat73R should be named "Un-flattener" I have bought it, try it and its now been sitting ont my shelf for 2 years. Also, more I learn about astro imaging less I want to buy WO gear. They are sexy looking, use FPL-53 and yet, if you look at the spot diagram, they're mainly shit.... Pinched optics, bloating stars, field unflattener, grub screw stuck in R&P gear teeths.... but, but, QC sticker is there🤷♂️ |
|
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
| Bad halos on OIII. |
|
1.43
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Peter Bresler: * Bad? HUGE you mean? They claim they worked on this, but thats until you contact them. Then its radio silence or its not their fault. Also, the coating on my SHO set look so uneven. I would be curious to have the spectrum verified on my OIII and SII. its it such a critical part of an imaging train, next time Ill be more carefull |
4.21
#...
·
|
|---|
|
My worst investment was a Celestron CGX-L mount. It started working fine right after delivery but after about 10 nights, the problems started - disconnected, positioning error, homing error, etc - after having tried everything possible for me, I returned it to the vendor company and got full refund - comment from them: Yes, we know, that mount has some problems. Some are excellent, some are very bad. I bought an iOptron CEM120 and I am very happy with it. |
|
4.21
#...
·
|
|---|
Peter Bresler: I have OIII filters of ZWO, Baader, Astronomik and Optolong.... from my own experience, the best are Astronomik. ZWO - their OIII has very bad halos, Optolong filters have visible gradients, Baader are fine, but I can comment only on the most recent new series, the older ones, I cannot comment. There are very high priced other manufacturers, but my budget does not allow me to buy them... I cannot spend 1000 Euros for one OIII filter (M48 oder 50,4mm) |
5.73
#...
·
|
|---|
|
All astro imaging electronics. It can be very expensive and all will eventually be outdated, and not only worth a fraction of the original value, but maybe not even functional. Cameras can be the worst. Next is mid value mount motors. But that's the nature of digital. Scopes can vary. My best value is a AP130GTX. My worst monetary value is Officina Stellare RH200, and even bought used. It's imaging value is to still be determined. Lynn K. |
|
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
I paid $5000 for my RH200 and $900 for a pro to collimate it for me. NINA Hocus Focus is very helpful to adjust tilt. It is one of my prime scopes now. |
5.05
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| I think "expenditure" might be a better word rather than investment for the context of this post. That being said, my worst expenditure (investment) is what some others have noted as well. The Nexstar SE single arm mount and wedge combination was without a doubt, the biggest waste of money I've made with this hobby. I now advise anyone considering astrophotography to suck it up and get a good EQ mount with modest refractor to start out with. |
|
2.71
#...
·
|
|---|
Lynn K: Not really sure I agree with this. You can almost always sell a camera for not much less than what you bought it for, as long as you don’t hold onto it for too long and you buy smart. For example, I bought the ASI1600 new when it was hot in 2017 and sold it in 2021 at a little more than a $200 loss. I got many images with that camera. I think that’s pretty good - it’s like I had rented it for a reasonable fee. Now, had I waited until now to sell it, I would have lost big. In my opinion this is what has to be done in this hobby for it to not be financially stupid. Buy used from reputable sellers as much as possible, and sell stuff before its value plummets. If a new, cheaper alternative to a product is in the pipeline, don’t buy the expensive outdated product before the new one comes out. I try not to buy any expensive gear at retail price anymore. Learned my lesson the hard way too many times now. |
|
0.00
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| Agreed, also what I suggest. I did sell the arm and wedge for about what I paid for them in 2019. That was after the 8se fell off the arm and broke the corrector plate. |
1.51
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
My worst was a Televue NP 101is which I bought new thinking it was a quality imaging refractor. Certainly, the price lead me to believe that. The big problem was the star distortion around the edge of the image (full frame Canon 6D). I sent it back to Televue, but it was returned with no improvement. I finally returned it to OPT (where I bought it) and bought the Tak 106 I should have bought in the first place. I could not sell it to anyone else, given the poor images it produced. I will always be grateful to OPT for helping me out. George |
0.00
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
I have a similar story as George with a TeleVue NP101is. My new TeleVue NP101is arrived with pinched optics. I had to pay return shipping and then pay shipping again to get it back after TeleVue worked on it. The tech verified that the optics were pinched even in warm weather from a spacer that was not to specifications. I did not get the scope back for 3 months. The tech told me that they were too busy to work on it. When I received it, it still had pinched optics, as well as fresh cosmetic damage. TeleVue told me to ship it back to them again. They denied my request for a new scope. The vendor then agreed to let me exchange it for a new Tak FSQ-106 while they dealt with TeleVue. While waiting for my scope to return, my wife kept saying "I can't believe how patient you are being through all of this." I always replied "Don't worry, TeleVue will take care of it." Now I chuckle whenever I see their warranty advertised. The TeleVue tech also told me that they could not guarantee that any NP101 would not pinch in cold weather. By contrast, I’ve had my Tak FSQ-106, AP Stowaway, and other quality refractors in below 0 degrees Fahrenheit many times with no issues.I often wonder who has the scope now and would they recognize pinched optics? |
2.41
#...
·
|
|---|
| Ditto those answering ZWO. My experience with ZWO cameras and abysmal customer service mirrors others. Just assume that it will break and that they won’t honor the warranty. |
0.00
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
This thing was the worst for me: |
8.04
#...
·
|
|---|
|
My Atik CCD cameras. Since the introduction of CMOS cameras you can hardly give them away. So sad, as they are excellent cameras. Luckily I don't have any plans to go over to CMOS, but I do have one CCD camera surplus to requirements which I was planning to sell until I saw what some-one else ended up selling it for. I keep it now as a back up. Carole |
2.11
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
| Bought a x5 barlow lens. I was new to the hobby and made a miscalculation, oops |
4.72
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
| Baader filters... |
