0.00
#... |
|---|
|
Ok - sorry for the long delay. I've been very busy with school and other commitments. I have a comparison of the WO taken without - and with - the aperture mask that was mentioned. Here's the link (it's posted here on Astrobin, anyway). Details on the capture are in the description. Without the mask, I'd probably be frustrated enough with the results to try a different scope. With the mask, however, the improvement is dramatic and I'm very happy with this little scope. The clear advantage over other small scopes is the freedom to "go commando" with regard to reducers, meaning there is no need at all to worry about getting spacing correct and you can incorporate filter wheels, OAGs, etc., into your optical train without having to consider backfocus of some add-on reducer. |
2.71
#... |
|---|
| Yeah, the lack of need for a reducer/flattener is definitely the most attractive aspect to me besides the relatively low price tag. Most other 4 and 5 element refractors look pretty damn expensive by comparison. |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
| Another peice of information, back focus spec changed from star71 to star71-II. Back focus on the 2nd edition is 66.78mm , WO did not have this on their website for the first 5 months of release, only after I wrote them regarding people need this critical information! |
1.51
#... |
|---|
Dan Kordella: Nice pictures, Dan. The one on the right looks much better but the one on the left also looks to be a bit out of focus. You are right about the advantage of the built-in reducer, one of the features which I will never get rid of my WO. On that little scope I have PreciseParts adapter, large OAG, filter wheel and camera and this is something I cannot do with my large refractor (ES 127) because most focal reducers out there have only 55mm back focus tolerance but I have to correct you on the go commando and not having to worry about backfocus, the WO has a large backfocus but it still does have one, I believe 94mm from flange to sensor, still, with FPL 53 that scope gives me wonderful pictures. When I bought mine, it was $900 so I got an even better deal. I absolutely love my scope and I wish good luck to people out there with this scope or with another brand. I have heard of people with pinched stars with all kinds of refractors, including the SV and I even had friends replace their focusers on their Takahashi because they could not automate and that's how bad the Tak's auto focuser was, you would think a Tak would come out of that box saying I love you and lets be happy forever (based on the price). Anyway, here is the last picture I took with my WO (without any mask) http://www.astrobin.com/271494/?nc=user |
|
2.71
#... |
|---|
| Your images with the WOStar are definitely an inspiration, Samara. I suppose in our hobby there's a degree of luck involved with all equipment, and the best we can do is test out different setups and see what works on an case-by-case basis. |
|
0.00
#... |
|---|
Tyler Jackson Welch: There is very much another option. I have a Stellarvue SV70T with reducer/flattener. The specification is almost identical. If you're using a DSLR Stellarvue ships the scope/reducer with the perfect threaded spacer. If a CCD they'll help you figure out the spacing. $1100. I like mine, haven't seen any complaints about aberrations. |
10.26
#... |
|---|
|
When the WO Star71 was out of production and unavailable, (my dealer refunded me when he heard there was a six month delay) I instead purchased a Stellarvue SV70T instead, and I'm delighted with it. This little 'scope has earned me 2 x APODs and an Astrobin IOTD.  Results here for those interested in this alternative - http://www.astrobin.com/users/Andys_Astropix/ |
|
2.71
#... |
|---|
|
I thought I should chime in here again since ended up pulling the trigger on a used WO Star71-II. In a grand total of one somewhat clear night, I've been able to test it a bit and it seems that the stars are fine across the board. No pentagons, teardrops, or iron crosses. I would share the test frames here but unfortunately I forgot to check off "save to disk" when I was doing my Frame & Focus shots in SGP. Hopefully I get another clear night soon and can test it on M42 or something. Even though I've barely had a chance to use it, I will say that I like the quality of the scope overall. The focuser feels solid and is tightly secured. I can also thread a 48mm t-ring directly onto the back to attach my DSLR so I don't need to worry about a t-adapter; this to me is a plus since it removes the need for another adapter. The mounting rings aren't terribly sturdy, but they don't seem to introduce any problems. The carrying case it comes with is also really nice; I can fit the scope, my camera, and t-ring in it. Barring any future optical issues, I think I will be keeping this scope for a long time. |
|
1.51
#... |
|---|
I thought I should chime in here again since ended up pulling the trigger on a used WO Star71-II. In a grand total of one somewhat clear night, I've been able to test it a bit and it seems that the stars are fine across the board. No pentagons, teardrops, or iron crosses. I would share the test frames here but unfortunately I forgot to check off "save to disk" when I was doing my Frame & Focus shots in SGP. Hopefully I get another clear night soon and can test it on M42 or something.Even though I've barely had a chance to use it, I will say that I like the quality of the scope overall. The focuser feels solid and is tightly secured. I can also thread a 48mm t-ring directly onto the back to attach my DSLR so I don't need to worry about a t-adapter; this to me is a plus since it removes the need for another adapter. The mounting rings aren't terribly sturdy, but they don't seem to introduce any problems. The carrying case it comes with is also really nice; I can fit the scope, my camera, and t-ring in it. I am glad you are happy with your WO Star71, Dan. What report sounds like how I always felt about mine. Wishing you clear skies so you can keep testing it. |
