TeleVue 102


 Info  Votes  Messages  More Stats  Up One Level
Switch to Subject View
Post Message



Page 1 of 1


Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.173.137
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.55.133)
Date: 05/04/2002 04:30:47 am PDT
Thank you for the nice report, after using my new TV102 found it very true for in city use which I do from the suburbs of St. Lois. I have also gotten out in dark sky with it and it does supprizingly well on darksky objects if you can get away from sky glow, still though for the fuzzies bigger is better as you stated, but what a wonderfull easy to use scope this is! Thanks again.
Big Al

>I've had this scope for two months now. I'm primarily interested in lunar, planetary, and the brighter deep-sky objects, and I wanted an instrument that was easy to use, could be set up quickly, and didn't need alot of cool-down time. I also didn't want to hassle with collimation, or worry about whether or not I was going to get a "good sample" or a scope that would need to be returned, replaced, tuned up, etc. The TV 102 is perfect for this, especially on the Gibralter mount. Perfect star test right out of the box. I saw 5 bands on Jupiter the very first time I used it, and I had never seen more than two with my old Meade 90mm achromat. Saturn was breathtaking, saw the crepe ring for the first time. And even under my light-polluted skies, the contrast is so good I could easily make out festoons in the Orion nebula. The workmanship is as superb as the optics, and as if all this weren't enough, it doubles as an ultimate spotting scope for the panoramic view from my living room window!

>I hope someone finds all this helpful!


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.156.181
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.163.97)
Date: 10/26/2005 11:51:05 am PDT
Respectfully, I've used my 102 dozens of times in the last two years. I have never seen any color on the moon that's been caused by chromatic aberration from the telescope. Some eyepieces can introduce color, atmospheric refraction can do the same, humidity, etc. But this scope is simply colorless when focused.

The only time I've seen color was when I pushed the scope to a little over 300X, while on Vega. Then I saw traces of a distinct dark, marroonish purple (in a tight fringe around the star) when the seeing was turbulent. Under no other conditions have I seen any trace of color from this scope.

I know that my Orion Expanse eyepieces do introduce some color (a bright neon blue, particularly at the edge of field), but my Naglers, Panoptics and Meade 5000 series SWA don't.

>I recently purchased a used TV102 made in 2004. I have a larger refractor and a 83mm f/15 refractor. I wanted a grab-n-go scope that would show me a little more planetary detail than the 83mm. The 3.25 inch scope is great, but IMO a 3-inch refractor doesn't quite show enough detail on planets to warrant taking it out every night.
>
>Pros: Optics are great. I was initially disappointed to see some false color. Many reviewers say there is no visible CA, and they are wrong. I quickly saw some purple when looking at the moon. However, the false color is minimal, really only noticeable on the Moon & bright stars. This is a high-contrast planetary performer. IMO, a 100% color-free triplet is not worth the additional cost and weight for visual observing.
>
>The size and f/ratio of this scope are near perfect. It's big enough to be fun on deep-sky and planets, and yet the OTA weighs under 9 pounds! I saw good detail on globulars, and lots of nebulosity in the Pleaides (from a dark site). It's well worth taking this scope out every clear night to look at Jupiter & Saturn, with lots of details visible. The f/8.6 ratio gives a nice flat field with simple eyepiece designs.
>
>The OTA is skinny at 114mm diameter, and the scope is compact when the dewshield is retracted. With the lightweight and small diameter of the tube, it is easy to attach to my Tak Teegul mount, which is very stable with this scope, even on my flimsy wood tripod. I considered getting a Tak F102, but it's a few pounds heavier, which turned me off.
>
>My only complaints with this scope are minor. The dewcap is nice and compact, but it requires a lot of force to slide it in and out. I know TV says that their black flocking paper in the tube works as well as baffles, but frankly, I don't believe it. And, if I'm keeping a scope for 20 or 30 years, I'd prefer to see nothing but metal inside the tube. Maybe the flocking stuff will never flake off, maybe it will.
>
>Also, the focusser is high quality, but it could be better. It struggles a bit with 2-inch eyepieces when the scope is pointed up near the zenith. They now offer a 2-speed option for $200, which seems pricey. The focusser is decent, but not up to Feather-touch or Astro-Physics quality.
>
>One last tip for other TV102 owners - B&G Photo has a padded soft-case that fits this scope PERFECTLY! If you want something smaller than the OEM case, check out the Tundra tripod case II, part #33S2TRIP2. It fits the scope perfectly with a 2-inch diagonal on there. This makes the scope an incredibly small and lightweight package.
>
>Also, I did not care for the TV clamshell tube holder. You can score some Vixen-type mounting rings from Orion that fit the tube perfectly for less than $20.


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Subject: Re: vote by xxx.xxx.156.181
By: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.72.44)
In Reply to: Anonymous (xxx.xxx.163.97) (Original Message)
Date: 01/11/2006 12:19:24 pm PDT
Hi - thanks for posting this, from the other reviews I'm sure others have had your color-free experience as well. I did see some purple on the moon, and also a small amount on Rigel as well. It's possible that it's the eyepiece, although I doubt it as I used several different types, all very high quality (Tak, TV, and Clave). On 2 nights I was able to compare the TV102 with a 3 1/4 inch F15 Jaegers achromat, and both times I was able to see slight false color in both scopes, with a little more visible in the TV102.

I think it's likely that some people's eyes are more sensitive to the CA than others. As I mentioned in the review, I don't think false color is a problem with this scope, but I could detect some. It's likely that many people won't see it, or maybe some lenses are corrected slightly better than others. I know that a marketing rep from TV said that the TV102 has a little false color (compared to the NP101). Check msg#28950 in the Yahoo group for details.

Keep enjoying those TV102's folks, it's a great scope.

>Respectfully, I've used my 102 dozens of times in the last two years. I have never seen any color on the moon that's been caused by chromatic aberration from the telescope. Some eyepieces can introduce color, atmospheric refraction can do the same, humidity, etc. But this scope is simply colorless when focused.
>


Reply
Post Un-related Message


Page 1 of 1

[Click Here to Login]
Don't have a login? Register!