There is probably a reason why many are reaching out to you to give reviews of their products - Your reviews always come across as reliable and honest. That makes them valuable to consumers (like me). I think you give critique where critique is warranted, as well as praise where it is deserved. Keep up the good work Cuiv, I think what you do is really helpful.
A very good review. I do feel that spending a few minutes taking calibration frames would help the quality of this and other presentations. It is not hard to take a stack of 25 flats and keep a bias & dark set for a few months- especially as you don't use dozens of different cameras. I spent more time looking at noise and the distracting dust rings rather than focusing on the content- calibration will make it easier to see the features you were pointing out.
Yep!! It's like I wrote on my blog (recently): Cuiv always gets the newest gear! If something is brand-new (and cool) Cuiv has got it! (and is reviewing it!) - Woah! A diagonal! Thank you! and Clear skies!
Nice review ! Thanks for your work. To be noted though, the "cross" as you say , or sometimes called swallows, is an astigmatism optical aberration. It means that the field is overcorrected and means the quintuplet formula is not very well designed. For that price range, it's not competitive with an Askar FRA400.
Oh wow, I was so convinced it was pinched optics... I'm hoping to see the results from other reviewers! Yes the FRA400 + Reducer is something like $300 more so quite competitive, although I would need to check the optics, especially reduced!
@@CuivTheLazyGeekYes Cuiv, the star shape, as far as I know, is astigmatism... Beautiful small refractor to keep an eye on (provided they fix the bugs). Thanks for this review!
I appreciate the honesty from all involved. Founders could have sent a hand-picked scope to guarantee that it would be flawless but instead sent a representative sample. Cuiv gave his honest opinion of what he found to be issues. I'm looking forward to viewing another review when Founders begin shipping production copies of the Draco.
Love the small form factor and including the reducer and other goodies makes it good value imho. I agree with you completely on the tilt issue. I would hate having to take the camera off every time I made an adjustment. Other than that I think it looks like a very nice scope package. Things seem to have really moved on in Astro imaging in the last few years.
Hey there, thank you very much for another great video and review. I still don't know where to go for my first real telescope, but I loved to hear that there are ways to go visual, even with a quintuplet 😊
The adjustment screws are orthogonal making it easier as the movements are left and right, or up and down. Far better than screws 120deg apart. But, to be effective, you must rotate the camera sensor to be in line with the axis of the tilt plate. otherwise a horizontal or vertical adjustment will produce some diagonal movement on the sensor. The third pillar, is some sort of pivot point, possible a ball bearing, but the distance between plates usually is not adjustable. This gap between plates can also be source of light leak. Unless you have some sort of locking ring on the M54 or M48 threads, or another camera rotator, between the tilt plate and camera, the full benefit of an orthogonal tilt plate is not realized.
I would think under engineered. Had they made provisions for aligning the sensor to the axis of the adjusters, it would be far more functional. The other problem I see, is the locking screws are not located near the adjustments screws. On the surface, as the lock and adjust screws are not co-located, it looks like the locking screws could produce a bending moment on the plate itself. I just can't see from the video. You could examine that assembly further to see if that is the case.@@CuivTheLazyGeek
Hi Cuiv, thx for the video. Like! 1- the cross shaped stars are sympthomatic of astigmatism, whether it is caused by the assembly is hard to tell. The problem is that it could be aggravated by tilt, so if you messed up with the tilt, maybe the scope is not so bad. Hence I recommend a second review and discriminate both contributors 2- why is your 3x3 mosaic to assymetric in brightness? 3- your non-calibrated images show a lot of dust/big spots. Given that the scope is new, I guess they are in the sensor. Why not cleaning it? All in all, its hard to justify the difference in price to an SW Evolux62
1- two other commenters said the same, but I didn't see oblong star shapes in and out of focus, so I don't know if it was astigmatism. I'll be looking forward to results with another scope! My tilt adjustment skills are definitely lacking 2- no idea 3- Dust on the sensor, will always be far more visible on low SNR images that are stretched a lot, as every single spot becomes an issue. It doesn't matter for the star tests so I don't really care :)
Fantastique Cuiv! It will be interesting to see how these telescopes evolve into and through the production cycle. Glad to hear they're taking your input seriously.
I’m glad I watched this. Been having bad star shapes on my GT81 for years. Stars look a bit oval-shaped, with little bulges or spikes. Also they are slightly flattened on one side.
It has been officially realised in the UK now and it is a great price. What I have noticed is that unlike their other scopes this one does not come with an optical report which is a real shame
Nice job on the review. I guess there are always different motivations for getting a small fast scope like this. For me, I’d get it for the wide field and for that I’d want to use a full frame sensor.. A field already performing poorly with APS-C wouldn’t be interesting. But I can also see someone buying this for air travel where you need to be light and compact, and a smaller field is better than none. Will be interesting to see how a production version performs. The tilt device sure seems a bit funky.
Did you sneeze on your camera sensor window or front objective of that brand new scope? 😁 As always, nice review. Did you happen to ImageSolve the normal and reduced images to see what the focal length and f-ratio really turned out to be.
No - very low SNR image means a lot of stretching means every single particle on the sensor gets its 15 seconds of fame lol I haven't tried plate solving to check the real focal length, good point! Need to check that data again
I'm surprised you didn't mention the Askar FRAs in the alternatives. The 300mm is f5.6, the 400 (also f5.6) can take a 0.7 reducer giving a real 3.9(2) at 280mm.
"it wasn't lazy either" appreciate the nod sir! hehe love the scope and if I didn't already have a redcat 51 then I would seriously consider it. A lot of companies seem to have... creative math skills let's say but I think "some rounding" was quite gentle. Even calculating the reducer from the f number yields f3.98 so.... Anywho, great video and thanks for trying to tempt me into spending some of my AM3 funds but I'm holding firm! Cheers P.S. Keep the budget office happy! It would be terrible if they forced an audit. hehehe
Hey Cuiv, excellent review as always! As for the tilter gap, this kind of reminds me of the gap on the C6 hyperstar. At least Starizona gave instructions on how to reset it by using a 1mm spacing gauge. The results for this scope, even though this was a pre-production, were pretty concerning as that is definitely the result of pinched optics. And by the lens chamber being sealed, there is no way for the end consumer to fix it on their own by loosening the lense element. Is this possibly a Askar whitelabel scope? Has a lot of similarities. Lets see if they take you good advice to heart and make a much better product! Thanks and Clear Skies!
Thanks Dave! And yes on the tilt - but this one you'd need thick washers or something to reset it because the gap is large. It will be good to see what the results are on production units!
This little scope looks very interesting. Should the mentioned faults be addressed it will be a perfect trvael scope! The included accessories are incredible!
Internal focusing design is the future... no tilt, no wobbling. WO has introduced a few new models recently. Askar ACL200 has it too, pin-point stars across the field... if you got a good copy ;0)
I'm actually not sure about the no tilt part! It's very similar to SCT focusing (moving the main mirror) which does introduce tilt, even with small scopes, unless you're careful. The tilt is just internal to the scope.
It is nice to see another Japanese made refractor, although they do seem to have some issues to work out. Still, that is a lot of bells and whistles for the price point!
I think the askar 103 APO with the .6 reducer comes in at F3.95 for about the same price (Have to pay for the reducer) and I love mine, amazing scope for the price! This looks nice too but that 103mm aperture is really nice.
I would have definitely be interested in this if I hadn't just bought the Askar 65 phq not as fast but really nice round stars. I like the features it has for the price it's definitely well thought out.
Learned about that nebula as I just imaged it. Amateur AP here. Got I think total two hours between clouds. Not processed yet as i just did a live stack on ASIAIR, and love that target, looks so kool! Thank you for all your content. Love your channel!
Another detailed and informative review Cuiv. As I am happy with my Red Cat and also have an 81GT and a Samyang 135, I don't really feel the need for a refractor of this size, though to be fair it does seem that you get some good accessories included for the price. Shame about the pinched optics, that would seem to be a quality control issue by the manufacturer, you think that they would check for this before sending out for review. The nebula was M78, by the way. Not really connected with you review but what camera are you using with your OAG? I'm using a GPCAM2 29O mono but can't get it to work ( camera works fine in my 5Omm guide scope ) is this camera suitable for OAG use?
Oh yes with your set of rigs you definitely don't need another refractor!! And yeah shame about the pinched optics (although other comments tell me it could be astigmatism)... I use the touptek g3m662c camera for guiding! The 290 should be suitable for OAG use as well
My FRA500 at 3.9 is also great, the FRA600 is another refractor that runs at 3.9. Yes, these are both more expensive but the point for Cuiv is sub F4 refractors are not unheard of.
"Should you get this TINY, ULTRA-FAST Refractor? " Heck, I have thousands of dollars' worth of astro/photo gear that doesn't get used due to bad weather. Adding ANOTHER item won't help much.
Thanks for the great video, I would like to try one of these one day. Just curious, what are the dark dots all around the image ? dust in your sensor or condensation ?
Cuiv I thought there wasn't a worry about backfocus with a Quintuplet. Am I wrong to think that? I'm sure I either read that or saw it in a video but I cannot remember where, sorry. I like the telescope though and I have been wanting to get a smaller scope with a shorter focal length. Can you tell me what the FOV is with and without the reducer? Also, Cuiv, can you explain to me what are "Pinched Optics"? How does it happen and how is it remedied? As always, thank you for your very nice and informative videos. Sincerely, Rich Williams Astor, Florida 32102 USA!
So it's not about Quintuplet or not, it's about Petzval Design or not! Petzval Design allows you to not worry about back focus... But not all quintuplets are Petzval design. Your field of view is different depending on your camera sensor, but you can check it out on astronomy.tools or telescopius! Pinched optics is when there is some pressure applied to the lens (like if the telescope tube is too tight around the lens, or the lens holder is pressing too hard), which will cause the lens to deform slightly - but enough to affect the image. This can also happen with telescope mirrors! That's why for Newtonians it's important not to tighten the mirror holding clips too much
@@CuivTheLazyGeek Cuiv, thank you for the explanations to my questions. It is very helpful and now I understand. So, thank you once again and, as always, please keep up the great videos because it really helps newbies, like me! Sincerely, Rich Williams Astor, Florida 32102 USA!
Always enjoy your pretty extensive reviews, they help keep me abreast of the ever changing astronomy equipment market, unlike my days in the 50’s, 60’s etc. What is the mount shown in this setup? Thank you and Greetings from Tasmania Australia.👍😁🇦🇺🦘
@@CuivTheLazyGeek Thank you, I have missed a few lately, my better half managed to get Covid, about 10 days ago so all normal routines have changed. I have also been watching your presentations on my normal TV-with no provision to make comments, Likes etc. unless there is a way & I have not worked it out. Very hot, dry and windy down here, low 40's, a tad too warm or doing much. It is great to see you so enthused with worthwhile projects and reviews. Take care my astronomy friend.
Hey Cuiv, Have you received any feedback from Founder Optics on the Draco 62? If so, I'm very interested to hear what they had to say about your review and what they are going to do about the multiple issues that you discovered while you were using it. I'm the same person that wrote the comment asking what "Pinched Optics" are. Any information you can provide, if you received any feedback from them yet, would be very much appreciated. Thank you Cuiv. Sincerely, Rich Williams Astor, Florida 32102 USA!
Just a notice - ZWO (askar) 65 was sold for 999 USD with reducer in presale :) so quintuplet + reducer - 0.75x :) At this time its about 1200 USD. So its not that uncommon in this price range
@@Masoch1st what is so funny about it? Im just reacting on Cuiv's excitement, that this refractor is something very special in field of small refractors around 1k USD ...
If you win the Powerball, please spare a million or 5 for me 😂 Otherwise they're just dust on the sensor - because of low SNR stretch is very aggressive, and every small dust spot is super visible
That is absolutely correct - no link to the optics, but large impact on the final image, making judging just the optics difficult on this scope, since tilt adjustment can't be zeroed
@@CuivTheLazyGeek Either way, I'm looking for a 3.something F ratio optic, and I'm super glad someone (YOU!) is trying it out before I make the forever decision. So, thank you SO much for giving these things the light. Its really one of few on the entire internet.
OK, that calculation is super shady. When I do the correct 300 * 0.83 / 62, I get a focal ratio of 4.016, which we can round down to 4.0. However, if you calculate the original focal ratio, sans reducer, it's 300/62 = 4.839. You can still round that down to 4.8 and be correct. However, if you multiply this 4.8 with 0.83, you get 3.984. This does NOT round down to 3.9; this rounds UP to 4.0. Telescopes are scientific instruments; if anyone should know how scientific rounding works, it's a telescope manufacturer. If they really want to advertise a sub-4.0 f-ratio, the only correct one is f3.98. Those are the minimal set of decimals that allow you to start your f-ratio with a 3 for the integer part. This is stuff that's covered in high school. So rounding this down to 3.9 is not a case of "but but, we didn't know"; it's a deliberate attempt at deception. This alone rules out this telescope for me, regardless of whether it's actually any good or not. I refuse to do business with companies that go out of their way to try and deceive me.
Low signal to noise ratio because it's Tokyo forces an aggressive stretch, revealing dust motes. Flat frames and longer integration time removes them completely!
Me with celestron powerseeker 80eq which is bigger and way cheaper kinda wondering "is this considered cheap"? :D ... But optics is not my strong side so I guess if I did tryed to photograph trough it I would probably see how bad image quality compared to this my telescope really has :D (It has obviously better features and materials than my cheap telescope but optics is what matters)
Bummer means that something is a mild letdown. It’s not as bad as a ‘real disappointment’, but it’s worse than a minor inconvenience. Cuiv feel free to correct my interpretation if I misspoke in your behalf lol
Am I the only one who longs for an f/3 80-100mm refractor that’s petzval? I don’t want to care about backfocus and I want a wide field with a larger aperture
@@CuivTheLazyGeek indeed, I like this brand and it’s definitely a compelling scope. Definitely will look forward to a follow up. Love the reviews by the way, one of my favorite channels.
I know - if I were doing a review for myself I wouldn't really care! But I feel I have a responsibility to report on things that a lot of my audience considers important!
@@CuivTheLazyGeek It definitely did - a great informative video, Cuiv. I use to think William Optics took the lead in aesthetics but looks like the others have caught up
Top post software should NOT be the excuse for forgiving a scope design issue. I've seen this in the photography world where a poor lens or photographer can escape scrutiny with a software cover up. AI is going to make this much worse. Even a very disciplined lazy geek can see the slippery slope this will lead down.
@@CuivTheLazyGeek exactly, you're are doing Orions work 😁 This will help the manufacturers improve products, users have a better, less frustrating experience & the software to improve detail not fix issues. Everyone wins. If this hobby wasn't challenging I wouldn't do it. Without reviews from trusted sources I wouldn't buy it. We are lucky to have our on pocket Cuiv on our phone 👍
It'll be very interesting to see the results with other units for sure - having a non zeroable tilt adjustment mechanism makes testing this in a reproducible manner difficult
This scope makes no sense to me, possibly one of the most useless scope combinations I've ever seen. What's the point of having a quintuplet 300mm f4.8 scope, and make a 0.83x reducer to make it 250mm f3.9? For a difference of 50mm no one would ever use it at 300mm f4.8, I'd much rather see existing scopes with f5.6 or so and 0.7x reducer to f3.9 like the whole FRA series.
I see where you're coming from - personally I almost always use a reducer with my scopes, especially if it comes with the scope. I see it as a set/integral part of the system. Now I'm really interested in the FRA+reducer series though :)
@@CuivTheLazyGeek Yeah but if you don't plan on using the 2 available combination then maybe it's worth just getting something with just a reducer/flattener in this case instead(well it's just a review but still ^^). The FRA series has been out for pretty long time now, I think some are better and some are worse, I own the FRA500 and natively it's such an amazing scope, with the reducer it's also good with APS-C, it states it supports full frame but like 90% of the scopes that states that they're kinda far from being round in the corners, though not that bad. If I remember you're not a pixel peeper so might not be an issue for you. As I said in another comment tho, I think nowadays the askar APO series is such a fantastic choice if you own BXT. Sure the CA is not fantastic with the reducer, but BXT does amazing job with it and it's really cheap, the askar 103 can be 700mm f6.8, 560mm f5.4, and 420mm f4 which is crazy for the size and nice to have so many options for the price. Really thinking of getting one of these.
So far I am not impressed and would not purchased this brand of scope! I think they are over priced and think they are a perfect scope company and they are far from that!
My Patreon: www.patreon.com/cuivlazygeek
Preorder the Draco 62 here: bit.ly/49WiiJJ
Full product page: www.founderoptics.com/index.php?action=productA-dl&id=39
Touptek IMX571 APS-C Cooled camera: tinyurl.com/mr2yhvcw
Cable organizers (and more): www.etsy.com/shop/SmartComponents
Alternatives:
William Optics Redcat 51 III telescope: bit.ly/48hyuVx
William Optics F3.8 telescope: bit.ly/49xi5x7
Sharpstar 61 EDPH IIII: bit.ly/3IgS3SC
Amazon affiliate: amzn.to/3hTB5Ne
Agena affiliate: bit.ly/3Om0hNG
High Point Scientific affiliate: bit.ly/3lReu8R
All-Star Telescope affiliate: bit.ly/3SCgVbV
Astroshop.eu Affiliate: tinyurl.com/2vafkax8
Dwarf 2 Smart Telescope: bit.ly/3SyChXua
Seestar S50: tinyurl.com/3n62hpzx
There is probably a reason why many are reaching out to you to give reviews of their products - Your reviews always come across as reliable and honest. That makes them valuable to consumers (like me). I think you give critique where critique is warranted, as well as praise where it is deserved.
Keep up the good work Cuiv, I think what you do is really helpful.
Giving the first view of the lenses to US was such a nice gesture!! We all thank you!!
That was your heart❤!!
😃😄😁🙂😍
My pleasure!
A very good review. I do feel that spending a few minutes taking calibration frames would help the quality of this and other presentations. It is not hard to take a stack of 25 flats and keep a bias & dark set for a few months- especially as you don't use dozens of different cameras. I spent more time looking at noise and the distracting dust rings rather than focusing on the content- calibration will make it easier to see the features you were pointing out.
Yep!! It's like I wrote on my blog (recently): Cuiv always gets the newest gear! If something is brand-new (and cool) Cuiv has got it! (and is reviewing it!) - Woah! A diagonal!
Thank you! and Clear skies!
Nice review ! Thanks for your work.
To be noted though, the "cross" as you say , or sometimes called swallows, is an astigmatism optical aberration.
It means that the field is overcorrected and means the quintuplet formula is not very well designed. For that price range, it's not competitive with an Askar FRA400.
Oh wow, I was so convinced it was pinched optics... I'm hoping to see the results from other reviewers!
Yes the FRA400 + Reducer is something like $300 more so quite competitive, although I would need to check the optics, especially reduced!
I have the askar fra400 and with reducer it’s also f3.9. It’s my first scope and love it to death!
@@CuivTheLazyGeekYes Cuiv, the star shape, as far as I know, is astigmatism... Beautiful small refractor to keep an eye on (provided they fix the bugs). Thanks for this review!
I appreciate the honesty from all involved. Founders could have sent a hand-picked scope to guarantee that it would be flawless but instead sent a representative sample. Cuiv gave his honest opinion of what he found to be issues. I'm looking forward to viewing another review when Founders begin shipping production copies of the Draco.
Yep, looking forward to seeing how other units and production units perform!
I clicked on the link and preordered the scope. Pretty excited! 😁 Absolutely love your channel btw.
Woohoo, thanks for the support! Will be good to know how well it works!
Love the small form factor and including the reducer and other goodies makes it good value imho. I agree with you completely on the tilt issue. I would hate having to take the camera off every time I made an adjustment. Other than that I think it looks like a very nice scope package. Things seem to have really moved on in Astro imaging in the last few years.
Hey there, thank you very much for another great video and review. I still don't know where to go for my first real telescope, but I loved to hear that there are ways to go visual, even with a quintuplet 😊
The adjustment screws are orthogonal making it easier as the movements are left and right, or up and down. Far better than screws 120deg apart. But, to be effective, you must rotate the camera sensor to be in line with the axis of the tilt plate. otherwise a horizontal or vertical adjustment will produce some diagonal movement on the sensor. The third pillar, is some sort of pivot point, possible a ball bearing, but the distance between plates usually is not adjustable. This gap between plates can also be source of light leak. Unless you have some sort of locking ring on the M54 or M48 threads, or another camera rotator, between the tilt plate and camera, the full benefit of an orthogonal tilt plate is not realized.
Yeah that's what I realized. In a way I feel this is over engineered?
I would think under engineered. Had they made provisions for aligning the sensor to the axis of the adjusters, it would be far more functional. The other problem I see, is the locking screws are not located near the adjustments screws. On the surface, as the lock and adjust screws are not co-located, it looks like the locking screws could produce a bending moment on the plate itself. I just can't see from the video. You could examine that assembly further to see if that is the case.@@CuivTheLazyGeek
Hi Cuiv, thx for the video. Like!
1- the cross shaped stars are sympthomatic of astigmatism, whether it is caused by the assembly is hard to tell. The problem is that it could be aggravated by tilt, so if you messed up with the tilt, maybe the scope is not so bad.
Hence I recommend a second review and discriminate both contributors
2- why is your 3x3 mosaic to assymetric in brightness?
3- your non-calibrated images show a lot of dust/big spots. Given that the scope is new, I guess they are in the sensor. Why not cleaning it?
All in all, its hard to justify the difference in price to an SW Evolux62
1- two other commenters said the same, but I didn't see oblong star shapes in and out of focus, so I don't know if it was astigmatism. I'll be looking forward to results with another scope! My tilt adjustment skills are definitely lacking
2- no idea
3- Dust on the sensor, will always be far more visible on low SNR images that are stretched a lot, as every single spot becomes an issue. It doesn't matter for the star tests so I don't really care :)
thanks for the reply !! @@CuivTheLazyGeek
Fantastique Cuiv! It will be interesting to see how these telescopes evolve into and through the production cycle. Glad to hear they're taking your input seriously.
What a little jewel, Founder Optics strikes again!
I’m glad I watched this. Been having bad star shapes on my GT81 for years. Stars look a bit oval-shaped, with little bulges or spikes. Also they are slightly flattened on one side.
The nebula is M78.
It has been officially realised in the UK now and it is a great price. What I have noticed is that unlike their other scopes this one does not come with an optical report which is a real shame
Awesome little refractor with amazing speed. Sign me up!👍
Indeed! Once the pinched optics are solved it's a solid option!
Nice job on the review. I guess there are always different motivations for getting a small fast scope like this. For me, I’d get it for the wide field and for that I’d want to use a full frame sensor.. A field already performing poorly with APS-C wouldn’t be interesting. But I can also see someone buying this for air travel where you need to be light and compact, and a smaller field is better than none. Will be interesting to see how a production version performs. The tilt device sure seems a bit funky.
Yep agree completely - I'm looking forward to others testing and reviewing this!
Did you sneeze on your camera sensor window or front objective of that brand new scope? 😁 As always, nice review. Did you happen to ImageSolve the normal and reduced images to see what the focal length and f-ratio really turned out to be.
No - very low SNR image means a lot of stretching means every single particle on the sensor gets its 15 seconds of fame lol I haven't tried plate solving to check the real focal length, good point! Need to check that data again
Think I will keep saving for the RedCat 71 III
A tested and proven scope with a proper focus mechanism, finally! Yes (hopefully) can't go wrong with these!
I'm surprised you didn't mention the Askar FRAs in the alternatives. The 300mm is f5.6, the 400 (also f5.6) can take a 0.7 reducer giving a real 3.9(2) at 280mm.
Didn't realize about the reducer, some other comments mention it!
The newer Askar FRA300 Pro is f5.
"it wasn't lazy either" appreciate the nod sir! hehe
love the scope and if I didn't already have a redcat 51 then I would seriously consider it.
A lot of companies seem to have... creative math skills let's say but I think "some rounding" was quite gentle.
Even calculating the reducer from the f number yields f3.98 so....
Anywho, great video and thanks for trying to tempt me into spending some of my AM3 funds but I'm holding firm!
Cheers
P.S. Keep the budget office happy! It would be terrible if they forced an audit. hehehe
Hold firm and get that AM3!
I think I would really like this one! Thank you!
It does look nice, and it will be interesting to see how the production version fares wrt pinched optics
Hey Cuiv, excellent review as always! As for the tilter gap, this kind of reminds me of the gap on the C6 hyperstar. At least Starizona gave instructions on how to reset it by using a 1mm spacing gauge. The results for this scope, even though this was a pre-production, were pretty concerning as that is definitely the result of pinched optics. And by the lens chamber being sealed, there is no way for the end consumer to fix it on their own by loosening the lense element. Is this possibly a Askar whitelabel scope? Has a lot of similarities. Lets see if they take you good advice to heart and make a much better product! Thanks and Clear Skies!
Thanks Dave! And yes on the tilt - but this one you'd need thick washers or something to reset it because the gap is large. It will be good to see what the results are on production units!
This little scope looks very interesting. Should the mentioned faults be addressed it will be a perfect trvael scope! The included accessories are incredible!
Excellent review as always but one thing... it would be handy to know the weight for people with small mounts
It's 3.2kg with all accessories on
$1299 can get askar 103 APO + 0.6x reducer, it's also F4 and I think it's also a good option
That actually sounds like a GREAT option!
Internal focusing design is the future... no tilt, no wobbling. WO has introduced a few new models recently. Askar ACL200 has it too, pin-point stars across the field... if you got a good copy ;0)
I'm actually not sure about the no tilt part! It's very similar to SCT focusing (moving the main mirror) which does introduce tilt, even with small scopes, unless you're careful. The tilt is just internal to the scope.
It is nice to see another Japanese made refractor, although they do seem to have some issues to work out. Still, that is a lot of bells and whistles for the price point!
Taiwan...
I think the askar 103 APO with the .6 reducer comes in at F3.95 for about the same price (Have to pay for the reducer) and I love mine, amazing scope for the price! This looks nice too but that 103mm aperture is really nice.
My mount is the SW ST GTi so a 80mm refractor is already heavy for the payload
The 103 seems like a fantastic scope with current tools to fix not very good star colors like with the 0.6x reducer.
I need to test that out!!
I would have definitely be interested in this if I hadn't just bought the Askar 65 phq not as fast but really nice round stars. I like the features it has for the price it's definitely well thought out.
I'll be very interested to see the results on other samples of the telescope!
Take this one:
Takahashi FCT-65D with the new 0,65xReducer. 😅
I think m78 is the nebula you’re asking about at 26:45? Kool scope package if they take care that pinched optics
M78! Thank you! And yes if those pinched optics can be fixed it can be a winner!
Learned about that nebula as I just imaged it. Amateur AP here. Got I think total two hours between clouds. Not processed yet as i just did a live stack on ASIAIR, and love that target, looks so kool! Thank you for all your content. Love your channel!
If it is not pinched optics, I am wondering if Croman's BlurXterminator would fix those corner stars.
Yes BXT basically fixes the issue
Another detailed and informative review Cuiv. As I am happy with my Red Cat and also have an 81GT and a Samyang 135, I don't really feel the need for a refractor of this size, though to be fair it does seem that you get some good accessories included for the price. Shame about the pinched optics, that would seem to be a quality control issue by the manufacturer, you think that they would check for this before sending out for review.
The nebula was M78, by the way.
Not really connected with you review but what camera are you using with your OAG? I'm using a GPCAM2 29O mono but can't get it to work ( camera works fine in my 5Omm guide scope ) is this camera suitable for OAG use?
Oh yes with your set of rigs you definitely don't need another refractor!! And yeah shame about the pinched optics (although other comments tell me it could be astigmatism)... I use the touptek g3m662c camera for guiding!
The 290 should be suitable for OAG use as well
26:40 - Caspers Ghost (M78)
Thanks!
Good Morning!
I do hope you have not rejected to test the ASKAR 185 APO!
🙂
Please make an all black version. My eyes hurt looking at it.
Veeery good to follow your tests, you don't stop speaking, goes like a machine gun, no stop even to breathe!!
Enthusiasm is your mark!!
😀😄😄😁😉😍
Hahaha cheers!
it's kind of in the range of some of my good camera lense f4 ,200-300mm, id rather something at 400-500mm fl
Askar FRA 400 can also image in f3.9. Price is 1200 without a reducer, but tbf askar has bigger 72mm aperture
My FRA500 at 3.9 is also great, the FRA600 is another refractor that runs at 3.9. Yes, these are both more expensive but the point for Cuiv is sub F4 refractors are not unheard of.
Didn't remember about the reducer of the FRA400-600 at the time! Very good point and thanks for bringing it up!
@CuivTheLazyGeek Thanks, Cuiv ^^ Great video once again!
Leaving a comment for the love
"Should you get this TINY, ULTRA-FAST Refractor? "
Heck, I have thousands of dollars' worth of astro/photo gear that doesn't get used due to bad weather. Adding ANOTHER item won't help much.
Just need a cloud chaser machine
Thanks for the great video, I would like to try one of these one day. Just curious, what are the dark dots all around the image ? dust in your sensor or condensation ?
Dust on sensor, because the image has very low SNR the stretch is extremely aggressive and even the tiniest dust mote is extremely visible!
So if it has a reducer, i'm guessing that requires a backfocus such as 55mm. Was hoping with quintuplet there would be no backfocus issue.
Unfortunately yes, requires 55mm of backfocus
Interesting product. Alternative: Sharpstar 50 with reducer. Can you make a review of the new Sharpstar 50? Thank you
Cuiv I thought there wasn't a worry about backfocus with a Quintuplet. Am I wrong to think that? I'm sure I either read that or saw it in a video but I cannot remember where, sorry.
I like the telescope though and I have been wanting to get a smaller scope with a shorter focal length. Can you tell me what the FOV is with and without the reducer? Also, Cuiv, can you explain to me what are "Pinched Optics"? How does it happen and how is it remedied? As always, thank you for your very nice and informative videos.
Sincerely, Rich Williams
Astor, Florida 32102 USA!
So it's not about Quintuplet or not, it's about Petzval Design or not! Petzval Design allows you to not worry about back focus... But not all quintuplets are Petzval design.
Your field of view is different depending on your camera sensor, but you can check it out on astronomy.tools or telescopius!
Pinched optics is when there is some pressure applied to the lens (like if the telescope tube is too tight around the lens, or the lens holder is pressing too hard), which will cause the lens to deform slightly - but enough to affect the image. This can also happen with telescope mirrors! That's why for Newtonians it's important not to tighten the mirror holding clips too much
@@CuivTheLazyGeek Cuiv, thank you for the explanations to my questions. It is very helpful and now I understand. So, thank you once again and, as always, please keep up the great videos because it really helps newbies, like me!
Sincerely, Rich Williams
Astor, Florida 32102 USA!
Hey Cuiv, I've got the same transport case at Leroy Merlin in France !
CS
Always enjoy your pretty extensive reviews, they help keep me abreast of the ever changing astronomy equipment market, unlike my days in the 50’s, 60’s etc. What is the mount shown in this setup? Thank you and Greetings from Tasmania Australia.👍😁🇦🇺🦘
Thanks Shevill! It was a lot of work so I'm glad this is helpful :-) The mount is the WarpAstron WD-20, which I reviewed on the channel recently!
@@CuivTheLazyGeek Thank you, I have missed a few lately, my better half managed to get Covid, about 10 days ago so all normal routines have changed. I have also been watching your presentations on my normal TV-with no provision to make comments, Likes etc. unless there is a way & I have not worked it out. Very hot, dry and windy down here, low 40's, a tad too warm or doing much. It is great to see you so enthused with worthwhile projects and reviews. Take care my astronomy friend.
Hmmmmm - I think the RedCat 51 is still the best in clas
The RedCat 51 definitely is a sweet spot - and finally has a normal focusing knob with v3! Now let's wait for WO to make an F4 version :D
That’s the Pleiades right? $2k though 😢
Maybe … but i Think scope takahashi FS60CB Flourita Optics with reducer F4.2// DF: 255mm, price $1800 include accesorios (ring, vixen, rotator, adapter camera)
The Askar ACL200 generally outperforms the RedCat51, from what I’ve seen, and it’s often cheaper.
@@CuivTheLazyGeek WO Pleiades 68 F3.8 is out! :)
I purchased a Takahashi Sky 90 that had pinched optics... but, I detected it by eyepiece .... they looked like little stop signs..
Hey Cuiv, Have you received any feedback from Founder Optics on the Draco 62? If so, I'm very interested to hear what they had to say about your review and what they are going to do about the multiple issues that you discovered while you were using it. I'm the same person that wrote the comment asking what "Pinched Optics" are. Any information you can provide, if you received any feedback from them yet, would be very much appreciated.
Thank you Cuiv.
Sincerely, Rich Williams
Astor, Florida 32102 USA!
They pledged to fix the issues for the production run, so we'll see what that brings!
It’s a small aperture, so all of that “speed” is paid for in resolution.
Correct
Just a notice - ZWO (askar) 65 was sold for 999 USD with reducer in presale :) so quintuplet + reducer - 0.75x :) At this time its about 1200 USD. So its not that uncommon in this price range
*cites a single example:
"its not uncommon"
lmao.
@@Masoch1st what is so funny about it? Im just reacting on Cuiv's excitement, that this refractor is something very special in field of small refractors around 1k USD ...
There he goes again... Yet another scope on my list. I'm gonna need to win the PowerBall... 🙄 And what are those dark circles in the images??
If you win the Powerball, please spare a million or 5 for me 😂
Otherwise they're just dust on the sensor - because of low SNR stretch is very aggressive, and every small dust spot is super visible
@@CuivTheLazyGeek You got it! Can't be cheap living there in Tokyo!
I thought the tilt adjuster was to compensate for the camera sensor's not being totally flat and had nothing to do with the optics.
That is absolutely correct - no link to the optics, but large impact on the final image, making judging just the optics difficult on this scope, since tilt adjustment can't be zeroed
@@CuivTheLazyGeek Either way, I'm looking for a 3.something F ratio optic, and I'm super glad someone (YOU!) is trying it out before I make the forever decision. So, thank you SO much for giving these things the light. Its really one of few on the entire internet.
150 quattro beater?
Not the same category - if the pinched optics are solved it could be very nice!
Actually, I'd say my Zenithstar 61mm smoked this telescope with only a doublet plus adjustable flattener, but not as fast.
They need to fix the pinched optics
Nice scope, I believe this is made in Taiwan? I am very tempted by the Apertura 75Q Petzval made by Sharpstar. It is $1,100 US$
It looks like an amazing scope! I gotta say my dream would be an 80mm-100mm aperture F4 Petzval :)
@@CuivTheLazyGeek where have I seen this dream before? ;)
OK, that calculation is super shady. When I do the correct 300 * 0.83 / 62, I get a focal ratio of 4.016, which we can round down to 4.0. However, if you calculate the original focal ratio, sans reducer, it's 300/62 = 4.839. You can still round that down to 4.8 and be correct. However, if you multiply this 4.8 with 0.83, you get 3.984. This does NOT round down to 3.9; this rounds UP to 4.0. Telescopes are scientific instruments; if anyone should know how scientific rounding works, it's a telescope manufacturer. If they really want to advertise a sub-4.0 f-ratio, the only correct one is f3.98. Those are the minimal set of decimals that allow you to start your f-ratio with a 3 for the integer part.
This is stuff that's covered in high school. So rounding this down to 3.9 is not a case of "but but, we didn't know"; it's a deliberate attempt at deception. This alone rules out this telescope for me, regardless of whether it's actually any good or not. I refuse to do business with companies that go out of their way to try and deceive me.
Yeah I agree - it should 100% be marketed as F4.
24:41 why SPOTS everywhere!
Low signal to noise ratio because it's Tokyo forces an aggressive stretch, revealing dust motes. Flat frames and longer integration time removes them completely!
Me with celestron powerseeker 80eq which is bigger and way cheaper kinda wondering "is this considered cheap"? :D ... But optics is not my strong side so I guess if I did tryed to photograph trough it I would probably see how bad image quality compared to this my telescope really has :D
(It has obviously better features and materials than my cheap telescope but optics is what matters)
Snow in Japan? and can you explain what a bummer is?
Its ok, I looked it up.. it how you insert the reducer..
Bummer means that something is a mild letdown. It’s not as bad as a ‘real disappointment’, but it’s worse than a minor inconvenience.
Cuiv feel free to correct my interpretation if I misspoke in your behalf lol
Am I the only one who longs for an f/3 80-100mm refractor that’s petzval? I don’t want to care about backfocus and I want a wide field with a larger aperture
You're not the only one, that's kind of my dream scope :)
I will stick with the askar 300
Is it a petzval, does it have a required backfocus?
Not Petzval, 55mm backfocus
The Martian!
Yesssss! 🎉
Nice review, the benefit of a nitrogen filled tube is also it stops any in tube aircurrents
sorry, but I think that you skipped the proper way to mounting of the reducer.
Mother of God! I want it!
Wait for other results with the optics!
@@CuivTheLazyGeek indeed, I like this brand and it’s definitely a compelling scope. Definitely will look forward to a follow up. Love the reviews by the way, one of my favorite channels.
So funny, "Sometimes I don't look lazy, but I am" jajajajaja, you are far from lazy, believe it!
No comment lol
Shure!!! No lazyness at all!!!
Great vídeos, full of informations, even for complete newbies!!
😃😄😁😇😍
I think you are a bit picky , but I am sure it can be processed out ... But look how much you have to zoom to see it
I know - if I were doing a review for myself I wouldn't really care! But I feel I have a responsibility to report on things that a lot of my audience considers important!
@@CuivTheLazyGeek ,you take great images even from Tokyo ... Impressive ...Stay well hope back is doing good
I just want to be the first to comment. This will be a great video
Hope it met your high expectations at the start! 😀
@@CuivTheLazyGeek It definitely did - a great informative video, Cuiv. I use to think William Optics took the lead in aesthetics but looks like the others have caught up
Nice
Thanks!
Redcat says no Copycats
Even green ones!
Cute. But, you don't seem to be getting very much telescope tube for the dollar. Tiny and expensive.
If the optics weren't pinched...
Without a full frame camera this isn't a real review. If it is advertised for full format, then it must be checked to see if it fits that class.
You already see the limitations at APS-C size :D
@@CuivTheLazyGeekYes, your are right. So, this is not good scope. ... tnx
Top post software should NOT be the excuse for forgiving a scope design issue.
I've seen this in the photography world where a poor lens or photographer can escape scrutiny with a software cover up.
AI is going to make this much worse.
Even a very disciplined lazy geek can see the slippery slope this will lead down.
I think I'm expressing exactly this in the video :)
@@CuivTheLazyGeek exactly, you're are doing Orions work 😁
This will help the manufacturers improve products, users have a better, less frustrating experience & the software to improve detail not fix issues.
Everyone wins. If this hobby wasn't challenging I wouldn't do it. Without reviews from trusted sources I wouldn't buy it.
We are lucky to have our on pocket Cuiv on our phone 👍
I wonder how BlurExterminator would work on this image.
I use BXT towards the end of the video :-)
@@CuivTheLazyGeek I missed that piece, LOL
Looks pinched to me, or there's more than one Saturn. 😁
Exactly :-) I hope it's fixed in the production version!
👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
Nice review! Seems to be a pass though
Yeah I'd want to see the results from another sample - if the optics weren't pinched it would be a yes from me despite the tilt adjustment mechanism
My God, this sensor is disgusting 😁
It actually isn't! because the image has very low SNR the stretch is extremely aggressive and even the tiniest dust mote is extremely visible!
Can't even use APS-C? Then it's worthless, if your tests are accurate.
It'll be very interesting to see the results with other units for sure - having a non zeroable tilt adjustment mechanism makes testing this in a reproducible manner difficult
This scope makes no sense to me, possibly one of the most useless scope combinations I've ever seen.
What's the point of having a quintuplet 300mm f4.8 scope, and make a 0.83x reducer to make it 250mm f3.9? For a difference of 50mm no one would ever use it at 300mm f4.8, I'd much rather see existing scopes with f5.6 or so and 0.7x reducer to f3.9 like the whole FRA series.
I see where you're coming from - personally I almost always use a reducer with my scopes, especially if it comes with the scope. I see it as a set/integral part of the system. Now I'm really interested in the FRA+reducer series though :)
@@CuivTheLazyGeek Yeah but if you don't plan on using the 2 available combination then maybe it's worth just getting something with just a reducer/flattener in this case instead(well it's just a review but still ^^).
The FRA series has been out for pretty long time now, I think some are better and some are worse, I own the FRA500 and natively it's such an amazing scope, with the reducer it's also good with APS-C, it states it supports full frame but like 90% of the scopes that states that they're kinda far from being round in the corners, though not that bad. If I remember you're not a pixel peeper so might not be an issue for you.
As I said in another comment tho, I think nowadays the askar APO series is such a fantastic choice if you own BXT. Sure the CA is not fantastic with the reducer, but BXT does amazing job with it and it's really cheap, the askar 103 can be 700mm f6.8, 560mm f5.4, and 420mm f4 which is crazy for the size and nice to have so many options for the price. Really thinking of getting one of these.
So far I am not impressed and would not purchased this brand of scope! I think they are over priced and think they are a perfect scope company and they are far from that!