Howdy CJ Perfect timing on this scope. I’ve been contemplating purchasing this unit, looking forward to your first light experiences Great looking scope! Cheers
Great review. I bought the FRA500. I'm happy with it so far - round stars to corners and chromatic aberrations appear barely noticeable. I got sick of the back focus measuring game (especially with the RASA). Petzvals are a godsend.
@@GeorgiaAstronomy Yes but what kind of ED glass... fpl53,fpl51,fk61,fcd-1,fcd-100??? If your going to plunk down 1000 dollars or more it's nice to know exactly what your paying for. William Optics, and many other makers tell you, why not Askar? Again it's just nice to know the quality level of glass your paying for especially when getting up there in that price range. Take care, and clear skies.
@@jinx0192 their website is not specific. I would assume FPL51 or 53 or 61 or combination of those, properly distanced and angled. Those numbers are not so much difference in glass, as it is how precisely is it utilized. What I look for is aberration and color in choosing. What Askar does provide are actual graphs, of the performance of the glass. See website: www.askarlens.com/index.php/wap/class2/182.html The Sharpstar 61 uses FPL53 glass. I would assume that Askar would use the same since they are the same company. If you go back to the "First Light with the Askar FRA400" video, you'll notice the aberration in the Radian 61 is more significant than the Askar. This is pretty clear with the coma present around the stars. Radian does not divulge their glass either, and for good reason, as they have had multiple issues with glass quality in this scope. To the point that they have accepted returns...funny enough, it is actually a Sharpstar that has been rebranded, and I guess, manufactured with cheaper glass to spec in order to have the lower price point. If you look at my picture, telescopius.com/pictures/view/100637/deep_sky/andromeda-galaxy/M/31/galaxy/by-roswellastronomy You'll see the bad coloring of the stars with coma. Also see telescopius.com/pictures/view/86011/deep_sky/heart-nebula/IC/1805/diffuse-nebula/by-roswellastronomy. This pic was taken with the Askar 107PHQ, also a petzval. While you see a little with the largest star, it is not across the field. The same glass is used as the ASkar FRA400. telescopius.com/pictures/view/113006/deep_sky/owl-nebula/M/97/planetary-nebula/by-roswellastronomy Hope this helps!
One reason for not mentioning is so they can use different glass for different batches. You won't be able to sue them because they never mentioned the glass in the first place.
Howdy CJ
Perfect timing on this scope.
I’ve been contemplating purchasing this unit, looking forward to your first light experiences
Great looking scope!
Cheers
Ben! I'll be dropping the video here soon once I edit it. Hoping for clear skies down under for you Aussies!
It's a great little scope. Love mine.
Great review. I bought the FRA500. I'm happy with it so far - round stars to corners and chromatic aberrations appear barely noticeable. I got sick of the back focus measuring game (especially with the RASA). Petzvals are a godsend.
I agree. I'd love to jump up to the long FL ones but that's where they get a little expensive.
This is exactly why I bought the FRA400 and reducer. Sick of the 'adjustable' focuser/flatenners with the WO Z61.
Hello - how can I screw my M48 (male threads) 2" filter into this ?
What glass does it use?
ED glass.
@@GeorgiaAstronomy Yes but what kind of ED glass... fpl53,fpl51,fk61,fcd-1,fcd-100??? If your going to plunk down 1000 dollars or more it's nice to know exactly what your paying for. William Optics, and many other makers tell you, why not Askar? Again it's just nice to know the quality level of glass your paying for especially when getting up there in that price range. Take care, and clear skies.
@@jinx0192 their website is not specific. I would assume FPL51 or 53 or 61 or combination of those, properly distanced and angled. Those numbers are not so much difference in glass, as it is how precisely is it utilized. What I look for is aberration and color in choosing. What Askar does provide are actual graphs, of the performance of the glass. See website: www.askarlens.com/index.php/wap/class2/182.html
The Sharpstar 61 uses FPL53 glass. I would assume that Askar would use the same since they are the same company.
If you go back to the "First Light with the Askar FRA400" video, you'll notice the aberration in the Radian 61 is more significant than the Askar. This is pretty clear with the coma present around the stars. Radian does not divulge their glass either, and for good reason, as they have had multiple issues with glass quality in this scope. To the point that they have accepted returns...funny enough, it is actually a Sharpstar that has been rebranded, and I guess, manufactured with cheaper glass to spec in order to have the lower price point.
If you look at my picture, telescopius.com/pictures/view/100637/deep_sky/andromeda-galaxy/M/31/galaxy/by-roswellastronomy
You'll see the bad coloring of the stars with coma. Also see telescopius.com/pictures/view/86011/deep_sky/heart-nebula/IC/1805/diffuse-nebula/by-roswellastronomy.
This pic was taken with the Askar 107PHQ, also a petzval. While you see a little with the largest star, it is not across the field. The same glass is used as the ASkar FRA400.
telescopius.com/pictures/view/113006/deep_sky/owl-nebula/M/97/planetary-nebula/by-roswellastronomy
Hope this helps!
One reason for not mentioning is so they can use different glass for different batches. You won't be able to sue them because they never mentioned the glass in the first place.
@@Z-add Kind of the story behind everything these days....