My first telescope was a 70/700 mm achromat. Recently I found a model sold by Opticon (From Poland) in my country Romania (Eastern Europe) for just 80 usd with tripod, mount, eyepieces etc. So I bought it. Surprisingly it has a sharp image up to 175x. It also has a nice color correction, chromatic aberrations are really not an issue. Of course it’s just a small 70 mm refractor buy it surpassed my expectations. It’s biggest downside is it’s low light gathering capacity, but that was to be expected. For someone who is poor or doesn’t want to spend a lot of money it still is acceptable for the Moon, planets, brightest galaxies and nebulas and daytime observations.
I used to have an SvBony 305 70mm ED Refractor which i used for celestial photography. When taking subs for a photograph, 70mm at f/5.6 is not all that bad an aperture. A 70/700 scope is f/10, which is not well suited for deep space photography. Takes a long time to get a photograph. And, for lunar and planetary work, the aperture is too small to achieve high magnification. The advantage of a high focal ratio on a refractor is reduced chromatic aberration. In fact, at f/15 all the light has had a chance to focus and there is no chromatic aberration. So, f/10 has much less than a fast f/5. I will soon be reviewing the Celestron 70mm/900 LT (long tube) with a focal ratio of 12.85. Stay tuned. Thanks for your comment.
@@AmatureAstronomer I only use my telescopes for visual observations. The 70/700 mm achromat I have has a sharp image even at 175x, which impressed me a lot. But the brightness is a lot lower than on my 102/714 mm ED doublet.
I had a similar 70mm refractor and it was quite good. Great on splitting double stars. Showed the Great Red Spot on Jupiter. Was able to see the Veil Nebula on a dark summer sky. Yeah it's needs a better mount.
I have taken some photos with this optical tube and the Nat Geo 114mm Newtonian, using a CG-2 mount. Haven't posted them, yet. Waiting to ge a photo of the moon.
I own this model an it is nice and sharp on the planets up to 140 magnification, on the Moon even more. It’s weakness is deep sky objects. I replaced the cheap Kellner eyepieces it comes with, with better ones with 68 degree field of view. I wonder what your opinion is on how it compares to a 114 or 102 mm newtonian :). A video comparison would be really interesting :)
Comparison video? May do one. I prefer the National Geographic 114mm Newtonian, as it gathers more light and is better for deep space objects, which is my passion. For planetary and lunar work, this 70mm is better, because the Newtonian uses a spherical mirror and does not focus as clearly.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Light gathering power is 100x for the (70mm)
A lot depends on the sky. The general rule is magnification = 2 x aperture.
My first telescope was a 70/700 mm achromat. Recently I found a model sold by Opticon (From Poland) in my country Romania (Eastern Europe) for just 80 usd with tripod, mount, eyepieces etc. So I bought it. Surprisingly it has a sharp image up to 175x. It also has a nice color correction, chromatic aberrations are really not an issue. Of course it’s just a small 70 mm refractor buy it surpassed my expectations. It’s biggest downside is it’s low light gathering capacity, but that was to be expected. For someone who is poor or doesn’t want to spend a lot of money it still is acceptable for the Moon, planets, brightest galaxies and nebulas and daytime observations.
I used to have an SvBony 305 70mm ED Refractor which i used for celestial photography. When taking subs for a photograph, 70mm at f/5.6 is not all that bad an aperture.
A 70/700 scope is f/10, which is not well suited for deep space photography. Takes a long time to get a photograph. And, for lunar and planetary work, the aperture is too small to achieve high magnification.
The advantage of a high focal ratio on a refractor is reduced chromatic aberration. In fact, at f/15 all the light has had a chance to focus and there is no chromatic aberration. So, f/10 has much less than a fast f/5.
I will soon be reviewing the Celestron 70mm/900 LT (long tube) with a focal ratio of 12.85. Stay tuned.
Thanks for your comment.
@@AmatureAstronomer I only use my telescopes for visual observations. The 70/700 mm achromat I have has a sharp image even at 175x, which impressed me a lot. But the brightness is a lot lower than on my 102/714 mm ED doublet.
@@3dfxvoodoocards6 As expected. Aperture is king!
I had a similar 70mm refractor and it was quite good. Great on splitting double stars. Showed the Great Red Spot on Jupiter. Was able to see the Veil Nebula on a dark summer sky. Yeah it's needs a better mount.
I have taken some photos with this optical tube and the Nat Geo 114mm Newtonian, using a CG-2 mount. Haven't posted them, yet. Waiting to ge a photo of the moon.
I own this model an it is nice and sharp on the planets up to 140 magnification, on the Moon even more. It’s weakness is deep sky objects. I replaced the cheap Kellner eyepieces it comes with, with better ones with 68 degree field of view. I wonder what your opinion is on how it compares to a 114 or 102 mm newtonian :). A video comparison would be really interesting :)
Comparison video? May do one. I prefer the National Geographic 114mm Newtonian, as it gathers more light and is better for deep space objects, which is my passion. For planetary and lunar work, this 70mm is better, because the Newtonian uses a spherical mirror and does not focus as clearly.
@@AmatureAstronomer they are in the same price category so it would be interesting to see a comparison video with their strengths and weaknesses :)