TeleVue 102

Ratings:Top:Astronomy:Equipment Reviews:Telescope Reviews:TeleVue 102

 Info  Votes  Messages  More Stats  Up One Level
Vote
Prev Page 2 of 3 Next

TeleVue 102
An ALT-AZ mount is designed for wide field deep sky work. If you want to use high power than get an eq mount

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40519

TeleVue 102
Now that the above posts have not told you anything about the SCOPE, let's get back to what we are reviewing. I wanted to give the scope a 10 because I enjoy it so much, but that would make it perfect, and I want to be honest. I think that this scope is one of the best values in the apo market. It performs just as good as a TAK and approaches Astro-Physics performance for a lower price (it approaches A-P performance but does not equal it). It is readily available, and if you have any problems with it, Tele Vue is a pleasure to deal with. My scope star tests very nicely, with identical (as far as I can tell) diffraction rings on both sides of focus. There is VERY (and you really have to look for it, I don't think most people would notice it) little color in focus on very bright objects. You should truly get high quality (read Tele Vue) eyepieces for this scope, as anything less will really hold it back optically. Also, get the Everbrite diagonal (I don't care what others think it does make a difference IMHO). Of course aperture always wins with equal optical quality, but for planetary and deep sky, this scope gives very good to almost great views (great contrast). Build quality is solid and finely done. So what don't I like? Well, the focuser on my unit is not as good as a TAK, but unless you have felt a TAK you would not know it. Other than that, I am proud to own this instrument and would recommend it to anyone wanting a 4 inch APO.

Overall Rating: 9
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40520

TeleVue 102
Just got scope and still evaluating. Wonder if there any other ratings? Also wondering if I should get the Gibraltar or and Eq mount?

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40521

TeleVue 102
Its Mr Nexstar 8 here to reply. It is funny how some people get really upset. Usually those people that reply like that really dont know what they are talking about anyway, I think it is funny. I have noe had a chance to compare my nexstar 8 against the 102. I have had the 102 out and it seems to perform well. I did compare the 8 against a good 8 inch dob and the sct view seemed a little more crisp. I have since purchased a eq mount. To the person that got so upset it sounds like you are the type that finds one manufacturer and then is in love with them. I use everyones equipment, cel, meade, tele etc etc. There is no way that you can push that thing by hand at 180 and not get the shakes, especially looking at the zenith when the drawtube is extended.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40522

TeleVue 102
Dont compare the view from an LX90 to a nexstar.Everyone who knows anything knows that the celestron sct is the best design, why do you think NASA uses the celestron 8" tube on the shuttle. My point here is not to bash meade, I use some of their equipment, but a "good" scope of any kind is hard to find. Good optics, knowing what is good and what isnt, is the point when you compare scopes to one another.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40523

TeleVue 102
Well then you must not know anything...the LX90 has a superior mount, superior electronics, better coatings, better star tests, and generally better views than the nexstar. Of course, the televue 102 blows them both away....

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40524

TeleVue 102
very good scope! Televue has done it again...I had this scope out for first light yesterday, and Boooy! Did it perform! But the real test came at; 1900x and
At jupiter Still at that mag. NO imagebreakdown! Boooy what views! What a scope!

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40525

TeleVue 102
I have had the Televue Genesis SDF since it first came out along with the Gilbratar mount and I have used it thousands of times. One thing I have come to realize is that the telescope needs to be balanced and re-balanced each time a heavier eye piece or barlow is used. This will allow for the best ease of use for pushing the tube around. When the tube becomes un-balanced, it gets harder to manuever the tube because you then resort to increasing the tension in the knobs. Just my thoughts....I still love Televue products, although the premium eye pieces are alittle heavy....maybe because big Al still uses brass !

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40526

TeleVue 102
Please see my update of the TV-102 review at.
http://www.websamba.com/AstroRatings/

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 3 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40527

TeleVue 102
This is a great scope. Just got the Renaissance version #1010 and it is fantastic. Split Epison Lyrae at 70x Pretty sure I got a good one. Which is key at this price I will not be buying abothers scope for a long time. Planetary detail is excellent. Had nearly the best view of Jupiter I have ever seen and the seeing was about a 3. Can't wait till one of those steady nights. Found Uranus using starbeam in about 2 min. Found Neptune in about 10 min (very faint in the south due to haze and murk.

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 1 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40528

TeleVue 102
Have a Tv-102 for about 6 months. I was a t at dark -site last week and it performaed very well. Optics are great. Saturn was low in sky and still held up at 253x. Also called Tele Vue the other day to ask them about cleaning the optics. Al Nagler got on the phone and I spoke with him for about 20 minutes. He then switched me to anohter person to answers further questions. A class act!
Did I forget to say the scope is awesome. I have it mounted on a GM-8 with a Regil quickfinder.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40529

TeleVue 102
Look.
I own 19 telescopes, i am a serious amateur astronomer and astrophotographer.
And I have 1 thing to say about the TV-102...
This is one of the BEST apochromats out there.
Tau Bootis was nicely split in exceptionally high magnification.
Although it can't get much deep-sky with it due to the aperture,
whatever bright nebula,galaxy or cluster you pick up with this you won't
be dissapointed. Not at all.


By Nick

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 3 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40530

TeleVue 102
I have enjoyed TV102 for a year and a half now, and getting the TV binoviewer
was the best addition to the whole system (I also love the tiny newest Naglers and the TV Zoom 3-6mm).

Star test is excellent, contrast is decent.
The only thing I do not like is the hard case, it protects it well, but it is too bulky. Also, I replaced the excellent Starbeam with a Riegel mounted on the retractable lens shade ! This way I can rotate it where I need it, and working at Zenith is much easier on my neck that way. (Gibraltar does not point fully to Zenith, but it is easy to lower one leg -and there you are! But be nimble, since upsetting the balance of the tripod could be expensive!)

Since I am quite nimble, I can use 300x magnification on nights of great seeing and still track the planets with my Gibraltar without frustration. The secret was mentioned by a smart gentleman above: exact balancing for the weight of your eyepiece. Also, a bit of lubrication in the Gib's plastic cylinder helps.

The new TV binoviewer increases contrast and improves the view considerably. Two eyes see more, and the comfort is out of this world. The binoviewer has to be used with the especially designed (and included) 2x barlow, screwed in. I like it, but for wider views I want to cut the OTA.

My question to anyone more experienced is this: I want to have the OTA shortened by 4-5 inches, so I can use TV binoviewer unbarlowed. TeleVue can do it, although it is not cheap. Would I regret it? (It would really become a sort of new "Bizzaro 102". If I ever needed longer focusing, I could use an extension tube in the focuser. And the benefit of a shorter refractor is obvious: less vibration in windy conditions.) Any comments?

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 3 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40531

TeleVue 102
Are you crazy, why would you take a chance and possibly destroy a great scope like the TV102? The focal length is not that long and the true 2x barlow will give you excellent wide views esp if you use celestron ultima 30mm eyepieces.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40532

TeleVue 102
TV 102 or FS 102?

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40533

TeleVue 102
HEED the words of Mr. Nextstar 8. I didn't and I am SORRY.....

Before buying a TV102 and a Gibraltar in August, I read the above postings several times and dismissed Mr. Nextstar 8 as some kind of crank. My mistake. His comments closely parallel my own experience.

I have an ETX125 and, like him, I can't see what all the fuss is about. Both scopes give nice views. The 102's a little crisper on faint doubles, the ETX is noticeably more impressive on deep-sky. The 102 excels at low-power wide-field views due to its relatively short focal length. The ETX excels at high-power views with comfortable eyepieces due to long focal length.

As Mr. Nextstar pointed out, attempting to use high-power on the Gibraltar is an exercise in futility, at least for me. Finding a target with a 2" low-power 'finder' eyepiece and then switching to a smaller high-power ocular is a nightmare. The tube becomes unbalanced at some point and unless pains are taken the target slips away. I was starting to get the knack of doing this, but then thought 'Why bother' when high power pointing and viewing is so much easier with the ETX and the views are just as good. So the Gibraltar was sold and now I'm saving up for a GM-8. Hope I'm not throwing good money after bad.

The TV102 (and the Gibraltar too)is certainly very well built. It will probably outlast 3 ETX's...but then, with its 'extras' it costs about as much as 3 ETX's. One quibble, the only finder mounting provisions are on the tube ring which is quite a ways forward of the main eyepiece. Until recently, the only finders available for that location were the 1X red-dot finders. The ETX spoiled me by providing a Right Angle optical finder conveniently placed right next to the main ocular. Viewing from the seated position I can go from red-dot finder, to optical finder, to main ocular without ever moving my butt or straining my neck. It's not that easy with the TV102.

Mr. Nextstar's rating of 7 for the TV102/Gibraltar combination seems about right, maybe overly generous. I'll wait to see how the 102 does on a GM-8 before giving it a rating. But maybe I'm unqualified to rate such a sophisticated piece of gear. After all I'm quite new at this and I've been spoiled by an ETX.

Mr. ETX125

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40534

TeleVue 102
I had an EXT125 and the optics was good but no where near sas good as a TV102. Also the way that the EXT125 was mounted is a joke (very bad vibrations). Get the GM8 and you will be happy with the TV102.All the TV scopes are EXCELLENT!

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40535

TeleVue 102
Well, as an owner of both a Nexstar 8 and a 102, my opinion is that the 102 has better optics, and is more fun to use. Contrast is better as well as image sharpness. To be honest, I haven't done side by side tests yet, so I'm relying on my memory between observations. Someone has said that the gibraltar is difficult to use at high mag. I've used the 102 with the gibraltar up to 275x with relative easy. Sure, it shakes a bit, but with some practice, it should become a easy task. Balancing is a pain, unless you know how to deal with it. I've been using the altitude tension adjustments with good results. Why do I use the gib instead of a gem? Simple. Portability and ease of setup are the two most important features for a visual observer. I live in an apartment, so I must carry the whole gear up and down. With the 102 + gibraltar, I can carry everything in one trip, something impossible to do with the nexstar. Also, the nexstar shakes like hell at high mag (>300x), so no advantage here. The only thing I like on the nexstar is the brighter images of deep-sky objects (But not on everyone. The 102 kicks nexstar butt on M42).

Just my .02 euro cents :-)

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 4 (Unreliable Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40536

TeleVue 102
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 think "10" ratings are thrown about a bit too casually, and I might have been more inclined to rate this scope a "9", because I think Astro-Physics and Takahashi are closer to perfection. But few observers, I think, would be able to tell the difference in the images if they compared all 3 side-to-side. Throw in the fact that the TV is available immediately and costs much less than the other two (I got mine on sale at Anacortes for only $2150 for the package, not just the OTA), I think it easily deserves a "10".

If you are considering buying this scope, here's some advice:

1. The Gibraltar mount is very good for an alt-azimuth, but, like previous reviews have mentioned, it's a little shaky at high magnifications, especially in azumuth. A small amount of graphite lubricant on this bearing helps smooth it out. I'm considering buying a JMI Moto-focuser to solve the handshake vibrations, and anti-vibration pads work very well if the tripod is on a hard surface. These are relatively inexpensive solutions that preserve the mount's convenience and ease-of-use.

2. It's best if you use either all 1-1/4" eyepieces or all 2" eyepieces. All of my 1-1/4" EP's are about the same size and weight, and while it is easy to rebalance the scope, you risk losing the object in the eyepiece by switching between the two sizes. I bought the new Nagler 3-6mm zoom eyepiece, which can take the magnification from 146x to 293x, or anywhere in between, in an instant, with no refocusing. If you can afford one, I highly recommend them. As much as I'd like to have the 2" premium EP's, I don't feel like I'm missing much. My lowest-power 32mm TV plossel gives me 27X and almost 2 degrees of AFOV.

3. Don't waste your money or time with the cheap "Quickpoint" finder, it's lens is too small and positioned too far up the tube to be very useful. Either spring for the Starbeam, or get a conventional finder and the new Universal Bracket that TV just made available. With a low-power eyepiece, you really don't need a finder. I had my Gibraltar equipped with the Sky-Tour system, which takes me right to the object without having to search through my light-polluted skies, but it's an expensive alternative.

4. No matter what people say about how surprisingly good this scope's deep-sky performance is, if you really are more interested in "faint fuzzies", this is not the scope for you. Open star clusters look great, but all but the biggest, brightest globulars and nebulae are disappointing, even under dark skies. An 8" or larger dob with a good mirror would be a better choice, even with the extra hassles mentioned previously. I will always keep this scope, but in addition I plan to get a larger dob to satisfy my "aperture fever"!

I hope someone finds all this helpful!

Overall Rating: 10
Weight: 12 (Trustworthy Vote)
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40537

TeleVue 102
in response to the above comment, you are correct about the side by side comparison's. the only time you will see a difference when comparing the 102 to let's say a traveler, is when you start pushing the power really high. then the traveler will have an edge in performance. the FSQ 106 will pull in a tad more light and the contrast will be a bit better. i really wish more people had the opportunity to compare these types of scopes side by side. the difference's are so trivial. the tele vue 102 is a outstanding performer and can be rightfully placed along side the finest 4" apo's on the market. put this scope on a rock solid mount like the GM8 from losmandy and you are set for life.

Overall Rating: No Vote
Weight: <none>
Date:
By:
Link to this vote: http://excelsis.com/1.0/displayvote.php?voteid=40538

Prev Page 2 of 3 Next

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

Checking Your Telescope
Starting out in Amateur Astronomy
 
How to use This Site
Why Register?
[Get rid of the ads!]
Voting Guide