Posts Made By: Timm Bottoni

Floyd Blue said:

I would like to either get to the bottom of this controversy or drop it. I feel this is taking up too much time having to monitor every post for content and answering to every one about my involvement with the issue. I have no involvement, I am a moderator.
I too would like to know who owns or controls the rights to these EPs if it is known. If this is on the up and up, well then let Markus and TS sell their EPs and be done with it.
If it is not, then decide whether you want to purchase them or not, it is your decision not mine or any one else's. :S
This is not a court of law and we don't even have any facts before us, but we are acting like a judge and jury. This bothers me a bit.

Hi Floyd,

There is a great deal of information in the thread on CN regarding this as well, including posts from Tom's friend, Tom, located here...

I think most of the questions have been answered by Tom, and Markus there.

http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php/Cat/0/Number/1467255/page/0/view/collapsed/sb/5/o/all/fpart/all/vc/1

Timm

I only have WO UWANs in 4mm, 7mm, and 16mm sizes and a 33mm SWAN - I guess maybe I have eyepiece envy :S

Timm

Here's my grab and go
http://www.astromart.com/articles/article.asp?article_id=474

I can pick it all up, move it at will, set up in 5 minutes, and tear down just as fast.

But honestly, the ability to grab and go is as much, if not more so, dependant on the mount, than the scope on it, in my opinion.

Timm

I've had one for a while now, bought from Anacortes, it's the newer version, and I like it a lot. It has a rotating back on it which is likely a huge plus for someone with a GEM mount. It also has a threaded hole that accepts an optional Rigel pulse light to light up the crosshairs. The crosshairs on mine, are actually very visible in my light polluted skies. They aren't thin wires, but are etched into a clear disk that floats in the middle, which is how it lights up (I tried with a red flashlight) when illuminated.

The optical quality is very good for something in this price range. The eyepiece is so-so quality, but it serves it's purpose well enough, and if you are interested in using std. 1.25" eyepieces they seem to all work pretty well. I have tried it with my WO UWANs and WO SPLs and all reach focus and work, however 82 deg FOV eyepieces quickly show that it has the expected amount of edge distortions for an F/4 50mm $119 product. It's NOT a telescope, yet it actually works quite well as one, or as a spotting scope since it is correct image viewing due to it's rather well made prism.

I'm in the process of writing a full review now, and it I weill be giving it a very good review, with only minor reservations. Watch for it soon on Astromart.

Hope this helps,

Timm

Hi,

Sorry, I couldn't find any complaints of backlash with the WO FLT132 scope on the WO Yahoo group. I don't recall anyone complaining about it here or on CN either to be honest.

But anything that has gears, has the potential for backlash, which can sometimes be minimized by proper adjustment.

I wish I had a WO FLT132 to check out to see for myself

Timm

Darren Drake said:

Here is the info. To me the eyelens looks to small with to little ER on all but the 31mm and the 23mm.
http://www.celestron.com/c2/product.php?ProdID=460

Hi Darren,

But the new space age look is, umm, interesting - sort of cool actually, but a little plastic-ish. Has anyone seen any of these yet?

Timm

Thanks for teaching us what some of this means!

Timm

jeff catalina said:

. . . or something else?

I want to make the "leap" from an 8" SCT to a 4" APO in the next few months. My interests for this scope are pretty much exclusively planetary and lunar, though it'd be nice to do some light widefield imaging with a DSLR when time and conditions permit.

I have owned TV scopes before and I'm familiar with the quality of the optics and mechanics, so I know pretty much what to expect with the TV-102. But the extra 8mm of the FLT-110 intrigues me---not to mention the huge 4 inch, 2-speed rotatable focuser and CNC tube. My only concern with the WO is with the "TMB designed" optics. I hear too many conflicting things about the manufacture of these lens cells to know for certain if quality control (or simply poor manufacturing) is an issue.

Please feel free to add to my headaches and offer some more for me to mull over. Don't feel you need to limit your response to these scopes . . .

Thanks!

Hi,

I have neither scope at the moment, but you may also find the information on the WO website useful.

http://www.williamoptics.com/telescopes/flt110_feedback.htm

On paper, the WO scope being a 100mm triplet, looks like a better value than the TV 102mm doublet, but I think visually I'm not sure my eyes would see a difference. For Astrophotography, I think you might also want to check out the dedicated field flattener that WO offers, and check their Gallery pages to get a feel for what you might expect from the scopes AP performance.

Hope it helps

Timm

Hi,

Here is my original review of this model from 2 years ago before WO discontinued it.
http://www.astromart.com/articles/article.asp?article_id=297

And here is my review of the 2-speed focuser I upgraded...
http://www.astromart.com/articles/article.asp?article_id=349

Here is a review of the APOGrade I did to replace the optics bringing it to an APO
http://www.astromart.com/articles/article.asp?article_id=398

Hope it helps, that ought to keep you busy reading for a while

Timm

Chris Watts said:

Hello,

I would like to purchase a new Diagonal for my Celestron 8" SCT. What would you recommend? This is to replace my original equipment 1.25 Diagonal.

Chris

William Optics has a great 2" diagonal, and the newest version of it has cool looking carbon fiber sides, along with BOTH an SCT end, and a refractor end for the price of $168.
http://www.buytelescopes.com/product.asp?t=54&pid=11467&m=

That would be what I would go with,and will go with once I get a C8, but that is only my humble opinion.

Timm