love my Redcat 61!!! Thanks WO

I love WO, theyre stuff has a high quality for the price. I use my zenithstar 81 and adjustable flattener constantly..... use the flattener on other refractors... its great

Oh I so want one of those Pleiades 111mm. Going to start saving now!

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

Yessss… haha

WO is decades ahead of any other telescope company hands down.

I'm liking those William Optics telescopes what a great idea, can't wait to see how well they perform.

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

Agreed. Awesome looking and great concept.

Thank you so much for this video, I own 2 W.O. units and cannot wait to get a center focus 7 element unit.

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

It looks awesome.

On one side I really like the idea of the internal focuser.. I've had issues with focuser-sag on one of my scopes (not from WO), so I replaced it with a feather-touch, which solved my tilt-issues.. on the other hand it makes it very difficult to service and possibly impossible to replace, in case you do want to upgrade it to a better quality unit in case this should ever be necessary. I will probably still give it a try to see how it works in the real life. Looking forward to it!

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

It’s good to try new things. Theoretically, internal focus makes a lot of sense. Hopefully I will get my hands on one and can do some testing for myself.

@johnnydanger8701

6 ай бұрын

If a quality feather-touch eliminates the need then I don’t understand why other companies would pay for the patent use. If the cost is 1/2 that if an FT then it would start to make sense.

Love my RedCat51 (original model). Great optics and tricky helical focuser, but focus doesn't drift through the night. The Bhatinov mask in the cap is great but you have to be careful not to move focus when removing.

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

I have yet to have the opportunity to use a WO scope myself. I am hoping that some day soon I will have the opportunity to test one of these new ones out.

@MrGp3po

Жыл бұрын

@@CosmosSafari The RedCat51 optics are impressive and small images can be cropped and look better than full size images from scopes with longer focal lengths but poorer glass; like my Orion ED80. As for this RedCat61 the design is innovative but maybe not well tested in use. I see multiple reports of people trying to balance the scope but running the focus knob into the saddle. (See AstroBackyard's review) Some people suggest rotating the scope in the rings to put the focuser on top, but that means the handle has to be removed and the mm indicator is now upside down. WO needs to ship these with taller dovetail to ring hardware so the focus knob clears the saddle.

Does internalizing the focuser improve a refractor's usability with binoviewers? Im hooked on binoviewers for visual but had to buy some extra parts from Siebert optics to make them work with my refractor.

@CosmosSafari

10 ай бұрын

Cool question, but I have no clue. 😂

How large of a well-illuminated, fully-corrected field will the Pleiades 111 refractors provide? Will it be a legit competitor to the Tak FSQ106ED series?

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

Great question, but I don’t have any answer for you. This product was at NWAF but I cannot find any information on it otherwise.

Is focal length or f-ratio available for the Pleiades 68mm scope?

Will there be any longer focal length petzval wifd scopes?

なぜ日本ではWILLIAM OPTICSの赤道儀が買えないのか？ かなり小さくて良さそう まだ販売されていないだけ？AM5より良さそう

I wonder is the Pleiades 68 will fit on my HEQ5i Pro or if the focusing knob will cause issues

@CosmosSafari

7 ай бұрын

Why would the focus knob cause issues?

What if you want to change the focuser?

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

What would be the goal of such an endeavor?

@miclanone

Жыл бұрын

@@CosmosSafari Mounting a better focuser?

@plumberman19

4 ай бұрын

@@miclanone ALL focuser issues are resolved with this design. And I imagine that in a few short years, we'll see this design proliferate, as well as have integrated electronic focusing. Basically a free standing AF AP lens.

I'd like to see these astrographs compared against high quality Nikon or Canon telephotos stopped down to the same aperture.

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

I don’t think it’s a fair comparison for either the scopes or the lenses. Camera lenses are significantly more expensive when it comes down to it than a telescope of equal optical specs, as they should be if/when you include autofocus and image stabilization, and even more so if it is a zoom lens with a fixed f-ratio. My 70-200 f/2.8 is a $3000 lens, and it will take amazing Astro photos, but at $3,000 that’s not much focal length. If you were to go to a 400mm f/4 Prime lens you are talking $12k+ and pushing $13k for a 600mm f/4.0 prime wildlife/sports lens. My Stellarvue scope can get similar optical performance at half that cost. High end optics are silly expensive. Telescopes also have the benefit of proper connections for heavy camera sensors, filter wheels, dovetail bars, precision focus, and more. The benefits of telescopes for their specific job are abundant. However, I wouldn’t want to use my Stellarvue scope to go shoot a sporting event or wildlife. The lack of autofocus, image stabilization, and sheer weight would be impossible to get any usable shots. If interested I could do a video on this topic at some point. Maybe I could work with a camera company or my Patreon subscribers to borrow or rent the big wildlife lenses for the comparison testing.

Where is this Redcat 61 being sold at?????? Me wants it!!!!

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

They look wonderful. I am very interested in them myself.

@BenGieCruz

Жыл бұрын

@@CosmosSafari please let us know when you get your hands on one!

@RayPaganJr

Жыл бұрын

Pretty impressive telescopes. The 61 is looking very inviting.

@Zealor365

Жыл бұрын

This booth is Woodland Hills Camera & Telescope.

@BenGieCruz

Жыл бұрын

@@Zealor365 I can see that but their site does not have the 61. I wonder what it’s release date is if not out yet.

Do u know the release date of the FLT 92?

@CosmosSafari

9 ай бұрын

I will ask about the FLT 92.

WO killing the business of Feather touch, moon light, etc

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

At least at this point there still appears to be the need to adapt with a third party auto-focuser for remote operations. It would be great to see something electronic integrated directly into the design. At the very least, I hope that the optec and feather-touch like focusers are able to easily adapt to this design.

@derekbaker3279

Жыл бұрын

@@CosmosSafari Excellent point. I want to add a focuser which has a very precise motorized rotator integrated in the system (e.g. the Nitecrawler or PrimaLuce Estatto with the Arco rotator.) , so with the Pleiades, I will need to purchase a separate motorized rotator).

@gothicm3rcy426

Жыл бұрын

Na theyre just giving people options...... digital astro photography didnt kill off eyepieces after all

Serious companies such as AP, Takahashi, Starlight, etc., will not do this. Moving half of telescope for focusing is silly.

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

It's not really moving half the telescope. All it effectively does is introduce a dedicated field flattener and then place it and the focusing mechanism inside instead of outside. There is a lot to be said for the improvements in balance, reduced chance of sucking dust inside the OTA, and decreased chances for flexure.

@anata5127

Жыл бұрын

@@CosmosSafari They should stop to be fancy and machine focusers like Moonlite, Optec and Starlight do.

@plumberman19

4 ай бұрын

@@anata5127 you just aren't getting it...

She is well trained in her selling talk, but non if it is true haha. I even think she's never used a telescope herself for real. Although the focuser is inside the body, it still moves the weight from forth to back inside the telescope. Being more in the middle would do some good to the balance, but it would not be significant. I rather have a extended focuser, so i can always switch it for another one. I got a William optics myself ( 81 mm Triplet GT ), and when using a good mount, it isn't even a problem at all.

@CosmosSafari

Жыл бұрын

Improving balance cannot hurt things, and the way the mechanism inside of this scope works the internal movement is significantly less torque on the mount. When you think of the scope acting as a lever on the RA and DEC axis’s distance from the fulcrum does matter. The fact that the movement is a smaller amount of weight (which it is) and a closer distance to the fulcrum (which it is) it most definitely makes a difference in how the scope affects balance and performance. Farah is very knowledgeable, and I can tell you from speaking with her both on and off camera that she’s got a pretty solid understanding of telescopes.

@miclanone

Жыл бұрын

@@CosmosSafariok, on the latter, i stand corrected , but still, if u use a good mount, the benefits of using a internal focuser doesn't outstand the cons of it.

@randolphpatterson5061

10 ай бұрын

Your village called, their idiot is missing.

@johnnydanger8701

6 ай бұрын

@@miclanoneI don’t see any benefit with the internal focuser for people who use FT’s or other comparable focusers with capable mounts. I’m not getting any tilt using a 3.5 FT w a long draw tube, I can swap out the focuser if needed for multi use or for cleaning and if I’m doing visual I don’t want to reach to the center of the OTA. If someone wants to stick a rotator and 5 lbs of gear on the end of a 60-70” APO on a Celestron VX then sure this could fill that niche. Good luck keeping dew out of 7 elements + internal focuser.

@johnnydanger8701

6 ай бұрын

@@CosmosSafari Farrah is very knowledgeable. I think that she misspoke a couple times due to technical language and camera which could give the impression of someone just using buzz words. ie Bahtinov mask (she knew exactly what it does) and direct drive v harmonic after just talking about the planewave.