SingAstro

I hope you aren't expecting a huge leap in performance from the C90 to Q3.5. For that price, very collectable, not very practical. Just my $0.02.

No indeed, I don't.

If it can explain, I enjoy my old leica iii lacquered black and nickel. I like to listen vinyls and to wear mechanical watches.
I like engineered objects that have been developed and built pushing the limit of a philosophy.
In that respect, C90 is very disappointing.

More practically, I need a compact scope that can be set in minute, with no compromise on the performance, I can use for planetary imaging. The Questar matches well my specs.

I was considering a doublet Takahashi too, but I worry the aging of fluorite here in Singapore....

He is buying it for the experience, much like why I am still buying old Sony walkmans off ebay!
If that's the case, maybe you can make an offer Albert can't refuse. He has one set at his shop in the Science centre although I think he intends to keep it for reasons similar to your own. or wait for Remus to finish his repair job on the old one he got from Cash converters. Maybe he will sell it after repair

Nicholas, even with perfect optics, the Q3.5 will not show you very much on planets. Aperture is the limitation here - even Questar cannot break the law of physics. All I'm saying is that you need to think carefully about purchasing a Q3.5 if this will be your main and only telescope. Performance wise, it is not the dream scope (the Q7 sure is). You will want something that could show you significantly more than the C90 could. However, as a second scope for admiration and occasional peeks, sure, I would want a Q3.5 too!

You are better off with a no compromise refractor of equivalent aperture, for example the Takahashi FC76, which is no less portable. Durability is not an issue if you keep them in dry cabinets. A total of $0.04 from me

Gentlemen,

Thanks for your advices, but the point of this thread is no to help me to make a choice. I know what I want: A Q3.5. When I am not happy, I'll sell it.
GRS, may I ask you if your comments are based on the specs of the Q3.5 or an actual user experience ? Do you think that the Tak 76 + mount + EP would significantly cheaper than a Questar? and a good choice for planetary observation?


Are there only two Questar in Singapore?

(I am currently grinding a 8" mirror to make scope that will show more, for sure, but that will be much more bulky, and less frequently used than a C90 or a Q.)

Woah! Take the hostility down a notch. Everyone is just trying to help.

Seems like there are very few (if any) Questar mct owners in singapore. I have never seen a Questar deployed at mersing astro trips.

That being said, i wish you good luck in getting one , be it first hand or second hand. Cheers.

Regards
Junwei

Nicholas, not based on personal experience, but based on informed guess. The Q3.5 is an obstructed system. It behaves like a smaller refractor, maybe 70mm. I have a 90mm doublet APO, and it leaves me unsatisfied for planets. I love planets, therefore my main telescope is a planetary scope of sufficient aperture. You said you love planets, hence I'm giving you some heads up as to what to expect. But I understand that portability and ease of set up are important issues for you. Therefore I suggested a Tak FC76, which has legendary reputation and could ride on a camera tripod. Bought new, yes, it will be cheaper than the Q3.5 and you cannot go wrong with Tak performance. But sure, nobody's stopping you from buying a Q3.5.

No hostility in my previous post. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
I agree that a Takahashi is also an alternative and for almost the same price (fullset) than a used Q.
Used one but that doesn't loose value on the market.

Pro/cons arguments are very similar to Leica RF: why to pay that much for a fully mechincal body that uses only film?
It's a question of approach.

nicolasM wrote:
Are there only two Questar in Singapore?

Hint: Search for 'questar' under Equipment Database.