Burgess 127?

Hello, Valery,
Somehow the Mikado comes to mind: " innocent merriment."
Clear skies,
Bill Meyers





More and more grandiose promises Bill strewing to the right and on the
left, upwards and downwards, gush forth!
Quite impressive! And I shoud note, that these 1026 are crippled with
promises
to fix or upgrade them somewhere in future. Of course, after
delivering these
new 9" APO, 11" and 16" Mak-cass.

LOLT!

V.D.

Huh! More slimy tactics by purveyors of cheap scopes trying to make them
out to be more than they are. Will it never end?
-Rich

I think you have missed the point here. Burgess Optical is not slimy in the
least.

Inexperienced probably, overly enthusiastic, most certainly, but the promise of
these scopes is a well made achromat both optically and mechanically at a
reasonable price. So far, the 127F8 scopes seems to bear this out.

The 102F6 scope has had some problems with the objective, it will be
interesting to see how they actually have turned out as they are apparently
shipping now.

It does seem to me that there is a place for decent 4 and 5 inch achromats with
decent 2 inch focusers and decent lens cells. Just a decent focuser that does
not to be reworked prior to use separates these scope from the Synta scopes.

Often a new telescope is tied up with wishes and wants that may be unrealistic.
It doesn't matter what scope it is, there is always the thrill and joy and
disappointment of the first light with any scope.

Some peoples expectations are unrealistic, whether it is color free performance
in 102mm F6 Achromat, seeing Stephen's quintet in a 60mm refractor or setting
up an 14 inch LX200 in 10 minutes, thats how it works...

Bottomline: I believe these scopes will be decent scopes that fill a hole in
the market.

jon isaacs

Huh! More slimy tactics by purveyors of cheap scopes trying to make them
out to be more than they are. Will it never end?
-Rich

I think you have missed the point here. Burgess Optical is not slimy in the
least.

Inexperienced probably, overly enthusiastic, most certainly, but the promise of
these scopes is a well made achromat both optically and mechanically at a
reasonable price. So far, the 127F8 scopes seems to bear this out.

The 102F6 scope has had some problems with the objective, it will be
interesting to see how they actually have turned out as they are apparently
shipping now.

It does seem to me that there is a place for decent 4 and 5 inch achromats with
decent 2 inch focusers and decent lens cells. Just a decent focuser that does
not to be reworked prior to use separates these scope from the Synta scopes.

Often a new telescope is tied up with wishes and wants that may be unrealistic.
It doesn't matter what scope it is, there is always the thrill and joy and
disappointment of the first light with any scope.

Some peoples expectations are unrealistic, whether it is color free performance
in 102mm F6 Achromat, seeing Stephen's quintet in a 60mm refractor or setting
up an 14 inch LX200 in 10 minutes, thats how it works...

Bottomline: I believe these scopes will be decent scopes that fill a hole in
the market.

jon isaacs

Huh! More slimy tactics by purveyors of cheap scopes trying to make them
out to be more than they are. Will it never end?
-Rich

I think you have missed the point here. Burgess Optical is not slimy in the
least.

Inexperienced probably, overly enthusiastic, most certainly, but the promise of
these scopes is a well made achromat both optically and mechanically at a
reasonable price. So far, the 127F8 scopes seems to bear this out.

The 102F6 scope has had some problems with the objective, it will be
interesting to see how they actually have turned out as they are apparently
shipping now.

It does seem to me that there is a place for decent 4 and 5 inch achromats with
decent 2 inch focusers and decent lens cells. Just a decent focuser that does
not to be reworked prior to use separates these scope from the Synta scopes.

Often a new telescope is tied up with wishes and wants that may be unrealistic.
It doesn't matter what scope it is, there is always the thrill and joy and
disappointment of the first light with any scope.

Some peoples expectations are unrealistic, whether it is color free performance
in 102mm F6 Achromat, seeing Stephen's quintet in a 60mm refractor or setting
up an 14 inch LX200 in 10 minutes, thats how it works...

Bottomline: I believe these scopes will be decent scopes that fill a hole in
the market.

jon isaacs

Huh! More slimy tactics by purveyors of cheap scopes trying to make them
out to be more than they are. Will it never end?
-Rich

I think you have missed the point here. Burgess Optical is not slimy in the
least.

Inexperienced probably, overly enthusiastic, most certainly, but the promise of
these scopes is a well made achromat both optically and mechanically at a
reasonable price. So far, the 127F8 scopes seems to bear this out.

The 102F6 scope has had some problems with the objective, it will be
interesting to see how they actually have turned out as they are apparently
shipping now.

It does seem to me that there is a place for decent 4 and 5 inch achromats with
decent 2 inch focusers and decent lens cells. Just a decent focuser that does
not to be reworked prior to use separates these scope from the Synta scopes.

Often a new telescope is tied up with wishes and wants that may be unrealistic.
It doesn't matter what scope it is, there is always the thrill and joy and
disappointment of the first light with any scope.

Some peoples expectations are unrealistic, whether it is color free performance
in 102mm F6 Achromat, seeing Stephen's quintet in a 60mm refractor or setting
up an 14 inch LX200 in 10 minutes, thats how it works...

Bottomline: I believe these scopes will be decent scopes that fill a hole in
the market.

jon isaacs

Steve it' not just about color. The D&G is a custom made objective, the uses
better quality glass, individually corrected for zones, astigmatism as well
as color. Even if they were the same focal length, the D&G would be better.
The Burgess (same factory as the Meade) is 100% machine made. In terms of
the total quality of the image, it isn't close. The Burgess compares to the
Meade and Synta scopes- Orion, Konus and Celestron. The D&G compares to
Vixen, Stellarvue and Televue. The Burgess costs the same as the Orion,
Celestron and Meade OTAs, the D&G costs the same as the Vixen, Stellarvue
and Televue.

Gary


stevew wrote:

I have seen a couple of these Burgess 127 mm F-8 Achromats on Astromart.
The owners rave about the lack of color. Has anyone out there used this
scope? How would it compare to my D & G 5 inch F-12 ?
Seems they are very inexpensive.
Steve

Steve it' not just about color. The D&G is a custom made objective, the uses
better quality glass, individually corrected for zones, astigmatism as well
as color. Even if they were the same focal length, the D&G would be better.
The Burgess (same factory as the Meade) is 100% machine made. In terms of
the total quality of the image, it isn't close. The Burgess compares to the
Meade and Synta scopes- Orion, Konus and Celestron. The D&G compares to
Vixen, Stellarvue and Televue. The Burgess costs the same as the Orion,
Celestron and Meade OTAs, the D&G costs the same as the Vixen, Stellarvue
and Televue.

Gary


stevew wrote:

I have seen a couple of these Burgess 127 mm F-8 Achromats on Astromart.
The owners rave about the lack of color. Has anyone out there used this
scope? How would it compare to my D & G 5 inch F-12 ?
Seems they are very inexpensive.
Steve

Steve it' not just about color. The D&G is a custom made objective, the uses
better quality glass, individually corrected for zones, astigmatism as well
as color. Even if they were the same focal length, the D&G would be better.
The Burgess (same factory as the Meade) is 100% machine made. In terms of
the total quality of the image, it isn't close. The Burgess compares to the
Meade and Synta scopes- Orion, Konus and Celestron. The D&G compares to
Vixen, Stellarvue and Televue. The Burgess costs the same as the Orion,
Celestron and Meade OTAs, the D&G costs the same as the Vixen, Stellarvue
and Televue.

Gary


stevew wrote:

I have seen a couple of these Burgess 127 mm F-8 Achromats on Astromart.
The owners rave about the lack of color. Has anyone out there used this
scope? How would it compare to my D & G 5 inch F-12 ?
Seems they are very inexpensive.
Steve

Steve it' not just about color. The D&G is a custom made objective, the uses
better quality glass, individually corrected for zones, astigmatism as well
as color. Even if they were the same focal length, the D&G would be better.
The Burgess (same factory as the Meade) is 100% machine made. In terms of
the total quality of the image, it isn't close. The Burgess compares to the
Meade and Synta scopes- Orion, Konus and Celestron. The D&G compares to
Vixen, Stellarvue and Televue. The Burgess costs the same as the Orion,
Celestron and Meade OTAs, the D&G costs the same as the Vixen, Stellarvue
and Televue.

Gary


stevew wrote:

I have seen a couple of these Burgess 127 mm F-8 Achromats on Astromart.
The owners rave about the lack of color. Has anyone out there used this
scope? How would it compare to my D & G 5 inch F-12 ?
Seems they are very inexpensive.
Steve

Jon,

if you looking for a real good 100 mm achromat , we started already to
introduce one a 100 mm F/700 mm douplet airspacest achromat.
Correspondance to the chinese manufactor its using somewhat diffrent
glas than typical achromat.
At first tests we found its colorcorrection is visible better than the
skywatcher 102/1000, we have not compared it against a japanese made
Vixen, but beeing better with F/7 than competition F/10 is already quite
good.

The polishing job of this 100/700 is very good , like very best
skywatchers, we have tested now 7 pc from first shipments and this
sounds very promissing.

Now before we starting this scope to the internationalk market they need
to do some little improvements
1, install a 2" focuser, instead of here M42/1.25" focuser
2, upgrate the coating from standart MgF2 to Multicoating
3, exchange the mountrail to tuberings with Vixen rail
4, improve 50 mm finderbracket which is shaky

after all that is done it will cost about $ 350 for optical tube with
rings,mountrail, 50 mm finder, diagonal and 1 eyepiece

if they continue to make the same good quality as we got in first 7
samples, than we will arrange a deal with Aries and offer a matched
chromacor with it

but lets wait till the improvements have been done, it will take a
while, maybe 2 or 3 monthes.
Its not a massproducet telescope, only small quantitys are beeing made,
the usual work of this company is big observatory class mounts for
chinese and large 9" and bigger achromats

best wishes
Markus


"Jon Isaacs" wrote in message


Do you like, Jon, expand your expectations? If yes, read this
message from
Bill Burgess:

Right now, the wait has been so long that I don't I actually expect the 102F6
to ever arrive. When that happens, if it happens, I may expand my
expectations... g

jon




--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG