2025-12-16 00:35:17 *
歡迎光臨, 訪客. 請先 登入註冊一個帳號.
您忘了 啟用您的帳號嗎?

請輸入帳號, 密碼以及預計登入時間
新聞:
 
   首頁   說明 登入 註冊  
頁: [1]
  列印  
作者 主題: Askar 的 PHQ vs FRA 的產品線定位怎麼區分 下圖2隻相近的鏡子 各位又會怎麼選擇呢  (閱讀 6098 次)
peter
正式會員
超星系團
******
文章: 51833



« 於: 2024-02-22 08:43:48 »

Askar 的 PHQ vs FRA 的產品線定位怎麼區分
下圖2隻相近的鏡子 各位又會怎麼選擇呢 
https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=7294128140668006&set=gm.3669737979965239&idorvanity=1782041272068262



* 236.jpg (64.84 KB, 671x615 - 已被閱讀 234 次.)

* 237.jpg (89.79 KB, 677x644 - 已被閱讀 210 次.)
已記錄

請連署支持翠峰天文科技觀星園區

http://campaign.tw-npo.org/campaign//sign.php?id=2009113019034900
peter
正式會員
超星系團
******
文章: 51833



« 回覆文章 #1 於: 2024-02-22 08:45:20 »

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/856662-askar-frp-and-phq-what-is-the-difference/


FRA are faster. PHQ are slower. So the 65mm phq is slower (but longer focal length) than the 300 FRA.


The longer, slower telescopes are easier to make in terms of optical quality,
 so basically the phq 65 is slower and longer and the FRA is shorter and faster.
« 最後編輯時間: 2024-02-22 08:46:52 由 peter » 已記錄

請連署支持翠峰天文科技觀星園區

http://campaign.tw-npo.org/campaign//sign.php?id=2009113019034900
peter
正式會員
超星系團
******
文章: 51833



« 回覆文章 #2 於: 2025-12-15 11:28:12 »

https://familystar.org.tw/index.php?option=com_smf&Itemid=4&topic=39712.new



https://www.cloudynights.com/forums/topic/958892-difference-between-askar-sqa-phq-fra-apo/

SQA Series SQA55 SQA70 SQA85 SQA106

 

PHQ Series 65PHQ 80PHQ 107PHQ 130PHQ 151PHQ

 

FRA Series FRA300pro FRA400 FRA500 FRA600

 

APO Series 103APO 120APO 140APO 160APO 185APO 203APO

 

FMA Series FMA135 FMA180pro FMA180 FMA230

 SQA.  Like Takahashi but cheaper and most likely no "lighthouse" aberrations.  Pricey for the aperture.  But apparently good.  According to YouTube they are the new Redcats...  Probably the best do it all.  But price to FL ratio and aperture is the lowest while quality is the highest.  But long focal lengths is not so much what they do.   

 

- PHQ.  Slower focal ratio, so easier to get well controlled stars.  Bonus points as they come in red and white with ZWO on the side.  It sold me!  Probably the best with longer integration/dark skies/price, trading speed for star shapes if you can accept the trade offs. 

 

- FRA.  Fast(er) and with options (some).  The 500 with a reducer is seriously fast.  But probably worse stars than a PHQ.  But speed is speed.  And Blur Exterminator works.  Best under polluted skies perhaps.

 

-APO.  Standard triplets, so unlike the above 3 "petzval, quad, quintuplets" means dealing with back focus.  Not a big deal if it works out and you aren't bothered by that.  The really big ones are probably to be avoided.  The 103 and 120 are said to be amazing for the price.  But you will be dealing with back focus.  And lurid orange. 

 

- FMA.  Ultra wide. Good and bad.  More like camera lenses but trading better stars for focal ratio (speed). 

 

In seriousness, I have to hand it to Askar.  In a few years they have come up with options for everyone.



SharpStar HNT - Very fast hyperbolic newtonian reflectors

SharpStar EDPH - Fast (reduced to faster than f/5), full frame traditional refractors.

Askar PHQ - Slower Petzval refractors, full frame

Askar FRA - Fast Petzval refractors, full frame

Askar FMA - Fast wide field petzval refractors, APS-C and lens format design

Askar APO - Very traditional triplet refactors. Full frame, requires a flattener/reducer and backspacing. Some very large designs available at a budget price

Askar V - Flexible modular refractor

Askar F - Budget friendly triplet petzval

SharpStar Z - Huh? A fast APS-C Petzval that makes no sense in the line up at all


已記錄

請連署支持翠峰天文科技觀星園區

http://campaign.tw-npo.org/campaign//sign.php?id=2009113019034900
頁: [1]
  列印  
 
前往:  

重要聲明:本論壇是以即時上載留言的方式運作,論壇對所有留言的真實性、完整性及立場等,不負任何法律責任。而一切留言之言論只代表留言者個人意見,並非本會之立場,用戶不應信賴內容,並應自行判斷內容之真實性。於有關情形下,用戶應尋求專業意見。由於本論壇受到「即時上載留言」運作方式所規限,故不能完全監察所有留言,若讀者發現有留言出現問題,請聯絡我們。觀星論壇有權刪除任何留言及拒絕任何人士上載留言,同時亦有不刪除留言的權利。切勿撰寫粗言穢語、誹謗、渲染色情暴力或人身攻擊的言論,敬請自律。本網站保留一切法律權利。
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.17 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!