William Optics Pleiades 111 Septuplet APO Refractor with WIFD - Now Available for Pre-order - Forums

I was excited to see that High Point Scientific now has the Pleiades 111 up for pre-order
… until I saw the price.

I knew this would be a "premium" scope, but am I crazy in thinking that $3800 is $500-$1000 too high?

Pros: f/4.8; 111 mm aperture; 530mm focal length, WIFD focuser

Are there any alternatives for this aperture/focal length/ratio? The Askar FRA600 108 mm Quintuplet APO Astrograph looks like a pretty good deal for $2600.

I wouldn't know, as both still are beyond my own accepted price range. I am puzzled, though, that WO asks for nearly 4K while adding inconveniences to their product:

"Please Note: William Optics has implemented a new lens cell design for their impressive new Pleiades line of telescopes. This new design requires a bit of extra attention to ensure the safety and longevity of the optics. William Optics recommends that when not in use the telescope be thoroughly dried, so as to be free of moisture or dew, and then stored in a dry, consistent temperature, space. When storing the telescope they recommend leaving it uncovered while it acclimates to room temperature slowly."

With the Pleiades 68, you could at least argue that you were paying for speed with it being below F/4. It's at least tempting.

However, I would hardly call F/4.8 fast and 3800 USD is a little too crazy for me. Then again, I am judging this as a person who makes use of devils magic (also known as mirrors). Reflectors are looking better and better every day as the price of convenience for refractors gets higher and higher.

Here, you can compare The Pleiades 111 with other common telescope of its class. For reference, 3800 USD is 5000 CAD and these are all listed in CAD.

I think the FRA500/FRA600 are the better buy by a long shot here, but as others have eluded to, whilst I think that refractors are the most beautiful scopes, and the easiest to use in most cases (baring >120mm F/7+ models that are quite long) once I go past 100mm of aperture, I'm looking at newtonians… They are simpler to get optically correct, cost a fraction of the price, are fast enough at F/4 or faster natively and take reducing coma correctors well.

The Sharpstar HNT15028 is WORLDS faster than the WO P68 or P111, has a lot more aperture than either, gaining a higher resolution as a result. likely be lighter than the WO P111 too.

Collimating a modern reflector is not complicated enough to call it a drawback, moreso if the scope is not your travel scope, and not at all if your scope is permanently mounted in an observatory.

So for me AUD $3900 for 111mm f/4.8 vs AUD $2900 for 150mm f/2.8 is absolutely a no brainer…

I love my APO, and I won't get rid of it at any stage as for a travel scope, its perfect.. But my HNT15028, in my opinion, was far better buying than looking at 100mm + refractors.

Hans P. Strifeldt:
I wouldn't know, as both still are beyond my own accepted price range. I am puzzled, though, that WO asks for nearly 4K while adding inconveniences to their product:

"Please Note: William Optics has implemented a new lens cell design for their impressive new Pleiades line of telescopes. This new design requires a bit of extra attention to ensure the safety and longevity of the optics. William Optics recommends that when not in use the telescope be thoroughly dried, so as to be free of moisture or dew, and then stored in a dry, consistent temperature, space. When storing the telescope they recommend leaving it uncovered while it acclimates to room temperature slowly."

You should be doing this will any refractor telescope already... Especially true if you store your scope with the camera attached, as any moisture drawn into the telescope during changes of focus will have nowhere to go, and your optics will be full of mould sooner rather than later.

Their design with the internal focusing likely makes matters worse, as I believe moving elements within the tube would be more likely to draw in outside air, however even with an air or oil spaced doublet refractor, I would never just take my scope off the mount at 4am, put it straight into its storage case and put it away. A dessicant filled end cap is your best bet if you don't have time to let the scope aclimate to the indoor environment, however, I would still very much avoid going straight from cold outside temps to hot inside temps wherever possible, and likewise, in summer, avoid going from hot and humid outside temps into cool airconditioned temps.

Dang. The manufacturer's moisture warning knocks this scope off my list as I have a full-time outdoor observatory.

That is crazy expensive! Asking $3800 for this scope is ridiculous IMO. You can get a Stellarvue SVX080 imaging version with 1x flattener (similar focal length but at f/6) AND .8x reducer (putting you at f/4.8) with a 3 inch Feathertouch focuser, on sale right now for about $3300. Better/premium optics, elite customer service (also located in the USA), rings that are bolted to the OTA, long risers, I mean you are getting so much more for less money, AND you are receiving individually hand crafted optics from the SV team.

WO is out of their minds for the price of this telescope. Unfortunately I bet they will still sell like hot cakes.

They will sell.

I have been truly shocked at the prolificy of the Redcat scopes… yes, they are reasonably priced and appear to be very well constructed, corrected and designed, but boy oh boy is the marketing/branding on them cringy as hell… bright red scopes with little hello kitty looking logos all over them, even cat ears on the top equipment rail..

If I got a redcat scope I'd be taking a grinder to those cat ears and and polish off all the branded/logo emblazoned surfaces back to bare metal.

I reakon your still going to have more fun with a 130pds

I know that it will sell, but not as much as other WO products, because of the glass temperature acclimation thing and the unreasonable price. I also found out the Pleiades 68 on Agena has the same glass temperature acclimation note.

has the same glass temperature acclimation note.

* The fact that they are just starting to list this process now, doesn't mean all scopes shouldn't be treated this way.

I've seen plenty of redcat scopes showing quite extreme fungus growth on the inside, same with a couple of Askar PHQ and FRA scopes. Basically all scopes with front and rear lens cells require proper acclimatisation before storage to avoid the scope internal air remaining moist, and being stores with caps on (ie. Damp, dark environment).

If you want your optics to last, you should be doing this with ALL scopes, especially refractors.

The fact that WO is specifically saying it for these scopes does not mean these scopes are different to others, it most likely means they have dealt with a number of warranty claims over scopes that have had fungus issues in a short amount of time, and have had a difficult time denying these claims as it is essentially lack of care with regard to storing the optical system.. now they are outlining the correct method of storing telescopes in their documentation as a clear guideline to people so when they fail to do so, and the scope gets mould growth, they can simply say "you didn't look after it as the documentation describes.. bad luck".

100%, any sealed optical system with internally moving element groups needs to be properly acclimatised before storage...

Anyone acting like this is new ans specific just to the new WO scopes is plain and simple, incorrect.

That is crazy expensive! Asking $3800 for this scope is ridiculous IMO. You can get a Stellarvue SVX080 imaging version with 1x flattener (similar focal length but at f/6) AND .8x reducer (putting you at f/4.8) with a 3 inch Feathertouch focuser, on sale right now for about $3300. Better/premium optics, elite customer service (also located in the USA), rings that are bolted to the OTA, long risers, I mean you are getting so much more for less money, AND you are receiving individually hand crafted optics from the SV team.

WO is out of their minds for the price of this telescope. Unfortunately I bet they will still sell like hot cakes.

The Pleiades 111 has 31mm more aperture so this is a bizarre comparison. A fairer comparison would be an SVX102 which, as you might guess, is similarly priced to this.

That is crazy expensive! Asking $3800 for this scope is ridiculous IMO. You can get a Stellarvue SVX080 imaging version with 1x flattener (similar focal length but at f/6) AND .8x reducer (putting you at f/4.8) with a 3 inch Feathertouch focuser, on sale right now for about $3300. Better/premium optics, elite customer service (also located in the USA), rings that are bolted to the OTA, long risers, I mean you are getting so much more for less money, AND you are receiving individually hand crafted optics from the SV team.

WO is out of their minds for the price of this telescope. Unfortunately I bet they will still sell like hot cakes.

The Pleiades 111 has 31mm more aperture so this is a bizarre comparison. A fairer comparison would be an SVX102 which, as you might guess, is similarly priced to this.

I do understand why this seems like a bizarre comparison on the surface, but I don’t really think it is.

the difference in FL between them is about 30mm. Let’s call it the same because it hardly makes a real difference. You’re paying an extra $500 for… what, then, exactly? The extra 31mm of aperture puts you at f/4.8 instead of the SV’s f/6 with the 1x reducer. That’s the only benefit I see. You’re missing out on all of the other things I mentioned above and paying more. If the speed is worth it to some people then I understand. But it wouldn’t be to me.

Is there something else I am missing in this equation? If the drop from f/6 to f/4.8 isn’t worth the price to someone, then does the extra aperture make a difference in some other aspect?

That is crazy expensive! Asking $3800 for this scope is ridiculous IMO. You can get a Stellarvue SVX080 imaging version with 1x flattener (similar focal length but at f/6) AND .8x reducer (putting you at f/4.8) with a 3 inch Feathertouch focuser, on sale right now for about $3300. Better/premium optics, elite customer service (also located in the USA), rings that are bolted to the OTA, long risers, I mean you are getting so much more for less money, AND you are receiving individually hand crafted optics from the SV team.

WO is out of their minds for the price of this telescope. Unfortunately I bet they will still sell like hot cakes.

The Pleiades 111 has 31mm more aperture so this is a bizarre comparison. A fairer comparison would be an SVX102 which, as you might guess, is similarly priced to this.

I do understand why this seems like a bizarre comparison on the surface, but I don’t really think it is.

the difference in FL between them is about 30mm. Let’s call it the same because it hardly makes a real difference. You’re paying an extra $500 for… what, then, exactly? The extra 31mm of aperture puts you at f/4.8 instead of the SV’s f/6 with the 1x reducer. That’s the only benefit I see. You’re missing out on all of the other things I mentioned above and paying more. If the speed is worth it to some people then I understand. But it wouldn’t be to me.

Is there something else I am missing in this equation? If the drop from f/6 to f/4.8 isn’t worth the price to someone, then does the extra aperture make a difference in some other aspect?

It translates to nearly twice as much light-gathering ability. Maybe in the realm of 4" refractors the Pleiades is a little overpriced, but comparing it to a fully-loaded 80mm is just not a fair comparison at all.

That is crazy expensive! Asking $3800 for this scope is ridiculous IMO. You can get a Stellarvue SVX080 imaging version with 1x flattener (similar focal length but at f/6) AND .8x reducer (putting you at f/4.8) with a 3 inch Feathertouch focuser, on sale right now for about $3300. Better/premium optics, elite customer service (also located in the USA), rings that are bolted to the OTA, long risers, I mean you are getting so much more for less money, AND you are receiving individually hand crafted optics from the SV team.

WO is out of their minds for the price of this telescope. Unfortunately I bet they will still sell like hot cakes.

The Pleiades 111 has 31mm more aperture so this is a bizarre comparison. A fairer comparison would be an SVX102 which, as you might guess, is similarly priced to this.

I do understand why this seems like a bizarre comparison on the surface, but I don’t really think it is.

the difference in FL between them is about 30mm. Let’s call it the same because it hardly makes a real difference. You’re paying an extra $500 for… what, then, exactly? The extra 31mm of aperture puts you at f/4.8 instead of the SV’s f/6 with the 1x reducer. That’s the only benefit I see. You’re missing out on all of the other things I mentioned above and paying more. If the speed is worth it to some people then I understand. But it wouldn’t be to me.

Is there something else I am missing in this equation? If the drop from f/6 to f/4.8 isn’t worth the price to someone, then does the extra aperture make a difference in some other aspect?

It translates to nearly twice as much light-gathering ability. Maybe in the realm of 4" refractors the Pleiades is a little overpriced, but comparing it to a fully-loaded 80mm is just not a fair comparison at all.

Right. A faster f/ratio. “Twice as much light gathering ability” = a faster f/ratio, no? Personally I would rather save the $500 and have the benefits from the SV at a slower speed, which is not twice as slow - the Pleiades is 1.5x faster, not 2x.

Again, is there something I’m missing? I’m not being rude asking, it is a genuine question. Aside from the f/ratio, what other benefits does it bring to the table?

That is crazy expensive! Asking $3800 for this scope is ridiculous IMO. You can get a Stellarvue SVX080 imaging version with 1x flattener (similar focal length but at f/6) AND .8x reducer (putting you at f/4.8) with a 3 inch Feathertouch focuser, on sale right now for about $3300. Better/premium optics, elite customer service (also located in the USA), rings that are bolted to the OTA, long risers, I mean you are getting so much more for less money, AND you are receiving individually hand crafted optics from the SV team.

WO is out of their minds for the price of this telescope. Unfortunately I bet they will still sell like hot cakes.

The Pleiades 111 has 31mm more aperture so this is a bizarre comparison. A fairer comparison would be an SVX102 which, as you might guess, is similarly priced to this.

I do understand why this seems like a bizarre comparison on the surface, but I don’t really think it is.

the difference in FL between them is about 30mm. Let’s call it the same because it hardly makes a real difference. You’re paying an extra $500 for… what, then, exactly? The extra 31mm of aperture puts you at f/4.8 instead of the SV’s f/6 with the 1x reducer. That’s the only benefit I see. You’re missing out on all of the other things I mentioned above and paying more. If the speed is worth it to some people then I understand. But it wouldn’t be to me.

Is there something else I am missing in this equation? If the drop from f/6 to f/4.8 isn’t worth the price to someone, then does the extra aperture make a difference in some other aspect?

It translates to nearly twice as much light-gathering ability. Maybe in the realm of 4" refractors the Pleiades is a little overpriced, but comparing it to a fully-loaded 80mm is just not a fair comparison at all.

Looking at the specs of the SV, they state that its native FL is 480mm. When I image with mine, I get 510mm of FL. 480mm to 530mm at f6 and f4.8 is a larger difference than I initially though since my SV performs differently than what is stated on the website, so I do see how this comparison becomes more out of place. I think a better comparison would be of the SV 102, which with the .74 reducer puts you at the same focal length, at f/5.1, at the same price.

That being said, there are still many more telescopes I would buy at the same or lower price range than the Pleiades, and it is still clearly overpriced compared to its competition unless one really values the WIFD design.

I was referring to 111mm vs 80mm. The larger aperture will capture finer details and, at this f-ratio, in less time than the smaller scope. Many, myself included, would pay $500 extra for that.

There's nothing particularly surprising about this. Virtually all brands, Stellarvue included, have a big price jump from 80mm to ~100mm.

And honestly, in response to other replies to this thread, I'm puzzled by the notion that this scope is overpriced. If the Pleiades 111 is overpriced then most 4" refractors are overpriced. Let's just compare it to an Esprit 100 - $3,210 retail, a smaller aperture (slight, but enough to make a difference), no built-in tilt plate, and a traditional focuser which, if we take WO's word, is more prone to sag than the WO internal focuser. And while Askar/Sharpstar/ZWO is a lot cheaper, I think we can pretty safely place WO above the Sharpstar rebrands in terms of QC and customer support.

I was referring to 111mm vs 80mm. The larger aperture will capture finer details and, at this f-ratio, in less time than the smaller scope. Many, myself included, would pay $500 extra for that.

There's nothing particularly surprising about this. Virtually all brands, Stellarvue included, have a big price jump from 80mm to ~100mm.

And honestly, in response to other replies to this thread, I'm puzzled by the notion that this scope is overpriced. If the Pleiades 111 is overpriced then most 4" refractors are overpriced. Let's just compare it to an Esprit 100 - $3,210 retail, a smaller aperture (slight, but enough to make a difference), no built-in tilt plate, and a traditional focuser which, if we take WO's word, is more prone to sag than the WO internal focuser. And while Askar/Sharpstar/ZWO is a lot cheaper, I think we can pretty safely place WO above the Sharpstar rebrands in terms of QC and customer support.

I would say most will compare it to the Askar/Sharpstar/ZWO scopes that are all basically the same but rebranded, which is why it would be considered overpriced. WO is just another brand of Chinese glass - maybe with better customer support. But I’ve owned and returned/sold a handful of Askar and WO telescopes, and in terms of optics might as well have been the same. The only thing I could say in favor of WO would be the machining and physical quality of the scopes. I was unhappy with the optics in all of them.

The Esprit’s certainly have better optical quality than anything WO puts out. QC and support, I’ve no clue.

Ryan Faulkner:
I was excited to see that High Point Scientific now has the Pleiades 111 up for pre-order
... until I saw the price.

I knew this would be a "premium" scope, but am I crazy in thinking that $3800 is $500-$1000 too high?

Pros: f/4.8; 111 mm aperture; 530mm focal length, WIFD focuser

Are there any alternatives for this aperture/focal length/ratio? The Askar FRA600 108 mm Quintuplet APO Astrograph looks like a pretty good deal for $2600.

https://www.tecnosky.eu/index.php/apo-sld-110-f-4-8-fcd100-owl-pro-series-tecnosky.html

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p15820_TS-Optics-110-mm-f-4-8-Flatfield-APO-Refractor-with-FDC100-Triplet-Objective.html

The price is even crazier when you find out Askar is coming out with a 185mm APO for $4800.

https://agenaastro.com/askar-185-apo-triplet-refractor-telescope.html

Alex Nicholas:
100%, any sealed optical system with internally moving element groups needs to be properly acclimatised before storage...

You're saying for lenses too? How about a weather sealed zoom lens? I have taken a $2100 lens outside in very cold temp and after a while took it back inside the warm house; it was like a 30 degree Fahrenheit difference (or something like that; I remember my lens objective glass being as cold as ice outside, and my house is around 70 degrees Fahrenheit) without any sort of temp acclimation and I was thinking that was okay.

A weather sealed lens will do better, however, I still wouldn't store my camera lenses without humidity control. Especially if going from extremely dewy conditions, into climate controlled environments.

Take a look on ebay at the number of used lenses with mould/fungus spores in them… its not a freak occurrence, it happens when moisture/damp air finds its way into the optical system, then it's sealed up with its end caps and stored in a relatively warm place… like in a case, photo backpack etc… mould and fungus requires 3 things. Moisture, darkness, and warmth.

Acclimatising your optics denies it the darkness, as you would leave your caps off while acclimatising/drying, and, if you use a bag of silica gel inserted into the focuser tube, you deny it the moisture too.

I have a dehumidifing cabinet that is essentially a magnetically sealed box (much like a fridge) with an electronic desicant heater inside it. My optics are stored in this cabinet, and it is temperature controlled at 24⁰ C, and maintains around 10-15% humidity. Compared to outside the cabinet averaging 40~60% humidity.

@Alex Nicholas Thanks for the info.

I found these cheap silica gel packets in large quantities in case anyone is interested https://www.amazon.com/s?k=silica+gel+packets+bulk&crid=3OPF18ZM8U75M&sprefix=silica+gel+packets+bulk%2Caps%2C129&ref=nb_sb_noss_1

Interesting, but it is the same scope as the TS 110 f/4.8 FLAT and the Tecnosky Owl Pro 110 f/4.8, where the 4 element reducer is optically matched to the triplet. Performs, apparently, almost as well as the AP 110, some have said.
Curious thing is that the Tecnosky will no longer be available apparently, due to a contract issue. Not sure how many of the TS ones will be available either, but WO seem to have that design (using their usual 1mm extra in aperture and 0.1 reduction in f-ratio marketing).
The Astro-tech version was also cancelled for the same reason, the 110EDA. Wonder did WO negotiate the exclusive contract or what else happened? The TS, AT and Tecnosky versions have limited users, but seems to be very good scope for full frame.
Remains to be seen how vapour ingress local to the triplet affects the inner element long term, might not be an issue if a dew heater is always used and kept on until the scope is dried, perhaps?
They are a bit spendy though, on price…

I thought the TS one is F4.8 after adding the 0.8x corrector, while the WO is F3.8. Are they really the same? Or I mis-understood something?