Follow @scope_views

 

William Optics 110 FLT (TEC) Review

FLT-110 with dew-shield extended (see end photo for retracted).

 

The Telescope Engineering Company moved from Kiev to Golden in Colorado some thirty years back and started making high-end Maksutovs. But by the late 1990s, TEC had flexed into apochromatic refractors, making their own triplet lenses, often with a fluorite centre element; their own high-quality tubes and focusers too. If you think of a cross between Astro Physics and LZOS you’ll get the idea.

 

TEC specialise in larger triplet apochromats up to 250mm (10”), but TEC have produced smaller APOs too. Perhaps the most famous is their 140 (reviewed here). At one time, TEC also made their own 110, called the Eclipse. It was by all accounts a fantastic little scope – one of that rare breed of APOs larger than 4” you can carry onto a plane – but sadly TEC discontinued it for reasons unknown.

 

Meanwhile, the FLT-110 on review here is the familiar William Optics tube and focuser, but with a 110mm TEC triplet objective replacing the usual Chinese one. So this is a budget Eclipse, then? Nope. This objective is F6.5 (vs F5.6 for the Eclipse) and the centre element is ED glass rather than the Eclipse’s fluorite.

 

Still, this is a very interesting scope. Why? Because scopes like this are rare and most alternatives – TEC’s Eclipse, AP’s Traveler and their new 110 GTX etc - will cost as much or even more.

 

At A Glance

Telescope

William Optics FLT110 TEC

Lens Design

Oil spaced, ED glass triplet

Aperture

110mm

Focal Length

715mm

Focal Ratio

F6.5

Length

575mm/22.6” (553mm/21.8” w/ visual back unthreaded),

Tube diameter

115mm (4.5”)

Weight

5.96Kg tube, 7.32Kg incl. rings, dovetail

 Data from me.

 

Design and Build

The tube and focuser are typical of William Optics (i.e. Chinese) fare from a decade or more ago, a lot like their Megrez scopes. So we have a heavy-duty CNC-made Crayford focuser with a 3” drawtube, a rotator and a flexible back threaded onto a nicely finished tube with a sliding dew-shield and that flashy gold lens ring.

 

Back in the day, WO made other scopes with objectives from LZOS, LOMO and TEC alongside their Chinese ones, in small batches when they were available. All such scopes are likely to be better than their Chinese-lensed equivalents, but cheaper than the same lenses in scopes in high-end tubes from APM, A&M and Stellarvue.

 

The F6.5 FLT-110 with its closest LZOS counterpart – the TMB 115/805 (F7). Note that the TMB is much longer in use with its drawtube extended.

 

Optics

To recap, the objective is what makes this different from most William Optics scopes of the era. Rather than the F7 Chinese-made objective found in most FLT-110s, it is a US-made F6.5 110mm oil-spaced triplet.

 

TEC (unlike, say, Astro Physics) employ fluorite for the centre element of many of their lenses, including newer versions of both their triplet and doublet 140 and the superficially similar Eclipse 110. However, this objective employs ED glass for its centre element. I know this thanks to testing it with a laser which vanishes in fluorite, but not here. However, I don’t know which ED glass TEC used.

 

According to WO, this objective was optimised for the green 546 nm e-line, roughly where the human eye is most sensitive. This was the standard approach a quarter of a century ago, when the FLT-110 was designed (Telescope Optics, Rutten and Van Venrooij, section 6.2).

 

However, looking at the published crossings, we can see that the 436 nm violet g-line is less well corrected than a modern fluorite doublet (Takahashi’s FC-100DZ). This is not an entirely fair comparison, because the FC-100DZ is F8 (vs F6.5) and employs a special dispersion flint, but it does suggest the FLT-110 might not be up to the best current standards for digital imaging and so it proves (see the astrophotography section below).

 

Published crossings for the FLT-110 and FC-100DZ, altered by me to the roughly the same scale.

 

Even though this is not a fluorite Eclipse objective, it has a similar artisanal build, with a beautifully machined and anodised, collimatable cell and traces of handwriting around the edges of the glass, much like an LZOS objective. However, also like objectives from LZOS and LOMO, it is a heavy cell too.

 

It’s worth commenting on oil-spacing, which is rarely encountered in recent refractors. In this lens, like say the AP Traveler’s, the three elements are separated by a thin layer of oil, with similar refractive index to the glasses, rather than air. This has several advantages:

·       No air spaces means nowhere for moisture to get trapped and cause problems like fungus

·       The inner surfaces of the elements don’t need to be as finely polished

·       With all elements in contact, cool-down should be faster

·       No glass-air boundaries should mean less scatter and better transmissivity

·       With no foil spacers to slip if jolted, the objective is potentially more rugged

There are a few possible disadvantages, however. One is oil leakage – by no means common but not unheard of either. Another is that – allegedly, I’m unconvinced - the objective may need to be stored flat to perform to its maximum potential. The third is more of a design constraint - all the lens surfaces need to be spherical.

 

Finally, this may be an older lens now, but it is multi-coated and those coatings look excellent.

 

 

 

Laser reveals the centre crown element is ED glass, not fluorite.

 

Tube

As I said, the tube and focuser are like a big Megrez 90. Build quality is very high and both the cell and focuser thread onto the tube (unlike the TMB above) - good for orthogonality and collimation.

 

The tube is finished in textured powder coat, not paint. Shinier and thinner than the stuff on a Tele Vue or Astro Physics, it doesn’t seem as robust judging from the scratches. I’ve personally got used to the signature WO gold accents on the lens ring and focuser (though I have a friend who dislikes them and I kinda get that too).

 

The OTA is quite compact at 553mm/21.8” without the visual back, almost the same as the (bulkier) TMB 115/805 you see above (and reviewed here), though that scope needs its drawtube extending a long way in use. Yes, but is the OTA small enough to carry on board? After all, that’s one of the main reasons for buying a scope like this. The answer is maybe: it’s just at the limit, depending on your airline, but see notes on the case below.

 

The FLT-110 is fairly heavy at ~6Kg (7.3Kg including the rings and plate), again almost the same weight as the TMB 115/805. Given its balance point, blame that triplet objective.

 

Focuser

The focuser is a large CNC Crayford unit typical of older William Optics scopes. It’s smooth, precise and almost free of image shift, has a flexible thread-on visual back, a rotator and even a scale, plenty of travel too. All good then? Not quite.

 

The problem is that Crayford focusers tend to rack out on their own under heavy loads like cameras (or large eyepieces come to that). A partial solution is a tension adjuster that locks the drawtube, but even this can’t fix the problem of slippage when actually focusing. In this case there isn’t any kind of lock or tension adjust that I can find.

 

For imaging with a heavy camera (and the lens is well up to it) you might consider replacing the focuser.

 

 

 

 

Mounting

The scopes’ short length is in its favour and it’s very stable on my mid-size Vixen SX (see photos at the start and end of this review), but it’s just too heavy for smaller mounts, especially once you add a diagonal and eyepiece or camera (folks often forget this when thinking about maximum load).

 

Accessories

The FLT-110 comes with CNC rings and a case (that unfortunately isn’t quite carry-on size).

 

I should point out again that a 4” plus APO you can travel with is rare. If that’s important to you, you could have a hard case made that just fits the tube length-wise without much protective padding (with the visual back unthreaded there’s only about 7mm to spare on BA, for example). See the example I had made by Thomann for the TMB 115 below.

 

Could you get away with the standard case? Just maybe, depending on the airline and how full the flight is. But the risk is that you have to check it at the gate (eek)!

 

 

 

Custom instrument case for the TMB 115 with minimal padding lengthwise for compactness.

 

In Use – Daytime

My usual test of viewing branches in silhouette at 100x yields almost no false colour and photos show the same. But you’ll notice some violet bloat in the star images than other well-corrected scopes. What’s going on?

 

This is likely the difference between an objective designed for visual (and perhaps emulsion) compared to one designed for digital imaging. Visual wavelengths are well corrected; the far violet, where a sensor is more sensitive than the eye, less so.

 

Slightly over-exposed branches show minimal false colour.

 

In Use – Astrophotography

For imaging, see the notes on the focuser above. I had no trouble with a DSLR, however. Coverage at full-frame is good with only minor vignetting in the corners. Field flatness is good for F6.5 too (better than a typical doublet of this focal ratio), but you would need a flattener for wide-field imaging.

 

Despite good correction for false colour for visual use, the B-class stars in the Pleiades show more violet bloat than the optically similar LZOS 115 F7, confirming that the g-line might not be as well corrected as I’d like for imaging, even though this is a very well corrected objective visually. The stars show a bit of spiking here too, see note on cooldown and star test below.

 

High optical quality and a well-corrected field make for a good snap of the Moon at this modest focal length.

 

Pleiades: unprocessed full-frame, 60s ISO 3200 Canon EOS 6D MkII.

Comparison of Alcyone and Merope: WO FLT-110 (left), TMB 115/805 (right), both 30s ISO 3200 Canon EOS 6D MkII.

Moon: FLT-110, Canon EOS 6D MkII.

 

In Use – Observing the Night Sky

 

General Observing Notes

The scope is very front-heavy due to that TEC triplet. This means you have to extend the dew-shield and then slide the OTA backwards when you’re mounting it in the rings.

 

The dual speed Crayford focuser has a very fine inner micro focus knob - smooth and precise, with no image shift and well up to getting perfect focus on the fast and snappy optic. The rotator is useful visually to get the right eyepiece position, but a bit stiff under load.

 

Overall, the focuser feels stable with its hefty drawtube and smooth action, but shows signs of wanting to rack out with a 2” diagonal and a T6 Nagler (not an especially heavy eyepiece). I noted some slippage on the coarse knob too. Typical of Crayfords, this would be problem for heavy cameras or eyepieces, unless I can find a tension adjuster!

 

Cool Down

Oil-spaced triplets are supposed to cool faster than air-spaced ones, but fast is relative here. Compared with a doublet, it’s slow. I could still see tube currents in the star test after ~1 hour: much the same as the air-cooled 115mm triplet in my TMB 115/805. See note on the star test.

 

Star Test

After an hour of cooldown there was still some pinching in the star test (note the slightly spiky stars above), so I left the scope to cool in the car for longer. Thereafter, the star test (on Pollux) was very good: nicely concentric, evenly illuminated, sharp rings either side of focus at 143x with a 5mm Nagler, the outside-focus outer ring just a touch more diffuse. The in-focus Airy Disk was excellent too, with no sign of decentring or miscollimation.

 

The Moon

At 204x with a 3.5mm Nagler, I had detailed views of Mare Crisium with lots of craterlets on the smooth lava plains of the floor, the curious hills near the far rim, odd-shaped Proclus with its breached wall and sweeping ray. Moving across to large crater Petavius, I explored its unusual clock-hand rille and the complex of central peaks. Finally, I swapped to the 3mm setting on a 3-6 Nagler Zoom giving 238x to investigate the bizarre pair of craters that are the Messier twins, one elongate and with a striped floor of smooth lava as if whatever caused it grazed the surface at a low angle.

 

Stopping exploring and returning to reviewing, I noted just a trace of false colour focusing through the bright limb at 200x+.

 

Jupiter

I had a very good view of Jupiter at 143x with a 5mm Nagler: the polar hood with delicate banding, thickness variations in both equatorial belts, and one very obvious dark storm in the NEB. I also spotted the dark shadow of Ganymede in transit. There was no false colour that I could detect.

 

On another occasion, I watched a shadow transit of Europa as it crossed to Jupiter’s limb and exited, at 143x and 204x with both 5mm and 3.5mm T6 Naglers. The bright disk of Europa was clearly picked out against the creamy cloud belts behind and distant from the small dark spot of its shadow – majestic stuff! Predictably, I got just a little more contrast and sharpness out of the 5mm TMB Monocentric – my favourite planetary eyepiece.

 

Mars

I caught the Red Planet at an altitude of about 45° and an angular size of 14.5” a week before the (admittedly unfavourable) 2025 opposition. At 179x with the 4mm setting on a Nagler Zoom, the FLT-110 showed a sharply defined gibbous planet, with no softness and just a trace (really) of red blur outside focus and shimmering into the seeing in focus – similar to an F8 fluorite doublet and perhaps just a little worse than a typical F6-F7 LZOS triplet.

 

I was able to pick up the bright north polar cap, the large dark patch of Mare Acidalium on the western limb, the darker region around both poles and a dark spike reaching up towards the centre of the disk that I mistook for Syrtis major but was actually Margaritifer Sinus.

 

Deep Sky
The Pleiades looked lovely with lots of hazy-blue nebulosity (the 21% extra light-gathering over a 100mm APO noticeable here), with nicely glittery, pin-point stars. The cluster was perfectly framed by a 19mm Panoptic giving 38x, stars towards the edge of the field remaining sharp and well-corrected. Stars at the field edge are even quite sharp in simple eyepieces like Plössls, with much less distortion than a doublet of similar f-ratio – an advantage of triplet objectives like this one.

 

I enjoyed sweeping for clusters in the Milky Way around Cassiopea too – still fun and easy given the wide field at this focal length.

 

Easy doubles like Castor and Rigel were trivial splits, given well-corrected stars with small Airy disks.

 

Summary

Even though it’s an old scope now, the TEC-lenses FLT-110 is rare and desirable, especially as a high-performance portable visual scope. Why? Because even today there are few scopes around with similar quality and specs. It is one of the largest-aperture (just about) carry-on scopes and likely (much) cheaper than a TEC 110 Eclipse (or the old AP Traveler, let alone the new AP Starfire 110 GTX).

 

For imaging, the objective is fast for its aperture, well corrected and with good coverage, but produces a bit more violet-bloat than a modern objective might. The main issue is the focuser, though. Like many Crayford focusers, it is smooth and precise, but can rack out under load and doesn’t appear to have a tension adjuster. It works well for a basic DSLR, but maybe not for a heavier imaging setup.

 

When fitted with a TEC objective, the FLT-110 is a premium APO in a rare and desirable format on the cheap. Highly recommended, especially as a portable visual scope.

 

 

 

Home