On this page, I present some information about my previous telescope, Bresser Venus 76/700 AZ Newtonian telescope. It was my very first telescope and I do no longer know when and where (Aldi or Tchibo, I assume...) I purchased it. I sold it in 1999, after I had acquired a Meade EXT-90C.
Note: I sold the telescope in 1999. I therefore can no longer report any experiences with this scope here.
Views of my Bresser Venus 76/700 AZ Newtonian telescope which I found in my photo collection. I no longer owned the telescope when I took the photos. And it is purely by accident that the telescope appears on the photos (sections).
|Venus 76/700 AZ||102||76||100P||114P||P130||150PDS||GSD 680|
|Optical Design||Newton||Maksutov-Cassegrain||Newton (Spherical)||Newton (Parabolic)||Newton
|Newton (Parabolic)||Newton (Parabolic)||Newton (Parabolic)|
|Primary Mirror Diameter||76 mm (3")||102 mm (4")||76 mm (3")||100 mm (4")||114 mm (4.5")||130 mm (5")||150 mm (6")||200 mm (8")|
|Focal Length, Focal Ratio||700 mm
|Resolving Power (arc secs)||1.51"||1.15"||1.51"||1.15"||1.01"||0.9"||0.77"||0.58"|
|Limiting Visual Stellar Magnitude||11.2 mag||12.7 mag||11.2 mag||11.8 mag||12.1 mag||13.3 mag||12.7 mag||14.5 mag|
|Light Gathering Power||117.9||212.3||117.9||204.1||265.2||344.9||459.2||816.3|
|Maximum Practical Visual Power||152 x||204 x||ca. 100 x (152 x)||150 x (200 x)||170 x (228 x)||ca. 195/220 x (260 x)||ca. 225 x (300 x)||ca. 300 x (400 x)|
|Optical Tube Dimensions (diam. x length)||n.a.||10.4 cm x 27 cm||n.a.||11.5 cm x 37 cm*||n.a.||Tube collapsed < 37 cm
|18.2 cm x 69 cm
18 cm x 68 cm*
|23 cm x 115 cm|
|Net Weight Basis||n.a.||---||n.a.||1.3 kg*||1.6 kg||3.1 kg*||--||11.2 kg|
|Net Weight Optical Tube||n.a.||1.9 kg||n.a.||1.2 kg*||3.7 kg||3.25 kg*||5.0/6.0 kg
|Net Weight Complete||n.a.||1.75 kg||2.5*/2.8 kg||5.3 kg||< 6.5 kg or 14 lbs.||appr. 21 kg|
Dark Blue: Telescopes that I still own; italic and dark red: telescopes that I owned; black: for comparison; *) own measurement
The following photos of the moon were taken with a digicam Nikon Coolpix 900s and the Bresser Venus telescope in April and in May 1999. I held the camera simply against the eyepiece of the telescope. This technique has been named "1:50 technique", because you have to take 50 photos in order to get one sharp photo...
I visited the following sky objects with the Meade ETX-90EC:
The Bresser Venus 76/700 AZ telescope was my very first telescope, which I probably acquired at Aldi or Tchibo, because it enticed me to buy it. I have virtually no memories of this telescope, but there are still a few moon shots that I created with it.
If I compare the Bresser Venus telescope with my later "small" Sky-Watcher telescopes, the aperture ratio drops to f/9.2 (compared to f/4 and less ...), as well as the long focal length of 700 mm (versus 300-400 mm). Thus, the telescope achieves significantly higher magnifications for the same eyepieces than the Sky-Watcher telescopes, but is less suitable for observing deep sky objects. Accordingly, it is also advertised as a lunar and planetary telescope. Also note that the aperture ratio of f/9.2 allows to use cheaper eyepieces, which can be an advantage, particularly for beginners.
The currently supplied accessories differs somewhat from the ones that I had acquired, at least as far as the viewfinder is concerned. This is now a red-dot finder. The telescope is advertised as allowing magnifications between 35 x and 525 x. 525 x can indeed be achieved if the the 4 mm eyepiece and the 3 x Barlow lens are considered, but I have no idea what you can still recognize using this combinations. There is, however, also a recommended maximum magnification of 152 x listed in the technical data, but 114 x would be more appropriate... The 4 mm eyepiece appears as a debatable choice to me, because using it, the telescope gets clearly above the maximum recommended magnification (the telescope achieves 175 x with it - instead of 152/114 x). With the Sky-Watcher kit eyepieces of 25 mm and 10 mm and possibly a good 1.5 x Barlow lens, the Venus would certainly be better and more sensibly equipped. Well, I unfortunately (or fortunately ...) I can no longer verify this...