Flame Nebula

1 minute ago, Flame Nebula said:

That's the kind of sentence I like to see. 🙂

Sorry, I think my last question went global. What mount do you use? 

Just now, Flame Nebula said:

That's the kind of sentence I like to see. 🙂

What mount do you use? 

32 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

I have zero regrets with my C9.25. Brilliant scope 👍🏻

That's the kind of sentence I like to see. 🙂

27 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

The only regret I have is not discovering Ethos eyepieces earlier in life. Lovely wide fields, allowing plenty of drift time in undriven scopes. They are also superb optically. I’m from the generation that thought fewer elements were better, especially for high power work. Many modern eyepieces with their improved coatings overcome this past worry. The Ethos range represents the pinnacle.

Ethos eyepiece. I'll have to investigate those. 👍

18 minutes ago, John said:

I got over ambitious when I bought an Istar 6 inch F/12 refractor. By the time I had found a mount and tripod tall enough and strong enough to deal with the really long and heavy tube I had a setup which weighed over 50kg and with no observatory it needed to be assembled and disassembled each time it was used. Not really a practical proposition, unfortunately. I learned a lot from that project though and it was not too expensive so not a disaster by any means. If I go for a 6 inch refractor again I will stick to a focal ratio of around F/8 I think.

Another one that did not work out quite as planned was a Meade Lightbridge 12 inch dobsonian. Again it was not expensive particularly but the overall weight of the scope and mount made setup and tear down hard work and once set up the scope could not be moved around the garden easily at all, which is a disadvantage with the obstacles I have around my horizons. Having learned from that experience, my next 12 inch scope was based on an Orion Optics tube assembly and with the custom made plywood base, weighed about 20kg less than the Meade Lightbridge 12 - around the same as a chinese made 10 inch dobsonian, so somewhat more manageable.

Having owned dozens of scopes and mounts over the years, having a couple that did not quite work out is not too much hardship I feel and I did learn some lessons from those experiences 🙂

 

Thanks to everyone so far. I guess I'm testing the water here, as I've been saving up for nearly three years (yes the old fashioned way of buying something 😆), and I've got the C9.25 in mind. Fortunately no one has used this scope in any rgrets(so far). 

Hi everyone, 

I would like to hear stories about regrets after buying your scope and/or mount? These can include anything. Example my biggest regret was buying a scope without tracking many years ago. A lesson I learned and my next scope will have it, so I can enjoy high mag views without spending most of the time keeping the object in view. 

So, anything really. Buying too small a scope, or too large? Etc. 

Thanks 

Mark

3 hours ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

But not too heavy for the Evolution mount? I guess it depends on what you are trying to achieve: visual, planetary imaging, or deep space imaging.

Hi, my plan (if it can be called that), is to be able to do planetary AP and visual with the sct, and dso AP with my existing 80ED, which I bagged for £330 off Ebay a few years ago. If the evolution mount that comes with the scope can suffice, then I 'only' need to get the minimum mount for the 80ed,which I suspect is an heq5. Alternatively, I could go for sct OTA only, and get the Az-eq6, which could actually handle both scopes simultaneously. 

18 hours ago, Owmuchonomy said:

Yes, I had this set up in the past; C9.25 on an HEQ5.  All that did was make me buy an AZ-EQ6!  It's too heavy for an HEQ5.

Hi, Have you ever compared the view through your C9.25 compared to a 10" dobsonian, with respect to planets? I see mixed reports, some saying the newt is sharper and has better contrast, others saying the best view of jupiter that they've seen was in a C9.25. A long time ago, I had a 9" dob. I couldn't use high mag on it without saturn flying off view! But, many years ago, I had an opportunity to look at saturn through, what I think may have been an 11 inch sct (it was 30 years ago and in Ayers Rock, Australia) and the view of saturn can only be described as superb! Far superior to the 9" dob. Admittedly the latter was in the UK, so seeing likely not as good as the outback! 

On 04/02/2024 at 16:07, Cosmic Geoff said:

Planetary imaging does not require the ultimate in mount stability.  It's nice if the mount does not jitter about when you are trying to focus, but the planetary images I took with a Celestron SE 6/8 mount were often just as good as those taken with a CPC800.

Hi Cosmic Geoff 

Yes, indeed the other option is to go with the mount set up provided for the nexstar evolution, and use that for planetary AP and visual, and get a separate heq5 for the ed80. I've seen tons of good images taken with the ed80 /heq combo. 

On 04/02/2024 at 15:02, Mr Spock said:

Works perfectly on an EQ6. I don't think something lighter would be of much use.

Hi Mr Spock. Thanks. 

I did tinker with the idea of the Az-eq6, but they're very expensive. 

On 04/02/2024 at 14:19, PeterCPC said:

If it's any help, I used my C9.25 quite successfully for AP on my AVX mount. I also use the AVX for AP using 80Ed and Esprit 100 with no problems.

Hi Peter, that is helpful. I guess that the other useful thing is that StarSense can also be used with the celestron mounts. 

Hi 

Does anyone use this combination? I'm thinking about a mount I could get that I could use for both an 80ED for dso AP, and for visual use plus planetary AP with a C9.25. I would like to avoid buying an expensive mount like the Az-eq6, as that would be £500 extra and overkill for an 80ED. Any experiences would be most appreciated. 

Thanks 

Mark

16 minutes ago, mikeDnight said:

For me, my favourite scope of all time and the one that's shown my more than any other, is the Takahashi FC100DC.  I've observed with pretty much every major scope type and aperture upto 30" aperture, but because that little 4" F7.4 apo was so light and easy to use, and was all but unaffected by atmospheric seeing as larger apertures can be, it demanded I use it on every clear night. I suppose a smaller scope that you use a lot will always show you more than a big monster that's rarely used. The FC100DC gave some of the finest, most detailed views of Mars I've ever seen, despite the planet being extremely low in UK skies in 2016. Saturn and Jupiter have been equally beautiful and detailed, but it's the Moon that never fails to leave me in awe. With a binocular viewer the mountains appear to tower in 3D and although resolution is not affected, the use of both eyes certainly boosts definition giving the impression you're using a larger aperture, and hence fine detail becomes easier to see. Even on deep sky the 100mm refractor delivered some impressive views of star clusters and nebulae, as well as some brighter galaxies. 

Below is the FC100DC and a few sketches of Mars from 2016.

Hi Mike, thank you. I'm interested in what your maximum magnification can be, before blurring occurs? 

2 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

I was lucky enough to have excellent seeing the first time I used my 12" on the moon. To have the surface razor sharp at over x450 was something I never expected and will never forget.

Hi Mr Spock, is that a 12" dobsonian? 

Hi everyone, 

I would like to know which scope has given you the most pleasurable experience, when you looked through it for the first time, and why? For me, it was seeing saturn through a large sct (I think it was a C11) when I went to an astronomy evening in Ayers Rock many years ago. Fantastic view, but whether I'd ever see anything like that in our UK seeing, is doubtful. Looking forward to your experiences. 

Thanks 

Mark