Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_solar_25_winners.thumb.jpg.fe4e711c64054f3c9486c752d0bcd6f2.jpg

Dunkster

Members
  • Content Count

    1,847
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Dunkster

  1. If portability is a consideration, the C8 on AVX is a decent combination and not very heavy. Any combination involving a C11 gets heavy fast the EQ6 to hold the C11 weighs more than the C8+AVX combined.
  2. Following on from all of the above, I upgraded my 6SE with the ota from an 8SE and it's a neat upgrade path. It is pushing the mount though a bit more, but gentle movements on the focus knob and not setting up on a hard surface can make a big difference to the vibration from the extra weight. The 8 gives the mount a bit of a Dob hole though even with the tube slid all the way up. The 8 has a lot to offer though - 90% more light gathering area than the 6, which is great for DSOs - but planetary wise I've had both tubes out a couple of times now and struggled to really tell them apart on Saturn (British weather!) The 6 has a lot to offer
  3. Wow Graham, what a cracker! Really gives a sense of scale Look forward to your follow-on with darker skies
  4. Gary, the stock finder doesn't use the standard shoe so you'll probably need something like this: http://www.telescope...s?ensembleId=41 The finder shoes for SCTs have the screw holes a little further apart than the shoes for other scopes. Oh and welcome to SGL btw
  5. I'd second John's suggestion...you've got a tracking mount, so if you don't need your glasses to correct for anything else, use the focus travel on your C11 and try one of the ortho types. You don't absolutely need to spend lots with an SCT but you can tell the difference between mass and quality glass in one. It's one half of your telescope.
  6. Typically, my guide has been that if I don't stand to save 25-30% after the 25% or so for duty + vat have been added, then it wasn't worth the hassle.
  7. This past week it's been clouds, rain, more clouds, torrential rain, clouds and just to make a change today, clouds so plenty of time for sleeping so long as it doesn't try to repeat this pattern around new Moon
  8. Their pricing does seem to be all over the map, although I appreciate this may be somewhat distorted by whatever the local importer/distributor dictates. In the US for example, even with the sale they're selling for $30-50 more (depending on FL) than the XW, where the normal Delos price would be $370. That probably explains why XWs have dominated over on CN for so long round these parts, I can't even find a supplier of the XWs let alone a price, but the Delos (and most other TV stuff) sells for only a small margin above the US$ prices, allowing for a little exchange rate wiggle room.
  9. Thanks for this one faulksy will add this to my list for my next session, Sagittarius is bang overhead here at this time of year
  10. Pretty much anything that reaches the maximum field stop for a 1.25" eyepiece (27mm) will give you the widest field of view with the reducer. As Olly said, you can go wider still with a C11 by using longer focal length 2" eyepieces without the reducer... Something like the LVW 42mm or Panoptic 41mm or a 55mm plossl.
  11. Sounds like you got a dud, do you have any opportunity to try it in another scope? None of mine behave like that in the ZS (f/5.9), just lovely wide pinpoint views....though because my other scope(s) are SCTs with much longer focal lengths, the shortest ES82 I have is the 8.8...I then use the Baader 2.25x Barlow with this to surprisingly great effect in the little scope The 100 degree view seems to be something very subject to taste. Personally, when I got my first I couldn't see that it was any wider than the 82, but as I've used it more and more I find it's slowly giving up the wider view, until recently when I discovered I could see the field stop! Where's 120 degrees when you need it
  12. Looks like plenty of room for a couple more A nice flex tube with a cushion on the lid could double up as a desk chair for your wife, everyone's happy
  13. Btw, the cynic in me questions the reason for the sale...if they were already selling like hot cakes before, why reduce the price? I've not seen one remotely negative review, the only hint is about eye placement, and that's not enough to scare off die hard ocularholics or maybe their original sticker price was just too high when the XW already exists (in fewer FL) at less £/$...
  14. The longest they could achieve within the specific design parameters of the Delos range. They quote a field stop of 21.2mm, which leaves some ways to go. Of course, the 24mm Panoptic holds the fort at maximum field stop for a 1.25" EP why try to beat that?
  15. Nice one Malc, glad to hear the prob with your focuser has been resolved and hope the clouds part so you can get out under the (albeit bright) summer sky soon
  16. Yeah that'd need some kind of back yard obsy
  17. I'm just disappointed there's no "order in the next 1 hour 43 minutes for delivery on Friday 21st June"
  18. Anything is possible but the only cure for ultra wide-itis is to look through an Ethos it also helps the bank balance too because it curbs any further spending on the 82s (that's my excuse story and I'm sticking to it )
  19. The C8 is a lot of scope in a small, portable package. I'm travelling with mine at the moment and so glad I brought it rather than a smaller one
  20. Keith beat me to it, but the C8 is sold for both Alt/Az and EQ mounting, so there are opposing holes for dovetail and multiple holes for a finder in suitable locations for either way of mounting.
  21. Not that there haven't been some fine suggestions so far, but it looks to me that by limiting yourself to options where the heritage focuser doesn't buckle under the strain is doing your observing eye a disservice... time to upgrade to something a little more robust perhaps Just a thought...
  22. I've used my C6 on my mini porta which is pushing it weight wise! Keeping the tripod low and using the slow motion controls gently made it usable. I'd rather have it than no scope. I didn't really go to really high power, but on something a little more sturdy it should be no problem. The key is a good finder. With regards to light grasp... the bigger the better. From my old light polluted suburb I had used a 127 Mak, a C6 and a C8 and the C6 would resolve a number of stars of M13, the C8 resolved a whole lot more. Obviously, the results from a dark site would be much different. With regards to planetary, I'd hazard a guess that the seeing would play as much a part of deciding what you see as the aperture, at least between the C5 and C6.
  23. Congrats on your new EP! Hope you get first light soon It's been clear here every night recently, but last night it hammered it down with rain. Maybe just maybe it'll cut you a break
  24. Oh those trolls on t'internet Alan know no bounds
  25. I very much doubt that but if you regard the optical system as two halves... the eyepiece and the telescope... then it'd be unfair to keep upgrading one half without paying some attention to the other
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.