Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

johninderby

Beyond the Event Horizon
  • Posts

    15,408
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    78

Posts posted by johninderby

  1. Pretty close on lunar / planetary although the 125 having the wider fov is better for other things of course. A better all rounder. The CC6 being a short OTA works on a lighter mount as well so better for grab’n’go.

    Purely for lunar / planetary the CC is a great buy. On Jupiter / Saturn might change my mind next summer when they’re better placed.

    • Thanks 1
  2. 5 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

    My favourite chapters was the one on Equipment. Patrick was always disparaging about pillar a claw mounts (quite rightly, although I don’t think I’d actually seen one), invariably describing them as steady as either a jelly (in this book) or a blancmange. I loved this idea. 
    Strange no mention of Taks, though. 

    Dated of course but still fascinating. If only Patrick was still here to present Sky@Night. 😢

    • Like 1
  3. Having had two C8s I’m quite familiar with how they perform. With the CC find it’s a bit sharper on axis with a bit better contrast Just has the edge optically. The CC build quality is extremely good. Great fit and finish. When I sold another scope recently the buyer had a look at the CC and was impressed by the build quality and he owned a Tak Mewlon.

    As it’s used for lunar / planetary diffraction spikes are not a problem and although this should degrade the sharpness and contrast it still has the edge over the C8.

    No scope is perfect of course but the CC is a great compromise and very happy with it. 

    I have the 6” CC as well as my grab’n’go setup.

     

     

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.