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.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by seiko

  1. For sale Mewlon 210 (as new) perfect condition cosmetically and optically. I purchased this new from Ian King and have used it less than a dozen times. Collimation seems pretty much perfect and views are stunning but as I'm trimming my equipment in an effort to purchase a large refractor this will have to go. Original packaging and paper work present. £1995 Collection only from Ipswich but can meet Colchester or Chelmsford if that helps.
  2. this looks fantastic and from an earlier round of questions asking about a larger refractor for some deep sky I'm looking at getting one of these primarily for my FSQ 130. I've got the dedicated 645 reducer and a 1.6 extender allowing the scope to go from F3.5, F5 to F8 with focal lengths of (455mm, 650, 1040mm). Is this scope suited to the NV above? Also, any chance of some simple pictures of the views that can be derived from a refractor and NV combo? Thanks in advance
  3. You'd definitely see a difference visually between the FC 100 and TSA 120. I could see more detail with the TSA 120 compared with my FSQ 106 with or without an extender. You'd definitely notice the bulk/weight increase in going up to 120mm too from a 100mm. In terms of going up to the 130mm class, well it's a completely different experience weight wise but similar experience visually to the 120. My FSQ 130 weighs a lot (lot) more than my TSA 120 and offers slightly nicer views. Each step up in size simply increases bulk, weight and cool down. For me the TSA 120 represents the goldilocks of the range as although expensive it's so similar to the 102 in size and weight but has a far larger aperture it's a clear choice. As the FC100 is lighter it falls into a separate category and offers a very nice light weight scope.
  4. if portability is your concern then as a new owner of an AZ-EQ6 all I can say it's a big heavy mount by comparison to my earlier 'light' weight mounts. Throw in the weights and its a lump to deal with. Positives, its quiet, stable (even with my C14 HD) and pretty accurate. Note, I'm only using it for visual use so tracking accuracy, loose play etc are of secondary importance to me. If I didn't have the C14 then I'd have also opted for the Az-EQ5 based on the reduce weight. Note, I have heard they are a little noisier than the AZ_EQ6 though but compared with Meade and Celestron still quieter.
  5. Once mounted and balanced the scope and mount work really well. Seeing hasn't been anywhere near good enough yet though.
  6. Thanks, yes I've got tempest fans which I just hope help with the temps.
  7. Revisiting this and the C14 HD won out. Fingers crossed it performs well.
  8. C14 HD is ordered so I'll be purchasing an AZ-EQ 6. Will hopefully find the mount copes ok for purely visual. Shame Celestron don't do an equivalent though as I'm keen to use the star sense kit I have. The skywatcher version is awfully over priced. still, looking forward to the big cat arriving
  9. interesting. I've seen a picture with one on so it might be doable. Still, I really wouldn't be surprised if in reality the vibration of wind, movement and focusing will really hamper.
  10. Well I'm definitely tempted!
  11. I see some people are using a C11 on the smaller AZ-EQ5 and wondered for visual use only would it be possible to mount a C14 on the larger AZ-EQ6? 20kg's plus eyepiece, diagonal, finder etc? Madness?
  12. No worries. I have exactly the same experience when my internal lens has dew. If the lens doesn't get worse and it often doesn't then the haze remains steady and consistent.
  13. Are you sure this isn't a little dew build up? I get this effect if my lens dews a tiny amount. I have a triplet and if the internal lens gets a little dew my view of bright objects gets a halo / scatter effect.
  14. Just to say I've decided on the Mewlon 210. Thanks to everyone
  15. Wow, so the 9.25 bested the Mewlon 210 on planets?
  16. Thanks, how do you find the views between the 3? Cool down time and effects of seeing? Those 3 are all considerations for my next 'large' OTA. In terms of size.. The 250 is 850mm long x 280 diameter The 210 is 700mm long x 245 diameter The 9.25 is 559mm x 245 diameter (ex Dew shield). So its really how far the nova hitch can be pushed noting I'd also at some point buy a mount in the future for goto's.
  17. Thanks I've seen that. The 210 is actually much wider than 210mm though. It's 245mm. The 250 is 280mm so the difference in diameter isn't that great. Crude measurements on the mount suggest 270mm would fit and 280 would be touch and go. The weight gain is an additional 4KG. I just want the largest I can get so wanted to double check. The 210 would be nice but would likely leave me wanting a larger aperture.
  18. Does anyone have any ideas how I can see a Mewlon 210 and / or a Mewlon 250 in real life? I need to check that it physically fits on my Nova hitch alt-az mount. The maker of the mount suggests the Mewlon 250 is 'unlikely' to fit so I have to be incredibly careful. Alas, takahashiUK don't stock them? Seems strange to be in such a predicament? Help?
  19. Thanks, I'm looking at the Mewlon 250 as well now. I've given up on the c14 until I have a permanent setup. Instead I'm looking at 4 scopes. C11 hd C9.25 hd Mewlon 250 Mewlon 210 the top 3 are all probably a little too big for the Nova Hitch mount so I may end up having to accept a Mewlon 210 but I'm still looking into it. I kind of need to see one and whether it can technically fit on the mount.
  20. Yes thanks to everyone. More research and head scratching to do.
  21. Thanks Chris. A permanent pier and mount sounds like a sensible idea.
  • Create New...

Important Information

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