Jump to content



  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Lerxst

  1. Hmm, I've been told on a Norwegian astro forum that the Sky-watcher dob GOTO is very shakey, for some it works great, other simply cannot get it to point at what they select...
  2. My intution agress with you bish and dweller25, but I'm just skeptical about the alt/az thing. However, I guess the Synscan takes care of this?
  3. Will it require any modification in order to be fitted with a 2" diagonal? Anyway brantuk, how tall is the 300p when fully extended and completely vertical? I'm «only» 1.78m, and would I need something to stand on if it's pointing directly upwards?
  4. Yeah, I simply cannot decide! Although the C9.25 personally has an edge over the 12", but this is simply due to it's elegant design and smaller footprint, while the dob is big, bulky and almost clumsy looking, in my opinion. Still, it's almost 3" more aperture, aargh... By the way, the C9.25 has a 1.25" star diagonal. Can it be fitted with 2"? And would a 2" eyepiece be beneficial if used with a 1.25" adaptor thingie?
  5. I see that you have the 300p, how is it? How's the tracking? And compared to the CPC-800 which although over 1" lesser aperture than the C9.25, how is it with planets?
  6. Both are within my price range, the 12" Sky-watcher dob with Synscan is actually cheaper than the C9.25 which I initially settled on, but I just bought the CG5 mount and hate the idea of trading it in already for a dobsonian. I will use it for backyard observation, no astrophotography, so portability and the imaging difficulties with dobs are no issue. However, for DSO's and planets, would I rather want the larger aperture dob over the C9.25? I know there's no such thing as the perfect telescope for everything, but what would you chose if you were me? I love the planets, but I would also be able to get a nice «detailed» view of i.e. M31, which now just look like a dark grey cotton ball in my F/8 6" reflector. Will a focal reducer give the C9.25 better and brighter views of DSO's? And I heard that Synscan is not as good as Celestron's GOTO. Any opinions on this?
  7. Oh no! More choices! I get a 12" Skywatcher GOTO dob for the same price - are you saying this would be much more beneficial than the C9.25 - for both DSO's and planets perhaps?
  8. Thank you all for your usefull input. I will go for the C9.25 instead. And bizarrely enough, my employer will pay for it. I won't bore anyone with the details, but they went very quiet when I told them exactly what I wanted. I bet they expected me to say something like a new computer or a LED TV. Still, nice employer, don't you think? A final question; two, actually: 1. With visual observing, what can I expect of DSO's? With my F/8 reflector, M31 is so fuzzy it's possible to see that there's something there, but not much more than a faint, grey blob. If DSO's are my thing, which scope should I go for? 2. Will a focal reducer help on DSO's as the C9.25 is a F/10?
  9. Thank you for the info. Between you and me, I am in the bizarre position that my employer will (hopefully, not 100% decided) pay for the telescope, hence the «problem».
  10. Hmm, I thought a Schmidt-Cassegrain was a step up from reflectors? If not, wouldn't a 10" (providing it's not too heavy) reflector be the ultimate choice?
  11. Okay, and please bear with me since I was unable to find the answers to these questions with Google: How much difference in light gathering will that mean? What will this mean visually when observing DSO's and planets, i.e. details? Also the star diagonal on both the C9.25 and the C11 are 1.25". I thought 2" was standard on telescopes above 8"
  12. Yes, I forgot to add, I'm out of the wind. But you're saying high mag will suffer? Because being able to use high mag is one of the reasons I want such a big bucket...
  13. Celestron pictures the C11-A XLT OTA on the CG5 mount on their web site, and according to some astronomy forums, the CG5 should handle almost 16kg (35lb), but is this with counterweights and all be pushing it to the extreme point where it's practically useless? First of all and since this always comes up : No, I will not use the setup for astrophotography. It will be used only for visual observations. And since I just got the CG5 I do not have the budget to purchase another mount either. I do realise I could go for the 9.25 instead of the C11, but I would like as much light gathering power as possible, so if the mount will take the C11 I will go for it.
  14. Would there be a point at all to buy this for my 6" reflector? Not that I will get into terrestrial viewing, but I thought it would be usefull for when moon gazing: that up is up and down is down as when you're looking at it without a telescope. It would also be usefull when navigating with a moon atlas. So how about it? Will it really work?
  15. Thanks all for good ideas. I'm actually thinking of just getting a diagonal, and fit it somehow. Maybe I need a hammer and a couple of nails, but fit, it will. Yes it will.
  16. I have two observing locations around the house; the shale stone covered walkway for the N/E sky and the balcony at the back for the S/E/W sky. Any attempt at making any markings at these sites will be wildly unpopular, as well as they will anyway be covered in snow and ice during the winter season, which is when it's only dark enough to make any useful observations.
  17. I have an EQ3-2 fitted with a Skywatcher polar scope. The problem is that living on these latitudes (59°), requires me to lie on the ground doing polar alignment. Something which is extremely cold in minus 10-20C which we've been having this winter, as well as adjusting the mount is awkward when you lie on your back. So is there any diagonal for polar scopes one can get so I can actually stand and polar align?
  18. I'm thinking of putting magnets on the back of the controllers of my motor and autofocuser, so I can simply stick the controllers on the telescope when they're not in use (the EQ3-2 mount doesn't seem to be magnetic anywhere). But before I do, does anyone know if the magnets will interfere with the controller's circuitry? Wouldn't have anything ruining the controller's precision...
  19. I finally got my scope properly collimated. The problem was that the thumbscrew on the focuser was too tight. Even though the drawtube does wobble a little bit, it's only when I rack it in/out fast - much faster than you would with looking through an EP. With careful movements, it was actually pretty perfectly dead on except for when fully racked in and fully out, so I got it collimated.
  20. Yes, the problem was that the thumbscrew was too tight! Even though the drawtube wobble, it's only when I rack it in/out fast - much faster than you would with an EP. With careful movements, it was actually pretty perfectly dead on, so I got it collimated.
  21. As reported in the Hotech SCA Collimator thread, I got a new Hotech laser collimator yesterday and collimated the secondary mirror as it was off. When extending the focuser with the collimator still inside and on, I noticed that the laser dot on the primary's doughnut moved with about a centimeter. I then could see (which I have never seen or looked for before) that the (rack and pinion) focuser drawtube wobbled as I extended it. Worried I then went on to collimate the primary, and sadly the end result is that everything is horribly out of collimation. Now I realise what I probably need to do is buy a better focuser, but since I spent a great deal extra already on eyepieces, motors, a laser collimator (hah!) and stuff, a new focuser is a bit more in the distant future than next week, so I need to get things back into collimation hopefully without any expenses. What is the best practice? Collimation with the drawtube fully retracted? Since I can easily shift the position of the drawtube when it's extended to about the EP length, I don't trust that that's where I should position it when collimating. Is there anything else I can do? Grease the drawtube? Should all screws be tight or can they be loosened like when collimating the mirrors to ensure a steady extension of the drawtube?
  22. On second thought, having the focuser (somewhat) extended to the point where I use the EP's, would worsen the situation! If the focuser is off-axis, any attempt at collimating, would result in severe out of collimation! If the focuser is fully retracted, it should be on-axis. Come to think of it, watching those Hotech Youtube collimation videos, they always have the focuser fully retracted when collimating.
  23. Thanks I'll try that, good idea, but is this a general problem with 'stock' focusers or is mine somewhat ruined? Is there anything I can do but purchase a new or better one?
  24. I just got the Hotech laser collimator, but what do I do when the focuser is wobbly? Looking at the doughnut while pulling out the focuser, the laser dot shifts about a centimeter when fully extended from when it's completely retracted. And not like it's slowly drifting, it sits about in the center of the doughnut (indicating the secondary needs alignment), and then all of a sudden it's a full centimeter to the right hand side of the doughnut. I tried tightening the four screws on the focuser; while it got better it didn't get good enough. Don't think I have banged the focuser in the door way either on my way out, so what's going on?
  25. I was thinking along the same lines, John. Will see what I can get hold of. Stig
  • 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.