Jump to content

1564402927_Comet2021Banner.jpg.a8d9e102cd65f969b635e8061096d211.jpg

Sweep

Members
  • Posts

    17
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

12 Good

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Blasted school teachers are lurking on this forum as well.
  2. It is tiny, but perfectly formed. I’m using in a 130mm Apo, and currently trying to decide whether to buy a 11” act or 10” classical cassegrain. Edge of field not perfect on axis best of my collection, which include Es 40mm 68 Es 30mm 82 Es 17mm 92 Es 12mm 92 Televue delete 7mm Wo 4mm Uwan Vixen 3.5mm ssw
  3. Hi I also had to scratch that itch. It is certainly one of my favourite eyepieces, eye relief bit tight but manageable. Views excellent on axis better than my es 92 17mm. Will certainly buy more in the range even though have all the eyepieces I really need.
  4. Hi It would seem the C11 edge is still the most favoured larger aperture telescope by most users. Released in 2009, no changes in the interim mass produced. Are there any real contenders in similar price category, that can deliver as reliable and consistent results, as the C11 edge,and be used both visually and for astrophotography, full frame with reducer to boot. Looking to purchase something good as a galaxy hunter in the 3 to 4.5k price range, have a 5” Apo. Any suggestions welcome in this regard.
  5. What about this one great new focusser with rotolock. Had to wait 5 weeks to get. Flt 132 should also enter calculations.
  6. What sort of Sky's do you have where you live? Are you in a dark site area or light polluted skys I live in a rural area in Ireland Bortle 4 sky’s. Had no intention of driving to set up, wheel out of garage.
  7. Although the instructions advise against using counterweights AND second scope on the bar, that’s just to avoid a situation where you’ve not tightened the weights on enough and they slip down the bar taking the second scope off with it. Just be sure to make the weights secure. Yes the manual explicitly states not to use a second telescope on the extension bar. it seems from user’s experience with the mount an C11 or a Meade 12” in alt-az should not be an overburdened for the mount. Thanks for all the reply’s.
  8. That info Stu changes things completely !! If that is correct the payload is 25 kg each side, in alt- az mode it’s now possible to consider an ota even larger than the C11??
  9. Looks a great combination you have there on the az-eq6! My considered combination is quite similar, but just checked weights your ota and Ed 150 weigh in around 18kg plus accessories thereafter would result in a total weight of around 21 to 22kg the c11 is 3.5 kg heavier than the c9.25. My overall weight is likely to be around the 25kg advised limit, will this make a difference? Maybe I should go with the C 9.25 if it will show enough of the Dso’s.
  10. Hi I have a 132 Apo on az-eq 6 which I’m pleased with, however have got aperture fever and really want to see more of the feint fuzzies, Dso’s Galaxies , etc. I am considering a Celestron C11 ota to use along side my Apo on the az-eq6 in alt-az for visual only on the C11. Payload weights for az-eq6 for visual use is advised by Flo as 25kg max. My Apo is 9kg add about 2kg for eyepieces and accessories plus C11 12.5kg plus accessories would bring total weight very close to maximum weight advised. Firstly would appreciate some seasoned advice wether the 132 Apo and C11 are a good combination to observer the hard to see galaxies and nebulas? And secondly am I pushing the boat too far in thinking of using the 132mm Apo and C11 on the az-eq6 Mount with total weight being at maximum weight advised for visual observing.? Thanks
  11. Hi I see in the US the Explore Scientific Sale is currently on until early May. Has anyone any idea if the sale will also will on this side of the pond, and if so when? Thanks
  12. Hi I wanted to try a Masuyama eyepiece and was trying to conclude if the 45mm was a viable option, on reflection it would seem an overkill having purchased an es 30mm 82. 21x mag and slightly smaller FOV just did make sense, although I think a lot of people feel the same when buying eyepieces. So what did I do?? I went through what I now have a 4mm Wo uwan, 7mm Delite, 12mm es 92 ,17es92, 30mm es 82 and bought the only conceivable size to justifying buying a Masuyama so purchased the 10mm Masuyama. Just had to, too tempting!!!! Hope its worth it!! Its Friday and payday.
  13. Hi Louis That is what I had exactly in mind. I have a 2’ OIII filer which may help with fainter detailing on nebulas which the Masuyama is renowned for! I know the field of view is not improved upon , but was hoping to find out from more experienced observers if this option of 21x magnification with a nebula filter had any advantages on Dso”s that suited this lower magnification with OIII filter Are there any recommended dso’s targets at 21 x that experienced observers view quite regularly? I reside in a rural area bortle 4 sky mag 21.39. Also hoping the Masuyama 45mm will bring additional contrast on axis to the viewing experience, compared to the es 30mm .
  14. Hi I am a beginner and need some useful advice. Looking at a Masuyama 45mm eyepiece, however with only a resulting 20 x magnification for my 130mm refractor, I think it would not be used much at such low magnification (binoculars territory) Just got an es 30mm 82 degree with a magnification of 31 degrees which should I think cover my low magnification widefield needs? Any seasoned advice would be most helpful thanks.
×
×
  • 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.