Ags

Welcome!

I think the Mewlon 180 ticks all the boxes, not too big, unquestionably excellent and it has a handle. On the way to Mewlondalay I'll pick up a CC8 travelling companion. When I've saved enough for the baby Mewlon 180, I may very well continue saving for the 210, particularly if the CC8 is good enough.

Superb sketch.

I suppose one could just get the mirror separation right, then fit an external focusser.

That's good information and may explain why I and many others claim the f6.3 reducer sharpens up the scope. Not because of the reducer, but because it changes the mirror separation. However, the elaborate steps you take to maintain the critical distance between the mirrors seems an argument against the SCT. This issue does not affect the CC8 (mirrors don't move) or the Mewlons (being a Dall-Kirkham design).

Well, I have convinced myself the CC8 would be somewhat sharper. Maybe I am wrong...

I must say I am a bit disappointed with my C6. It's collimated, but star images are just a bit soft, so the extra aperture over my other scopes doesn't give any more sparkle in star clusters.

It's the same as the Zenithstar 66 that I have. Very nice optics and not too heavy.

I think it would not be bad to be "stuck" on the CC8, they seem to be rated really highly by their owners, at least those that can forgive the slightly dodgy aperture. It's heavy for its size though.

Saving for the Mewlon would be a long-term endeavor so my reasoning is I might as well shift some of the savings into a stopgap and secondhand CC8/C8/Mak180 rather than have no upgrade at all for a long time. I can then sell the stopgap for what I paid for it later on. I think the CC8 is probably the best stopgap choice but I'll see what comes up. If I did get a Skymax, I would try insulating it.

I wasn't aware the Skymax 180 was only 7kgs, not too bad. It is one I will consider while saving for the Mewlon, and I might make a detour into Mak territory if one comes up second-hand for a nice price in the interim. If the insulation approach really works, the Skymax could even be up and running before the Mewlon... Did I mention I like Maks? I would need 2" eyepieces for these monsters, at these slow focal ratios I am tempted by the Speers WALER 31.5mm 90 degree eyepiece, which is both very light and same true field as a 56mm Plossl. Even in the Skymax, it would give a degree field and a pleasant 2mm exit pupil.

This was pointed out to me today: Power consumption is 0.8A, but power requirement is 5A, which is an unbelievable lotta Amps and more than the ASIAIR Mini can deliver. Is this really correct? It looks more like the power delivery of the power supply rather than the mount's requirements... There are other errors in the spec sheet like "Payload with CW 16.5 lbs (12kg)" so error is relatively likely.

I wonder how the Mewlon 180 compares to the 8" Classical Cassegrain? They have the same effective aperture and the CC design has theoretical advantages over the DK design off axis.

@dweller25 those do not appear to be favorable observing conditions! I think I will save up for a Mewlon 180. A C9.25 would be nice but I believe rather too big for me whilst being too small for the Jupiter pictures I want to take. But if I do successfully save up for the M180, will I be able to resist the temptation to push on to the M210?

I have a simple system for evaluating eyepieces. I read all the positive reviews before buying the eyepiece, and all the negative reviews after buying it.

Yes, but what is it?

The Svbony 3-8 has a 60 degree FOV, I wouldn't describe that as a tiny FOV.

I think it comes down to aperture vs quality, so I think it will be either the C9.25 or the Mewlon 180. Decisions!

Don't dither, dither!

Tech writing is my day job, so all the technical aspects are doable, but we are struggling with the details like label placement. The book's 95% done but those last 5%...

I do like Maks! But I think the 180 has a bit too much focal length for me

I finally made up my mind about my mount upgrade from my current AZ-GTi, and have gone for a HEM15. The stated capacity is 8 kg without counterweight and 12 kg with counterweight, and I can believe the capacity having seen a video of the little mount throwing an 8 kg RC around like an anodised toilet roll. Admittedly it was just the RC OTA and no accessories. The question I am asking myself is what planetary telescope to aspire to put on this mount? I am assuming it would be something with a folded light path and would take a year of saving, so what should it be? The objective is something with a bit more imaging and observing oomph than my worthy C6. I want to get a lot closer to the Moon for example. The obvious option is a C8, which the mount would carry very comfortably indeed. A cheaper option more skewed to visual enjoyment would be the 8" Classical Cassegrain - the main downside being it is more of a 7" Classical Cassegrain? Instead of the C8, I could save a few months more and get a C8 Edge? Worth it for visual? Am I right in thinking there would be no benefit from a planetary imaging viewpoint? For the same money as the C8 Edge, I could get a C9.25 non-edge. At over 9 kilos a counterweight would be needed but I wouldn't be using heavy accessories. My main concern is not that the scope would be too big for the mount, but rather that the scope would be too big for me! For the same money I could also get a Mewlon 180 - possibly the best visual option?

Looking forward to getting my HEM15 in a few weeks (not in stock at FLO currently)! Three-minute subs at 135 mm focal length is quite remarkable performance for a harmonic mount I think. I went for the non-iPolar version as iPolar only works with a laptop not a phone, and doesn't work with ASIAIR at all. I'll use the ASIAIR polar alignment routine instead. Sad to hear that the handset does not cope with even the realtivle moderate subzero conditions we have been having! But I think the only use I'll be making of the handset is plugging in the ASIAIR 😃

Yes, I will share my findings.

HEM15, ASIAIR Mini and ASI120MM ordered today!