Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

who else here owns a intes mk-66 ?

jordan20

Recommended Posts

GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted
The review earlier in this thread states that the central obstruction of the M66 is 35%. Out of curiosity I looked up the CO of the SkyMax 150 and it is only 28% according to SaN magazine.

Some reviews just measure the spot on the meniscus from the outside to get the CA percentage but don't allow for the baffle inside the scope that extends past it and affects the size of the CA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Ags

Ags

Posted
Posted

If I recall correctly, your scope has a focal length of 1800mm, which means a 24mm Baader Hyperion would give a 0.9 degree field of view - enough to squeeze in a big object like the double cluster (but not the pleiades). So you don't really need to go to extreme eyepieces.

I think if you could find out the field stop of the scope you could then find a suitable 2" EP for it. Here is a cloudy nights thread where 35mm field-stop EPs are discussed (35mm was used as an example earlier in this thread - I don't know what that figure is based on though - your scope may not have a 35mm field stop):

Telescope Reviews: Quest: 35mm field stop, minimal glass

I'm not certain but I think the field stop of an EP grows in proportion to its focal length - so a 56mm EP is likely to have a large field stop and so likely to show vignetting. Perhaps somebody more knowledgeable could confirm...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
F15Rules

F15Rules

Posted
Posted

I've got a Lomo Mak 6" F14, FL is almost 2200mm, and I regularly use a 32mm EP and am happy with the FOV. I can just about (not quite) get the Double Cluster into the FOV, well, the two centres anyway. I've also got a 40mm but it shows a less "pleasing" view than the 32mm, even though the FOV shows more..it's a bit like looking with tunnel vision.

I find that the contrast on the Lomo often improves with increased magnification: the other night I was looking at M13 with a 6mm Pentax Ortho giving approx 360x and the background was just BLACK: the fov was very small (it's a 0,965 ep) but the contrast was great and the glob filled most of the field...and loads of faint stars just "popped out" into view.

I'd say that the ability to take very high mags is one of the big strengths of these Russian scopes, and one reason why they are so good for Luna, Planets and doubles..

At £250 you are getting an utter bargain. Oh, and the fine micro focusing is normally excellent, with zero image shift.

enjoy!

cheers

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jordan20

jordan20

Posted
  • Author
Posted

hmmm i will have to have a think and see if i can get him to measure it. but i may be able to get the 56mm EP for £50 onto of the scope so would it be worth it. or should i just get the baader 24mm because i know if you take off the bottom part if focal length is increased but i don't know what to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ags

Ags

Posted
Posted

I love the 24mm in my mak. It gives the max field of view for a 1.25 eye piece. But unlike other hyperions you cannot change its focal length.

A 32mm plossl will have the same field of view as the 24mm hyperion but with less magnification and contrast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyH

AndyH

Posted
Posted

I think if you could find out the field stop of the scope you could then find a suitable 2" EP for it. Here is a cloudy nights thread where 35mm field-stop EPs are discussed (35mm was used as an example earlier in this thread - I don't know what that figure is based on though - your scope may not have a 35mm field stop):

The 35mm figure was purely an example size :o

My Tal 200K(8"F10) has a 38mm baffle.

Back to the 56mm eyepiece. I had an old 'smooth side' 56mm Meade Plossl and it was a nice eyepiece in my 100RS. But how it'll work on your Intes is another question ;) Streching my mind back, I think it had a field stop of more than 40mm. I could be wrong. I've been looking at my Tal 24mm UWA and it's got a 40mm field stop. I'm sure the Meade was bigger.

Ideally I'd try the eyepiece out first, to see if there are any problems. I must admit, I think it's a bit too 'long' for the Intes. There is another optical issue with using long focal length eyepieces on cassegrain type scopes, if I remember correctly. You can start to see the secondary shadow. Hopefully others can clarify this.

Cheers,

Andy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted
....Back to the 56mm eyepiece. I had an old 'smooth side' 56mm Meade Plossl and it was a nice eyepiece in my 100RS. But how it'll work on your Intes is another question ;) Streching my mind back, I think it had a field stop of more than 40mm. I could be wrong. I've been looking at my Tal 24mm UWA and it's got a 40mm field stop. I'm sure the Meade was bigger.....

Andy - I'm so sorry :o - I've managed to edit your post rather than quote it :D

If there is a way to recover it, I'll do that.

Sorry again - I pressed the wrong tab :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyH

AndyH

Posted
Posted

;):D I was just about to go back and do a wee edit and it went weird. I wondered what I'd pressed.

If you can't get it, I'll redo the post. I think I may have copied and pasted it the last time, so it might still be there. :o

Andy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

I don't think I can recover what I edited - sorry about that Andy :o

I can assure you it was not censorship but cak-handedness !.

What I was trying to add the the thread was that I think there is a risk with the Meade 56mm plossl that you would see the shadow of the central obstruction with the MK66. I've also read that the eye relief on that eyepiece is so long that finding the correct eye position is quite difficult as you need to "hover" well away from the rubber eye cup.

Definitely worth "trying before buying" with that eyepiece IMHO.

Sorry for mucking Andy's post up ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyH

AndyH

Posted
Posted

Good call on the eye relief, I had forgotton about that.

My 'smooth side' 56mm was built without an eye cup and as John says, you need to place your eye waaay back to avoid blackouts.

Mine was nice, but tough to use at times, especially if I wasn't seated.

Andy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyH

AndyH

Posted
Posted

I've always read "Diameter of Secondary incl. baffle 50 mm"

as meaning, the small baffle that surrounds the secondary mirror, rather than the inside size of the primary mirror baffle tube.

So 50mm is the MK66's secondary obstruction.

Andy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
AndyH

AndyH

Posted
Posted
UPDATE the 56MM meade EP works perfectly tried it today at the shop. but its way out of collimation :D

Good news regarding the eyepiece !

As for the collimation. It's most probably the secondary that needs some adjusting. Try that, before thinking about touching the primary.

Cheers,

Andy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AndyH

AndyH

Posted
Posted

Yup :D

Been reading up on the Rumak type Maks and what they all is, is if the scopes collimation is out, 99% of the time, it's the secondary. The Intes/Intes-Micro primary seems to keep it's collimation well. Or so the buzz says.

I've just been so used to my Klevtsov and the mantra of 'don't touch the corrector unit unless absolutely necessary.'

Really pleased the big Meade works though.

Andy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.