Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

What should I spend the dosh on?

Kaptain Klevtsov

Recommended Posts

Kaptain Klevtsov

Kaptain Klevtsov

Posted
Posted

The chancellor of my exchequer has unexpectedly decided that I can blow a few hundred on a new toy. No really!

I was looking at the Tal 200K and she asked when it was being delivered. Having not actually ordered one I was a little taken aback, but she said to go ahead and get one.

Now the big quandry is, I was looking at the big sortaMak as it offers a flat field like a mak. but is faster, like an SCT, but costs like a posh Newt. Technically very interesting, but a step up from an APO Barlow to stick in the Newt. price wise.

So, being thrown a pile of folding stuff, I've come up stumped as to what I "need" in the short term, so I'm open to suggestions which fill the following criteria:-

a) Must be less £ than the TAL 'scope - taking the P wouldn't go down well.

:) Must fit on either the HEQ5 or the EQ6

c) Must suit imaging (No Dobs.)

d) Must be sufficiently different to the stuff I have to warrant the spending.

e) Must be interesting.

So guys and gals, what do you suggest?

BTW The TAL would be easy to sneak in, as she's expecting one, so votes in favour of one of those are still welcome if convincing enough.

Captain Chaos

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barkis

barkis

Posted
Posted

Is there a statute on time CC?. your good lady has made a wonderful gesture here, and I reckon you should immediately make plans to take her out to dinner or something of that nature. Talk to her in general about the second area of your life that you care about.Try to explain to your lady what areas of the hobby you would like to improve on and what that would necessitate. Who knows, you may discover the answer to the question yourself. Of course we can all make suggestions as to what you could spend the money on, and it is very satisfying that you hold the opinions of your peers in such esteem, but the lass might not be keen on us spending your cash for you.

I've got my coat off the peg ready.

Ron. :D

You notice CC, I never use half a dozen words when a hundred will do. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kaptain Klevtsov

Kaptain Klevtsov

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Ron, thanks for your input, it was most appreciated. There is absolutely no statute on time, it waits for no man. :)

She is now full of prawn biriani, and we spoke at some length about unsprung weight and the effect on traction circles in a damped Macpherson strut, but she wasn't too keen unfortunately and has retired for the evening.

I tried to explain to myself which areas I want to improve on, as no-one else was listening, and came to no serious conclusion as yet. "All of it" springs to mind, but having been through the "throw money at it" phase already I would like a second opinion.

When I first ordered the Newt. I was swayed by an offer of a cheap 120mm refractor that Bern had in his odds and sods at Modern Astronomy. The Frac. arrived before the Newt. so that was my first glimpse of the sky via the DSLR. The frac. didn't come with fancy kit like eyepieces, but I did manage to stick the camera on there and snap some lunar shots. These pleased me no end, as the image scale was better than I could get with a 600mm FL camera lens, and they stacked up great. When the Newt. arrived it was even better as I could whizz it around and see loads of stars. Nary a DSO though, even though the goto said (beeped) it had gone to whatever it was told to. After I finally managed to get the DSLR to focus on the Newt. I was amazed to see that the DSO thingy was actually there, even though I couldn't see it in the eyepiece. That was a revelation which led me up the rocky road to imaging.

After the Newt. I got tempted by the OMC140 which offered even closer views of the "stuff" up there. This shattered an illusion or two. When you look through a really good 'scope at the dark sky, you can see loads of stars. Choosing the big one was never a problem with the Newt. as the FOV was big enough, and the stars looked different, big 'uns and little 'uns in the same area. The Mak. made them all look little with no swelling up of the brighter ones, so aligning the goto was awful.

Imaging through the Mak. was a no-no with the DSLR as the polar alignment had to be spot on to stop trailing, and focusing was taking half an hour and was still hit and miss (and miss, and miss).

Enter the modified webcam. This let me get some pictures through the 'scopes, but the FOV was tiny with the Mak., and not much better with the Newt.

Then I decided that I needed aperture, not magnification, so I bought a 300mm mirror set and built a serious big 'scope. It turned out to be too big for the HEQ5, so I had to get hold of an EQ6 with goto to handle it.

Time then to build a roll off roof shed to get rid of the polar alignment pain, but the long subs and tiny FOV got to be a nuisance, especially as I'd just heard of narrow band filters. So I bought a CCD camera.

FOV still was an issue, so I swapped the OMC for an ED80 to have a chance at M42 and suchlike.

So, with the potted history of Captain Chaos' imaging, where do we go next?

Captain Chaos

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kaptain Klevtsov

Kaptain Klevtsov

Posted
  • Author
Posted

An ED100 would come in on budget Phil, but its focal length is 900mm, so almost the same as the 8" Newt., but at f/9 the subs will be much longer with the CCD od DSLR. Can somebody talk me through how, in use, it would be different to (as in better than) the Newt?

Captain Chaos

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GordonCopestake

GordonCopestake

Posted
Posted

Depends on if you are imaging planets or DSO's. For DSO's I would second the ED100, you can use a focal reducer to get it down to 630mm or even 500mm which means you can sell the ED80 too. For planets I would buy an ED100 instead but use a decent barlow to make it 1800mm. Although 4" isn't massive for detail on the planets and a C14 would be better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
geppetto

geppetto

Posted
Posted
how, in use, it would be different to (as in better than) the Newt

Thought about this a lot and if I ever got enough spare readies, I would end my days

with as big an apo as I could afford.

No more collimating every other session

Better contrast

Less flexing on the mount

Camera and stuff down the bottom end

Good bye to "in focus" woes

Easy use of focal reducers

to name but 6 :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
barkis

barkis

Posted
Posted

I thank you for your resume CC. You have a varied selection of gear already at your disposal, but you are set on reaching a higher standard, and I reckon most of understand that. It would seem most of us are striving for our personal Holy Grail.

I have just had a look at your website. For the first time, I have to confess, in my initial perusal of your profile, I did not notice it.

I am very impressed with what I saw. A number of those images are quite splendid, so you must have absorbed a great deal of satisfaction in what you have achieved. You certainly have my respect.

You mentioned an OMC 140, so you must have one. The 200k would be a giant step up from that, but at about 600 for an OTA, would your mount carry it. I am not all that familiar with the modern setups, so you must forgive any ignorance I might display.

There was a thread earlier on Light grasp, and I won't be swayed by the anti's

If I were making the choice, I would dive in.

Ron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kaptain Klevtsov

Kaptain Klevtsov

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well if the TAL is a giant step up from the OMC140, then it must be outstanding!

So far my research tells me that the TAL has a problem in the length of the image train that it can support whilst still reaching focus, that might be the clincher as I would want to fit a filter wheel and the Atik for RGB stuff. I'll e-mail FLO and find out if the specification lists that distance, The TAL website has a link to the manual, but the link doesn't work for me so its no use.

Phil, those are very valid reasons for getting an ED100 and on the back of the "stuff you have sold and wished you hadn't" thread the ED100 is obviously highly regarded. For imaging the Newt. can do everything that the ED100 can do, but faster so there must be a reason for people buying it that I've not latched onto yet.

To add to this, I notice that MartinB uses fracs, as does Rog., and their images are far from poor. Neither of them owns a Newt. to my knowledge, so maybe they have yet to have a go with one and be amazed, but somehow I doubt that. professor Parker uses a Frac. (a rather posh one) so that's another tick against the ED100.

Pete Vaseys page http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/astroplover/Main.htm has loads of pictures taken using a Mirage 200mm f/10 Mak. but for many he has used a focal reducer, which might not work with the TAL. His Mak. is for sale for more than I can spend. This is about the closest I've got to checking out some DSO images with a similar instrument. I know the TAL is different so still don't know what to think.

Will keep rambling about my ponderings until the order is placed.

Captain Chaos

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cloudwatcher

Cloudwatcher

Posted
Posted

Shame that nice Mr. Brown can't add another zero to his gift.

I don't do a lot of imaging so I may be talking out of turn but

it sound as if one of the Takahashi Epsilon Astrographs might

do what you want.

Anacortes in the U.S have the very fast 180ED Hyperbolic f2.8

in stock and at current exchange rates will cost £2,133.27 + shipping.

The cost of a S/hand car I know but it's the fastest i've seen and

would cut exposure times and related tracking probs by quite a

margine. Compact size as well.

As I say I may be talking through my hat so ignore if irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kaptain Klevtsov

Kaptain Klevtsov

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Shame that nice Mr. Brown can't add another zero to his gift.

I don't do a lot of imaging so I may be talking out of turn but

it sound as if one of the Takahashi Epsilon Astrographs might

do what you want.

Anacortes in the U.S have the very fast 180ED Hyperbolic f2.8

in stock and at current exchange rates will cost £2,133.27 + shipping.

The cost of a S/hand car I know but it's the fastest i've seen and

would cut exposure times and related tracking probs by quite a

margine. Compact size as well.

As I say I may be talking through my hat so ignore if irrelevant.

Gift? He's giving stuff away? What, THE Mr Brown? Oh, that, I meant my own personal fiscal guardian, not him, he wouldn't give me the steam off his peas.

HOW MUCH?? Now I've got coffee all over the screen. It would be a very fast second hand car for that kind of money!

Well seeing as I've placed the order I may as well admit that I'm waiting for the TAL factory to cast me a shiny new 200K. It took me long enough to lern to spell Maksutov, now I've got to learn Klevsov as well.

I just had a call from a very nice man from FLO who tells me its going to be weeks before it arrives, so I'll be pacing the floor like Rog. for a while. It should be just starting to get dark again when it arrives, so in plenty of time for Mars to say cheese.

I'll do a review when it finally lands, if I can heave it onto the pier. :)

Captain Chaos

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kaptain Klevtsov

Kaptain Klevtsov

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Gordon, its 12% compared to 11% of the hugely more expensive C8. I'm hoping that is counting the "spokes" which look a bit "chunky" to say the least.

Themos, I'm hoping that there should be no collimation issues as its all spherical. If the optics are misaligned they'll just image another bit of the sky. :D The Mak. that I had before, the OMC140, was a doddle to collimate and, once I'd put it back where it was after doing it all wrong, it never needed touching again. It's not an SCT with all those diddy screws to play with round the front where you get chocolate on the front glass either, the adjusters are on the back where you can get at them easily, and probably cast iron as well.

Flat field wise, a Mak. should outperform an SCT and be better for imaging with a DSLR or film SLR especially.

Pete Lawrence getting worried? I think not. :) His SCT still ought to outdo the TAL Klevtsov because of the bigger front hole. Granted his has a huge hunk of glass over it, which the TAL doesn't so it can't get finger marks all over it.

I'm really hoping that its going to be like the OMC140 but faster for imaging. The OO 'scope was a stunner for loads of sharp dots both visually and for imaging, but it couldn't do fuzzies at f/14. The R&P 1.25" focuser is going to be the worst bit, I imagine, but I ought to be able to adapt the skywatcher type electric focuser to make that work, or, if it unbolts, get Ambermile or some other machine shop to make an adapter for one of those nice Moonlight focusers that FLO sell so cheaply.

I'll let you guys know what it's like when it lands and try to do an image or three with it.

I've only got to figure out how to guide the thing now, as its a bit long in the focal length department. Never tried the OMC as it didn't have rings, but neither does the TAL (yet), so it may just work with the nasty camera lens that I use now, or I might need to go longer FL with the guide 'scope. Oh and figure out how to load it onto the pier, maybe get a crane rigged up in the shed roof for that. Apparently it weighs quite a bit :)

Captain Chaos

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.