Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Preferred telescope Type

narrowbandpaul

Recommended Posts

Whippy

Whippy

Posted
Posted

They've all got their strengths and weaknesses although I haven't owned a SCT (yet). I like a newt for the aperture/price ratio, a Mak/Cass as a planetary/Lunar scope and refractors for the usual cliches about 'diamonds on a jet black sky' and so on. I'm wanting a Mak-Newt again after owning one for short time too so I guess I just want them all!

Tony..

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

Over the past 30 years I've owned over 20 scopes including refractors (achros and apos), newtonians, SCT's, and mak-cassegrains and enjoyed them all :lol:

Because I like a "grab and go" observing style I tend to favour refractors and newts because of their faster cool down time (my scopes have to live in the house).

I've yet to try a mak-newtonian (eg: an Intes) and a classical (ie: open tube) cassegrain or Klevtzov or for that matter an off-axis newtonian or a Ritchey-Chrétien so I've got some designs to go yet :shocked:

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lunator

lunator

Posted
Posted

Having owned a Newt, Mak and refractors I would say that each has it advantages.

I used the Newt the most as it's focal length made it a good all-rounder.

My main scope is now an OMC 250 which has a long focal length so it is less suitable for general viewing but is fantastic for what I want to do :shocked:.

I guess the right answer is find our what interests you in astronomy and then get the most suitable scope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lunator

lunator

Posted
Posted

sub arcsecond doubles...very impressive

paul

It does take time to learn how to observe tight doubles.

On an average nights the seeing limts you to 1-2" doubles. But it is good to know that when the conditions are right then doubles down to 0.6" are observable.

Cheers

Ian

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iancandler

iancandler

Posted
Posted

It tends to be refractors for me.

Whilst I loved my dob when I had it and I love my C6, the one I couldnt bear to part with is still the little ZS66 and if money was no object then there would be the biggest APO I could lay my hands on in an observatory ( well two actually, one WF one planetary)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ajohn

Ajohn

Posted
Posted

I tend to lean towards refractors these days too. Don't know how many early amateur astronomy books I've read that say it takes a good 6ins newtonian to equal the performance of a good 4ins refractor and now I've owned a couple I have to agree. 2nd in line would be a newtonian. I've owned a few sct's. They have a big compactness advantage but suffer for visual use. Have to admit that in many ways I'm more interested in pleasing views than resolution. In my experience SCT's just wont take the magnification a good refractor or newtonian will take.

I've also tried mac cas but was left with an I'm not sure feeling. My next scope is likely to be a true cassegrain. Can't buy what I want so I'm going to have to make it. I used to lust after a ritchey type but having gone through it I think I would be better of with a normal type and a coma corrector. Much more flexible.

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites
moondog

moondog

Posted
Posted

Having used most types of scopes over the years I have to say that I think my C8 SCT has been my best all round scope to date. In alt-az mode I can just sit down on a chair and use it - no standing up or lying on my back on the floor with a good size refractor and no using the step ladder for a large Newt.

With all the bits you can get with SCT's they can be made to do most things very well.

MD

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tiny

Tiny

Posted
Posted

It's horses for courses with us - we have some of each. Newts are value for money. Refractors give nice images but cost. SCTs on alt azi computer mounts are great for easy astronomy without contortions. But you need other kit that is almost as important. The mount gives a lot of choice but manual is fast to grab and go, computer better for finding and tracking. Then there is the eyepieces and all the other kit you need. The list goes on and you never are quite happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sfarndell

Sfarndell

Posted
Posted

I currently own a 10"Newt, 10"SCT and and a small refractor. It all boils down to personal preference. Newts have smaller obstructions and are faster, SCTs are more compact, but heavier, refractors have no obstruction, but are more expensive for similar apertures...

For me my newt definitely wins for wide-field views, but on planets it's the SCT mainly due to the tracking ability.

I have recently acquired a F/6.3 focal reducer, so that might sway me more towards the SCT once I have given it a test run.

When I live in Johannesburg, monthly astro society meetings were held at the Johannesburg Observatory where we could occassionally use the 26" refractor! Yeah baby! Now that is a telescope!!! :shocked:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sam

Sam

Posted
Posted

I currently own a 10"Newt, 10"SCT and and a small refractor. It all boils down to personal preference. Newts have smaller obstructions and are faster, SCTs are more compact, but heavier, refractors have no obstruction, but are more expensive for similar apertures...

For me my newt definitely wins for wide-field views, but on planets it's the SCT mainly due to the tracking ability.

I have recently acquired a F/6.3 focal reducer, so that might sway me more towards the SCT once I have given it a test run.

When I live in Johannesburg, monthly astro society meetings were held at the Johannesburg Observatory where we could occassionally use the 26" refractor! Yeah baby! Now that is a telescope!!! :shocked:

Wow! a 26" refractor, that would be amazing to look through!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sfarndell

Sfarndell

Posted
Posted

Wow! a 26" refractor, that would be amazing to look through!

It's absolutely indescribable. I only got to look through it twice - but once was at M42 (2 of the stars forming the trap are doubles and were split clearly using a 50mm eyepiece!!).

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.