I want a visual reflector

[TareqPhoto]

About that link of FoV, it won't help, because it can give me the idea about size no doubt, but it doesn't change the quality, so even if i passed the magnification of maximum power it is still clear details, so it is illusive i think.

[Stu]

7 minutes ago, TareqPhoto said:

I saw one scope that is 10", F10, is this a better choice over C9.25" for example?

Not sure a 10" f10 would be very practical, at 2.5m long.

This is a very simplistic comparison. A 10" Newt can be mounted on an EQ mount or as a dobsonian. It is quite big and takes some storage and transportation space. A C925 would be mounted on a EQ moun, or a Goto or manual altaz. The tube itself is mount compact so easier to transport and store. A C925 will likely take longer to cool, be prone to dew on the corrector plate (although I suspect that won't affect you).

Where do you observe, at home so power is available or somewhere you would need a battery pack to power an EQ mount. A dobsonian is generally manual so needs no power.

Perhaps some other detail about your circumstances would help. Budget too.

[TareqPhoto]

5 minutes ago, Stu said:

Not sure a 10" f10 would be very practical, at 2.5m long.

This is a very simplistic comparison. A 10" Newt can be mounted on an EQ mount or as a dobsonian. It is quite big and takes some storage and transportation space. A C925 would be mounted on a EQ moun, or a Goto or manual altaz. The tube itself is mount compact so easier to transport and store. A C925 will likely take longer to cool, be prone to dew on the corrector plate (although I suspect that won't affect you).

Where do you observe, at home so power is available or somewhere you would need a battery pack to power an EQ mount. A dobsonian is generally manual so needs no power.

Perhaps some other detail about your circumstances would help. Budget too.

I will observe from home, and i already have a portable power for my mount, i may buy another one that may give more lasting power if possible and keep the current as backup.

That 10" i saw is about 28.7lb or say 29 lb [~13kg], while that C925 is abut 20 lb [~ 9 kg], is that a huge difference in weight? Does that mean my mount can't handle that 10" 29 lb adding for example accessories or a camera?

[Stu]

12 minutes ago, TareqPhoto said:

That 10" i saw is about 28.7lb or say 29 lb [~13kg], while that C925 is abut 20 lb [~ 9 kg], is that a huge difference in weight? Does that mean my mount can't handle that 10" 29 lb adding for example accessories or a camera?

I assume you misread the spec as a 10" f10 would be extremely long as I mentioned. It is not so much the difference in weight that is the problem, but the additional length which creates a much higher turning moment around the mount's axis so vibrations are worst. Newtonians can tend to act a bit like sails in the wind!

[TareqPhoto]

16 minutes ago, Stu said:

I assume you misread the spec as a 10" f10 would be extremely long as I mentioned. It is not so much the difference in weight that is the problem, but the additional length which creates a much higher turning moment around the mount's axis so vibrations are worst. Newtonians can tend to act a bit like sails in the wind!

So tell me about your C925 with AZ-EQ5 or even Vixen GP?

With that 10", which mount do you think it is suitable? tell me the cheaper suitable mount for it.

[Stu]

The C925 will sit ok for visual on either of them, but I do have the Vixen GP on an EQ6 tripod.

I think a 10" Newt would be too much for either of them, I would want an AZEQ6 for that probably. Others may have different opinions though.

[TareqPhoto]

17 minutes ago, Stu said:

The C925 will sit ok for visual on either of them, but I do have the Vixen GP on an EQ6 tripod.

I think a 10" Newt would be too much for either of them, I would want an AZEQ6 for that probably. Others may have different opinions though.

I have SW AZ-EQ6

Later one day i will write down my equipment in signature.

[TareqPhoto]

So strange?

I went out just now and turned off all the light of my yard and the view is way better than about 1 week up to 10 days, very strange to see the view is better while the moon is at half moon stage than when it is gone or new born, and this is not the first time, i saw the Big Dipper today better than how i saw it 5 days or 8 days ago, isn't the moon killing the view more when it is getting bigger or brighter day after day?

Jupiter is clear next to the moon, Saturn is other side also clear, i think i can see the Polaris too which is almost a pain..... to view it most times, and i feel the sky is a bit hazy but still i can see, not sure what happened to give that better view tonight than several days or weeks, i remember it was nice view too by April and March, May wasn't mostly good and June was worse.

So, again, the transparency or clarity isn't a big problem with me to view the moon or planets, so whatever scope it will do the job for quality viewing.

[TareqPhoto]

By the way, i am looking at Saturn right now and i am crying? it is not big at all even using 2X barlow and 10mm EP, ST80 is very limiting, hehehehe

Not sure how mushy it will be if i tried with 5X barlow [i don't have yet], i ordered 7.5mm EP, i will give it a try and see.

[Erla]

At 400mm focal length you would get x40 with 10mm ep. With 2x barlow- x80. Kind of on a smallish side. 

I read somewhere that theoretically you can go to the magnification of apperture in mm x 2, which should mean your scope should be capable of up to x160, it would require 2.5mm eyepiece, but eye relief etc can be unacceptable, much better 5mm barlowed, IMHO.  

You actually have a very good mount, so a wide variety of scopes is possible. I have 8" newt on eq6, and the mount just buzzes along. You could get sw 200p (I think there's one at 1200 mm length). They are not that expensive so even if you ultimately  don't get along with it - not that big of a loss.

And before you start crying, consider this - I can't see anything with a bigger scope. Not even the moon. It's 100% cloud and forecasted to stay so for at least a week. Enjoy what you can - at the end of the day, you get better, much better views than Galileo did.

[TareqPhoto]

7 minutes ago, Erla said:

At 400mm focal length you would get x40 with 10mm ep. With 2x barlow- x80. Kind of on a smallish side. 

I read somewhere that theoretically you can go to the magnification of apperture in mm x 2, which should mean your scope should be capable of up to x160, it would require 2.5mm eyepiece, but eye relief etc can be unacceptable, much better 5mm barlowed, IMHO.  

You actually have very good mount, so a wide variety of scopes is possible. I have 8" newt on eq6, and the mount just buzzes along. You could get sw 200p (I think there's one at 1200 mm length). They are not that expensive so even if you ultimately  don't get along with it - not that big of a loss.

Someone recommended me 200PDS long time ago [2 months or 3 months ago] because i was asking about visual scope, he told me that it is good for visual and for imaging at good price, it was in my mind for a while, but then things changed in my mind, i included 130PDS, then i thought if i buy APO triplet then 130PDS is out of use.

I will delay this visual decision, i better get the refractor first and then i can think wisely and slowly about which visual scope for planets, if i didn't go to that group before yesterday [Friday] and tested that C925 i may end up with 200PDS definitely, but now i feel 200PDS won't get my attention much if i look for higher magnification newt/SCT ones.

[John]

The ST80 scopes are great low to medium power / wide field / portable scopes but the images do tend to suffer as the magnification rises above 80x-100x because of the fast focal ratio of the scopes and the chromatic aberration (CA) that the fast achromat objective displays. They can also show spherical aberration (SA) which does not help high power views.

Within that constraint they are nice scopes. The ST80's share the above characteristics in common with other F/5 achromat refractors of course - the ST80 shows less CA and SA than the 102, 120 and 150mm versions.

 

[TareqPhoto]

16 minutes ago, John said:

The ST80 scopes are great low to medium power / wide field / portable scopes but the images do tend to suffer as the magnification rises above 80x-100x because of the fast focal ratio of the scopes and the chromatic aberration (CA) that the fast achromat objective displays. They can also show spherical aberration (SA) which does not help high power views.

Within that constraint they are nice scopes. The ST80's share the above characteristics in common with other F/5 achromat refractors of course - the ST80 shows less CA and SA than the 102, 120 and 150mm versions.

 

I have a filter that can kill almost CA on my ST80, i use it for the moon and planets, i even add that Neod filter, so color isn't the main problem, i can always just think about it as B&W if i need.

ST80 is my starter scope, but it will be a guide scope immediately once i buy any scope whether for imaging DSO or visual planets, for now i just practice with it to pass the time.

[N3ptune]

I have the BKP p200 DS in Canada, I believe it's the same thing has the 200p in UK. I can see a great deal of things on the planets with it, it's good on DSOs too, the tube itself is not really expensive. Depending of your tolerance to imperfection, you might want a coma corrector and/or high grade EPs for low power observation (28mm, 30mm, 32mm) because it's a F5.

OR you can live with a bit of coma just like me. (: So far I am really satisfied of it.

Canada

http://ca.skywatcher.com/product/product/bkp-p200-ds/

UK

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-200p-ds-ota.html

[Dave In Vermont]

Hey Tareq -

I've been reading this thread with a mixture of interest and bemusement. I like to see people stand their ground in seemingly unpopular opinions & positions. And wanting clarity and details - over size of image - is about as popular a position as can be asked for in the world of telescopes and their owners! Good job in standing with your position! Obviously very well researched on your part. Anyways, the reason I write is your mentioning using a filter to cut CA in your ST80, and as a filter-fan, you caught my interest.....

There are 3 filters which most would say are the best - once again a matter of opinion and personal-taste - and these are the Baader Contrast Booster Filter, the Baader Fringe-Killer Filter, and finally the Baader APO Filter- along with a smattering of lesser-known filters and mixes of filters. So my question to you sir is: What filter do you use and think works best? Please be aware that I don't believe in a 'right' or 'wrong' answer, the only right answer is the one that works best FOR YOU!

Earlier in this thread, I thought I was going to have to step in and break you all off each other!   Speaking of such and the ST80, I'll add this: In the last few years, I've witnessed the ST80 go from a position of being universally maligned and loathed - up to being considered by many - vocally by many - as wonderful, little instruments worth upgrading and idolized! Strange how the times change!

 

 

Enjoy!

Dave

[TareqPhoto]

6 hours ago, N3ptune said:

I have the BKP p200 DS in Canada, I believe it's the same thing has the 200p in UK. I can see a great deal of things on the planets with it, it's good on DSOs too, the tube itself is not really expensive. Depending of your tolerance to imperfection, you might want a coma corrector and/or high grade EPs for low power observation (28mm, 30mm, 32mm) because it's a F5.

OR you can live with a bit of coma just like me. (: So far I am really satisfied of it.

Canada

http://ca.skywatcher.com/product/product/bkp-p200-ds/

UK

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-200p-ds-ota.html

There are exactly the same, just the product name or code is different between worlds region, maybe in Asia it will be called different than Europe and North America, but the item or the scope remain the same.

It is still in wish list, but i can't decide on that yet, it is all depending on what i can have and my budget, if i go with APO triplet then this will go down to 40% as interesting, and if i bought 8"-10" then this scope will be 0% interesting, so i don't want to buy it temporarily then once i get another scopes it will be out of use, at least my ST80 will become a guide scope with any better scope, and this 200PDS it will be hard to find a place against APO and 10" SCT for example.

[TareqPhoto]

4 hours ago, Dave In Vermont said:

Hey Tareq -

I've been reading this thread with a mixture of interest and bemusement. I like to see people stand their ground in seemingly unpopular opinions & positions. And wanting clarity and details - over size of image - is about as popular a position as can be asked for in the world of telescopes and their owners! Good job in standing with your position! Obviously very well researched on your part. Anyways, the reason I write is your mentioning using a filter to cut CA in your ST80, and as a filter-fan, you caught my interest.....

There are 3 filters which most would say are the best - once again a matter of opinion and personal-taste - and these are the Baader Contrast Booster Filter, the Baader Fringe-Killer Filter, and finally the Baader APO Filter- along with a smattering of lesser-known filters and mixes of filters. So my question to you sir is: What filter do you use and think works best? Please be aware that I don't believe in a 'right' or 'wrong' answer, the only right answer is the one that works best FOR YOU!

Earlier in this thread, I thought I was going to have to step in and break you all off each other!   Speaking of such and the ST80, I'll add this: In the last few years, I've witnessed the ST80 go from a position of being universally maligned and loathed - up to being considered by many - vocally by many - as wonderful, little instruments worth upgrading and idolized! Strange how the times change!

 

 

Enjoy!

Dave

Hey Dave!

Thank you very much for your post, i don't know what to say, i am flattered, hehehe

Regarding the filter for my ST80, i am using Baader Contrast Boost, it is really a great filter, it will give that kind of yellow cast overall, i think people will care less about this cast than a CA issue, and this yellow cast is easily to correct, and i am planning to get that Semi APO filter too, from FLO site they posted reviews and i read somewhere that someone prefer Semi APO over Contrast Boost filter, it minimizes the CA [not killing it] but doesn't add that yellow cast, so he feels it is better overall, Fringe killer has the least effect correction so it is not that much better, in all cases those filters are dirty cheap, i can buy them all if i need too, but i started with the strongest and happy with the results, even sometimes i don't notice that warm tone/cast much, and in darkness it is even better because i just use cool WB so it will balance a bit, i mean i enjoy to use it and find solution if needed to, but i really don't need, only others who care about it.

ST80 is really a nice scope if someone can live with its issues, CA? use a filter to eliminate or minimize it, field curvature? use flattener if it may correct, if not then just live with it or crop, problem solved? People sometimes screaming about issues more than laughing about the amazing pros of any items, it is like they only want 1000% perfect tools, even if they get that they keep screaming about other issues such as Price, weight, color, ....etc.

Good that i bought ST80 first, because it gave me an idea about the refractor telescope before i get the APO one at very low price without much headache, and it is F5 which is a bonus, it can be used as a guide scope which is designed for as i hear, so it has multi tasks, can't ask more, i did shoot the moon yesterday with this scope and ASI cheap camera, you will have hard time to believe it is done from this cheap scope, but i got an issue with the camera i will ask later somewhere about the solution, but the result isn't less than most APO scopes, why not using it then at that lower price?

Back to my original post, i am already have the idea of which scope to get for DSO imaging, mostly one of those 65-85mm APO refractor, so it is done, and now i look at or research about visual scope because 2 days ago i looked through C925 and the view was nice, so i was greedy for more, i feel 10" will be enough, maybe they didn't use that C925 with better or higher magnification EPs and no barlow, so that maybe i saw the planets not that big size enough, but clear, maybe the scope is able to go higher magnification without lose of quality, but pity i couldn't do that, so i think 10" will be slightly bigger and i can't say better as it will be almost same quality if i keep within the proper magnification as others suggested.

Nice to ask and learn and share, this is the beautiful side of forums, and if i get nice results in astronomy it is because the help i get from you in forums or astronomy sites.

[Dave In Vermont]

Somewhere there's a website devoted to astrophotography done with the ST80. It's BIG and the images are incredible! If someone out there reads this and knows this site I'm reffering to it - please post a link! Thanks!

I grew up in the days before there were any other refractors but achromatic ones. So I don't even notice CA, except on the brightest things up there - like a full Moon. While I have all those filters I listed - I never bother using them!

Have fun, Tareq -

Dave

[TareqPhoto]

I don't use the filter too, it is there just as backup or when needed, but i really don't bother as you said.

Can't wait to buy more scopes in the future.

[John]

Rather than spend money on various filters to remove / reduce the CA I think I'd invest in a pre-owned Skywatcher ED80 refractor in all honesty. With an ED objective a much higher % of the light gathered is bought to focus at the same point (ie: within the airy disk) so it's able to produce much sharper and contrasty planetary and lunar images and support higher magnifications as well (eg: 200x) than an achromat of the same specification. The ED objectives tend to have much less SA as well which also enhances high power performance.

I'm not "down" on the ST80 and the other ST F/5 refractors (I've owned 3 of them !) but it's a case of "horses for courses" in my view.

 

 

[TareqPhoto]

49 minutes ago, John said:

Rather than spend money on various filters to remove / reduce the CA I think I'd invest in a pre-owned Skywatcher ED80 refractor in all honesty. With an ED objective a much higher % of the light gathered is bought to focus at the same point (ie: within the airy disk) so it's able to produce much sharper and contrasty planetary and lunar images and support higher magnifications as well (eg: 200x) than an achromat of the same specification. The ED objectives tend to have much less SA as well which also enhances high power performance.

I'm not "down" on the ST80 and the other ST F/5 refractors (I've owned 3 of them !) but it's a case of "horses for courses" in my view.

 

 

I am new to astronomy or astrophotography, i just bought my Mount by last April, and my next big purchase is the mono astro camera, i hope in this month of July once i get the budget soon, then later maybe after 4-5 months or by nearly the end of this year i will buy a triplet APO scope, if not then a visual reflector scope, my plans are gong slowly, so for the main time i keep learning and asking and watching.

St80 is my learning scope and a starter, once i get the APO then this ST80 will be a guide scope, don't worry about me, sooner or later i will get equipment and you will see unless i die or bad things happens to ruin my plans, but if everything is going fine then i mainly think about 2 scopes and a mono camera and i am ready to go for long long time, and i will buy filters, but not for CA, i will buy filters for NB, and already know which filters to buy also.

[Dave In Vermont]

In AP, you can filter-out CA (if present). That's why I was writing about the ST80 AP site with all it's (amazing!) images.

Speaking of AP, you might want to take a look into Video-AP while you're at it. It's a less expensive version of AP to go into. And you can spend as little as a webcam will cost - and up to multi-thousand of $$$$ or ££££'s for a top-drawer video-cam made exclusively for V-AP. The results of this are almost instant. And with an attached monitor, a whole crowd of people can look at what's in your eyepiece.

Worth a good read on.

Onwards -

Dave

[TareqPhoto]

21 minutes ago, Dave In Vermont said:

In AP, you can filter-out CA (if present). That's why I was writing about the ST80 AP site with all it's (amazing!) images.

Speaking of AP, you might want to take a look into Video-AP while you're at it. It's a less expensive version of AP to go into. And you can spend as little as a webcam will cost - and up to multi-thousand of $$$$ or ££££'s for a top-drawer video-cam made exclusively for V-AP. The results of this are almost instant. And with an an attached monitor, a whole crowd of people can look at what's in your eyepiece.

Worth a good read on.

Onwards -

Dave

I don't know what is that Video-AP, i hope to find it out one day.

Thank you very much!

[N3ptune]

Hemm.. you can use your ST80 and have another separate bigger scope, these 2 won't necessarily be in competition. When you don't want to carry the heavy stuff, you can use the ST80 for fast visual observation of the planets (or use it has a guide scope) Then if you want to drive to a dark spot you can bring the 8", 10" to have larger aperture for visual observation of the DSOs and for the planets too. (I don't know why you should limit yourself to 2 planets only.. people usually look at what's interesting at a certain period of the year, planets, stars, DSOs)

Both instruments are useful. If a 8" or 10" aperture becomes 0% interesting, it will be really interesting for someone else second hand, these are interesting sizes.

 

I asked myself the following question to make my own choice.

- What's my price limit? Mine was around 1000$ for a telescope and mount.  (A money limit will set the goals straight from the beginning)

- I want long term reliability and something easy to collimate. A manual German equatorial mount and a simple Newtonian. (instead of complex electronics and Schmidt lens)

- What's my goal? To look at the DSO's first, to look at the moon and planets seconds. (Right now it's really 50/50 I like both equally)

- Do I want to do astrophotography? My answer was no because money is required to produce quality images, I don't think there is a way around that.

- I want to sketch. Tracking is mandatory, an inexpensive RA clockdrive was required has an extra. (Easy to replace if it fails)

That's how I narrowed down the options to the kit I have right now. Nothing is perfect in life but I know I did the right choice.

=========

You have a massive and expensive AZ-EQ6 mount, you like the planets, you want to get great visual results on the planets, you already tried the 9.25 and you liked it, the 9.25 seems to be a popular choice for the planet and it's supposedly good for astrophotography too!  Maybe the 9.25 is the perfect instrument for you.

 

[TareqPhoto]

9 hours ago, N3ptune said:

Hemm.. you can use your ST80 and have another separate bigger scope, these 2 won't necessarily be in competition. When you don't want to carry the heavy stuff, you can use the ST80 for fast visual observation of the planets (or use it has a guide scope) Then if you want to drive to a dark spot you can bring the 8", 10" to have larger aperture for visual observation of the DSOs and for the planets too. (I don't know why you should limit yourself to 2 planets only.. people usually look at what's interesting at a certain period of the year, planets, stars, DSOs)

Both instruments are useful. If a 8" or 10" aperture becomes 0% interesting, it will be really interesting for someone else second hand, these are interesting sizes.

 

I asked myself the following question to make my own choice.

- What's my price limit? Mine was around 1000$ for a telescope and mount.  (A money limit will set the goals straight from the beginning)

- I want long term reliability and something easy to collimate. A manual German equatorial mount and a simple Newtonian. (instead of complex electronics and Schmidt lens)

- What's my goal? To look at the DSO's first, to look at the moon and planets seconds. (Right now it's really 50/50 I like both equally)

- Do I want to do astrophotography? My answer was no because money is required to produce quality images, I don't think there is a way around that.

- I want to sketch. Tracking is mandatory, an inexpensive RA clockdrive was required has an extra. (Easy to replace if it fails)

That's how I narrowed down the options to the kit I have right now. Nothing is perfect in life but I know I did the right choice.

=========

You have a massive and expensive AZ-EQ6 mount, you like the planets, you want to get great visual results on the planets, you already tried the 9.25 and you liked it, the 9.25 seems to be a popular choice for the planet and it's supposedly good for astrophotography too!  Maybe the 9.25 is the perfect instrument for you.

 

Thank you very much!

Your questions are nice and valid, i did the same too, in fact i bought that mount after almost 2 months discussing, but i didn't want to wait longer, and when i ordered that mount i included that ST80 for practice, i was able to buy only the mount but then i will be like without an eye to look up in the sky, good i started with cheap ST80, now i can upgrade slowly.

9.25 will be perfect as long i can't find anything else better cheaper, but i am still waiting and not in rush, in another forum someone mentioned a scope that i was looking at to get last month but ignored it due to no popularity or mentioned it in many forums as a choice, but this member sounds giving valid points that it may change my mind again about that scope i first chosen.

About DSO, i already said in many threads that i gonna buy a triplet [or doublet] APO no doubt, so DSO isn't included in this visual scope purpose, i put DSO for imaging and planets for visual and sometimes imaging too if possible, but i don't want to make things more complicated, 2 separate scopes will make my life easier than 1 scope for everything from DSO to planets to moon and sun.