Sanity check what scope for permanent setup for visual: EdgeHD 11, EdgeHD 14, or Mewlon 250

[Dr Strange]

Happy New Year everyone!

Thank you in advance for your advise.

SWMBO has agreed to let me have a backyard permanent setup. This will be for visual only. I have the AP end covered. I have the first component to my setup. That being an Explore Scientific/Bresser FPL-53 140mm refractor. I was able to find an excellent priced gently used one. So my lens based part of the setup is covered. I am hopeful based on tests using the local mountain antenna farm that it will perform well. If not I will use a Tak TSA-120. 

The question now is what to get for the mirrored part of the equation. With the following in mind:

1. I have owned and used the EdgeHD 11", EdgeHD 14", and Mewlon 250.

2. I am in a Bortle 8/9 transition zone. My seeing is usually above average on average with some nights of excellent seeing.

3. I will be using both scopes with a EP and a night vision device. I have the TV NVD kit.

4. This will be a permanently mounted setup. 

5. I can afford all of the scopes (SWMBO through painful and drawn out negotiations where there was much posturing, wailing, quiet tears, resentful glares, gnashing of teeth, and several firm grunts has given me a realistic budget)

6. Non EdgeHD scopes are not an option.

7. The mount they will be on is quite capable of supporting both scopes with headroom to spare

And with the caveat that QUALITY aperture is king, what are your ideas on what I should go with? 

Edited January 11, 2022 by Dr Strange

[Froeng]

Sell the refractor and find a used Mewlon 300 😹😎

[Froeng]

Seriously, Ι would say get the Mewlon 250 if you really have a site with good seeing. You should be able to appreciate the quality optics more than the C14 aperture (I’d forget about the C11). In B8, your NV can “replace” the extra light gathering power of the C14. But the high mag views of the Mewlon are likely going to be better…

just some thoughts!

Edited January 15, 2022 by Froeng

[JeremyS]

I’d also go for the Mu250 for the better star images and likely better planetary too.

One consideration though is whether you can stomach the star spikes with the Mu….

[jeffmar]

In light polluted areas larger aperture almost always wins out. I would imagine the MU250 would have great optics, but a C14 will usually beat out any 10 inch scope in these conditions, assuming the collimation on the SCT is good. 

[Deadlake]

On 11/01/2022 at 22:41, Dr Strange said:

3. I will be using both scopes with a EP and a night vision device. I have the TV NVD kit.

This is a main factor for a decision. I’d then bring in a fast Astrograph into the equation as the NVD needs to be illuminated with a flat field to avoid EoF effects. 

Looking at an SCT first, the SCT will need adaption with a AP 0.75 reducer, not any faster as you need back focus. You will then need the usual TV 41 panoptic and TV 55/67 mm EP’s which creates a long stack but it will get you to around F4. I’d reach out to Mark (CN Mazerski), he has been thru this before and gave up on SCT’s as the view was not bright enough when using an NVD.

If you have an a AG power newt (F4 newt supplied with an ASA reducer) you can start at F 4 but can insert the ASA reducer to run at F 2.8.

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p4611_Boren-Simon-8--f-2-8-PowerNewton-Astrograph---Carbon-Tube.html

With a 3 nm H-alpha filter you need all the speed you can get in your bortle 8/9 environment. The advantage is that you can insert a Barlow into the power newt to increase the focal length. It’s aways easy to make a scope slower then faster. The Barlow will cover the ranges the reduced SCT would reach.

In summary it’s hard to have a single scope that’s covers visual and NVD usage cases. I would split them out as a power newt scope is a lot less then the above scopes you have mentioned, you could buy that and decide if you needed to go with an SCT for visual. The reason I suggest this is that NVD users I have talked to have the complete range of scopes from Takahashi etc (Even more then @JeremyS 😃) and in then end they sold them all as they just used a power newt. They also sold a large amount of there glass collection as well.

For visual usage I’d go with the Mewlon as for non DSO work as the  smoother mirrors would be a main advantage however it’s not as BV friendly as the SCT’s.

A good thread to read would be: What is the Ideal set of equipment for Night vision Astronomy?

 

Edited January 18, 2022 by Deadlake

[GavStar]

1 hour ago, Deadlake said:

This is a main factor for a decision. I’d then bring in a fast Astrograph into the equation as the NVD needs to be illuminated with a flat field to avoid EoF effects. 

Looking at an SCT first, the SCT will need adaption with a AP 0.75 reducer, not any faster as you need back focus. You will then need the usual TV 41 panoptic and TV 55/67 mm EP’s which creates a long stack but it will get you to around F4. I’d reach out to Ray (CN GeezerGazer), he has been thru this before and gave up on SCT’s as the view was not bright enough when using an NVD.

If you have an a AG power newt (F4 newt supplied with an ASA reducer) you can start at F 4 but can insert the ASA reducer to run at F 2.8.

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p4611_Boren-Simon-8--f-2-8-PowerNewton-Astrograph---Carbon-Tube.html

With a 3 nm H-alpha filter you need all the speed you can get in your bortle 8/9 environment. The advantage is that you can insert a Barlow into the power newt to increase the focal length. It’s aways easy to make a scope slower then faster. The Barlow will cover the ranges the reduced SCT would reach.

In summary it’s hard to have a single scope that’s covers visual and NVD usage cases. I would split them out as a power newt scope is a lot less then the above scopes you have mentioned, you could buy that and decide if you needed to go with an SCT for visual. The reason I suggest this is that NVD users I have talked to have the complete range of scopes from Takahashi etc (Even more then @JeremyS 😃) and in then end they sold them all as they just used a power newt. They also sold a large amount of there glass collection as well.

For visual usage I’d go with the Mewlon as for non DSO work as the  smoother mirrors would be a main advantage however it’s not as BV friendly as the SCT’s.

A good thread to read would be: What is the Ideal set of equipment for Night vision Astronomy?

 

It’s important to take into account that the OP has the Televue nv setup which is a pvs-14. This means he is doing afocal only nv, not prime. The USA nv users of the powernewt are in most cases using nv in prime mode only and hence need a very fast (eg f2.8) base scope to get the required bright views.

I use a c11 edge with the edge 0.7x reducer and with a 67mm used afocally with nv I get an effective speed of f2.8 which gives great views from my bortle 8 light polluted London back garden with a 3nm ha filter. I would thoroughly recommend an edge c11 for afocal use with nv.

However, for standard visual use, I’m less convinced by the c11 and would generally use my 130mm or 160mm refractor. For most DSOs aperture is needed and from a lp site, nv can really help with emission nebulae, globular clusters and many galaxies (particularly edge on). For open clusters I prefer my refractors with normal glass. And of course for planetary/lunar it’s my 130mm/160mm refractors every time for me. 

The OP has a very nice 140mm refractor that can be used for lunar/planetary and also with nv for the large emission nebulae such as the North America, California or rosette. So in my opinion the c11 edge would be a great addition. However, I’ve never used a Mewlon so can’t really comment on that (although I think for nv the c11 would be better where speed/aperture is more important).

Here’s a couple of recent phone pics of the horsehead taken through my c11 and nv monocular at my London back garden to give an idea of the live visual views possible with this setup (one with 41mm panoptic and one with 67mm adapter Televue plossl)

Edited January 18, 2022 by GavStar

[Deadlake]

6 minutes ago, GavStar said:

It’s important to take into account that the OP has the Televue nv setup which is a pvs-14. This means he is doing afocal only nv, not prime. The USA nv users of the powernewt are in most cases using nv in prime mode only and hence need a very fast (eg f2.8) base scope to get the required bright views.

I use a c11 edge with the edge 0.7x reducer and with a 67mm used afocally with nv I get an effective speed of f2.8 which gives great views from my bortle 8 light polluted London back garden with a 3nm ha filter. I would thoroughly recommend an edge c11 for afocal use with nv.

However, for standard visual use, I’m less convinced by the c11 and would generally use my 130mm or 160mm refractor. For most DSOs aperture is needed and from a lp site, nv can really help with emission nebulae, globular clusters and many galaxies (particularly edge on). For open clusters I prefer my refractors with normal glass. And of course for planetary/lunar it’s my 130mm/160mm refractors every time for me. 

The OP has a very nice 140mm refractor that can be used for lunar/planetary and also with nv for the large emission nebulae such as the North America, California or rosette. So in my opinion the c11 edge would be a great addition. However, I’ve never used a Mewlon so can’t really comment on that (although I think for nv the c11 would be better where speed/aperture is more important).

Here’s a couple of recent phone pics of the horsehead taken through my c11 and nv monocular at my London back garden to give an idea of the live visual views possible with this setup (one with 41mm panoptic and one with 67mm adapter Televue plossl)

I agree with @GavStar that in a Bortle 8/9 environment then speed is everything (within reason) and for a 130 mm scope APO  F 5.5 / 6 scope afocal will deliver the fastest system and hence brightest image with most contrast.

For context when @GavStar mentions a 130 mm I presume its is an AP130GTX 😃

Back to the C11 EdgeHD versus Newtonian, this really does split NVD users and there are quite a few different views in the US.

The attraction for me was quite a small NVD stack as the NVD I use supports prime. At the same time the C11EdgeHD is quite compact, and if its on a EQ mount then really viewing through a Newt would not be the best ergonomics.

I guess then question is what more would you get out of a C14 EdgeHD over the C11EdgeHD as far as NVD goes?

If I want super sharp stars and planets I'll take my LZOS APO any time.
 

 


 

[Stu]

15 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

I agree with @GavStar that in a Bortle 8/9 environment then speed is everything (within reason) and for a 130 mm scope APO  F 5.5 / 6 scope afocal will deliver the fastest system and hence brightest image with most contrast.

For context when @GavStar mentions a 130 mm I presume its is an AP130GTX 😃

Back to the C11 EdgeHD versus Newtonian, this really does split NVD users and there are quite a few different views in the US.

The attraction for me was quite a small NVD stack as the NVD I use supports prime. At the same time the C11EdgeHD is quite compact, and if its on a EQ mount then really viewing through a Newt would not be the best ergonomics.

I guess then question is what more would you get out of a C14 EdgeHD over the C11EdgeHD as far as NVD goes?

If I want super sharp stars and planets I'll take my LZOS APO any time.
 

 


 

In your experience using NV, which works best Martin?

[Deadlake]

31 minutes ago, Stu said:

In your experience using NV, which works best Martin?

It's not a simple answer since it depends on a lot of factors around the viewing environment, aka sky brightness and transparency. 

For a 130 mm APO F6 or faster scope afocal usage, for speed reasons. EoF is a minor concern to get a high contrast image. Would post photos but phone holder in the post, views are similar to Gavins excellent shots from last week with his AP130GTX or FSQ-130.

For a larger focal length than prime in a Newt as better EoF in my use case, however a C11 is tempting as the EP is in the correct position for mounting on an EQ. 

Which is why I suggested reaching out to some users in the US who can give some feedback as they have used both set up's.

Also remember @GavStar NVD tube is vastly superior to my tube and in certain tests sets records on previous tests recorded by CN's NV community.

This means a slower set up at longer focal lengths can be used, the C11EdgeHD will be  subjectively running around F4.

 

Edited January 18, 2022 by Deadlake

[Stu]

40 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

It's not a simple answer since it depends on a lot of factors around the viewing environment, aka sky brightness and transparency. 

For a 130 mm APO F6 or faster scope afocal usage, for speed reasons. EoF is a minor concern to get a high contrast image. Would post photos but phone holder in the post, views are similar to Gavins excellent shots from last week with his AP130GTX or FSQ-130.

For a larger focal length then prime as better EoF in my use case, however a C11 is tempting as the EP is in the correct position for mounting on an EQ. 

Which is why I suggested reaching out to some users in the US who can give some feedback as they have used both set up's.

Also remember @GavStar NVD tube is vastly superior to my tube and in certain tests sets records on previous tests recorded by CN's NV community.

This means a slower set up at longer focal lengths can be used, the C11EdgeHD will be  subjectively running around F4.

 

Understood, I was just asking what you had found in your own experience? I’m getting confused by stuff that you are just quoting from other forums and what you have actually experienced yourself.

[nfotis]

Maybe a stupid question, but wouldn't a RASA or Hyperstar-equipped SCT be fast enough for a NV set-up?

N.F.

[catburglar]

On 18/01/2022 at 10:09, GavStar said:

It’s important to take into account that the OP has the Televue nv setup which is a pvs-14. This means he is doing afocal only nv, not prime. The USA nv users of the powernewt are in most cases using nv in prime mode only and hence need a very fast (eg f2.8) base scope to get the required bright views.

I use a c11 edge with the edge 0.7x reducer and with a 67mm used afocally with nv I get an effective speed of f2.8 which gives great views from my bortle 8 light polluted London back garden with a 3nm ha filter. I would thoroughly recommend an edge c11 for afocal use with nv.

However, for standard visual use, I’m less convinced by the c11 and would generally use my 130mm or 160mm refractor. For most DSOs aperture is needed and from a lp site, nv can really help with emission nebulae, globular clusters and many galaxies (particularly edge on). For open clusters I prefer my refractors with normal glass. And of course for planetary/lunar it’s my 130mm/160mm refractors every time for me. 

The OP has a very nice 140mm refractor that can be used for lunar/planetary and also with nv for the large emission nebulae such as the North America, California or rosette. So in my opinion the c11 edge would be a great addition. However, I’ve never used a Mewlon so can’t really comment on that (although I think for nv the c11 would be better where speed/aperture is more important).

Here’s a couple of recent phone pics of the horsehead taken through my c11 and nv monocular at my London back garden to give an idea of the live visual views possible with this setup (one with 41mm panoptic and one with 67mm adapter Televue plossl)

Off topic- sorry- but that second image and the context of your observing site is a very compelling advert for night vision astronomy…if only it wasn’t so damn costly and complex😁

[Dr Strange]

Thank you all for your replies. It has been very helpful. I have come to a decision as to setup.

I will go with either a Celestron EdgeHD 14"/35.56cm with a 0.7x reducer or a Meade 16"/40.64cm f/8 SCT. I will wrap it in reflectix insulation on either. I will install TEMPest fans if it is the EdgeHD or use the stock fans if it is the Meade for TE and cooling. I will also have a 140mm f/6.5 Explore Scientific APO refractor and a Tele Vue NP101is for EAA and everyting will ride on a AP 1600. I will receive the mount in May. I have the two refractors and I just need to figure out the SCT. I would like the Meade because I have always liked Meade and the extra 33% light gathering is nice but I am concerned about Meade's future as well as Orion's who now owns Meade. I am leaning heavily towards the EdgeHD. 

I love refractors and I found a killer deal on the 140 used. It is FPL-53 and super fast plus it has the lifetime warranty. So it is there for use also.

I have abandoned AP. I just don't have the time for it with work and other commitments and the bloody Starlink satellite constellations are almost at my Lat so I am concerned about the impact they will have. I plan to revisit the subject of AP when I retire. In that amount of time I expect the options for CMOS cameras will have advanced and there may possibly be something even better. So I sold my SBIG recently. It plus the funds from the sale of my Mach2 and 1100 as well as some other items will help fund the new setup. As some of you are shocked by my drunken spending please remember I am an Irish ex rugby Lock who played at the Uni level (explains much) so I am not very bright and I tell my wife that the Astronomy hobby  keeps me out of fights and the pubs so it is money well spent.  I also have no other hobbies and I scrimp and save to afford the items I do have. 

I am slowly working on a setup where I can use a Oculus VR headset to do a somewhat full immersion view via the EAA setup. I have a ASI 553c Pro and ASIAir Pro, Feathertouch FocusBOSS (FT makes the focusers for TV), and Pegasus power box that will make it self contained.  

I plan to invite various groups for a backyard outreach event as part of my volunteer work as a NASA/JPL Solar System Ambassador. I also plan to stream sessions using the EAA setup and use it for virtual outreach events.

I really wanted to go with the Mewlon 250 but at the end of the day the value for the cost just wasn't there. Same with a Mewlon 300. For just a bit more cost I could buy the Meade and the light gathering of the Meade/Celestron simply leaves the Mewlon in the dust. If I really want to focus on the moon and planets with bang on crystal clear views (weather permitting) I can bring out my Mewlon 210.