Holy Grail Scope

[globular]

My Holy Grail scope can be used on all targets and in all weathers from my back garden. Oh and it costs very little too.

[Froeng]

To compare this thread's subject to the actual "Holy Grail", ie the humble carpenter's cup, wouldn't we be talking about something like:

a) Galileo's original telescope that he used

b) Newton's original "newtonian" reflector

or c)   the Hooker telescope Edwin Hubble used at his time.

I admit non of the above people were Jesus, but then we are comparing ordinary telescope to holy cups...?

[jetstream]

1 minute ago, Froeng said:

humble carpenter's cup,

Now thats a humbling comparison. Good one.

[Nakedgun]

On 23/02/2023 at 10:34, Sunshine said:

Is there one particular scope which you would consider your holy grail scope? one which you do not have and may never get your hands on but it crosses your mind leaving you starry eyed every now and then. For me, I think it would be an FS128.

~

Having foolishly sold my FS128 some years back, I can say you lust for a nice instrument.

The scope I will never own but wish I did would be the Astro-Physics 10" MCT.

 

.

[saac]

13 minutes ago, Froeng said:

To compare this thread's subject to the actual "Holy Grail", ie the humble carpenter's cup, wouldn't we be talking about something like:

a) Galileo's original telescope that he used

b) Newton's original "newtonian" reflector

or c)   the Hooker telescope Edwin Hubble used at his time.

I admit non of the above people were Jesus, but then we are comparing ordinary telescope to holy cups...?

If I had either Galileo's or Netwon's original scope, they would be upload straight away to buy and sell.  Then I would buy a RASA 8

Jim 

[Highburymark]

17 hours ago, paulastro said:

I have my Holy Grail scope, and it's not a Tak, it's not even a refractor!  It's the Celestron Starsense Explorer 8inch Dob, which I bought last July.

I sold my 102ED F7 refractor to buy it, as I'm waiting for my second hip replacement and I have severe multilayer spinal stenosis. This means I can only use a finder with great difficulty, and it causes ne great pain despite shed loads of pain killers.

The SS means I can observe largely pain free (as long as I'm sat down) and the target finding app means I can find any object I want in less than a minute, and through thin layers of cloud where you literally can't see a single star, I kid you not. Plus no set up procedure each session and no finder necessary.

It's means I can carry on observing and making the most of every session I am outside. It's been a game changer for me.

What's more I have to say I can see a lot more through  the  8inch Dob than I could ever could see through my refractor.

 

 

Have followed your posts on this scope with great interest Paul. Given half the chance (darker skies, more space), I wouldn’t hesitate to buy one too. 

[F15Rules]

8 hours ago, JeremyS said:

I never joke about Taks, Dave.

Or handles.

Actually, Jeremy, that very fact is in itself rather funny!😋

Dave

[mikeDnight]

 One of the nice things about the FS128, apart from its excellent optics and build quality, was that it could be carried very well on a GP mount, providing the tripod was sturdy enough. In the pic below is my FS128 on a GP and tripod made by Peter Drew. The wide tripod neck gave it great stability while the tripod itself was light and easy to carry. It's probably my favourite tripod!

Here at AstroFest in 2007ish I'd pretty much set up camp at the TruTek stall. At the time TruTechnology was the sole UK importer, so it was rare to see any Takahashi scopes. This was a TOA130.

 

Back home I'd let my FS128 go in part exchange for a FS152, but the brand new EQ6 was no match for the 6". Eventually I had to buy a Losmandy G11 to carry the scope. The EQ6 was returned due to an internal rattle and a factory touched up paint chip, and its inability to hold the scope steady.

 

[ollypenrice]

3 hours ago, tomato said:

The RASA is a fine scope but like all of these "Which Scope?" threads, it depends on want you want to see/image. If you want small galaxies like this:

Then you need one of these:

Oh, and it needs to be located in Atacama...

And there's the problem. If you want to image at very high resolution you will, in no time at all, find yourself seeing-limited and having anything larger than a 6 inch refractor will get you nowhere, unless you locate in exceptional seeing. When you've finally done that, you will be imaging targets already imaged by professional telescopes and you will have little or no chance of offering a new perspective on a target.

If, on the other hand, you aim to go wide and deep, who knows what you will find?

Olly

[Marvin Jenkins]

I like the price on request. “Well how much is it” is that enough of a request?

I just won 70 mill on the euro millions so are you going to continue to play a strange game.

If I wanted a super car then do we play charades?

Edited February 25, 2023 by Marvin Jenkins
This was a response to the Planewave but everything jumped forward a load of messages

[ShinyTwelve]

21 hours ago, pipnina said:

Why stop there?
https://www.astrosysteme.com/en-us/products/az2500-f6-f2/

Anyone got 7 million euros to spare?

It weighs 17 metric tonnes!!!!!

[F15Rules]

1 hour ago, mikeDnight said:

 One of the nice things about the FS128, apart from its excellent optics and build quality, was that it could be carried very well on a GP mount, providing the tripod was sturdy enough. In the pic below is my FS128 on a GP and tripod made by Peter Drew. The wide tripod neck gave it great stability while the tripod itself was light and easy to carry. It's probably my favourite tripod!

Here at AstroFest in 2007ish I'd pretty much set up camp at the TruTek stall. At the time TruTechnology was the sole UK importer, so it was rare to see any Takahashi scopes. This was a TOA130.

 

Back home I'd let my FS128 go in part exchange for a FS152, but the brand new EQ6 was no match for the 6". Eventually I had to buy a Losmandy G11 to carry the scope. The EQ6 was returned due to an internal rattle and a factory touched up paint chip, and its inability to hold the scope steady.

 

That's so true, Mike.

On my original photo the FS128 is on the original Tak tripod, which looks great and works fairly well..but I did get some wobbling. The EM2 mount is excellent (think GPDX capacity), so I decided to use my trusty 14 year old fixed height hardwood tripod which was built by another SGL member and has a nice Berlebach wooden tray for extra rigidity (and ep storage of course).

I recently cut 100mm off each leg to make seated observation more comfy on my Geoptik Nadira chair, and it now makes an excellent platform for the scope..👍

Dave

[900SL]

Mine isn't yet available. F1.8 400 - 4000 mm adaptive optics with inboard guiding sensors and perfect correction via a micro black hole held in stasis at one end with variable gravitational lensing

Balancing is a bit of a [removed word] though. Rather front heavy

[Alien 13]

My needs are simple, a 70mm refractor with fixed 6x magnification and a correct image view with internal focusing, it should have zero CA or other defects and be nitrogen purged... It should also not have a commercial eyepiece in its construction as they all have some issues but should have a soft rubber eyecup assembly. The military have some and I was lucky enough to look through one a few years ago and nothing today comes even close to the clarity and colour of the pinpoint stars.

Alan

[paulastro]

6 hours ago, Sunshine said:

Look at that frost caked dob, you guys don't mess around across the pond.

It was -5 C, not unusual up here.  The good news was that the optics didn't frost over 🙂

[paulastro]

4 hours ago, Highburymark said:

Have followed your posts on this scope with great interest Paul. Given half the chance (darker skies, more space), I wouldn’t hesitate to buy one too. 

Many thanks Mark.  I must admit, I do go on about it a bit.  Its just so good, every time I use it I'm amazed how well it works. 🙂

[Grump Martian]

15 hours ago, F15Rules said:

Hi Martin, 

Yes, the FS128 is very light for it's size..7.5kg for a tube that is almost 6" diameter and c. 1 metre in length. The finder, diagonal and big EP or binoviewers bring that up to c 9 kg.

The newer 4" Taks are even lighter. If the day comes when I can't lift my current setup (and that would probably be the only reason I would change it), I think I'd go for one of the FC100 range on a light  Altaz type mount.

I was very moved by Paul's post though and feel a) so fortunate that I can still lift my present setup and b) more importantly, so pleased for Paul and others like him that they have found a literally perfect "Holy Grail" solution for their needs.

We often joke and tease one another about which of refractors, dobs, newts, scts or maks are best..but surely, in extremis, surely the best scope is the one that prolongs our ability to participate in our wonderful hobby for longest.

Dave

Thankyou Dave for this.I was astonished at how light the Tak refractors were when I handled one at an Astrofest one year. My Starfield 102 mm is very easy to handle. But I have sold instruments on in recent years that were long and heavy. This was due to discomfort caused by injuries.

Edited February 25, 2023 by Grump Martian
Added content

[tomato]

2 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

And there's the problem. If you want to image at very high resolution you will, in no time at all, find yourself seeing-limited and having anything larger than a 6 inch refractor will get you nowhere, unless you locate in exceptional seeing. When you've finally done that, you will be imaging targets already imaged by professional telescopes and you will have little or no chance of offering a new perspective on a target.

If, on the other hand, you aim to go wide and deep, who knows what you will find?

Olly

Yes, it’s a problem, and I know I can’t come close to professional results on small galaxies but that won’t stop me trying. There are other challenges for  close in imaging e.g. plasma jets, Crab Nebula pulsar etc, so I don’t regard it as an unrewarding exercise. I do enjoy imaging gas and dust with the RASA but galaxies motivate me more. It was @gorann’s M31 first light with his RASA that prompted me to get one, if he had gone straight to Ha and IFN targets I probably would never have bought one!

[wookie1965]

11 hours ago, paulastro said:

Many thanks Mark.  I must admit, I do go on about it a bit.  Its just so good, every time I use it I'm amazed how well it works. 🙂

I haven't had a good time with mine whether it was the seeing or transparency I was out Friday night M42 looked brilliant even in the 25mm but when I went to M65 nothing nada nought same with M51, I would have thought a 10" would at least of showed something.

[Ricochet]

10 minutes ago, wookie1965 said:

M65 nothing nada nought same with M51, I would have thought a 10" would at least of showed something.

The problem with galaxies is that light pollution (or lack of) is probably more important that telescope size. I know I've seen both of those with my 8" so your 10" should have no problem, on the right night from the right location. M65 in particular is very small so making sure that you absolutely on target and switching to a high transmission eyepiece that produces an optimal exit pupil, say around 12mm in an f5, will give you a better chance, but if the light pollution washes the galaxy out you just won't see it. From a light polluted site open and globular clusters will be much more rewarding targets.

[wookie1965]

10 minutes ago, Ricochet said:

The problem with galaxies is that light pollution (or lack of) is probably more important that telescope size. I know I've seen both of those with my 8" so your 10" should have no problem, on the right night from the right location. M65 in particular is very small so making sure that you absolutely on target and switching to a high transmission eyepiece that produces an optimal exit pupil, say around 12mm in an f5, will give you a better chance, but if the light pollution washes the galaxy out you just won't see it. From a light polluted site open and globular clusters will be much more rewarding targets.

I lined the scope up dead right objects right in middle, Yes clusters looked good maybe only using the 25 mm was part of the problem.  When I had my 8" reflector on the EQ5 I never saw the trio or M51 so it maybe more my light pollution than anything else. I am checking a place out 45mins away to see what that is like, if I cannot find a place I may well sell the dob and get a new to me mount then save for a good 5" or 6" refractor.

[wimvb]

I'm a bit of a MakNewt fan, so an 8" or 10" Intes Micro would be nice to have ...

 

[DaveS]

2 hours ago, wookie1965 said:

I haven't had a good time with mine whether it was the seeing or transparency I was out Friday night M42 looked brilliant even in the 25mm but when I went to M65 nothing nada nought same with M51, I would have thought a 10" would at least of showed something.

Shortly after I moved here I pointed my little 180 Mak at the Leo Triplet. I only managed to get M65 and M66 in the FoV, but they looked like a pair of car headlights. Having a dark sky helps.

[wookie1965]

1 minute ago, DaveS said:

Shortly after I moved here I pointed my little 180 Mak at the Leo Triplet. I only managed to get M65 and M66 in the FoV, but they looked like a pair of car headlights. Having a dark sky helps.

I wouldn't mind just a pair of fuzzies but to see nothing is disappointing. Hopefully I can find a dark site within a hour of me. 

[mikeDnight]

43 minutes ago, wookie1965 said:

I wouldn't mind just a pair of fuzzies but to see nothing is disappointing. Hopefully I can find a dark site within a hour of me. 

 It sounds like it might be your local transparency that might be the problem. My own site, low down in a valley and close to the river Calder, often suffers from a thin mist that hinders deep sky viewing. It makes for a wonderful lunar and planetary site, but only when the mist is gone do I have great DSO views. I've only had two good transparent nights this year, at least on nights I've observed. A couple of nights ago, even after observing the crescent moon for around an hour, I turned my attention to M1 in Taurus and found it, large and with subtle detail, quite easily in my 100mm Tak.  (I was using a 16mm eyepiece giving 50X). Yet a few days earlier using my Genesis SDF on a moonless night and with a 35mm Panoptic (a 4.5° true field at 15X), I couldnt see M110 the fainter of the two satalite galaxies in the same field as M31. That's normally an easy catch!  It seems that for me at least, having good seeing and good transparency at the same time, is a rare event.