Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b83b14cd4142fe10848741bb2a14c66b.jpg

Set ups for visual observing

MartinB

Recommended Posts

MartinB

MartinB

Posted
Posted

Reading a lot of threads recently I've been interested how many of the visual observers on the site stick with GE mounts - EQ6 etc. I know they are very flexible re use of different scopes but they are great heavy clumsy things. GEMs seem to be the business for astrophotography with their eq tracking but visual??? fork mounted alt az scopes are such a joy to use. the lack of rotation isn't an issue visually, they are much easier to lug out into the garden and have none of the problems that GEMs have around the meridian. Fork mounted scopes can be awkward around the zenith if a small EP is being used but a very minor issue in comparison.

Smaller scopes can easily be piggy backed. Alt az adjustments feel very natural. so what is the big attraction of GEMs?

OK, coat's on, I'll close the door as a leave :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted

Martin I know you mentioned this, but its a big factor IMHO, most popular commercial fork mounts restrict you (without a lot of messing about) to one scope per mount, they also tend to have GOTO systems whether you want them are not (with the attendant cost).

EQ mounts can be used on many different scopes and tend to have GOTO as an option so the cost can be spread out or cut if you don't want GOTO.

Can't think of anything else......:))

Link to comment
Share on other sites
russ

russ

Posted
Posted

If I was looking for a visual only scope it would have to be a dobsonian, whats the point in a fork mounted bells'n'whistles scope just to visual observe. Get a big light bucket for a lot less cash.

IMHO the best setup would be a dob and an EQ6 Skyscan. Put the dob OTA on the EQ6 when you want the GOTO/Image or just chuck it in the dob box for some visual only.

Russ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OXO

OXO

Posted
Posted

but for a visual (working class) observer its probably the best we're going to get and be able to use as a one man setup.

Deff Gaz and within a price range of 2000 gbp it has to be great value for money too :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GordonCopestake

GordonCopestake

Posted
Posted

anything with tracking is ideal really. Gems just make things a little easier. You can have EQ platforms for dobs, but full GOTO is nice. AltAz is a pain as you constantly have to twiddle two knobs to keep an object in view, especially at high mag. EQ-tracking will keep your object in view pretty much as long as it's above the horizon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kaptain Klevtsov

Kaptain Klevtsov

Posted
Posted

So how do these fork things work WRT tracking? Surely if you want to watch something for more than a few seconds you will need at least one drive motor otherwise it's gone by the time you have changed eyepieces, put the Barlow in or whatever. Assuming you mean GOTO fork mounts compared to setting circles on a handmatic GEMs, then that's not a fair comparison really.

As far as heavy clumsy things goes, with the GEM you can at least take the 'scope off the mount, take the counterweights off and move the bits seperately. A fork mounted SCT is just one lump, if I understand the way the things are made, so you end up moving the whole lot together.

The Geppetto Dob mount would be my ideal low cost visual choice as far as bang for the buck goes.

Captain Chaos

Link to comment
Share on other sites
russ

russ

Posted
Posted

Hi Martin, i see where you are coming from and you are right, the EQ6 was a bit off putting for just a bit of visual. And GEMs can be awkward to use, especially anywhere near the pole.

And I can see the appeal of the C8 CPC, it really does look easy to use and move around. And the C8 OTA is a great all rounder. The whole setup looks a good all round package.

Only trouble is the dob is a far better visual only package. Easier to setup and use, faster cool down and an unbeatable aperture per £ factor.

Russ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted

Wouldn't a 16" dob need a good dark sky site to give value for money?

It would be better at a dark site, but more aperture is more aperture. The myth that big scopes just collect more light pollution, is a err.....myth!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted

So how do these fork things work WRT tracking? Surely if you want to watch something for more than a few seconds you will need at least one drive motor otherwise it's gone by the time you have changed eyepieces, put the Barlow in or whatever.

For tracking both motors move, up-down, left-right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MartinB

MartinB

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Just thinking of my own experiences really and advice to give to people exploring new scope options. My normal routine now is to be imaging with the nextar and visual observing with the ED80 on a Super Polaris. The fork mounting is much more pleasurable!! No awkward positions, no rotating of the scope, no readjusting everthing to pass the meridian and almost as easy to manouevre the NS8 into the garden as the ED80 on its mount! The HEQ5 and skywatcher 8" seems such a great combination but at this price range I think an nextar i is a fantastic, less flexible but neater alternative.

Just for discussion that's all (no axe to grind!!!) :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted

Thats not just the mount though Martin, a SCT is inherrently easier to mount/use than a Newt or a refractor.

When comparing fork SCTS and EQ Newts you've got to look at the ££££ as well....it's not "like for like".

I know I'm biased :) but if you get an EQ6 you can put just about any scope under 14" on it and have GOTO/tracking, it's a mount for life (or until your back goes!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MartinB

MartinB

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Don't disagree with you at all Gaz except for saying that a goto eq6 is not much less than a nexstar i 8"! Ultimately I plan to have an SCT on a hefty GEM for imaging.

It's just that fork mounts are such a pleasure to use and this often seems to be over looked.

I think we need another star party to compare gear :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GazOC

GazOC

Posted
Posted

Don't disagree with you at all Gaz except for saying that a goto eq6 is not much less than a nexstar i 8"!

Ah, but I can put a 12" Newt on my EQ6!! :)

I agree though mate, maybe forks do get ignored a wee bit, but when a newcomer asks for advice you could be steering them up a deadend unless they are sure thats what they want.

A 8" Newt on a (H)EQ5 is pretty flexible in that regard, a bit of a catch all recommendation (or kop out? :))

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FLO

FLO

Posted
Posted

I often observe with Greg where, between us, we have all mount options in use - Dob, AltAz (driven), GEQ, and a regular video tripod (for a short-tube refractor).

I find my preference depends on the magnification used. For low to medium powers, the Dobsonians AltAz arrangement or even the regular tripod is fine and convenient. For high power planetary/lunar observing a driven mount is easier, particularly when using eyepieces with a narrow FOV. Trying to chase a planet at 150x thru an Orthoscopic with a Dobsonian is tiresome!

As a side: Thats something to consider when buying a Dobsonian - wide-field eyepieces allow you to remain at the eyepiece longer before having to nudge the scope. Problem is, with a fast (f5 and faster) Dob, only expensive wide-field eyepieces provide sharp image peripheries!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
iancandler

iancandler

Posted
Posted

" Problem is, with a fast (f5 and faster) Dob, only expensive wide-field eyepieces provide sharp image peripheries! "

I've been using the Antares W70 series of eyepieces and had no problems at all.. the image is sharp and clear even when using the 5.7mm with my 10" revelation.

I know they arnt in the same league as naglers etc but for roughly £45 a piece theyre pretty good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
russ

russ

Posted
Posted
" Problem is, with a fast (f5 and faster) Dob, only expensive wide-field eyepieces provide sharp image peripheries! "

I've been using the Antares W70 series of eyepieces and had no problems at all.. the image is sharp and clear even when using the 5.7mm with my 10" revelation.

I know they arnt in the same league as naglers etc but for roughly £45 a piece theyre pretty good.

The Burgess/TMB Planetary Eyepiece is designed specially for this task. Good eyerelief, wide(ish) field and knockout sharpness edge to edge. Thomas M Back designed them with the dob in mind. Having used one in my f5 Newt i can confirm they do exactly as it says on the tin!

Russ

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Warthog

The Warthog

Posted
Posted

I have my C6N on a GEM, and it's a bear to get pointed at stuff in the circumpolar regions. It never seems to want to go the right way, and you have to fool it into pointing at your target. An alt-az mount would be much easier. I like my GEM for planetary and lunar observing, when I want to look at the target for a long time, say when I am drawing, or waiting for an event with Jupiter's moons, or just waiting for those moments of clarity that reveal detail on the surface. When observing DSOs, I observe for less time than the target stays in the FOV, usually, as I am using low powers.

I plan to get a dob in the future, and a GEM mounted refractor for planets.

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.