Jump to content


Photo

1.75in Stainless steel legs.

  • Please log in to reply
13 replies to this topic

#1 Darren B

Darren B

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 02 May 2005
  • Loc: UK

Posted 30 January 2011 - 03:11 AM

How good are the 1.75in Stainless steel legs at damping vibration?
At the moment I am using Vixen Portamount on a Vixen P90 tripod and a 8 inch extension pillar. Although this deals with vibration really well, the tripod is just not tall enough.
I have enquired about the wooden tripod from Handson Optics, but I live in the UK. First there is $110 in shipping (quoted from Handson Optics), then 4% import duty, then 20% VAT and then a handling fee. with all that added on, the tripod costs three times as much (around $270-$300)
We have no equivalent that I can find, only Berlebach and Baader and they're expensive.
The other alternative is the 1.75in Stainless steel legs, that's resonably priced.

#2 Midnight Dan

Midnight Dan

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11167
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2008
  • Loc: Hilton, NY, Yellow Zone (Bortle 4.5)

Posted 30 January 2011 - 09:48 AM

I depends on how much weight you put on it, and what the focal length of the scope is. If your largest scope is the WO 80mm, you should have no problem at all.

I have a Celestron NexStar 8SE and 5SE, both on 1.75" stainless tripods. The 8", 2000mm FL scope is at the upper end of what this tripod can handle and needs a deft touch on the focuser when used at mags >200x or so. Anti-vibration pads help a lot.

But the 5", 1250mm scope is solidly at home on this tripod. So I would think your 80mm, 545mm FL scope would be fine.

-Dan

#3 pennyandchris

pennyandchris

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 928
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2007
  • Loc: Horsham, England

Posted 30 January 2011 - 11:39 AM

Darren, have you considered a surveyor's tripod? Good (unbranded) wooden models are available for about £80. You can get top quality Sokkia or similar models for about £150.

I have one that I've used with my LXD75 to get extra height, and more recently with an Ambermile alt-az. The standard connection is 5/8" BSW, but that's easily removed so you can use any size bolts/spacers.

Assuming your Portamount has the standard (60mm?) collar, it'll probably fit staight into the hole in the tripod head - I just used a couple of extra homemade spacers with my similar LXD75 fitting.

#4 Darren B

Darren B

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 02 May 2005
  • Loc: UK

Posted 30 January 2011 - 12:14 PM

Thanks for the replies. Yep, my largest scope is the WO80.
I have thought about the surveyors tripod and wondered what size the hole was in the center of the mounting plate.
The collar on the Portamount and the Pillar is 45mm. These are to fit the Vixen SX series tripod. however the Vixen P90 tripod center hole is 60mm and I had no problems with it fitting together.

#5 Phil Wheeler

Phil Wheeler

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2018
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2005
  • Loc: 3 miles WNW of Celestron

Posted 30 January 2011 - 01:05 PM

I use a Manfrotto 475 photo tripod under my WO ZS80 FD, with Celestron anti-vib pads under the legs, and it works well and stably -- even with the center pillar cranked up 8" or so and locked. It's really my workhorse tripod for astro and photo apps, and I've had my 5" SCT on it with magnification limited more by use of a push-to Az-El mount than by tripod stability.

A surveyor's tripod seems a good choice (with anti-vib pads if not on ground where you can sink the leg tips) -- if you can interface your mount to it. I use Universal Astronomics mounts and Larry's posts on my tripods (475 for scopes, surveyor's for binos).

#6 John Huntley

John Huntley

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 925
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2006
  • Loc: South West England

Posted 30 January 2011 - 07:16 PM

....and more recently with an Ambermile alt-az....


I have one of those as it happens :)

For those that don't know them they are a Giro-type mount made by a small UK engineering company.

I have mine mounted on a CG5 2" steel tripod. That makes a pretty steady platform for my 3 heavier scopes - a Meade AR6, an Intes MN61 and an Orion Optics 10" F/4.8 newtonian although counterweights are needed for the smoothest operation.

I have tried my Ambermille on a survey tripod as well and that was pretty steady and also, tall !.

#7 dscarpa

dscarpa

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3006
  • Joined: 15 Mar 2008
  • Loc: San Diego Ca.

Posted 31 January 2011 - 10:13 AM

That's the tripod that came with my SW AZ4, it gets a lot of use with my WO ZS110 and Lunt 60. It's very stable, I don't have to use anti-vibration pads when viewing on a hard surface using high power. The only negative is that the legs are pretty splayed out when extended all the way. David

#8 jason_milani

jason_milani

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2349
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Northeast Ohio

Posted 31 January 2011 - 12:24 PM

I have a Celestron NexStar 8SE and 5SE, both on 1.75" stainless tripods.


Are you using different tripods than stock? The reason i ask is that the Nexstar "SE" tripods have 1.5" legs, not 1.75". I have an Orion Sirius EQ-g which uses 1.75" legs and it's a good step up from the Nexstar SE 1.5" legs.

#9 midnite4blues

midnite4blues

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 525
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Denville, NJ

Posted 31 January 2011 - 12:51 PM

I use the 1.75" SS legs that came with my Sirius mount for my DSV-1 alt-az with excellent results. I've mounted up to a 5" f/5 reflector and used it up to 163x magnification. On solid ground (dirt) the dampening times were under 2 seconds. Focusing is easy. The only thing I don't like about this tripod is the range of height is more limited that my other tripods.

#10 Darren B

Darren B

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 02 May 2005
  • Loc: UK

Posted 31 January 2011 - 04:08 PM

Thanks for the replies. I have a Vixen P90 wooden tripod. It is very solid, but when fully extended it is only 90cm high. Also the legs are splayed out wide, but I do have the Vixen SX half pillar and vibration suppression pads, so I am not to worried about that.

My opinions to the latest replies.

The Manfrotto 475: As an owner of the Manfrotto 055 & 190 tripods, I know how good these are. However It costs more than what I want to spend, plus I have to purchase an adaptor plate so the Portamount can be fitted onto it (more costs). I do like my Portamount.
The Surveyor Tripod, I'm looking into.

CG5 2" steel tripod, this is the one I would like the most, but where do they sell the tripod by itself???????

Dscarpa, Jason and Ted, encouraging news. As I said, I have a half pillar and a short tube refrator, so it will not bash onto the legs when I am viewing overhead.

Ted, you say the height is a bit limited, but when the tripod is fully extended, is the base of the mount is about or higher than 1 metre of the ground?

Thanks for reading and answering
Darren

#11 Midnight Dan

Midnight Dan

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11167
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2008
  • Loc: Hilton, NY, Yellow Zone (Bortle 4.5)

Posted 31 January 2011 - 06:03 PM


I have a Celestron NexStar 8SE and 5SE, both on 1.75" stainless tripods.


Are you using different tripods than stock? The reason i ask is that the Nexstar "SE" tripods have 1.5" legs, not 1.75". I have an Orion Sirius EQ-g which uses 1.75" legs and it's a good step up from the Nexstar SE 1.5" legs.


You are correct! I thought they were 1.75" but measured them to be 1.5". So, as you point out, 1.75" legs ought to be considerably more solid than what I have, and should be WAY more than adequate for an 800mm refractor.

-Dan

#12 midnite4blues

midnite4blues

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 525
  • Joined: 21 Nov 2005
  • Loc: Denville, NJ

Posted 31 January 2011 - 08:10 PM

Ted, you say the height is a bit limited, but when the tripod is fully extended, is the base of the mount is about or higher than 1 metre of the ground?


Sorry, I don't have my metric conversions down, but I measured my Sirius tripod at 32" minimum and 45" maximum. The difference of only 13" is small compared to my CG5 tripod (with 2" legs) 29-49". It may not seem like much, but it makes a difference when you are using it for both newts and refractors. The measurements are from ground to top of mounting hub.

#13 Darren B

Darren B

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 289
  • Joined: 02 May 2005
  • Loc: UK

Posted 01 February 2011 - 12:51 PM

Thanks Ted, in metric it works out at around 81cm to 114cm. Around 9 inches taller than my current set up. I would be quite happy with that.

Thanks
Darren

#14 bardo

bardo

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 795
  • Joined: 13 Sep 2009
  • Loc: US

Posted 01 February 2011 - 01:37 PM

CG5 2" steel tripod, this is the one I would like the most, but where do they sell the tripod by itself???????


http://www.clearvueo...SSNE/Mounts.htm






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics