Jump to content


Photo

Anyone have an XX16g on the way?

  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#26 MikeBOKC

MikeBOKC

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4649
  • Joined: 10 May 2010
  • Loc: Oklahoma City, OK

Posted 01 December 2012 - 01:04 PM

Any subsequent or second light report on this scope? Operation, setup and of course visual impressions . . .

#27 sniperpride

sniperpride

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 155
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2012

Posted 01 December 2012 - 11:51 PM

uhh, that thing is massive, 200lbs are you kidding me. And for that price Id much rather get a used premium dob of similar aperture.

#28 CounterWeight

CounterWeight

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8237
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Palo alto, CA.

Posted 02 December 2012 - 01:25 AM

I agree, 200lbs is acceptable if you are talking about a 25-inch, but that is ridiculously heavy for a 16-inch. My 15-inch assembled weighs 120lbs, and that is because I have a heavy battery in the base. Just the telescope alone is about 100 lbs. That is much more reasonable for a 16-inch.

Taras



uhh, that thing is massive, 200lbs are you kidding me. And for that price Id much rather get a used premium dob of similar aperture.


OK... so there's two at least that do not have one on the way.... (maybe start another thread along the lines of "orion 16G too heavy for me or anyone", or "why i'm not ordering the orion 16G...")

Hopefully we can continue to hear from those that do have one on the way and if arrived how they like it? How they feel about the weight, if they feel it such a gross negative to justify going to another vendor or buying something else on used market?, or if the 'convex-back' mirror/cell construction, collimation, and cooling is better or worse or non-issue, or if the weight / drive system any difference in performance in a windy night of viewing...


I'd much prefer to hear more about what these scopes are from folks that have them... instead of what they are not by folks who have never used them.

#29 kharrison

kharrison

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012

Posted 04 December 2012 - 11:08 PM

Well I’ve had it out 4 more times since first light. Over Thanksgiving I took it out to my folks place out in the country near Huntsville, TX. I managed to put it together in about 30 minutes. The alignment did not hold well this time. Within 2 hours the go-to was quite a bit off. I suspect I didn’t have the base level. I was sitting out in an overgrown field and the only level I had was an app on my old iPhone (has a curved back). A bright moon washed out some of the fainter objects, but planetary nebulae were easy to spot. I got Jupiter up to 450x with my Ethos on a Barlow and it still looked sharp. Take down took about 20 minutes this time. The other 3 times I had it out were at public observing events in the city so there was lots of light pollution. This past Saturday was the most recent one and I had a friend who had just bought a gently used 16” Lightbridge. We both went to the blue snowball and tried to get close to the same magnification so we could compare. Both images looked pretty good. I think mine was a little brighter than his. We are working out a plan to go to a good dark site and do a serious comparison test. The alignment held well at all the public observing events, which tends to support my “base not level” theory.

OK, now the weight issue. It is heavy, there’s no disputing that. But it does break down into manageable pieces. And the weight has a benefit: in a gusty wind last Saturday there was little shake in the image. The only wind effect I noticed was that I had to tighten the clutch as it tried to turn into the wind.

The conical mirror is great. Without fans it is fully equalized by the time I get everything assembled. It holds collimation very well for a truss tube. I keep the trusses in the same position each time and I really haven’t had to collimate it. I just started to notice it was a little off by the end of the night Saturday.

The closed-loop electronics work as advertised. I loosened the clutch and pushed it all over the place and it was still accurate when I used the go-to.

#30 CounterWeight

CounterWeight

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8237
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Palo alto, CA.

Posted 07 December 2012 - 09:46 AM

good information - :goodjob:

#31 MikeBOKC

MikeBOKC

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4649
  • Joined: 10 May 2010
  • Loc: Oklahoma City, OK

Posted 07 December 2012 - 11:57 AM

How are you finding the eyepiece height? At what altitude are you needing to use a step stool?

#32 kharrison

kharrison

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 16
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:05 PM

I haven't actually measured it but I'd guess about 20 degrees from zenith. And I'm 6' tall.

#33 GeneT

GeneT

    Ely Kid

  • *****
  • Posts: 12839
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2008
  • Loc: South Texas

Posted 07 December 2012 - 10:18 PM

Glad you are happy with the telescope.

#34 Kevdog

Kevdog

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1310
  • Joined: 11 Jul 2012
  • Loc: Desert Hills, AZ

Posted 15 December 2012 - 01:21 AM

Thanks for the follow-up reports!

I still really like the idea of the scope, but my purchase of one has been greatly put off as I recently picked up a used C11 for a good price. Couldn't quite swing the $4k for the XX16g yet. Maybe in a few more years now!






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics