Jump to content


Photo

Celestron C5+ owners- your experiences

  • Please log in to reply
39 replies to this topic

#26 Crow Haven

Crow Haven

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1400
  • Joined: 09 Jan 2009
  • Loc: Oregon USA

Posted 06 December 2012 - 01:48 PM

I noticed vibration with my stock eq. mt. and wedge also but what I did was use a JMI motofocus on the DEC to handle the vibration...at least I think that was how I had it -- that mt. is packed away now so I can't check it. It was what I set up my 10" LX5 with though.
---Maya

#27 prestonrich

prestonrich

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 636
  • Joined: 01 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Washington DC Mayland suburbs

Posted 07 December 2012 - 02:42 PM

As you can see in my sig I have a bit of decent astro equipment, but the scope I use most is my C5 w/2"VB and the 6.3FR and the BIPH--a phenominal combo! It's portability is superb. Even with its relatively small rear baffle I really don't mind the vignetting w/the ultra wide 2" EPs--otherwide it's used w/my Brandons and binoviewers. The Brandons are tiny and great for binoviewing and travel. For me it's the best of all worlds. Daytime viewing finds me w/my Lunt DS60/60PT.

I use both on a Manfrotto 475 tripod w/half-hitch head. The C5/BIPH, Lunt 60DS and my Canon 15x50IS are my most used. The Miya Saturn III is mounted in a window. All are great for travel and rousing-up wonder in the grandkids.

#28 mike bacanin

mike bacanin

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1601
  • Joined: 19 Mar 2007

Posted 07 December 2012 - 04:29 PM

regarding using binoviewers. is anyone using binos with the original c5+ single arm fork?
any balance issues?
if you had a choice of either a 8mm vixen lvw in mono or wo binos with 13mm tv smoothie plossls,
which would you go with?

thanks
mike



#29 charles genovese

charles genovese

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 646
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Madisonville Louisiana

Posted 07 December 2012 - 08:18 PM

C5 is much better than you might think for imaging deep sky. Did a few play shots off my balcony with a Meade f3.3 reducer and Meade DSI Pro 2. 15 second shots X10

Attached Files



#30 charles genovese

charles genovese

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 646
  • Joined: 04 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Madisonville Louisiana

Posted 07 December 2012 - 08:21 PM

another with RGB- way too much green but it was my first try with the Meade software.

Attached Files



#31 highfnum

highfnum

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2421
  • Joined: 06 Sep 2006
  • Loc: NE USA

Posted 08 December 2012 - 12:19 AM

i like core of galaxy shot

#32 azure1961p

azure1961p

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 10430
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2009
  • Loc: USA

Posted 09 December 2012 - 04:25 PM

I agree with everything Eddgie mentions tho my Celestron is a 6" and it still hasn't seen Jupiter yet - BUT - festoons vary in intensity and I wouldn't rule them out in a C5 at all. There have been apparitions where they were unmistakeable in my 70mm refractor and then other times like last year virtually lost in a frothy mess thru my 8" reflector. If my 70mm can do it then believe you me so can your 125mm and with a little color boost too. The caveat here that Eddgie underscores is that to reliably see them a bigger scope is in order but even then, recalling last years equatorial zone *washout* even my long focus 8" had trouble to nil results depending on seeing. When they aren't compromised and show fairly well however they ought to show fine. Delicate but fine. I used to sketch them using my 70mm. Lately though they are still quite the low contrast thing - far better than a year ago but not a chance thru the refractor in 5/10 seeing.

I will say that a well made sct is every inch a superb lunar and planetary scope. You'd be amazed how well the image holds at higher magnifications on a small mars for example. Just make sure it's cooled at least an hour and have it collimated. Beyond that the the focus (sky willing) is gratifyingly sharp and lunar and planetary is rewardingly detailed. What it can't do is worth a shrug because it is so very highly capable everywhere else and at a price point no refractor can touch. Don't overlook some nice double star observing on better nights that are at the diffraction limit.

Eddgies spot on just thought I'd mention the contrast variability of festoons and for a lot of Jovian features really. It's always shifting and in that is ever present the fact that every time you set up and look something can have changed and so new things appear.

The fives a great scope.

Pete

#33 Starhawk

Starhawk

    Space Ranger

  • *****
  • Posts: 5594
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Tucson, Arizona

Posted 10 December 2012 - 06:09 AM

I filled the tripod legs with foam and found that killed vibration. I bought an inexpensive foam mat for camping and cut it into strips, which I stuffed into the legs and packed down with a dowel. Since no two parts are identical when done this way, it has many different damped frequencies so vibration goes away practically instantly.

-Rich

#34 Raginar

Raginar

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6138
  • Joined: 19 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Rapid CIty, SD

Posted 16 December 2012 - 05:15 PM

Check out my AB page; I've got several shots through my C5. I bloomed out the stars with poor focus, but otherwise it produced satisfactory images. Not to mention considering how light it is... it's great for the focal length!

#35 Astrosetz

Astrosetz

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 654
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2003
  • Loc: Wisconsin

Posted 18 May 2013 - 03:54 PM

I just acquired a quite minty C5+ from a nice fellow on Astromart, and I'm very excited about this little scope. While I've had two Nexstar 5 scopes (still have one of them) I just prefer to point the scope on my own most of the time -- especially during public outreach events

I've found that the C5+ fits perfectly on the old Nexstar 5 tripod, and the views through the Thousand Oaks filter have been great today, so I'm chomping at the bit to get it out tonight at our public viewing event.

Did Celestron ever make a case for the scope on it's base? I've seen cases mounting the OTA itself, but I like to carry the whole thing at once by the handle because it's so convenient. Also, if anyone ever comes across the original white finder and/or hand controller, let me know ;) The scope is in super-excellent shape, but there were a few things missing.

#36 ardunstan

ardunstan

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2013

Posted 28 February 2014 - 10:14 PM

I have one from 1994. The above assessments on the C5+ are pretty much on the mark. However, my own scope appears to exhibit rather heavy spherical aberration. The extra focal rings on a star test are not identical. The focused image does not snap into focus, but rather eases into it. Planetary images aren't as sharp and detailed as they could be on mine. Would anyone care to comment on star test performance on their C5+s? I'd really like to know so I have something to compare to.

#37 Starhawk

Starhawk

    Space Ranger

  • *****
  • Posts: 5594
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Tucson, Arizona

Posted 01 March 2014 - 09:46 AM

Collimation is your friend- if you have a 3mm eyepiece, use it to get a super precise collimation at higher than usable power. This will leave the collimation ostensibly perfect at regular magnifications. Then try looking at a planet. Take care not to touch the optics when you hug it afterwards.

-Rich

#38 ardunstan

ardunstan

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2013

Posted 01 March 2014 - 11:32 AM

Rich,

I have a 4mm Celestron Ultima eyepiece and a 4.8mm TV Nagler that I use for high magnification. The rings are indeed concentric. I also have collimated with and without the diagonals to see if there was some other factor. They are the original Celestron 1.25" and a TeleVue 1.25" mirror diagonal. Nevertheless, I will follow your advice and see if there is an improvement.

#39 stevew

stevew

    Now I've done it

  • -----
  • Posts: 4372
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2006
  • Loc: British Columbia Canada

Posted 01 March 2014 - 03:08 PM

However, my own scope appears to exhibit rather heavy spherical aberration. The extra focal rings on a star test are not identical. The focused image does not snap into focus, but rather eases into it. Planetary images aren't as sharp and detailed as they could be on mine. Would anyone care to comment on star test performance on their C5+s?

Iv'e had 3 white tube C5's over the years.
The first was perfect with diffraction rings on both sides of focus, The second was not nearly as good, and did not show rings properly on both sides of focus. I sold it and bought my current white tube C5 that shows good diffraction rings on both sides, and does snap to focus on the planets.
There was talk back in the 1990's that some of the white tube C5's had corrector plates that were a tad too small, as a result they would shift out of alignment. Double check that yours is correctly aligned. Some people have also used 2 inch diagonals on their C5's. It's a bit of a waste as the central baffle limits the amount of light getting to the eyepiece. I tried a 2 inch diagonal and found that the longer optical train added spherical aberration to the in and out of focus star test image. C5's work best with a 1.25 inch diagonal.
Hope it all works out for you.
They are really nice portable little scopes.

Steve

#40 ardunstan

ardunstan

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2013

Posted 02 March 2014 - 02:09 AM

Steve,

Thanks for the insight. I removed the corrector and cleaned out all the gunk on the inside. I also noticed that yes, the corrector on my C5 is undersized. It did have a mark at the 3 o'clock position, so I placed it back in the proper alignment as best I could. I took my time collimating the secondary and there was a slight improvement in image quality. Jupiter was a little better at about 125x as the sky was nicely steady, but kind of hazy. They really are great portable scopes, but I still am not impressed with this one. I guess I got an average to below average scope. I was planning on getting a C6, but that was sidetracked for a while. This gives me a better rationalization on getting that C6 now.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics