Jump to content


Photo

Which tripod, Berlebach, Geoptik?

  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 ThomasM

ThomasM

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 297
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2009

Posted 06 January 2013 - 06:50 AM

I am considering to purchase a stable, but not too heavy tripod for visual observation with a 160 mm refractor. The Geoptic Hercules 105 looks very interesting, only 8 kg weight.

http://www.geoptik.c.../30H100_105.pdf

An alternative would be Berlebach Planet (11 kg) or Berlebach Sky ( 9 kg, but rather expensive).

Can anybody report on the Geoptic, any comments?


with many thanks in advance

Thomas

#2 Agatha

Agatha

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1210
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2012
  • Loc: Coulee Region, Wisconsin

Posted 06 January 2013 - 04:11 PM

Thomas,

Not knowing the length of your 160 makes it hard to recommend a tripod. But, just guessing, I would think it is fairly long. The Geoptik 105 looks pretty short at it's minimum height. The less one has to extend the legs, the more stable it will be. It is a very nice looking tripod, but I would recommend the Berlebach Planet. Lots of members have the Planet and are quite happy. It also is a beautiful tripod. Hopefully others will chime in with their experience. I am still new at this so I can't speak with much experience but my Planet is very solid and very gorgeous. :)

Best, Linda B.

#3 Mark9473

Mark9473

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8676
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2005
  • Loc: 51°N 4°E

Posted 06 January 2013 - 04:54 PM

I'd also put one of Rob Miller's Tri36L (or Tri36M) on your shortlist. From what I read, it's the one tripod that matches (if not exceeds) the Berlebach Planet while being considerably lighter.

I agree the Geoptik would be just too short.

#4 ThomasM

ThomasM

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 297
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2009

Posted 06 January 2013 - 05:23 PM

Linda,

thanks for you comments, actually, 800 mm hight is sufficient since I use an fork mount. I agree, the Berlebach Planet is very nice, but I would prefer a lighter Tripod.

Thomas

#5 ThomasM

ThomasM

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 297
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2009

Posted 06 January 2013 - 05:29 PM

I'd also put one of Rob Miller's Tri36L (or Tri36M) on your shortlist. From what I read, it's the one tripod that matches (if not exceeds) the Berlebach Planet while being considerably lighter.

I agree the Geoptik would be just too short.


800 mm hight would be sufficient, so from that point of view the Geoptik is fine.

Thanks for drawing my attention to the Rob Miller's tripos, where can I find detailed specs? It seems that they are made of metall, aluminum or so. In terms of vibration damping carbon tubes are much better. Does he make carbon version?

Thomas

#6 Agatha

Agatha

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1210
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2012
  • Loc: Coulee Region, Wisconsin

Posted 06 January 2013 - 05:54 PM

Thomas,

I am not understanding how a fork mount makes the short tripod workable with a 160mm refractor. How long is your telescope? I am also in a learning mode. That doesn't make sense to me. Please, someone explain. :confused: And yes, the Miller tripods look good.

Best, Linda B.

#7 Tamiji Homma

Tamiji Homma

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3123
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2007
  • Loc: California, USA

Posted 06 January 2013 - 06:20 PM

Hi Linda,

You can take a look at Thomas' scope here A 160 mm f/6.5 binocular telescope.

In the thread, his mount wasn't a fork mount. So he must have a new mount :)

Here is an example of fork mount that I have for 6" binoscope. The scope wasn't binoscope in the photo but 5" f/7 scope. His scope may be a little longer than 5" f/7. The tripod height in the photo is about 45 inch. The fork mount lifts OTA above the tripod enough so that he does not need the high tripod, assuming that he observes seated on star chair.

Posted Image Posted Image

Tammy

#8 andysea

andysea

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1507
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Seattle, WA

Posted 06 January 2013 - 11:27 PM

I'd also put one of Rob Miller's Tri36L (or Tri36M) on your shortlist. From what I read, it's the one tripod that matches (if not exceeds) the Berlebach Planet while being considerably lighter.

I agree the Geoptik would be just too short.


I use the Rob Miller TRI36L with my Mach1. It's (obviously) extremely well engineered and stable. If I am not mistaken it can carry ~300lb. and it only weighs 8lb. I would definitely recommend putting it on your short list.

Andy

#9 Agatha

Agatha

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1210
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2012
  • Loc: Coulee Region, Wisconsin

Posted 07 January 2013 - 01:15 AM

Tamiji,

Thank you for the clarification and the link to Thomas' bino project. It makes a lot more sense to me now. I was picturing one very very long telescope. Thanks again. :)

Best, Linda B.

#10 Agatha

Agatha

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1210
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2012
  • Loc: Coulee Region, Wisconsin

Posted 07 January 2013 - 01:26 AM

Thomas,

I am understanding better now about your telescope. I visited your previous thread about your project. Your big binocular scope is beautiful. Good luck with your tripod search. :)

Best, Linda B.

#11 ThomasM

ThomasM

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 297
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2009

Posted 07 January 2013 - 05:24 AM

Hi Tammy,

thanks a lot for your kind comments, your folk mound looks very interesting.

Thomas






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics