Jump to content


Photo

C6 or 6SE? New York City dilemma re: TV eyepieces

  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

#1 FishInPercolator

FishInPercolator

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2013
  • Loc: NYC

Posted 17 May 2013 - 04:08 PM

I first had my eyes on the EdgeHD 800". My thoughts were given that I will be observing and periodically using it for video astronomy (mallincam) in the "big city", the enhanced optics and aperture would compensate for whatever light pollution there is. However, given that I will probably only see a handful of DSOs with it anyway, perhaps the C6, 6SE, or even the C5 spotter would be a greater advantage due to their portability (weights 5+ less than the EdgeHD 8") and cost savings.

I also had in mind to go all out Tele Vue for additional compensation.

However, with the 5" and 6" models, an Ethos providing the widest field of view will probably still show some coma if I am not mistaken. With the Edge this would not be an issue in theory.

So with the 6" models or less, I figure the Delos or Panoptic would be more suitable. However, in the event I do get something like the EdgeHD in the future, I would probably like to have the Ethos on hand.

Did I just answer my own question?

Thanks again for all of your help on my endeavor thus far.

#2 Patrick

Patrick

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11264
  • Joined: 15 May 2003
  • Loc: Franklin, Ohio

Posted 17 May 2013 - 04:59 PM

Did I just answer my own question?



I don't think so. If and when you decide to get an Edge, then start thinking about eyepieces for that scope. I think your first inclination is right...C6 with Panoptics and Delos, or Plossls.

Regarding the Malincam and the C6's field of view...the Malincam sensor is very small so when you're using it your DSO will most likely be near the center of the field of view. At the center of the field of view there isn't a great deal of difference between the Edge scopes and standard scopes, so it shouldn't matter much.

I'm not sure any enhanced optic or aperture or better coatings can deal with the light pollution in NYC! ;)

Also, regarding 2" eyepieces in the C5 and C6...you're not getting a great deal of benefit using them with either scope. The central baffle tube diameter on the C6 is 27mm (not sure about the C5), so any eyepiece that has a field stop diameter greater than 27mm will start vignetting. I used my 27mm Pan in my C6 all the time though. It has a 30mm field stop diameter, so I cheated a little. I was okay with it.

Patrick

#3 FishInPercolator

FishInPercolator

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2013
  • Loc: NYC

Posted 17 May 2013 - 05:22 PM

ok so in essence according to your link, the 24mm is the widest (lowest mag) I can go without any vignetting?

#4 Geo.

Geo.

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2773
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 17 May 2013 - 05:23 PM

See: http://www.scoperevi...om/page1aa.html

For the price of an Ethos you can probably buy 2-3 used Naglers. The 21 and 17mm Ethos have 2" insertion barrels. The 21mm's field stop is 36.2mm. The 17's is 29.6. so the C6's baffle tube will limit the true FOV. The Ethos were designed with faster refractors and reflectors in mind.

#5 FishInPercolator

FishInPercolator

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2013
  • Loc: NYC

Posted 17 May 2013 - 05:27 PM

Right. Even with Naglers though, the 82 deg AFOV will probably show a lot more coma on a C5 or C6 given they lack Edge optics... right? So something smaller like 50 thru 72 degrees would probably be more suitable... I think.

What's the field stop limit on a C5?

#6 Patrick

Patrick

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11264
  • Joined: 15 May 2003
  • Loc: Franklin, Ohio

Posted 17 May 2013 - 08:17 PM

So something smaller like 50 thru 72 degrees would probably be more suitable... I think.



Yep...you got it. :smirk: I don't know what the C5 baffle tube size is. Maybe someone else can help with that one.

Clear Skies,

Patrick

#7 Patrick

Patrick

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11264
  • Joined: 15 May 2003
  • Loc: Franklin, Ohio

Posted 17 May 2013 - 08:22 PM

According to THIS WEBSITE the C5 baffle tube size is 26mm. Sounds about right...

Patrick

#8 FishInPercolator

FishInPercolator

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2013
  • Loc: NYC

Posted 17 May 2013 - 09:42 PM

I've decided. C6 coming my way...

#9 Patrick

Patrick

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11264
  • Joined: 15 May 2003
  • Loc: Franklin, Ohio

Posted 17 May 2013 - 10:11 PM

You will not be sorry! It's a very versatile scope. :)

Patrick

#10 FishInPercolator

FishInPercolator

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2013
  • Loc: NYC

Posted 18 May 2013 - 05:01 PM

Patrick, thanks for the support :)

I do have a question, are there any f/8 6" SCTs?

#11 mclewis1

mclewis1

    Thread Killer

  • *****
  • Posts: 10737
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2006
  • Loc: New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:32 PM

No, both the Meade and Celestron 6" SCTs are f10. The Meade f8 ACF SCTs start at 10".

There is a 6" f9 RC scope and an 8" f8 RC. The downside to the RCs is that they weigh a bit more than the equivalent SCTs and require some planning for back focus positions.

If you could handle a slightly heavier mount and tube one of the 8" f8 RC scopes with a .7 or .5x (f5.6 or f4) focal reducer and the Universe camera would make a very capable outreach setup.

#12 FishInPercolator

FishInPercolator

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2013
  • Loc: NYC

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:34 PM

mind if I asked you to post a link?

#13 FishInPercolator

FishInPercolator

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2013
  • Loc: NYC

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:42 PM

Ah nevermind, I found it...

Unfortunately it weights quite a bit for something I will be taking out onto the subway (worst case scenario, which will probably happen more often than not).

Hmm... it's unfortunate.

#14 FishInPercolator

FishInPercolator

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2013
  • Loc: NYC

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:52 PM

I'm drooling over this one but it's unfortunately a little big and slightly out of my price range... :(

http://telescopes.to...escopes/astr...

#15 desertlens

desertlens

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 817
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2010
  • Loc: 36°N 105°W

Posted 18 May 2013 - 07:07 PM

I think you'll be very happy with the C6. It's a lot of scope in a reasonably small package... maybe an inconspicuous tool bag or some such with room for a few eyepieces for the subway.

#16 Patrick

Patrick

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11264
  • Joined: 15 May 2003
  • Loc: Franklin, Ohio

Posted 18 May 2013 - 07:29 PM

I do have a question, are there any f/8 6" SCTs?



You can get an f/6.3 focal reducer and add it to the back of the scope. That will make the C6 an f/6.3 scope with a focal length of about 960mm. It will also help flatten the field of view.

Out of curiosity, why is f/8 important to you?

Patrick

#17 Goodchild

Goodchild

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 881
  • Joined: 31 Dec 2008

Posted 18 May 2013 - 07:44 PM

I'm drooling over this one but it's unfortunately a little big and slightly out of my price range... :(

http://telescopes.to...escopes/astr...



Astronomics has this scope for $1395, or you can get the steel tubed version for $500 less and only two pounds more.

#18 FishInPercolator

FishInPercolator

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2013
  • Loc: NYC

Posted 18 May 2013 - 10:07 PM

Royce thanks for pointing that out, unfortunately I feel it's a tad heavy for my purposes.

#19 Starhawk

Starhawk

    Space Ranger

  • *****
  • Posts: 5489
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Tucson, Arizona

Posted 18 May 2013 - 11:28 PM

Did you already order it? The Nexstar SE mount is cute, but it never tracks correctly in mobile mode (it tracks via a triangle wave). And, you'll burn through a set of AAs in one evening.

So, if you start out with a little push mount, it will be light and easy to move, and you can look at what's working for a photography mount, and won't need lots of batteries.

-Rich

#20 FishInPercolator

FishInPercolator

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 660
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2013
  • Loc: NYC

Posted 19 May 2013 - 12:39 AM

Nope, I'm debating now between a C6 and an Omni XLT 150.

I'm just about to go a little crazy. I have to make up my mind soon.

#21 Starhawk

Starhawk

    Space Ranger

  • *****
  • Posts: 5489
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Tucson, Arizona

Posted 19 May 2013 - 02:33 AM

An Omni XLT 150 is pretty big- 9.5 lbs heavier than a C5. On the bright side, when equipped with the old school drive, it runs for quite a while on a set of D cells.

Tell me this, would you feel comfortable toting a cello around NYC? Being a pedestrian stuck moving a heavy payload around the city isn't generally my idea of great fun. Of course, if your model was taxi-mobility, then this gets to be pretty forgiving, payload-wise. Not so much, wallet-wise.

How about this: mock up one of these scopes you are considering with a combination of cardboard boxes, bricks, and broomsticks, then go where you are thinking of observing from, and observe how it goes. The idea of doing this with cheap materials is if it's a total foob, you can jettison the mockup and just come home without the pressure of trying to recover over a thousand dollars worth of gear.

-Rich

#22 Starhawk

Starhawk

    Space Ranger

  • *****
  • Posts: 5489
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2008
  • Loc: Tucson, Arizona

Posted 19 May 2013 - 02:56 AM

Note- consider when people look at you with your odd looking mockup how you would feel when they were gazing at gleaming stainless steel legs and odd bags heaped with you.

-Rich

#23 pjensen

pjensen

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 173
  • Joined: 08 Apr 2012
  • Loc: Highland Village, Tx

Posted 19 May 2013 - 07:08 AM

Tell me this, would you feel comfortable toting a cello around NYC? Being a pedestrian stuck moving a heavy payload around the city isn't generally my idea of great fun.


Great point.

One more consideration - it will take dozens of these trips to get used to the equipment. The first couple of times, you will find something not working right (aka: not understanding how it works). Or you will find you need this or that - a light, a chart, gps co-ordinates, a connector... Or just not knowing the star names (required for 2+4 star alignment). Or clouds will roll in.

Learning how to use this stuff and learning the sky takes time (and repeated attempts). I just can not imagine how hard this would be if I had use a subway (and hours of transit time) every time I wanted go out.

Perhaps taking a vacation for a week at a dark location might be a better option.

#24 Patrick

Patrick

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11264
  • Joined: 15 May 2003
  • Loc: Franklin, Ohio

Posted 19 May 2013 - 08:59 AM

Nope, I'm debating now between a C6 and an Omni XLT 150.



It's nice to explore all the options. The C6 and Omni XLT 150 have the same aperture, but the 6" f/5 reflector is about twice as long as the C6. Just sayin'...

With an f/6.3 focal reducer, they're almost identical (750mm vs 960mm). The C6 can also be mounted on the CG4 mount if that's your concern. The C6 would also be easier to use on a GEM style mount than the Newt.

Patrick

#25 Geo.

Geo.

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2773
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Upstate NY

Posted 19 May 2013 - 03:53 PM

Nope, I'm debating now between a C6 and an Omni XLT 150.


Pretty sure the optics are the same.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics