Jump to content


Photo

How heavy-duty a mount for 10" RC

  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#26 pfile

pfile

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3169
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2009

Posted 17 June 2013 - 02:21 AM

true, that's kinda why i jumped to the conclusion that the purpose was AP.

#27 andysea

andysea

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1611
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Seattle, WA

Posted 17 June 2013 - 09:49 AM

Correct me if I am wrong but I believe that the main issue with that design, when used for visual, is the lack of contrast due to the very large central obstruction.
Because of that I always thought RC's were very poor visual performers. There might be more that I am not aware of.

#28 pfile

pfile

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3169
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2009

Posted 17 June 2013 - 12:42 PM

there's a heck of a lot of discussion in the cats&casses forum about whether or not 'large' central obstructions *really* reduce contrast. i don't understand enough about optics to come to my own conclusion...

#29 andysea

andysea

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1611
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Seattle, WA

Posted 17 June 2013 - 12:51 PM

Yeah I'm with you. I don't know plus I have no direct experience since I never looked through my 10" RC when I owned one.

#30 pfile

pfile

    Gemini

  • -----
  • Posts: 3169
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2009

Posted 17 June 2013 - 12:56 PM

i know, me neither. i think some people would think we are crazy owning a telescope and never putting an eye to it!

i should get a 2" diagonal and just try it for fun.

#31 andysea

andysea

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1611
  • Joined: 03 Sep 2010
  • Loc: Seattle, WA

Posted 17 June 2013 - 01:27 PM

You can borrow mine, I have a 2" diagonal that has seen very very little use :grin:

#32 AlphaGJohn

AlphaGJohn

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 129
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2013
  • Loc: Wasatch Front, Utah

Posted 09 July 2013 - 12:30 PM

I went with the iOptron iEQ45--I haven't got the 10" RC fully set up, but I did a jury-rigged setup the other night and stability was not a problem--I immediately ordered the counter-weight shaft extension, though (wish I'd done that with the initial order). The description with the shaft extension includes a mention of the fact that it raises the mount's capacity up to its full rated 45#--that would have been nice to know when I placed the order for the mount.

At any rate, it takes a bit of time to set up the tripod & mount because the individual parts have to be lugged out (I don't have it packaged very well for transport yet) and then set up, but it sure seems like stability will be fine.

RE AP vs. visual: I bought the mirror set for this scope years ago--before the Dob revolution had really hit its stride and I just do not have the time/interest/budget to do AP, but I do like to look! So, I'm finally getting around to completing the scope.

In the mean time, my C 102GT is solid as a rock on the iEQ45 also. So, I might have been satisfied with the iEQ30, but given that I immediately needed the CW shaft extension, probably a good thing to have gone w/ the heavier option. I just need to get the pieces parts set up for easier transport. (Trying to buy a long-skinny duffle bag, such as for the tripod turns out to be more difficult than I'd expected: if it's long enough, it's 18" in diameter! So I currently have a very floppy bag for the tripod legs.)

John

#33 Jared

Jared

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5077
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Piedmont, California, U.S.

Posted 11 July 2013 - 12:21 AM

The 45 is a MUCH better choice for a 10" RC. You won't be sorry you skipped the 30.






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics