Jump to content


Photo

ES A152 Refractor

  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 Light Bender

Light Bender

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2013
  • Loc: Middle Tennessee

Posted 25 August 2013 - 10:28 PM

I currently have a Celestron XLT 120 Refractor. I am thinking about buying another scope.
I'm looking seriously a the ES AR152. A couple of questions.
1)Visually, will I see much difference between this and my existing scope?
2)Can I get a decent go to mount for this scope for $1000.00 or less?
Thanks ahead of time for advice.

#2 MikeBOKC

MikeBOKC

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4592
  • Joined: 10 May 2010
  • Loc: Oklahoma City, OK

Posted 26 August 2013 - 08:05 AM

I imagine the 152 will ride on the Celestron AV-X mount but that is a fairly long OTA and eyepiece positions will sometimes be awkward when observing near zenith. Plus you will have come chromatic aberration on bright objects. Given your stated budget I would suggest a Nexstar 8SE, which would give you two more inches of aperture that the 152, a nice boost over your current scope, easy portability and setup and the whole package for about the same cost you are considering for a mount.

#3 Jon_Doh

Jon_Doh

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1004
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2011
  • Loc: On a receiver's back

Posted 26 August 2013 - 09:58 AM

The AR 152 will give you better views of deep space and clusters than an SCT.

#4 George Methvin

George Methvin

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1351
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2006
  • Loc: Central Texas

Posted 26 August 2013 - 10:10 AM

If you are talking about a 6 inch sct then yes the views through the ES A153 should be better. The view through the ES 152 should come close to the views seen through a 8 inch sct. :)

#5 Light Bender

Light Bender

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2013
  • Loc: Middle Tennessee

Posted 06 September 2013 - 03:55 PM

Thanks for all the advise. I have a lot of thinking to do.

#6 DaveG

DaveG

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 284
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2003
  • Loc: Ohio

Posted 06 September 2013 - 06:25 PM

If you don't mind used equipment, you could always pick up a Celestron ASGT CG5 that's in good shape, and then get a SVP pier extension from Orion to help with raising the eyepiece position to a comfortable level. Of course the AR152 will be pushing the mount's weight limit, but it should be good for visual use. I got a used ASGT in new condition and the SVP pier from Orion for less than the price of a new CG5.

#7 Light Bender

Light Bender

    Sputnik

  • -----
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2013
  • Loc: Middle Tennessee

Posted 06 September 2013 - 06:32 PM

Thanks Dave. I actually have the pier extension for the CG4 that came with the XLT 120. I have looked at that mount and can still buy one from opticorp. It's $595.00 new. But, I wouldn't have a problem buying a used one as long as it performed and was at a good price. I have my eyes open.

#8 Pat at home

Pat at home

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 328
  • Joined: 16 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Campbellton, New Brunswick, Canada

Posted 09 September 2013 - 11:09 AM

I've seen a couple of EQ6's without tripods in that price range on the second hand web sites. Watch Astromart and Astro Buy Sell, they come up once in a while. I suspect more will show up given the increasing popularity of EQ-Alt/Azm combination mounts and also the introduction of EQ8.

I have an AR152 and its very happy on my EQ6.

#9 SDTopensied

SDTopensied

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 203
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2011
  • Loc: Atlanta

Posted 09 September 2013 - 01:45 PM

The AR152 is a hoss!

I think the AVX would carry it, but you would probably be better off with a CGEM.

As an alternative, the AR127 is a really nice scope with great optics. It rides on an AVX quite nicely.

-Steve

#10 Ira

Ira

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2633
  • Joined: 22 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Mitzpe Ramon, Israel

Posted 09 September 2013 - 03:56 PM

Consider a 130mm refractor instead. Alot cheaper and much easier to mount. a 6" refractor is a big beast.

/Ira

#11 Mike4242

Mike4242

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1099
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2011
  • Loc: West Tennessee

Posted 12 September 2013 - 08:13 PM

I've been using my AR152 on a CG-5 for about a year now and it works just fine for visual. Setting up in the grass instead of on concrete makes it quite a bit more stable. I tried the Orion 16" pier extension with mine and found it to be much less stable than the CG-5 with tripod legs fully extended. It was almost unusable for me with the extension.

The AR152 views are on par with what you get with an 8" SCT; however, the AR152 will give you much wider fields of view than an SCT. CA isn't that bad with Baader Fringe Killer and a Baader Contrast Booster pretty much kills all CA on Jupiter at the cost of a dimmer and yellower image though.

#12 coopman

coopman

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3470
  • Joined: 23 Apr 2006
  • Loc: South Louisiana

Posted 12 September 2013 - 08:39 PM

If you don't already use them, a set of vibration suppression pads under your tripod legs when on concrete would most likely lessen the mount's dampening times quite a bit.

#13 Mike4242

Mike4242

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1099
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2011
  • Loc: West Tennessee

Posted 12 September 2013 - 09:01 PM

I haven't tried suppression pads, but I've often thought they would be helpful. I'm very close to picking up an Atlas Pro AZ/EQ-g for the scope -- if I don't decide to pick up a C9.25 on an Advance VX instead. Decisions decisions.

#14 Mike4242

Mike4242

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1099
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2011
  • Loc: West Tennessee

Posted 12 September 2013 - 09:09 PM

Here's an unfiltered picture of Jupiter I took with my AR152 to give you an idea of the CA. Picture was taken by hand holding my very low quality camera phone up to the eyepiece. I cropped and zoomed in on the picture, but other than that it's a raw photo. The sky is blue because I took this about 3p.m. in the afternoon. I have markers for where to place my tripod legs for polar alignment, so I just powered up and told the CG-5 to go to Jupiter. It wasn't in the eyepiece, but it didn't take much searching to find it.

Posted Image

#15 De Lorme

De Lorme

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 874
  • Joined: 30 Dec 2008

Posted 12 September 2013 - 10:52 PM

A {home made} spreader bar{to expensive to buy new} and a
Hargreaves strut will make the difference. Wait if you have to and put more money together. I have a Cgem and it's been great with my CR6" on top these last 3 years. Plus when you
start to really dream of the BIG 8"f6 OR f9 you will have the mount that will handle it with the added upgrades.
Of course this would be for visual only.
De Lorme

#16 T1R2

T1R2

    Surveyor 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 1662
  • Joined: 11 Jun 2013
  • Loc: NeverWhere, 35*N

Posted 12 September 2013 - 11:29 PM

The AR152 will be under mounted on the AVX and the CGEM, but if you don't mind not being able to touch the scope, then anything is possible. On the other hand if you don't mind not having Goto, then a ES Twilight II Alt-Az will hold it, an older CGE mount will be the next step up from a CGEM, and will hold it if you can find a used one, theres really not much else out there for $1000 or less that can handle it, and everything that can handle it starts to get pricy, you already have a CG4, I put a AR127 on mine and its still under mounted a little, not much, but it is, but if you stick to 1.25 eps, and turn the 7lbs counterweight over so that it can slide down the shaft halfway through the weight giving you a little more counterbalance, then it will work. sometimes you have to compromise, I troubled over the same issues as you AR152/AR127 mounted on either a CGE or CG4, I'm happy I made the choice I did.

#17 mayidunk

mayidunk

    Don't Ask...

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4039
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2010
  • Loc: Betwixt & Between...

Posted 12 September 2013 - 11:42 PM

My ES AR152 weighs 24.5 Lbs. with a 2" diagonal and 13mm Ethos eyepiece, and my Vixen Sphinx eq mount (using the HAL130 tripod and SX half-pillar) carries it quite well for visual use. When tapped, the scope's vibrations stop within a couple of seconds, there are absolutely no issues with the mount slewing or tracking with this scope, and gotos are always spot on! BTW, I replaced the Sphinx's motor controller board with the NexSXD, and the StarBook controller with the Celestron NexStar+ HC. The AR152 mounted on the upgraded Sphinx is currently my favorite setup for quick and easy deep sky viewing!

Update: To be accurate, the mount I'm using is the Sphinx SXW with Sayama motors installed. The replacement controller board is the NexSXW for use with those motors. (Originally, Vixen used RA and Dec. motors from Tsukasa on the earliest versions of the SXW, replacing them with motors from Sayama shortly afterwards. So, there are two versions of the NexSXW motor controller board, one for the old motors, and one for the new motors.)

Also, in an earlier post I had said that my AR152 weighed in at a bit over 26 Lbs. At the time I was going by some notes I had from when I was looking into purchasing it. It so happens that last night I actually weighed the scope with everything attached to it, as I was looking into seeing if I could mount a 10" newt. OTA on the Sphinx, and wanted to see exactly what the AR152 weighed. It turns out that the newt. OTA, without rings, rail, and finder, is several pounds heavier than my AR152, so the idea of mounting the newt. on the Sphinx has been shelved for the time being.

#18 Jon_Doh

Jon_Doh

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1004
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2011
  • Loc: On a receiver's back

Posted 13 September 2013 - 08:08 AM

I have the AR152 mounted on the AVX and it is not undermounted. It handles the scope just fine. There is no need for suppression pads or anything else. For astrophotography I might need to add a little more weight to the balance rod. The AVX seems to me to be a bit sturdier than the CG-5 mount that it replaced.

#19 Jon_Doh

Jon_Doh

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1004
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2011
  • Loc: On a receiver's back

Posted 13 September 2013 - 08:11 AM

I've been using my AR152 on a CG-5 for about a year now and it works just fine for visual. Setting up in the grass instead of on concrete makes it quite a bit more stable. I tried the Orion 16" pier extension with mine and found it to be much less stable than the CG-5 with tripod legs fully extended. It was almost unusable for me with the extension.

The AR152 views are on par with what you get with an 8" SCT; however, the AR152 will give you much wider fields of view than an SCT. CA isn't that bad with Baader Fringe Killer and a Baader Contrast Booster pretty much kills all CA on Jupiter at the cost of a dimmer and yellower image though.


Mike have you tried a Moon and Skyglow filter in combination with the Fringe Killer on Jupiter? The Skyglow filter gets rid of the yellow while improving contrast and restores Jupiter very close to its natural color all the while getting rid of most of the CA.

#20 Mike4242

Mike4242

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1099
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2011
  • Loc: West Tennessee

Posted 13 September 2013 - 10:29 AM

I've have a Baader Semi-Apo which is the same as the Fringe Killer + Moon and Skyglow. I find I like the Fringe Killer better because it dims the view less.

#21 mayidunk

mayidunk

    Don't Ask...

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 4039
  • Joined: 17 Feb 2010
  • Loc: Betwixt & Between...

Posted 13 September 2013 - 10:43 AM

I could never get used to the fringe killer filters! I had earlier on learned that, with time, your brain has a way of filtering out the purple fringe. I discovered that I was able to quickly acclimate to the fringe being there such that it became unobtrusive as long as I didn't keep focusing on it. I just stopped using the filter, and never looked back! YMMV.

#22 ed_turco

ed_turco

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1389
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2009
  • Loc: Lincoln, RI

Posted 13 September 2013 - 11:23 AM

I notice in your photo that there seems to be a greenish rim on one side of Jupiter and a purple one opposite.

Does your lens have some wedge, or did you take the picture when Jupiter was below 20* from the horizon, (i.e. atmospheric dispersion)?

#23 Mike4242

Mike4242

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1099
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2011
  • Loc: West Tennessee

Posted 13 September 2013 - 02:27 PM

I noticed the green too -- it is most likely atmospheric. I've never seen any green fringing visually. Could also be an artifact from the camera; I was having a hard time holding it steady.

#24 Jon_Doh

Jon_Doh

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1004
  • Joined: 16 Sep 2011
  • Loc: On a receiver's back

Posted 13 September 2013 - 03:17 PM

Mike, the semi apo applies stronger filtering than the fringe killer skyglow combo, thus doing a better job of reducing the CA. It won't dim the view as much, although you may find it too dim. I like the combo and find it necessary only while looking at Jupiter or Venus. I can hardly see any CA on the moon and don't use any filter.

#25 Mike4242

Mike4242

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1099
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2011
  • Loc: West Tennessee

Posted 13 September 2013 - 03:34 PM

The Baader Contrast Booster is a good one to try on Jupiter. It eliminates almost all of the CA and the contrast is really good. I'm looking forward to trying it out on Mars this coming up spring.

Here's an article that Neil English wrote about the contrast booster: http://neilenglish.n...s-with-filters/






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics