Jump to content


Photo

Celestron C8 vs. C6

  • Please log in to reply
31 replies to this topic

#26 dpippel

dpippel

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1160
  • Joined: 05 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Desierto de Sonora

Posted 29 August 2014 - 01:40 PM

 

 

It takes me approximately 10 minutes to completely set up my AVX and polar align it well enough for visual use. It breaks down into several easy to manage pieces for convenient transport and I can use multiple OTAs with it. My adjustable observing chair and Baader Clicklock VB make it very convenient to observe with no matter how the mount is positioned.

 

;)

I use both (GEMs and alt-az mounts).  I prefer GEMs for their versatility, load handling capacity and less demanding balance characteristics.  But alt-ax mounts do put the eyepiece in a much more consistent and comfortable range than do GEMs.  You'll move your observing chair around the mount just as often as with a GEM, but will be adjusting your seat height far less often, which makes for a much more relaxing observing session.  The problem is, there are no decent quality, medium load, tracking, GOTO alt-az mounts, which for me relegates the alt-az offerings to second class citizens in the mount world.  Imagine if Losmandy or or even A-P decided to make a high quality, full featured, versatile, visual, GOTO alt-az mount capable of holding up to a C11 or better yet C14.

 

- Jim

 

 

 

You nailed it.  I really like my AVX, it sets up/torn down quickly (less the the 10 minutes someone quoted) and the tracking and goto are great.  But I don't do photography so I don't really need a GEM.  But there's no other alternative really.  An alt-az would be much more intuitive.  I think Losmandy and AP are marketting to photographers... Actually, I think most in the astronomy business are marketing to them, that's where the money is.  Even the AVX is marketed as "Built with astrophotography in mind", which isn't really true.

 

Nice mount though, I don't regret buying it.

 

 

I have and have had both Alt-az and GEM mounts. I don't find using a GEM any less relaxing or any less intuitive. But, as with most things, YMMV. There's a huge personal preference component here.



#27 shortbread13

shortbread13

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 05 Sep 2013
  • Loc: Los Angeles County, CA

Posted 29 August 2014 - 03:50 PM

 

 

 

It takes me approximately 10 minutes to completely set up my AVX and polar align it well enough for visual use. It breaks down into several easy to manage pieces for convenient transport and I can use multiple OTAs with it. My adjustable observing chair and Baader Clicklock VB make it very convenient to observe with no matter how the mount is positioned.

 

;)

I use both (GEMs and alt-az mounts).  I prefer GEMs for their versatility, load handling capacity and less demanding balance characteristics.  But alt-ax mounts do put the eyepiece in a much more consistent and comfortable range than do GEMs.  You'll move your observing chair around the mount just as often as with a GEM, but will be adjusting your seat height far less often, which makes for a much more relaxing observing session.  The problem is, there are no decent quality, medium load, tracking, GOTO alt-az mounts, which for me relegates the alt-az offerings to second class citizens in the mount world.  Imagine if Losmandy or or even A-P decided to make a high quality, full featured, versatile, visual, GOTO alt-az mount capable of holding up to a C11 or better yet C14.

 

- Jim

 

 

 

You nailed it.  I really like my AVX, it sets up/torn down quickly (less the the 10 minutes someone quoted) and the tracking and goto are great.  But I don't do photography so I don't really need a GEM.  But there's no other alternative really.  An alt-az would be much more intuitive.  I think Losmandy and AP are marketting to photographers... Actually, I think most in the astronomy business are marketing to them, that's where the money is.  Even the AVX is marketed as "Built with astrophotography in mind", which isn't really true.

 

Nice mount though, I don't regret buying it.

 

 

I have and have had both Alt-az and GEM mounts. I don't find using a GEM any less relaxing or any less intuitive. But, as with most things, YMMV. There's a huge personal preference component here.

 

 

I appreciate reading both sides to this.  I will try the GEM for myself to see if it will work for me, no regrets.  Otherwise I'll keep wondering if I'm missing out on any benefits to my observing…  :thinking:

 

Sorry to throw the thread off track, I was thinking to pair it up with a C6 or C8!  :)



#28 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 17139
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 29 August 2014 - 05:16 PM

I tend to agree. I have found that for me, the aversion to GEM's is more psychological than anything else. It probably goes back to the old days with my old Meade reflector that really was a pain to set up. The new mounts are amazingly fast to align and in truth, assembling them only takes a few minutes. Smaller ones can be carried without disassembly (maybe the OTA removed). Everyone's situation is different, so obviously others will disagree, but I think modern GEM's sometimes get a bad rep from their distant cousins.

 

No, in my case it's not a psychological aversion but physical one.  A GEM is heavier to move to the observing site and more awkward to move when it gets there.

 

:grin:

Mike


Edited by Sarkikos, 29 August 2014 - 05:19 PM.


#29 Erik Bakker

Erik Bakker

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3184
  • Joined: 10 Aug 2006
  • Loc: The Netherlands, Europe

Posted 30 August 2014 - 06:10 AM

 

I tend to agree. I have found that for me, the aversion to GEM's is more psychological than anything else. It probably goes back to the old days with my old Meade reflector that really was a pain to set up. The new mounts are amazingly fast to align and in truth, assembling them only takes a few minutes. Smaller ones can be carried without disassembly (maybe the OTA removed). Everyone's situation is different, so obviously others will disagree, but I think modern GEM's sometimes get a bad rep from their distant cousins.

 

No, in my case it's not a psychological aversion but physical one.  A GEM is heavier to move to the observing site and more awkward to move when it gets there.

 

:grin:

Mike

 

 

I am with Mike here. My fork mounted Questar 7 spoiled me in the ergonomics department. And my little fork mounted C5 does even better ergonomically . Much more convenient and comfortable than my 4" apo on it's GEM.


Edited by Erik Bakker, 31 August 2014 - 01:54 PM.


#30 A6Q6

A6Q6

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 846
  • Joined: 31 May 2011
  • Loc: Stroudsburg,Pa,U.S.A

Posted 31 August 2014 - 01:43 PM

 

 

I tend to agree. I have found that for me, the aversion to GEM's is more psychological than anything else. It probably goes back to the old days with my old Meade reflector that really was a pain to set up. The new mounts are amazingly fast to align and in truth, assembling them only takes a few minutes. Smaller ones can be carried without disassembly (maybe the OTA removed). Everyone's situation is different, so obviously others will disagree, but I think modern GEM's sometimes get a bad rep from their distant cousins.

 

No, in my case it's not a psychological aversion but physical one.  A GEM is heavier to move to the observing site and more awkward to move when it gets there.

 

:grin:

Mike

 

 

I am with Mike here. My fork mounted Questar 7 spoiled me in the ergonomics department. And my little fork mounted C5 does even better ergonomically . Much more covenant and comfortable than my 4" apo on it's GEM.

 

+1 at this time in my life the C5 is my most used telescope.



#31 A6Q6

A6Q6

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 846
  • Joined: 31 May 2011
  • Loc: Stroudsburg,Pa,U.S.A

Posted 31 August 2014 - 02:19 PM

I was once using my Astroscan ( I took it to work and was on break) enjoying M42 and thought, " wouldn't it be nice to have something the size of the Astroscan, that can give me the same full view of M42 but would be good on the Moon and Planets." Well , here it is------ the C5.  For some people the C6 can be used  as a grab and go, I would get the C6 for grab and go if you can handle it and get the C8 later for when you have more time to set up.

Attached Files


Edited by A6Q6, 31 August 2014 - 03:06 PM.


#32 Dunkstar

Dunkstar

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 278
  • Joined: 26 Mar 2012
  • Loc: Under the clouds

Posted 04 September 2014 - 06:07 AM

 The problem is, there are no decent quality, medium load, tracking, GOTO alt-az mounts, which for me relegates the alt-az offerings to second class citizens in the mount world.  Imagine if Losmandy or or even A-P decided to make a high quality, full featured, versatile, visual, GOTO alt-az mount capable of holding up to a C11 or better yet C14.

 

Obviously it's your prerogative to determine what you feel is "decent", but the AZ-EQ6/AZ-EQ G is decent enough for a C11. Overkill for a C8, but the iOptron mini towers can do a decent job with a scope of that size/weight. High quality is a different category altogether IMO. Does seem like a bit of a niche for an easy to setup and use C14 mount, no doubt there's money to be made somewhere  ;)








Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics