Jump to content


Photo

Backpacking Scope

  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#51 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 16664
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 29 August 2014 - 08:02 AM

Mike, check out the Stellarvue M2 mount with Vixen saddle.  It weighs 4#, handles up to 115mm APOs/26# payload, and does have a handle option.  Probably on the heavy side for backpacking, but for grab and go from your apartment, those are great capacity specs.

 

Regards,

 

Jim

 

 

Thanks, that looks like a worthy mount.  I'd have to get the panhandle option.  My "backpacking" would probably not be for more than two or three miles at the most, to somewhat better sites in my neighborhood.  I'm not taking this up into the high country, the back of beyond, or the great walkabout.

 

Mike



#52 BillP

BillP

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11645
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Vienna, VA

Posted 29 August 2014 - 10:04 AM

What...campers/hikers can no longer build make-shift tables from all those resources in the woods??  People need to be watching more of those survival shows on TV :lol:


  • Sarkikos likes this

#53 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 20270
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 29 August 2014 - 11:45 AM

 

Otherwise there is this, which will still get you 1.2 deg TFOV with no CA - http://www.telescope...yPriceAscending

 

The problem with these table top scopes is that you need to bring along a table. Not too good for backpacking. 

 

:grin:

Mike

 

No you don't need to bring a table.  Just bring a saw.  I cut down a tree or telephone pole to use mine when I find my spot.  :grin:

 

- Jim


  • Sarkikos likes this

#54 BillP

BillP

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11645
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Vienna, VA

Posted 29 August 2014 - 12:34 PM

I cut down a tree or telephone pole to use mine when I find my spot.   :grin:

 

- Jim

 

 

 

:rofl:


Edited by BillP, 29 August 2014 - 12:34 PM.


#55 drollere

drollere

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1581
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2010
  • Loc: sebastopol, california

Posted 29 August 2014 - 01:01 PM

Hmm... I think the C5 is a little chunky. Mostly because you have to pack the mount. Looking at what everyone has said I think a refractor is the best choice. Lots of aperture isn't needed when I'm in no mans land right? So something like an 80mm would be sufficient right?

 

to my eye this whole conversation is really about magnification, not aperture. dark skies are absolutely the best place for the largest feasible aperture, because as jim demonstrated dark skies are a huge aperture multiplier. by why prefer an 80mm monocular view when you can have a 100mm binocular view? the only answer can be: magnification.

 

magnification (steady image of a very small field) is really the only reason you need a portable mount. you want to look at the *detail* in globular clusters, planets, individual craters on the moon, double stars like castor, some of the brighter deep sky objects.

 

a mount won't be regretted if you are using the scope for wide field viewing. a mount? for pete's sake, you're in the woods, you can certainly find a branch or rock overhang or a tent pole or clothes line to prop it on. strap it in the bear pulley, raise the scope to eye height, and enjoy.

 

a 20-25x 100 mm binocular will work with a camera tripod, it can be used for wildlife and landscape viewing, it is lighter than most of the kits being sold you in the comments above.

 

of course, you can still use that 150mm APO to view wildlife. you just set down your pack, take out the scope, take out the mount, set up the mount, put the scope on the mount, fish around for an eyepiece, put the eyepiece in the scope, point the scope, then wander it around until you find what you want to see.

 

then, when you're ready to move on, you just need to put everything away.



#56 MooEy

MooEy

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 78
  • Joined: 02 Oct 2007

Posted 29 August 2014 - 07:00 PM

If weight is a concern, I don't believe anything comes anywhere close to the weight/aperture of the borg scopes. They are pricy, but u get japanese stuff.

 

If you need to go even lighter, mini borg configuration are available in 60mm, 67mm and 71mm apertures, thou i would go for series 80 on the 67FL or the 71FL.

 

For mount, i think a modded 2 axis manfrotto 410 is a good lightweight choice. The stellarvue m1 is another wonderful choice, thou it's discontinued. The m2, imho, is way too big for small scopes. 

 

~MooEy~



#57 tomjones

tomjones

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 198
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2011
  • Loc: along the 32nd parallel

Posted 30 August 2014 - 11:32 AM

I weighed my 90mm f/6.7 at 6.5 lbs.  kind of the limit for a backpacker.

 

Hunted around and found the Explore Scientific 80mm f/6 Carbon Fiber at only 5 lbs. and a triple.


Edited by tomjones, 30 August 2014 - 01:06 PM.


#58 contrailmaker

contrailmaker

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1243
  • Joined: 02 Jan 2009

Posted 30 August 2014 - 12:54 PM

I wouldn't have dared to bring any of my dedicated astronomy gear to my last backpacking trips. To me the clear choice for this task would be the Pentax 60mm ED spotting scope with the built in 45 degree erecting diagonal and a zoom eyepiece. It is built to take anything you can expect to happen during such a trip. It is great for wildlife spotting and also as a rich field telescope. A basic camera tripod would work well too. An 80mm version is available but it is considerably larger.

 

CM



#59 jrbarnett

jrbarnett

    Eyepiece Hooligan

  • *****
  • Posts: 20270
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2006
  • Loc: Petaluma, CA

Posted 30 August 2014 - 02:21 PM

I weighed my 90mm f/6.7 at 6.5 lbs.  kind of the limit for a backpacker.

 

Hunted around and found the Explore Scientific 80mm f/6 Carbon Fiber at only 5 lbs. and a triple.

That's the same weight as the C5 SCT, and about the same length too on account of the SCT's f/10 focal ration and folded design.

 

Just sayin'...

 

- Jim



#60 tomjones

tomjones

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 198
  • Joined: 25 Jan 2011
  • Loc: along the 32nd parallel

Posted 31 August 2014 - 07:09 AM

Attached File  5942058-0011.jpg   135.44KB   1 downloads

Hated my porta mini mount, so disassembled it to get the rotators off and bolted to a piece of 3"x3"x3" aluminum angle with pvc pipe extension column, still had the tripod at this point.  And you can add the slow-mo cables.


Edited by tomjones, 31 August 2014 - 07:11 AM.


#61 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 16664
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 31 August 2014 - 09:51 AM

For backpacking to a dark site, I'd try for optimal combination of aperture, wide TFOV and light weight.  My money would go on either the C5 or a C80ED.  The C5 would get me around 1.4 degrees with an Orion Ultrascopic 35.  The C80ED would yield around 4.5 degrees with a Titan-II 40.  On the other hand, the C5 has about 2.5x the light grasp of the C80ED.  The C80ED weighs about 4.5 lbs. The C5 comes in around 3 lbs.

 

So, which will it be? :thinking:

 

Mike


Edited by Sarkikos, 31 August 2014 - 10:04 AM.


#62 GOLGO13

GOLGO13

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3109
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2005
  • Loc: St. Louis area

Posted 01 September 2014 - 09:21 PM

Just travelled to a few places which had pretty dark skies. I was glad I had my TV60mm and Dwarfstar vs something bigger. Was able to carry all my luggage, Laptop, scope, tripod in one trip at hotels etc.

 

I was fortunate to have a 6 inch F8 newt at one of the sites as I had donated it to my friend who lives in a rural part of Maryland. Great skies there and fresh blue crab. Holy moley was the crab good.

 

Anyways, yes it was nice to have the 6 inch in those skies.

 

However, I would not have traveled with a scope had I not had a super light small scope setup. At least for this trip as astronomy was not a focus.

 

I do need to get a good pair of 10x50s though. I don't want expensive ones but semi-decent. And of course for backpacking a pair of 10x50s would be nice. Still I like having magnification as well. So I would probably want to pair a small scope with some binoculars.








Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics