Jump to content


Photo

Celestron or Orion OAG for 9.25" EdgeHD?

  • Please log in to reply
9 replies to this topic

#1 Poochpa

Poochpa

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 986
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2005
  • Loc: Buffalo Burbs, NY

Posted 24 August 2014 - 07:41 PM

Any thoughts on whether Celestron's OAG (#93648 with #93562 adapter) or Orion's TOAG (#05531) would be better to use with a 9.25" EdgeHD? The Celestron looks more solid and has a larger prism, which I think would result in more and brighter guide stars. It also has a helical focuser for the guide camera, which the Orion lacks. The Celestron OAG, however, is considerably more expensive than the Orion TOAG. Also, while the Celestron will work with my DSLR at f/10, it is too thick (29mm) to use with my f/7 set up, which has only 19mm of backspace to spare between the AP reducer I use and the camera. The Orion TOAG, with some tinkering with spacers, I think could be used with both f/10 and f/7 setups. Then again, when imaging at f/7, my little finderscope guider does just fine. Either way I go in terms of an OAG, the guide camera will probably be something like a QHY5L-II or Lodestar. Thanks for any help.

Mike



#2 Poochpa

Poochpa

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 986
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2005
  • Loc: Buffalo Burbs, NY

Posted 26 August 2014 - 06:04 PM

No one?



#3 budman1961

budman1961

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1112
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2011
  • Loc: Springfield, MO

Posted 26 August 2014 - 07:58 PM

Mike,

 

You will have to do a bit of searching here on CN.......  As I remember when the Orion TOAG first came out, there was an issue with (if I recall correctly) the stalk that held the pick off prism.  Many customer complaints ensued, and Orion made good, and the product being delivered today is supposed to be A-OK.

 

I dont recall any reviews for the Celestron OAG, it sure looks beefy, and well made.  Perhaps some CN'ers with some experience can chime in!

 

Best of luck, I look forward to reading the results!

 

Andy



#4 Poochpa

Poochpa

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 986
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2005
  • Loc: Buffalo Burbs, NY

Posted 29 August 2014 - 03:58 PM

Andy,

Thanks for responding. I was already familiar with that thread, which was highly informative about the TOAG but didn't involve any discussion or comparison with Celestron's OAG. Thanks.

Mike



#5 WesC

WesC

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2119
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2013
  • Loc: La Crescenta, CA

Posted 29 August 2014 - 05:03 PM

The Celestron unit is relatively new and I've only heard of a few folks using it. I was surprised how large it is, and it does eat up a lot of backspace.



#6 Patrick

Patrick

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11408
  • Joined: 15 May 2003
  • Loc: Franklin, Ohio

Posted 31 August 2014 - 07:25 AM

Any thoughts on whether Celestron's OAG (#93648 with #93562 adapter) or Orion's TOAG (#05531) would be better to use with a 9.25" EdgeHD? The Celestron looks more solid and has a larger prism, which I think would result in more and brighter guide stars. It also has a helical focuser for the guide camera, which the Orion lacks. The Celestron OAG, however, is considerably more expensive than the Orion TOAG. Also, while the Celestron will work with my DSLR at f/10, it is too thick (29mm) to use with my f/7 set up, which has only 19mm of backspace to spare between the AP reducer I use and the camera. The Orion TOAG, with some tinkering with spacers, I think could be used with both f/10 and f/7 setups. Then again, when imaging at f/7, my little finderscope guider does just fine. Either way I go in terms of an OAG, the guide camera will probably be something like a QHY5L-II or Lodestar. Thanks for any help.

Mike

 

I know they're expensive, but I still recommend the Innovation Foresight ONAG (ON Axis Guider).  Much easier to use than an Off Axis Guider.  With longer focal length scopes like the C9.25 you'll need all the help you can get to achieve good guiding.

 

Patrick



#7 Poochpa

Poochpa

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 986
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2005
  • Loc: Buffalo Burbs, NY

Posted 31 August 2014 - 12:01 PM

Hi Patrick,

I've wanted the ONAG for a while, but it's beyond budget.



#8 ewave

ewave

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1222
  • Joined: 16 May 2009
  • Loc: northwest NJ

Posted 31 August 2014 - 12:11 PM

Mike

 

Have you found any lower profile OAGs than these?  It just seems that both of the ones in your post take up too much backspace.

I was thinking along the lines of a TS-09 or a Baader equivalent?  I have the TS-09 but haven't got around to testing it out. 

It is a bit flimsy, but with everything tightened up, and using the optional 48mm adapter for it, I think it might offer the backspace

requirements with the AP CCDT67.



#9 Poochpa

Poochpa

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 986
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2005
  • Loc: Buffalo Burbs, NY

Posted 31 August 2014 - 04:47 PM

Hi Sean,

The Orion TOAG has sufficient backspace to use the AP reducer. I have 19mm to play with and the TOAG is 10.5mm thick. See my original post above for the pluses and minuses for the two OAGs  I'm looking at.

Mike



#10 mike17

mike17

    Vostok 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 127
  • Joined: 26 May 2014

Posted 03 September 2014 - 07:05 PM

I recently purchase a celestron oag for use on by 8" celestron SCT with a F6.3 Focal reducer.  I have been having some problems getting the correct spacing but I think I have finally got the spacing correct.  I also plan to use a QHY5L-ii as a guide camera.  I need to get the guide camera setup and optimize the setup....I'm kind of new at this so it is taking me a while .  I can provide a update when I have it all working.








Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics