asaint
Carpal Tunnel
   
Reged: 04/25/03
Posts: 2019
|
|
Celestron CG5-GT Mount
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Great initial review. Thanks, Tony. I hope you come back and update your review as you get more visual time with it.
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Hi Tom,
After all I went through with the LXD55 mount, the CG-5 GT is like a happy dream. It's not perfect by any means, but the quality appears to be so much better. I can't imagine if anyone had a choice between the two mounts and examined both side by side on a showroom floor, that they would even consider the LXD55 mount. Where Meade has you though is the "package". Some of those OTA's are just not available by themselves (like the Schmidt-Newtonian tubes). I'm not sure its worth the aggravation though. I've heard that some folks have had some trouble with the Celestron mount, but seems to be related to a circuit board being pushed against the mount by a too close fit in the housing. From what I've read, seems an easy enough fix. I'm still getting use to the Celestron Hand Controller. I was pretty proficient with the Meade Autostar, having used (and still using) a really terrific LX90 (best bang for the buck out there in my opinion). Occasionally, the new mount slews somewhere unexpected, but hitting one of the arrow keys stops it and then hitting the enter key sends it back on track toward the target. Last night I had the mount out with the 6" Alter Mak-Cass and did a tour of about 30 objects. Every one of them was in the FOV (about 60x), they weren't in the center of the FOV, but all were clearly visible. I suspect taking time to really do a precise alignment will provide even better GOTO accuracy. It is important with this mount to "level" it and also to approach the final centering of the alignment stars using the 'up' and 'right' arrow keys. This is Celestron's way of dealing with backlash and it makes a significant impact on GOTO accuracy.
All for now... some nasty weather coming in, so may be awhile before I have a chance to do any oberving.
Cheers,
Tony Bonanno
|
matt
Vendor (Scopemania)
   
Reged: 07/28/03
Posts: 10015
Loc: Chaville, France
|
|
Tony, do you have any OTA heavier than 12lbs to challenge this mount? And how heavy is the mount itself?
Great review btw. We read what we need to know.
-------------------- Matt
CI700 mount with various scopes on top.
|
Stelios
Pooh-Bah
   
Reged: 10/04/03
Posts: 1356
Loc: West Hills, CA
|
|
I actually DID have both the LXD55 and the AS-GT mounts "side by side" and was planning to do a review, but I could not make the LXD55 mount work sufficiently for it -- the mount would have every few minutes an uncontrolled spontaneous slew of a few degrees, moreover a slew not registered by the encoders -- future GoTo's were simply not even close, and I never managed more than 1 GoTo (after alignment -- the problem would often occur before) without running into this.
The actual mounts (aside from GoTo capabilities) seem to mainly differ in the tripod, but what a difference this is.
However one thing that I have noticed that is a minus of the otherwise great CG-5 tripod, is that the legs, if you clamp them in an intermediate position, seem to deform after a while and become impossible to extend fully. I have this problem right now -- it's not very serious in the sense that the legs do extend to where I normally use them, but recently I wanted to mount a refractor and extend the legs further and I could not do that. I expect Celestron will replace the legs under warranty, but that's something to be careful with -- do NOT overtighten (and I am no Charles Atlas) the leg clamps.
-------------------- APM/TMB 115/805 APO
9.25S - GT
Naglers: 17T4, 13T6, 3-6 zoom
UWANs: 28mm, 7mm
Pentax 10XW, 10mm Radian (shootout coming!!!)
Misc EP: 50mm Parks, 42mm GSO, 2x TV Barlow
|
jrcrilly
Refractor wienie again
   
Reged: 04/30/03
Posts: 22362
Loc: NE Ohio
|
|
Quote:
However one thing that I have noticed that is a minus of the otherwise great CG-5 tripod, is that the legs, if you clamp them in an intermediate position, seem to deform after a while and become impossible to extend fully.
That's interesting; the tripod seems to be modelled after the Meade HD field tripod, and it's prone to the same problem. For some reason, the Celestron-produced tripods in that weight class don't have that problem.
The LXD55 symptoms you describe are usually caused by a known connector problem. It's fairly easy to repair but folks do wonder why a repair is necessary on a brand new item. Later units use a different connector and are much less prone to it (I've never seen one of the later ones act like that). If you still have that mount let me know & I'll explain how to sort it out.
-------------------- John C
Urban Observatory
Tele Vue Pronto
A&M/Astreya 76mm F/6 APO
TMB/LOMO 80mm F/7.5 APO
Tak FSQ-106N F/5 APO
Meade 152ED F/9 "APO"
152mm F/10 achromat
Tak CN-212 8" F/12 classical Cass/ F/4 Newt
Teeter 20" F/3.8 truss Newt w/ServoCat
LXD750, EM-200
ST-10XME
|
Stelios
Pooh-Bah
   
Reged: 10/04/03
Posts: 1356
Loc: West Hills, CA
|
|
Quote:
The LXD55 symptoms you describe are usually caused by a known connector problem. It's fairly easy to repair but folks do wonder why a repair is necessary on a brand new item. Later units use a different connector and are much less prone to it (I've never seen one of the later ones act like that). If you still have that mount let me know & I'll explain how to sort it out.
The mount belongs to a close friend of mine, part of an AR-5 (scope is great). At last count he was planning to send it back to Meade for repairs, I don't know if he has done so already or not. In any case, as they may very well return it with little done, it would be wonderful if you would explain this -- perhaps privately or on another thread if it is too "off-topic" for this one.
-------------------- APM/TMB 115/805 APO
9.25S - GT
Naglers: 17T4, 13T6, 3-6 zoom
UWANs: 28mm, 7mm
Pentax 10XW, 10mm Radian (shootout coming!!!)
Misc EP: 50mm Parks, 42mm GSO, 2x TV Barlow
|
jrcrilly
Refractor wienie again
   
Reged: 04/30/03
Posts: 22362
Loc: NE Ohio
|
|
Quote:
In any case, as they may very well return it with little done, it would be wonderful if you would explain this -- perhaps privately or on another thread if it is too "off-topic" for this one.
Sure thing; I'll send you a private message.
-------------------- John C
Urban Observatory
Tele Vue Pronto
A&M/Astreya 76mm F/6 APO
TMB/LOMO 80mm F/7.5 APO
Tak FSQ-106N F/5 APO
Meade 152ED F/9 "APO"
152mm F/10 achromat
Tak CN-212 8" F/12 classical Cass/ F/4 Newt
Teeter 20" F/3.8 truss Newt w/ServoCat
LXD750, EM-200
ST-10XME
|
Mike28
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 06/21/03
Posts: 2889
Loc: Morris County,NJ
|
|
Sounds like this mount will make things easier to assemble then a heavy fork mount SCT like the NS11GPS. A tube by itself with no fork would seems to takeup less space in a case than that of a fork scope - also lighter? Was the 'Go To' tracking accurate after 2 hours? was their any drift on the target? I would assume that the program is simular to the NS11GPS. Also I take it this is a none GPS 'Go To'. so I assume that entering time and date, Longitude/latitude is still required before the alignment process. You mentioned no vibration. This also is a question I have-What lenses did you use other than 1.25. size? did you try 2" lenses with 60' FOV and over? I ask because I have some heavy 82'FOV Naglers (particularly 31mm) that can show the slightess vibration. This mount seems to be more stable than the factory issued mount for my NS11. I found your article and discription very informative and enjoyed it. Good luck with your new mount.
-------------------- Mike
'The only reason for time is so that everything doesn't happen at once.” Albert Einstein
NS11GPS/Sky align
TAKAHASHI TOA150F
Celestron 80ED
TV Pronto
Burgess Bino
Coronado Ha PST
CGE mount
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Stelios, Matt, Mike,
I set up the LXD55 10" SN OTA on the AS-GT mount. It seemed to work pretty well, but it took a lot of counterweight - about 35lbs or more as I recall. Nevertheless, the GOTO's were good, but not as good as I had expected.. later I realized that my mount base wasn't tightened down adequately and I probably introduced some shift in alignment as I slewed from one part of the sky to another. The AS-GT mount was more solid with the 10" tube than the LXD55 mount had been. Dampening times were certainly better than with the LXD mount, but I think that the large 10" SN tube still pushes the limits of the the AS-GT. The 10" SN is 30lbs before Telrad, eyepiece, dew shield, etc. And the 10" SN is a fairly long tube and susceptible to wind. I do not consider the 10" SN on the AS-GT an ideal setup, but it is workable. An 8" SCT on the AS-GT would be a piece of cake. My 6" Mak-cass, at 12.5lbs is an easy ride. I have a 22lb 6" Mak-newt that I haven't tried yet (its pretty lengthy also), but I think it will do fine and am planning on setting it up as soon as the weather cooperates.
Stelios is correct that the AS-GT mount base and tripod is the most obvious and probably most significant difference between the two mounts. But it goes further. The materials in the AS-GT mount appear to be much higher quality to me (I say this as someone who had his LXD mount apart many times and was very UNimnpressed with the soft metal and cheap quality of materials). The only area I've noted that Celestron might want to re-visit are the plastic motor housings on the AS-GT. I've heard that some folks have had some issues with the housing pressing up against a circuit board, etc. So far I haven't had any problems like that. I took the DEC housing off to have a look at the motor and gears. Was a lot neater and cleaner than what I remember on the LXD55 mount. I suspect Celestron made sure they didn't make the same mistakes that Meade did with their mount.
Mike - I haven't tried tracking an object more than about 45 minutes, so can't really comment on 2 hour tracking. Polar alignment will be critical in that area. I suspect the Hand Controller software is similar to your Nextstar 11 in that it has a polar alignment utility. I tried using it once and it seemed to work well. The mount is a NON-GPS setup, but Celestron's GPS accessory module is reportedly compatible with it. I use a hand held GPS and just punch in the coordinates manually. Largest eyepiece I've used is a Vixen LV 4 mm (45 deg, 375x). Wasn't really doing any testing, but didn't notice any unusual vibration, etc.
Tony Bonanno
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Quote:
Occasionally, the new mount slews somewhere unexpected, but hitting one of the arrow keys stops it and then hitting the enter key sends it back on track toward the target.
It sounds like a good mount, but I would be concerned with your above statement. I don't think that should be acceptable for a new mount. This is exactly what my LXD55 was doing before it was sent back a second time. Except it wasn't happening occasionally, it was happening always.
|
matt
Vendor (Scopemania)
   
Reged: 07/28/03
Posts: 10015
Loc: Chaville, France
|
|
Quote:
Occasionally, the new mount slews somewhere unexpected, but hitting one of the arrow keys stops it and then hitting the enter key sends it back on track toward the target.
My Nexstar 5 does that also! He does it when the batteries get low, and I guess the low power makes the "brain" of the scope a little "dizzy"
-------------------- Matt
CI700 mount with various scopes on top.
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Occasionally, the new mount slews somewhere unexpected, but hitting one of the arrow keys stops it and then hitting the enter key sends it back on track toward the target.
It sounds like a good mount, but I would be concerned with your above statement. I don't think that should be acceptable for a new mount. This is exactly what my LXD55 was doing before it was sent back a second time. Except it wasn't happening occasionally, it was happening always.
Hi Schultze,
I have to admit, it startled me when it did this. Fortunately, since the one session when it happened, it has not re-occurred. If it does, I'm going to have to carefully troubleshoot what is going on. Hadn't thought about power, but I suppose that could be a factor.
Tony Bonanno
|
ric_capucho
Vendor
Reged: 05/11/03
Posts: 57
|
|
Yep, a few people are a little gun shy with these goto equatorials due to their recent experiences with the LXD55. Poor Celestron should be sueing Meade for undermined the reputation of the concept. :-)
Looks very much like the CG5-GT is a winner. I really do hope so. Let's wait for an astro-photo review to confirm it, as that auto-guider port looks interesting.
Ric
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
I agree Ric... it will be interesting to see what the astro-imagers can get out of this mount. My main goal was just a reasonably portable, visual GOTO mount, and in that respect, I'm quite pleased. It is NOT a GM-8, that's for sure. But for the money, it seems quite capable, good materials, a two year warranty - and it worked right out of the box. 
Tony Bonanno
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Matt,
I just mounted a 21.5 lb 6" Russian Intes mak-newt on the mount and I'm impressed with how solid the setup appears. Dampening times seems quick, about the same as with the much smaller 12.5 lb mak-cass tube. By the way, I'm not using any vibration dampeners under the tripod legs. I suspect the similarity stems from the fact that the tripod is collapsed as much as possible with the Mak-newt, whereas with the mak-cass, the legs are extended (more like using an SCT). The mount seems quite comfortable slewing the tube to various targets. The rather longish mak-newt OTA actually seems to be a very good match for this mount. You may recall that when Orion sold their version of the 6" Intes Mak-Newt, that it was offered with the Vixen GP-DX mount.
Also, I can confirm that the mount handles the ASCOM PC control platform just fine. Last night I played around with some planetarium software, and it appeared to work well. Unfortunately, it was a dry run indoors due to extreme winds and cold.
I may update my review soon with some of this information.
Tony Bonanno
22:00 MST, 11/23/03 UPDATE to this Post - Just came in from an hour out in 18 deg (F) temps viewing with the mak-newt. Froze my butt off due to the wind. Anyway, the setup performed very well. Went through the regular setup routine, but was careful to make sure base was tightened down and mount was level. Also, approached the alignment stars using up and right arrow keys. Then did a tour. Every target (about 20+) was within the central 2/3rds (approx) FOV in a 26mm eyepiece. The OTA is pretty fast and wide-field, so that's no big deal in itself, but at least the mount has been consistent getting the targets in the FOV. Regarding the cold weather operation. Not sure what the wind chill factor was tonight, but it was cold. I noticed after about 30 minutes the buttons on the HC getting sluggish. Had to push on the button for a second or two to activate the command. The motors seemed to be okay, although a little more sluggish. At one point, the HC seemed to be unresponsive. I then noticed that the cigarette lighter plug looked like it was not seated all the way in the power supply receptacle. Sure enough, I re-seated the plug and the HC came back to life and the motors perked up. There is no question that the power supply is a critical factor with these electronics. I also realized that the power cord that came with my mount is ridiculously LONG - probably 25 feet of small gauge wire... I will replace it with something shorter and more substantial soon. I suspect that will also help in the cold weather.
Regarding the grease in the mount. I didn't notice any problem on either axis as a result of the cold. I did notice a little grease along the edge of the DEC mount. It was black and looked like a lithium type. I don't think this is the stuff that used to cause problems in the older mounts.
I measured the dampening time of the 22 lb mak-newt tube, looking through a moderate power eyepiece. Definitely LESS than 2 seconds. The new design tripod really makes a difference.
I'll try to attach a pic to this post.
Tony Bonanno
Edited by Tony Bonanno (11/23/03 11:58 PM)
|
summitlake
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 09/05/03
Posts: 878
Loc: Castro Valley CA
|
|
Wow, Tony, thanks for a great review! I ordered one of the CG-5GT's from OPT in August, for our new 10" Orion OTA, when I found the LXD-55 not available separately through retail. Sounds like our wait is almost over. Luckily I decided NOT to chance the Astromart route with picked-over LXD-55 parts.
We even had our LX-90 go bananas once (spontaneous slew), but only once. Cosmic rays? Neutrinos? Fleas?
All this is encouraging news. It is nice to make what appears to be a right decision with too little information. I am SO glad it was not easier to order the LXD-55 mount!
Thanks again!
--------------------
Alex
Meade LX90 8" SCT
Orion 127mm Mak
|
Oldfield
Postmaster
Reged: 03/20/02
Posts: 5209
Loc: Hong Kong
|
|
I'm happy to see that it actually handles a 22 lb and long OTA, thanks for tell us.
-------------------- The Home Astronomer from a city where most people are proud of the light pollution
Toys: C5, Ranger, Borg 45ED II, SM40/BF10, Unistar Light, TG-SP II, LXD55, ToUCam Pro, DMK 31AF03, Canon 10x30 IS, Pentax PCF III 10x50...
My observation log and ideas My General Blog
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Thanks for the usefull info, Tony
I live in Brazil and just bought an Intes MK 67. I own a Celestar 8 for some 4 years, but I was having trouble taking it to travel with my wife and little boy´s baggage, so I wanted something more "transport-friendly". Then I realized that the EQ2 mount I have is useless for this OTA, and so I´ll have to get a heavier mount. The problem is that I´m afraid that I´ll fall again in the "too big and too heavy to carry" category with The CG 5 plus weights and power tank. What is you impression about the size and weight of it compared with a standard Celestar 8 with wedgepod?
Thanks
Edited by AlJr (11/25/03 04:35 PM)
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Hi Aljr,
I think you will find it will be reasonably portable. The mount is substantial, but not as unweildy as a GM-8. I bought this mount precisely for the same reasons you described. I wanted something reasonably portable with GOTO that I could easily use with different OTA's. All along I had in mind to use the mount with the Alter 603 mak-cass as my "take it on a trip" setup. The MK-67 is very similar to my Alter 603 in size and weight. In my opinion, the MK-67 or Alter 603 with the AS-GT mount is the best match of all for a GOTO system that packs performance, but also is fairly transportable. You will only need one weight with the MK-67. I find it is a sweet match with minimal mass.
Tony Bonanno
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Great! Thank you so much, Tony! That´s exactly what I needed to know. After acouple of hours strugling with my EQ2 last night, I specially appreciate your help for this decision.
Clear skyes,
Alceu
|
Ralph McIntosh
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 11/26/03
Posts: 908
Loc: Hanau/Germany
|
|
Hi Tony
Thank you for your info about the mount. I was looking to get some information about it as I found your review and this forum. But till now I couldn’t find any thing about the usability of this mount for photography. I am using an GSO 800mm F=4 Newton with guiding scope (70/700), makes about 10kg (21 lb.) I am using SBIG's old ST-4 for guiding. As the Celstron mount has an Autoguider port its should be easy to control it.
Dou you know any body who uses this mount for photography? Add do you know if the Axes of the mount are made out of aluminum ore steel?
Ralph
-------------------- http://home.arcor.de/ralph.mcintosh/
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Hi Ralph,
I don't have any experience imaging with this mount, but if you visit some of the other internet forums, I suspect you will find some contacts that do. I've seen several images taken using this mount on some of the yahoo groups. I'm not sure what the axis bearing material is. I just assumed steel. The axis housings are aluminum I believe. I'm pretty sure this mount uses the newer design ball bearings for the RA axis. Maybe someone else reading this could provide better information.
By the way, I learned a lesson the hard way the other night. Check and make sure the azimuth peg on the tripod base is installed in the correct position (over a tripod leg, NOT between the tripod legs). The mount will readily TIP OVER if the peg is not positioned correctly and you have attached counterweights without an OTA mounted ! I just sent this picture and an update to the original review to Allister. It will probably be posted in a few days.
Tony Bonanno
|
Ralph McIntosh
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 11/26/03
Posts: 908
Loc: Hanau/Germany
|
|
Hi Tony
I travelled the web some days and could not find any information about it. Even the people at yahoos Groups arent talking about photography, strange. The fisr thing I did with my scope and mount (Synta H-EQ5) was to attache my Canon 10D and made some test series.
I got a mail from celestron, they are using brass and aluminum for the gears. But they did not answer the question about the axis material.
Ralph McIntosh
-------------------- http://home.arcor.de/ralph.mcintosh/
|
POPEYE
journeyman
Reged: 09/08/03
Posts: 8
Loc: Bedford Texas U.S.A.
|
|
Well I thought I might tell you after sending my CG5-GT back to Celestrn For the third time, it seams to work well. I have noticed a few of you have found it to be a circuit board, and that is what Celestron told me was wrong with mine. I was given my telescope for my 32 wedding anniversary by my wife and have only had it out once. I only hope I can learn how to use it before my 60th birthday!HA!HA!
|
POPEYE
journeyman
Reged: 09/08/03
Posts: 8
Loc: Bedford Texas U.S.A.
|
|
WOW!! thanks Bonnano My peg was in the wrong place also and after getting the CG-5GT back from repairs, I can just imagine this novice watching my imbalanced telescope falling over right in front of me
|
Cow Jazz
professor emeritus
Reged: 11/24/03
Posts: 643
Loc: Toronto, Ontario
|
|
re: The fisr thing I did with my scope and mount (Synta H-EQ5) was to attache my Canon 10D and made some test series
Ralph, how did these tests go? I am considering either the AS-GT or an HEQ-5 with DSC (even though that would be much more expensive, but at least available). I would be using it for astrophotography, probably with my ED80 (talk about overmounting!). John
-------------------- John aka: Byrdzeye
NYAA, Toronto
Observatorium Orionis
XT10i w/PT (push-to)
ED80 on AZ3 or NexstarGT or LXD55
350D w/17-85 IS & 70-200 f4 L
Taylor guitar & IPod
|
Ralph McIntosh
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 11/26/03
Posts: 908
Loc: Hanau/Germany
|
|
Hi John
I would not recommend Syntas H-EQ5 fpr astrophotography. At 800mm Focal you only get about 30 Seconds until the mount gives you visible errors on your picture!
I use an F4 8" Newton with a 70/700 Refractor as Guiding Scope. At focal length and SBIG's ST-4 (autoguider) it just works to keep the mount in balance. But its hard on the limits! It works better if you mount the camera on the scope and yous a Zoom Lense. Here some examples: Here M45 (Canon mounted on the Scope)=

And M31, Canon 10D assebled focal on the Newton:

That’s why I was looking for Losmandys G;-8 or Vixens GP-DX (and over here in Germany we have a very stable OTE150) A couple of weeks I found Celestrons new GOTO mount. Adding GOTO to a photography usable mount would be perfect.
ANd never vorget, you cant overmount! A good mount is the key to a good photo.
Ralph
-------------------- http://home.arcor.de/ralph.mcintosh/
|
Anonymous
Unregistered
|
|
Thank you, Tony and others, for your very useful info on the Celestron CG5-GT mount. Last week, I just received the Celestron 6 inch Refractor mounted on the CG%-GT mount (got at Woodland Hills Camera and Telescope) and I am hoping for a chance soon to take it out for first light. From what I see indoors, it certainly looks stable, and I'm grateful for the heads up about not tightening the tripod legs too much. As this is my first real experience with this kind of mount, I was surprised when the mount came with a 6 inch long dovetail plate with two unthreaded holes that exactly matched a longer, footlong dovetail that bridged between the two rings on the 6 inch refractor. I called Celestron since I was confused, and they said to mount the refractor onto the CG-5 directly using the footlong dovetail that comes attached to the tube rings, and they told me that the 6 inch long dovetail that comes with the mount is only for if you want to put cameras or something else on to the mount. However, this arrangement seems quite loose and unstable: even though there is the main tightening knob and a smaller diagonally-placed shiny knob to tighten down onto the dovetail, Celestron said to just use the big clamping knob (with the black plastic knob handle) and clamp onto the footlong dovetail, and not to use the diagonal mini-screw at all. The problem I see is that at a public star party (I'm a librarian and do public star parties at branch libraries), someone could just loosen the main clamping knob just a little and the long 6 inch refractor (f8) would just come sliding down onto the ground in no time! At least with the 6 inch dovetail that was supplied, there are little notches so that the screws are more secure in the notches; also using it you would always know where to attach the tube for correct balancing without having to make marks on the longer unnotched dovetail. The Celestron Tech did not recommend piggybacking the footlong dovetail onto the 6 inch notched dovetail below it due to stability reasons; however I went to the hardware store, got hex screws, washers and wingnuts, and did just that (making a good tight connection), so I can see if there is any sacrifice in stability with the two dovetail bars piggybacked. It just seems better to lock the smaller dovetail into place using the mounts two clamping screws going into where the dovetail notches are. Do you or anyone else who has this mount have any experience with these dovetail mounts? The other question I had is about power supply. Woodland Hills C&T sold me an AC adapter so I can power the GT in my back yard with AC; however the AC runs on 1.5 amps and the Celestron website says the Advanced Series can't use AC power since it takes 2 amps only. Woodland Hills reported no problems with customers using the 1.5 amp AC, and Celstron also told me that it would probably work fine, though since there's less amps than it officially needs that the goto might seem sluggish at times. I have not yet experimented with this due to lack of time, but will let you know when I do. Since all they supply is a DC adapter for the car, it looks like I'm going to have to buy the $60 power pack for it. Everything seems real smooth and nice. The bubble level seems cheap and doesn't seem to be correct on leveling, but the dealer suggested not to use it since it's so tiny, and just to use a regular leveler spread out over the accessory tray for better leveling. Someone suggested using WD40 on the scope to protect the metal -- would you guys suggest that, and if so, where does the WD40 go? (I'm a newbie with mounts -- just have a Sidewalk Astronomer's-made wooden 8 inch dob that belongs to the LA Library where I do star parties -- the library paid for the Sidewalk Astronomers to build it for us so we could put on more public astronomy programs at branches (I work at a branch in boyle Heights, and the public loves our views of the planets, even though limiting magnitude in the inner city is under 3). Thanks much for your help! Dana Eklund Montrose, CA
|
rboe
Numbfinger
   
Reged: 03/16/02
Posts: 39486
Loc: Phx, AZ
|
|