Quote:

---

One hour under really dark skies with a C-14 will make you a believer.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

My C925 thinks it's a Mak.

---

Quote:

---

I also wish I was a LOT younger, too.

Ron

---

You were!

I've always been old, however.

-Tim.

--------------------
"In the old days, before the discovery of eruptions, the lava had to be carried by hand down the mountain and thrown on the sleeping villagers. This took a lot of time." - New Yorker Cartoon, ~ 1980

Hatch Observatory details:

http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=0&Number=3593949&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=all&fpart=1&vc=&PHPSESSID=

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Doug76,

SCTs are all about getting a decent size aperture into a compact OTA. So:
If portability is a real issue - get a C8
If portability is not an issue - get a C11 (I’ve had one for 8 years)
If you have an observatory - get a C14
General statements - sure, but you get the idea.

Bob

---

Good statements, I would say, and I do get the idea.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Cool, I prefer to live in a rational world.

To each his/her own.

---

Yes, to each his/her own, and it is entirely rational.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Whether you have one or not, what model/size is the one you would want, and why.

---

I'd love to have a CPC1100. Lots of aperture on a great goto mount. Great for planetary imaging and viewing, not to mention fantastic for DSO's. It also would make a wonderful scope for outreach work.

Patrick

--------------------

Celestron CPC 1100 XLT
10" f/6 Truss Tube Newtonian
Celestron C6S-GT SCT
AT66ED Refractor
Canon XSi; Meade DSI;SPC900-NC
Vixen GP2 Photo Guider Mount


My Astronomy Pages
The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands.

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

I don't have one.

Wanting a C11 to equip my EQ6-Pro.

Have viewed through a couple of SCTs, but haven't owned one so far. Dreaming of a CPC1100, but aiming at the more modest goal of someday acquiring a used C11 for equatorial mounting. Many criteria are pushing me to this choice, but portability is the main thing. I drive a small car, and it's already quite packed on (darksky) camping trips as it is. Just gawked (literally) at M82 through one, with a 24mm Panoptic, on a perfect seeing period that lasted about 1 hour. The sight was utterly flabergasting, hypnotizing. I still drool when talking about it.

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Question...

Are SCT telescopes over 8" really worth it if you are only doing visual observing?

---

I hate to say this, but, yeah, they are.

You will see more detail; not just more objects...

A C11 is also remarkably easy to set up and carry around.

All that said, my C8 is _still_ my most used scope.

--------------------
Uncle Rod

Rod's New Book:
Choosing and Using a New CAT
Available now!

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

You know, most everything that we do has already been done better by an awful lot of other people. If we limited ourselves to doing only what we can do better than anyone else, most of us would be lying inert in our beds waiting to die. Unless somebody has already died better than us.

---

HAHA Oh man that was so perfectly stated.

I only meant that statement in regards to photography, not in all aspects of life.

Pictures are different than first hand experience. Even if someone viewed something with their eyes better than you did, you cannot relate because everyone's eyes are different. Also, you cannot share first hand experiences when it comes to doing something with your own body.

All pictures made by astrophotograhy are more or less very similar to one another, that is why this is an exception to the rule. A picture taken in 1999 by some random person, is going to look almost the same as the picture taken in 2008 by a different person, even if the two pictures were taking with completely different gear and telescopes. Sure the brightness or contrast might vary a bit, but the picture itself will be identical (except for the angle of course).

Its only because of this, that I chose for myself to be a visual observer first and foremost, before I ever venture into the astrotography arena. And likewise, finances have much to do with the decision as well.

I never said that taking pictures through a telescope isn't fun or great or exciting, I just meant that for me in particular, I don't find it that interesting, so far.

But who knows, maybe in 2 or 3 years you'll see me posting pictures of my own...eating my own words from years ago.

--------------------
Meade 8.25"(209.55mm) LX-90 EMC (SCT)

Albert Einstein =>
“Intellectual growth should commence at birth and cease only at death.”
“If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.”

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

One of the advantages of the SCT over the dobsonian is that it is easier to get GoTo and tracking with an SCT. That said, there are a variety of 'push to' systems being developed. If I was strictly interested in visual, I'd probably go with ...

---

Although that might be true to a point, there are still many problems inherent in the Meade Go-To system.

If the person doing the goto setup did not train the drives, enter all the perfectly accurate information, and perfectly align the scope and alignment stars, the GoTo will be far from on point.

There are many little tweaks one can do to improve meade goto functionality, and these are all posted up by Dr. Clay sherrod at weazners etx website.

http://www.weasner.com/etx/techtips/etx_tuneup3.html

Now, say I was a beginner with the same scope and did not know of the weazner/dr clay website...i would be hopelessly lost as to why my goto isnt accurate. Most likely, people blame meade for a broken goto system, when in fact it is their own inexperience and lack of knowledge that is making the goto system not work. That lack of information, mixed with meade's notoriously bad instruction manual, leads to potential bad news.

Make no mistake, when i first received my telescope the goto was completely off. It took many weeks of reading, learning, and tweaking to finally get the scope in near perfect working order.

I think that once this technology is given a good few years to really evolve, we will see very nice goto systems right out of the box that last for decades without maintenance.

--------------------
Meade 8.25"(209.55mm) LX-90 EMC (SCT)

Albert Einstein =>
“Intellectual growth should commence at birth and cease only at death.”
“If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough.”

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

..........
All pictures made by astrophotograhy are more or less very similar to one another, that is why this is an exception to the rule. A picture taken in 1999 by some random person, is going to look almost the same as the picture taken in 2008 by a different person, even if the two pictures were taking with completely different gear and telescopes. Sure the brightness or contrast might vary a bit, but the picture itself will be identical (except for the angle of course).
............

---

Once you get into the hobby you see it a different way. You may catch something that interest just you. It's a great accomplishment personally. I really love seeing the shock waves around Holmes and the disturbances around the comet itself. This was only visible this one time. Likely never to be exactly this way ever again. You couldn't see that with the naked eye (no camera) using any commercial scope. Events like this are constantly going on. It's why I love the effort.

Oh, this is with my favorite Celestron scope. A C-11 XLT on an NJP at the time of the photo.

--------------------
Jerry
Celestron C-11, ED-100, CG-5
Meade 102ED, LX200R 14"
Takahashi FS-60c, FS-78, FS-152, TOA 150
Astro-Physics 1200, M-1, AP-140 F7.5

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

All pictures made by astrophotograhy are more or less very similar to one another, that is why this is an exception to the rule. A picture taken in 1999 by some random person, is going to look almost the same as the picture taken in 2008 by a different person, even if the two pictures were taking with completely different gear and telescopes. Sure the brightness or contrast might vary a bit, but the picture itself will be identical (except for the angle of course).

---

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

All pictures made by astrophotograhy are more or less very similar to one another, that is why this is an exception to the rule. A picture taken in 1999 by some random person, is going to look almost the same as the picture taken in 2008 by a different person, even if the two pictures were taking with completely different gear and telescopes. Sure the brightness or contrast might vary a bit, but the picture itself will be identical (except for the angle of course).

---

The same can be said for tourist photos of the Grand Canyon or other natural wonders that have been there for generations and likely will remain for a few more generations.

Part of the draw is that the photo becomes mine. I did it, with my gear, and my skill. The sense of ownership of the effort involved is what drives some people. In my case, it is hard to share my viewing with family who live far enough away it isn't feasible to sit them in front of the eyepiece. So I am learning so I can take shots of objects I am observing to share with them.

---

Besides, all you see from others is really great astrophotos. If you want to see lousy ones, you pretty much have to do them yourself.

--------------------
Tim S
C6-RGT
13.1" Truss Dob
Osypowski dual-axis Eq. Platform
15x70 Obies
NP-101
Gibraltar tripod/mount
Losmandy G-11 w/Gemini


I'm headin for Galt's Gulch

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Events like this are constantly going on. It's why I love the effort.

---

Yeah I don't think I'll be around for the next Hayles Comet (year 2061), wish I'd had a scope back in 1986 (was it that long ago?), but all I had was a camcorder

--------------------
Hioptic 152mm f12.5 Maksutov, CG5-AGT, Meade Super Plossl Set, Casio QV-2900UX

Edited by sang33ta (08/18/08 07:01 PM)

Post Extras: