Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
Paul_R
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/05/05
Posts: 1644
|
|
I've been getting interested in buying an 8" Intelliscope. I read Sky & Telescope's November 2004 review (pp. 86-91) and had several questions, especially about whether certain problems have been fixed.
1) Optics. They indicated that the mirror was good for low power, but suffered at higher power. "you get what you pay for" was how they put it (p. 90).
2) They found that the object locator was fast but "not highly accurate" (p. 91).
3) They also found that the locator "works well only when the telescope is on hard ground" (p. 91), that "a grassy lawn was too yielding a surface" (p. 89), and recommended observing from a patio or driveway.
4) They warned that "when putting the tube back on the mount, it's easy to bang and damage the altitude encoder" (p. 91).
5) They found that the scope does not balance well and, to compensate, they had to tighten the altitude knob so much that the motion became "unpleasantly jerky" (p. 91). They also had to add a counterweight. The picture of a rock rubber banded around the tube is disturbing!
6) The azimuth motion was poor, though they improved it by sanding the pads and then polishing them. After doing that, they still graded the motion only a B+!
Never having seen one, and after reading such comments, you can understand that this review gives me pause. I'm hoping that the scope they reviewed was a "lemon" or that, in the 3+ years since the review came out, Orion has improved things.
I'd be interested in hearing from Intelliscope owners (any size scope) and others about these issues. Are recent 8" Intelliscopes free of these issues? Or, would a new 10" Intelliscope be a better choice?
|
Gunner
sage
Reged: 06/20/06
Posts: 331
Loc: Bellville,Texas
|
|
Having owned a XT12i since 2005 here's what I have found.
1. Optics - most scopes suffer at the higher power and that is due to atmospheric conditions, some night are great, others aren't so good, awhile back I could easily see stars E & F in the Trapizium, some nights E is a hard target.
Are there better optics out there? For sure, but the optics used by Orion are built to the same specs as most mass produced scopes and the company that makes them also supply other scope makers.
2. Object locater - this one is flat out wrong, I can easliy do my two star alignment and switch over to my 24mm Pan, and virtually every object is within the FOV, as long as the warp number is a 0.4 or less, usually I get 0.2.
3. This one is true in a sense, any dob that would have a large flat base would have a hard time sitting on it feet if the grass is too tall, and since in 2004 there were no other DOB's in the class that had a locater built in so there was no other to compare it to, I have had this problem with mine, not all of the time, like in the winter, but spring and summer, yes, I just keep the yard mowed to normal height.
4. Have yet to damage mine and the 12" is a lot heavyer than the 8", just be mindful of the potential.
5. This one also is wrong, I have used an Orion 35mm Stratus a lot ( 2 lbs ) and haven't had any problems balancing the scope, have never needed a counter balance.
6. The azimuth motion, I have heard others who have had problems, my self I have no problems moving the scope on the lower angles of course as it gets higher it does become harder but that's to be expected since the scope uses friction pads and the higher the angle of the OTA the center of gravity gets higher and since there are no handles on the OTA except for the small on at the front of the OTA, moving it at zenith or close to it requires a two handed style, I have found on mine it's easier just to drop the angle of the scope, move the OTA, the raise it back.
Could the movement be made easier, yes, there are several people here you have installed sliders on the base and have noticed a great improvement.
The size of scope you want should be determined by how much you can afford, next is how much scope can you handle physiclly, I myself can handle the 12" without problems, but each person has got limitations, due to physical strength or location where they live.
Normally I tell everyone to buy as large as you can, apperture is king, but if a scope is too large to be handled easily it's not worth getting it since it wouldn't be used that much.
Hope this helps a bit.
Allen
--------------------
Orion 8" Reflector Flocked
Orion XT12i w/ Moonlite Cr-2 and Flocked
Orion Atlas EQ-G mount
|
Shawn H
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 05/16/07
Posts: 855
Loc: Southern France 43°56'N-4°50'E
|
|
Ive had a xt10i for over a year now and I like it, so heres answers from my experience:
1) the mirrors are fine (its not refractor fine) I use a 7mm Pentax XW for high power (171x) no distortion there!
2) COL accuracy depends on the warp factor you get after centering your 2 alignment stars! Even with high warp factors my target was always in the FOV of my finder ep a 27mm Panoptic at 44x with 1.53°TFOV
3) My dark site is in a grassy field at 400 feet, as long as you first regulated the vertical stop knob the COL works fine even on unlevel ground.
4) TRUE be very careful with the encoding disk when mounting the OTA! a bent encoding disk means false COL readings!
5) I find the azimuth tightening knob with a telon washer works very well! I have a telrad and use some very heavy 2" ep's (35Stratus, 27Pan, 17Nag & 12Nag) tightening the altitude knob at just the right resistance dose not make altitude positioning jerky! But the teflon washer does wear down and has to be replaced every year or so.
6) Azimuth motion is fine when the scope is new, after time and especially observing in sandy & dirt fields the teflon pads (heads) get scratchy and must be sanded down or replaced with magic sliders or virgin telfon (ebony star), all works very well (as per the guy's on skyquest groups yahoo) I just sanded mine a bit and put car wax on the baseboard! works fine!
OK I'm no specialist to do telescope reviews! My experience is limited, but I think the intelliscope was the best deal I could have made! (But I am having wet dreams about owning a 18" Obession UC!  )  Hope this helps! Shawn
--------------------
xt10i with Telrad & feather touch focuser & huge Boston Red Sox decal
Starblast
15x70 Celestron Skymasters
35Stratus
27Pan
20XW
17Nag
13 Ethos
12Nag
8 Ethos
Orion ultrablock
Astronomik OIII
Tele Vue 2x barlow
Antares 1.6x barlow (2")
|
Out of Focus
sage
Reged: 09/23/07
Posts: 230
Loc: Roseville (Sac) CA
|
|
I agree with the above responses. I highly recommend the XTi dobs. I would also like to recommend the 10" if you can afford the extra cost.
--------------------
Orion XT10i w/FT
Orion XT6
Orion Mini Giant 15X63
Orion ST80-A
24mmHyperion,13mmEthos,
9mmNagler
AO series 160 &
L10 Microscopes
--------------------
Blue Canyon, Placer Co. CA
 
|
rocco13
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 07/29/06
Posts: 1469
Loc: Phoenix, Arizona
|
|
Although I just recently sold mine, it wasn't because I was unhappy with it. Here's my two cents...
1. No complaints about my mirror whatsoever.
2. I'd say 39 out of 40 objects were in my FOV with a low power eyepiece. And I usually didn't re-align as long as my warp factor was 0.9 or below. Close enough for me.
3. I wouldn't think any aligned system would work 100% if there is movement such as soft ground. No knock on the Intelliscope system as far as I'm concerned.
4. This concern is legitimate. I read somebody's website before I purchased mine which depicted this could happen. Just be careful, and slide that side in first when assembling it.
5. Even with a Nagler 12T4 and 2" barlow combination, I experienced no balance issues at all.
6. The azimuth motion. This is one that I'd agree with, it does leave something to be desired. But truthfully, a little car wax, or plastic washers and it supposedly improves tremendously. There have been several threads here dealing specifically with this issue.
Overall, for the money, I would definitely recommend this scope. It holds collimation very well, and little things like the navigation knob and adjustable tension knob really make it nice. Go for it.
--------------------
Rocco
Obsession 15"
Super C8 (1984 vintage)
Celestron 102 f/5
and a cheap pair of binoculars
|
Deb and Todd
super member
Reged: 05/23/06
Posts: 109
Loc: Billings, MT
|
|
I have one of the first XT8i's shipped, and same with the COL that was finally delivered several months after the scope.
1. I find some truth to the high power comment. My XT8i is always clear at 175x, frequently clear at 200, and rarely good for more. I do live under the jet stream however. As a side note, my 12.5" Obsession is always razor sharp at 256.
2. I've found the COL to be extremely accurate. 50% of time it locates objects with my 10mm (120x) radian or 8mm Vixen superwide (150x). The other 50% time objects will be just outside these eyepieces. I can always find objects in the 25mm eyepiece that came with the scope.
3. I often park my scope in the grass, and there is some truth to this statement. On occassion, I've set up a patio stone on the lawn and put the scope on that. It does work well from hard packed dirt surfaces however.
4. I've never had an issue with encoder damage. I can see where it might happen, but only a small measure of care is needed when setting the tube on the base. Most of the time, I never seperate the tube from the base if viewing at home. I just pick-up the scope and go. I have transported this scope many times however, to camp grounds. The only transportation issue I've had is that the Bob's nobs I've put in the secondary have a tendendancy work loose on long trips and over gravel roads. (Half a turn at most). This does require readjustment of secondary. At home, collimation never moves.
5. I've not had any balance issues with the scope. I use mostly radians on my scope.
6. I never noticed an issue with motion, until I bought an Obsession. Many people do make various mods to improve motion but I've never felt the need to do so.
I love my XT8i, and will keep it forever. Add a cooling fan though, best $30 spent. The scope is just so portable, and views below 200x are great.
--------------------
Todd Miller
XT-8i
12.5" Obsession
Billings, MT
Edited by Deb and Todd (05/09/08 12:15 PM)
|
Jason D
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 10/21/06
Posts: 1675
Loc: California
|
|
Paul, have you considered getting XT10 classic?
- It is cheaper than XT8i+LOC yet you get more aperture
- Many of the concerns you have listed are not applicable to XT10 classic
- Modifying XT10 is less restrictive and you can do more to improve its AZ and ALT motions.
I have XT10 classic and so far I never regretted getting the XT10i version. I know my way around the sky and it literally takes me seconds to locate common targets using my GLP/RDF and finder scope. I do not need to worry about 2 star alignments. Granted that it would take me more time to find elusive targets for the very first time; however, once I find them it gets easier and easier each time I look for them.
With respect to optics, as someone who upgraded the stock optics to premium, I can tell you that the quality of the stock optics is great and worth the money.
Jason
--------------------
XT10 classic with premium optics
Tri-knob CR2 with compression rings
Round Table Platform
4.5" StarBlast
6" StarBlast6
TV EPs
|
doug76
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/05/07
Posts: 1895
Loc: 30.8N 90.0W
|
|
Just got one for my grand nephew. Here's what I found.
Optics very good to at least 240x, at least where I live, cause I ran it up that high with a 5mm BO/TMB to test it out, on Saturn. Object locator accurate enough to put searched for object in FoV of 25mm TV Plossl. Azimuth motion is still bad, but there are easy fixes, I understand. Balance is fine unless you put a lot of accessories or huge eyepieces in it, I would think. I had no problem with the 24mm Panoptic or 10mm Pentax XW. And last, putting the tube in the rocker is easy, just pay attention. I haven't messed anything up in it yet! Great buy, suggest if you want it, get it.
Doug
--------------------
Trucker, Astronomer, Fisherman
Meade 12" Lightbridge w/Dob Driver II
Celestron C6S OTA
Celestron C6R OTA
Celestron Omni XLT150 OTA
Astro-Tech AT80EDT (coming soon)
Celestron CG5-ASGT mount
Celestron Omni XLT CG-4 mount
Celestron Nexstar SE mount (6SE/8SE type)
Celestron Nexstar SE mount (4SE/5SE type)
Meade 5K SWA 34mm
Televue Panoptic 24mm
Pentax XW 10mm, 7mm
Televue Plossl 32mm
BO/TMB Planetary 9mm, 5mm, 4mm, 3.2mm, 2.5mm
Astro-Tech diagonals
|
epee
professor emeritus
Reged: 11/30/06
Posts: 534
Loc: Suh-van-nuh, Jaw-juh
|
|
1. Probably true compared to a mirror that costs what the entire XTi costs. You can't buy a Ford and expect it to perform like a Porsche. Most of the time the atmosphere, not the optics, will limit your magnification.
2. If you do your part it's certainly accurate enough for optical work. It's not going to put a 1 arc second object smack in the middle of a barlowed 5mm eyepiece but neither will anything else you can move.
3. Don't observe in a swamp.  If you live around soft ground buy a piece of plywood to sit your scope on. This holds true for any telescope.
4. Yes, some care is necessary here but we're not talking about fine china fragile either.
5. Balance can be tricky if using heavy eyepieces. This is true with any telescope and especially dobsonians. The tensioning system works admirably well for its simplicity and if you need more counterweighting then cheap solutions are easy to find.
6. My chief gripe. It does work fairly well when new but will require another solution in the future. Almost all of the solutions cost less than $50 with most less than $20.
--------------------
Jim Girardeau
Orion XT12 Intelliscope
Celestron 11X80mm binoculars
|
albert1
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 01/01/07
Posts: 816
Loc: Northern New Jersey
|
|
Yes, a little caution with the Alt encoder goes a long way.
Lots of great mods in the forums for the Az movement.
Other than that, the best astro purchase I ever made and it looks darn cool in my living room. 
Go as large as you can afford and enjoy it.
--------------------
Albert
Coulter Odyssey 10 (red)
Upgraded Astro Systems 2-speed Crayford
1984 C90 Astro, (cool little thing)
Upgraded to 1.25 visual back from .965
made a big difference in viewing quality.
Criterion Dynascope RV6
(another cool vintage scope w/an amazing little mirror)
Baader Hyperions
Edited by albert1 (05/09/08 10:07 PM)
|
Paul_R
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/05/05
Posts: 1644
|
|
Great help and information. Appreciate the detailed responses, especially linked to my original 6 points.
I'll have to find someone who has one and see it up close. Thanks, all!
|
Mark Harry
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 09/05/05
Posts: 2415
Loc: Northeast
|
|
I have an XT8I and got it to my door for about 6.5 bills, when they were a little cheaper.
I note the issues you have brought up, and have taken note that they do exist, though whether they are all that much of a distraction for such little outlay.... Come on, guys!
Typically, a premium guaranteed primary mirror alone will cost you more than the whole scope. I think you and S&T should take such issues in the context of getting an excellent value, considering the scope comes with a locator, software, adequate optics, and reasonable tube & base to contain the optical train.
To me, it was an excellent way to get a basic scope, and CL to boot, plus a set of rings to mount on my Atlas, and it has provided an excellent starter "kit" for one of my mirrors. The OEM mirror was capable of 175-200x, and was donated to a capable tinkerer on a tight budget, and he's having fun with it, afaik.
And, don't forget the free software that came with it. I find it a nice useful item as well.
You're not going to get research-grade hardware for the price, but I can tell you it's going to be very useful, and a good value; and there's a lot of little mods you can do with very simple tools or supplies.
And to cover another point, this is a TELESCOPE with a LOCATOR, not a lawnmower that you can get away with an occasional bout of rough handling; or toss around with little concern. Reasonable care will assure years of enjoyment.
'Nuff rant for the day!
Later, Mark
--------------------
Scopes in the works-
Too many for putting down here! Favorites- 8" F/6, 8" F/4.72, 4.5" F/5.4, 14" F/4.455, all completed.
|
Paul_R
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/05/05
Posts: 1644
|
|
Mark, I agree with your general point and I certainly wouldn't expect a mass produced scope to be the equivalent to a personally crafted, high-end one with an individually ground and polished mirror (a Harry or a Zambuto!) with a cutting-edge DSC (a la Argo Navis).
But I was taken aback when I dug up the old review and started to itemize the problems they found. If they had all been true (and the responders here indicate several were over-stated or mis-stated), it would have been a serious red flag! I mean, the review suggested the mirror would be good mostly for low not high power, the object locator was inaccurate (especially on a lawn!), the motions weren't that smooth even after adjustment, and the balance was off and tightening the altitude tensioner resulted in jerkiness. Those are *major* concerns, not minor ones, as they go to the heart of the scope and its operation. They pertain to basic functionality not achieving high-end status! I would find them incredibly distracting and, if they were true, not worth the expense! 
But, as others reported, the most serious issues were overblown, and, as you described, the Intelliscope line represents a real value with good performance! Thanks for chiming in.
P.S. I laughed about your lawn mower analogy. We just got a new cordless one, and like our scopes, we won't be handling it roughly--or with kid gloves--but somewhere in between!
|
Mark Harry
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 09/05/05
Posts: 2415
Loc: Northeast
|
|
I'm glad you could see my point. One additional thing, I believe ANY scope placed on a mushy lawn, regardless of the drive/locator, would have issues with accuracy. Another, balance on scopes under 12" will be grossly affected by the big widefield hand grenades. Some of these issues are just plain common sense.
Have a good time in making a decision!
Mark
--------------------
Scopes in the works-
Too many for putting down here! Favorites- 8" F/6, 8" F/4.72, 4.5" F/5.4, 14" F/4.455, all completed.
|
Paul_R
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/05/05
Posts: 1644
|
|
I think that an Ethos on a 12" Intelliscope placed on quicksand would have some balance and accuracy issues, too!
The S & T review actually reported problems even on a "grassy lawn", so they felt it had to be on a hard surface such as driveway. That was distressing, and was confirmed as something of an issue by several users here! I had a 10" Discovery dob for a while and it spoiled me. It worked fine, whether on a lawn, even after it rained, and even after I put wheels on it! Balance, with or without heavy eyepieces, and DSC accuracy were fine. (Yes, should have kept it!)
The altitude problem that S & T found was, apparently, *without* an eyepiece and they attributed it to the heavy focuser and large finder! I know that problem well from an old Coulter dob I once owned. If you weren't careful when you removed an eyepiece, the scope would swing upwards and you'd lose the object. A nuisance, especially at higher powers!
It sounds, though, as if that problem is really not a problem... several people posted here having no problems using large, heavy eyepieces and finding an appropriate tension point.
What has intrigued me about the Intelliscopes is the hand control, especially the ability to select objects by simply pressing an M or NGC key. That is appealing and would be far easier to use than the dial/button and labyrinthine hierarchical menu systems of other DSCs.
|
Starman1
Postmaster
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10837
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
So why is everyone so stressed out about adding a counterweight? If done right, it's no big deal to adjust.
Tightening the altitude bearing is definitely the WRONG way to address the issue of balance, since that way leads to jerky motion.
A counterweight allows you to keep the bearing motion light and smooth.
I even went the other direction to reduce friction to nearly zero, which requires a different counterweight setting for every eyepiece at every altitude. It takes 5 seconds to adjust the weight, and I can control the scope with one finger.
It does move if the wind catches the scope, but I can track at 730X with little effort--a reasonable compromise.
As for having the scope head to the zenith when changing eyepieces, you can easily add a "brake" to hold it in place while you change eyepieces.
Tightening up the bearing friction just isn't the right way to handle this.
Unless, of course, you ONLY use the scope at low powers and you don't mind jerky movement.
The intelliscope is a great value in scopes, though, however you adjust it.
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
Paul_R
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/05/05
Posts: 1644
|
|
Who's stressed out about adding a counterweight? No doubt if one received an imbalanced Intelliscope, it could be balanced with something magnetic attached to the top underside. But S & T's rubber banding a rock around the front end of their 8" Intelliscope was ridiculous!
OTOH, if one really had to add a brake, that would be another matter. Many of us are NOT DIYs, so that could loom as a major production! Plus, having to use one wouldn't fit everyone's observing style.
Tightening the altitude bearing is definitely NOT the best way to fix a *severely* out of balance scope! S & T did that and found it made the scope's motion jerky. All that's moot, however. Several people reported *earlier* in the thread that the Intelliscopes generally do NOT have a balance problem. And that one can readily find a good tension setting that provides both smooth motions AND good balance.
That was good to hear. I've puttered with out of balance scopes before and some can be a nuisance to get right. If you have decent DIY skills, it can be fun to tinker and solutions can be eventually found, but that's not for everyone.
In my experience, a well-balanced scope that stays put without the need for counterweights, or switching them or moving them around, or having to deploy a brake, is a simple joy. When I switched from a out of whack, runaway dob to a well engineered one, it was the difference between night and day! Or should I say, day and night?
|
Starman1
Postmaster
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10837
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Well, you simply cannot balance a scope for all eyepieces at all altitudes. My eyepieces vary from 6 ounces to 36, and the balance cannot be achieved for each without a rearrangement of the COG by means of a weight.
And when such a heavy eyepiece is removed, the scope will head for the zenith.
A brake is easy to install--took me 10 minutes and I worked slowly.
You drill a hole in the rocker box, install a nutsert with a hex wrench, screw in the knob, and you're done.
Here's a thread where I show how it was accomplished:
Install an altitude brake.
Like the one on the Meade LightBridge, it's best used to lock the scope when changing eyepieces.
Now, if all your eyepieces are small 1-1/4" eyepieces, it should be possible to achieve good balance everywhere except near the horizon without using a counterweight.
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
Paul_R
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 04/05/05
Posts: 1644
|
|
I've used and owned several dobs and the best engineered ones (Discovery, Starmaster, Plettstone, etc.) had no problem with balance and staying put with or without eyepieces! (With one Discovery dob, we had to add some extra felt pads to achieve that balance, but once done, no more fuss.)
And I used 1.25" eyepieces and 2" eyepieces with these scopes-- from a tiny 8mm RKE to a 2" 32mm and heavier eyepieces combined with barlows! Even with one of the heavier combos with the longest leverage arm, a 10mm Pentax with 3x barlow sticking way out, the scopes stayed put when you removed the eyepiece/barlow. It's really a treat observing that way.
Now admittedly, I wasn't using Nagler hand-grenades or Ethos ... we were below 2 pounds. I guess I've been spoiled. No brakes, no counterweights, no more DIY "projects", and no puttering in the dark!
Thanks for the info about the brake. That should be a help to many CN members retro-fitting their scopes or using the really BIG and HEAVY eyepieces! For those building their own dobs, one feature that can help is using a large cradle with large outside bearings. It means that if you've miscalculated weights or if your finder or eyepiece set changes, you can reposition the tube to achieve a universal balance point for your particular equipment. (I'm talking about sliding the tube ONCE during the daytime to get to the right place--you wouldn't want to have to reposition the tube for each eyepiece change!) Such a design also means that you can change your mind later if you prefer a different eyepiece orientation--just rotate the tube in the cradle. Quite cool!
|
sabir
sage
Reged: 06/23/07
Posts: 455
Loc: Pune (India)
|
|
FWIW, I use my 10mm XW amd a TV Big Barlow with my XT10i without any blance issues what so ever. I also sometimes stack a 2x celestron ultima barlow with this combo without any balance issues. I also have a Telrad and the 9x50 finder up front, so IMO the break system works great!
I also agree with all the other observations posted earlier.
I find the XT10i to be a great scope.... useable right out of the box. The azimuth bearing could use some improvement though
Sabir
|
|
10 registered and 7 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: Don W, werewolf6977, Jason B
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 685
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
