Quote:

---

Hi All,
I'm collecting a variety of small scopes to get a handle on what I like best. This is easy since two of them I got from my Dad (the 12" isn't finished yet). Along with them I picked up a C6 for the recent low price, as a travel and grab/go scope. But unfortunately I like the C6 the least.

I have Bob's knobs on them and they star test perfectly. But the tiny 15x70's and AT66 beat the C6 by having better contrast, brighter (apparent) images, and pinpoint beautiful optics. Likewise the 8", admittedly almost twice the aperture, has stars which are far brighter and pinpoint compared to the C6.

The C6 has a comparatively dim view and the stars are boring little blobs. Now I can see more DSO's - the ring nebula for instance which can't be seen in the refractors - but the view is totally boring.

I'm not disappointed in buying it, it's still a lot of aperture in a little package, but the other scopes give better views for me so far. I don't know if it's the scope, design, aperture, or what. Comments?

---

None of the above. Most people who talk about the "better contrast," "better stars," "brighter images," etc., of very small telescopes as compared to something like your C6 are actually noticing the wee scopes' large fields and low magnification. Compare the scopes at equal magnification and report back. Stars will always look smaller in smaller aperture scopes, too, when the seeing ain't what it oughta be.



--------------------
Peace,
Uncle Rod

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

The C6 has a comparatively dim view and the stars are boring little blobs.

---

This statement has me a little baffled. I have all three of the scopes/binocs you mentioned and I don't think its possible to compare equal magnifications with either one of them. I love my 15x70's so don't get me wrong, but they will never show me the Ring Neb. The lowest power on the C6 is around 35x with an exit pupil of 4.0mm.

The AT66 is a great little scope too but by the time you pump enough mag in it to see the Ring it's going to be pretty dim, if you can see it at all. If you look at exit pupils as a guide, the AT66 at 1.0mm exit pupil yields 66x. The C6 with a 1.0mm exit pupil gives 150x. Big difference. At 0.5mm exit pupil (3mm eyepiece), the AT66 is only at 132x and has exceeded 50x per inch of magnification.

When I look at clusters like the Double Cluster with the C6, I see bright well defined stars, many with color. On the other hand, planetary views are just okay, but certainly better than the AT66ED.

I'm not sure what's going on...maybe you just don't like the slightly softer view of the SCT, although of all the SCT's I've looked thru, the C6 has had the least amount of softness.

Patrick

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


Discovery 10" f/6 Split Tube Dob
Celestron C6S-GT SCT
Denk Binoviewers
AT66ED Refractor
Oberwerk Ultra 15x70 Binocular
475B Geared Tripod & 501HDV Head
Oberwerk 9x60 Binocular
Celestron Regal 8x42 Binocular
Canon 30D DSLR


My Astronomy Pages

Post Extras:

Quote:

---

Patrick - wow great post. I didn't mean to say that they all go equally deep, certainly the bigger scopes see more in the sky, but the view is different somehow. You describe the SCT as being softer, that's the word I was looking for, exactly! That softness is what I'm having trouble with.

So SCT's have this characteristic, why? Is it the multiple glass/mirror surfaces?
.

---

They don't have this characteristic. Assuming your 6 is collimated, what you are seeing is differences caused by seeing and magnification.



--------------------
Peace,
Uncle Rod

Post Extras: