Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

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

Equipment Discussions >> Reflectors

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | (show all)
Gray
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/31/11

Loc: Hixson, TN
Planet scope decision
      #5614492 - 01/09/13 08:58 PM

I am looking for a good planet scope in my price range of $1000 and under, preferably under...

So far I'm seeing three scopes, but want the best choice of the three but I have neither seen or used any. They are:

1) Parks 6" F/8 Newt
2) IOptron 150mm F/12 Mak
3) Skywatcher 100mm F/9 ED frac

Of the three which is the best buy? I live about 5 miles north of the city in South-Eastern Tennessee. My skies are decent when it's clear. I would like a very nice performer on Saturn, Jupiter, Mars and the Moon. Solar option is not that important to me. I do understand that the Mak would take a long time to cool down. I have an Atlas mount that would handle all of these scopes. I think I'm leaning towards the Parks newt for now. Can any of you fine gentlemen offer me some sound advice? Thank you


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mr. Marbles
professor emeritus


Reged: 04/23/05

Loc: Saratoga Springs, NY
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Gray]
      #5614528 - 01/09/13 09:19 PM

I haven't used any of those 3 telescopes, but I would go with the Parks as well. Aperture is king on planets, contrary to what some may tell you. I had an FS-102 and I never found it be a great planetary scope. Don't get me wrong, it provided aesthetically pleasing images but the detail was not there. And that's a world class 4-inch APO. I don't know how the Mak-Cass will stack up against the Parks. F/8 is nice for a Newtonian, generous diffraction-limited field.

Edited by Mr. Marbles (01/09/13 09:21 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gray
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/31/11

Loc: Hixson, TN
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Mr. Marbles]
      #5614533 - 01/09/13 09:24 PM

Thanks for the input Mr. Marbles. I read Jon Issacs say that Parks was out of business although their website is still up? It would be nice to view before you buy lol.

Edited by Gray (01/09/13 09:50 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Achernar
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 02/25/06

Loc: Mobile, Alabama, USA
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Gray]
      #5614538 - 01/09/13 09:27 PM

Of the three, I would probably opt for the 6-inch F/8 Newtonian. Choice number two would be the Mak. Both would be very good planetary telescopes, but the Newtonian would cool down faster. The Mak would be more portable and can be used easily for astronomical imaging too, not to mention no need to collimate or wash the mirrors. I have had a 6-inch F/8 for 30 years, and I still use it for lunar and planetary observing. From a dark site, I have hunted down a lot of DSO's too with it. You can find a 6-inch F/8 OTA or build one for your Atlas EQ mount, they are common.

Taras


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gray
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/31/11

Loc: Hixson, TN
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Achernar]
      #5614549 - 01/09/13 09:39 PM

Taras, Thanks for pointing a few advantages out on the Mak, with portability and collimation in mind. An hour of cool down time is no biggie to me. If Parks is indeed out of business, I only really have 2 choices left. Btw, I throughly enjoyed your homepage. Very nicely put together with a wealth of information from just a few minutes glance. Thank you sir.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
careysub
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 02/18/11

Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Gray]
      #5614550 - 01/09/13 09:40 PM

Duplicate post appearing. Weird.

Edited by careysub (01/09/13 09:41 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
careysub
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 02/18/11

Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Gray]
      #5614551 - 01/09/13 09:40 PM

If you are really, really looking for a planet-optimized telescope, and are willing to go the full $1000, then you might take a look at this:

http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=67-12025

It is an 8" F/9 with a 15.6% central obstruction.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gray
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/31/11

Loc: Hixson, TN
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: careysub]
      #5614564 - 01/09/13 09:46 PM

Careysub, Thanks, I have looked at that scope as well but did not put it in my line up because I would rather use my mount for tracking. The dob does look attractive, but I'm wondering how comfortable the view would be with 60" of focal length? I'd rather sit if possible. Thanks for bringing that to the table though!

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
zipthelipp
member


Reged: 09/10/12

Loc: Bayside NY
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Gray]
      #5614579 - 01/09/13 09:59 PM

Skywatcher 100mm F/9 ED frac
I think I'm going to get the ES152 doublet and get a fringe filter to view planets.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
george golitzin
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 02/24/06

Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Mr. Marbles]
      #5614584 - 01/09/13 10:02 PM

Quote:

I haven't used any of those 3 telescopes, but I would go with the Parks as well. Aperture is king on planets, contrary to what some may tell you. I had an FS-102 and I never found it be a great planetary scope. Don't get me wrong, it provided aesthetically pleasing images but the detail was not there. And that's a world class 4-inch APO. I don't know how the Mak-Cass will stack up against the Parks. F/8 is nice for a Newtonian, generous diffraction-limited field.




I agree. I also think that 6 inches is where it just starts to get interesting. I had a 6-inch Intes mak that was wonderful on Saturn, perhaps less so on Jupiter: that is, fine, high-contrast detail was great, whereas low-contrast stuff was harmed a bit by the CO. If you can find an 8-inch f/6 Newt OTA for your mount, one with a good mirror, I would go with that, provided you have a way to rotate the tube. And don't be afraid to buy used.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: george golitzin]
      #5614608 - 01/09/13 10:24 PM

Quote:


I agree. I also think that 6 inches is where it just starts to get interesting. I had a 6-inch Intes mak that was wonderful on Saturn, perhaps less so on Jupiter: that is, fine, high-contrast detail was great, whereas low-contrast stuff was harmed a bit by the CO. If you can find an 8-inch f/6 Newt OTA for your mount, one with a good mirror, I would go with that, provided you have a way to rotate the tube. And don't be afraid to buy used.




I see that Gray/Graham already has an 8 inch F/5 Newtonian as well as an Atlas Mount. I suspect that this is at least as good and probably a better planetary scope than any of the three smaller scopes. I can see two ways to proceed. First would be a longer focal length 8 inch such as George suggests. The second would be to make sure the 8 inch F/5 has good mirrors, have both tested and reworked/replaced as needed.

The Skywatcher 100mm F/9 ED has the virtue that it will cool down much quicker than the others so it would be a reasonable choice for shorter sessions and sessions when there is not enough time to allow the others to reach thermal equilibrium.

Besides, everyone needs a decent 4 inch refractor, that's just how life is.

Jon Isaacs


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dpwoos
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 10/18/06

Loc: United States
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5614636 - 01/09/13 10:43 PM

I agree - it would be good to know why the 8" f/5 is not a satisfactory "planetary" scope. There are some folks in our club who make this distinction, but in my experience it is not very useful. If a scope has good optics then it is good (for everything, including planets, and within the limits of the aperture), and if not then it is not much good (for anything).

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gray
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/31/11

Loc: Hixson, TN
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: dpwoos]
      #5614975 - 01/10/13 07:30 AM

Wow folks, didn't think I hear all that. I'm embarrassed to say my new atlas is a closet queen since I bought it. I have had the 8" out once but not on a EQ 6 mount (another closet queenie). The time I had that newt out, I checked my finder on Jupiter and about burned my eye out with how bright it was. I also read the f/5 newt should work well if the mirror has been made right. I'm getting that maybe I don't need another scope I agree with that thought, but inferno, it's been cloudy for a week and a half & rain for the next four days. I guess I'm gonna have to call Parks & ask them if they are open. Btw, I wouldn't buy an ES AR152 frac and look at anything but the Milky Way . Thanks fellow folks.

Edited by Gray (01/10/13 07:31 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Ed D
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 04/30/10

Loc: Sunny South Florida
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Gray]
      #5614996 - 01/10/13 07:54 AM

My suggestion would be taking the Chino mirrors (primary and secondary) out of the 8" f/5 and either replace it with a good custom one, or have it figured and coated by one of the reputable firms or individuals. Don't get hung up obsessing about the secondary size and central obstruction. As long as it's about 20% or less it's fine, as are 4 vane spiders. You already have a Moonlite focuser, which I assume is two speed, which makes it easy to achieve good focus at high mags in the f/5. I want to add that flocking my tube helped immensely, as did adding a fan to control the boudary layer.

Ed D

Edited by Ed D (01/10/13 08:15 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Gray
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 01/31/11

Loc: Hixson, TN
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Ed D]
      #5615071 - 01/10/13 08:55 AM

Ed D, that's an interesting idea. I haven't actually found pricing for such a thing except getting a re-coat job done which was under $100 for an 8" I think... It seems the practical solution is to get the newt out and do some tests before making any purchases. I've been manly concentrated in using imaging equipment thus far after a bad experience with an ES AR152 refractor and selling my Z12 dob. I thank you for your input, that is also an excellent option although I'm still leaning towards a longer focus instrument. I will definitely make note of that.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
dpwoos
Pooh-Bah
*****

Reged: 10/18/06

Loc: United States
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Gray]
      #5615099 - 01/10/13 09:15 AM

Our club has an excellent 14" f/4.7 dob (mirror refigured by club member) and its performance on planets is great. I think this idea of a long focus "planetary" scope is from a time when it was really hard to find an excellent "fast" mirror. These days, f/4.7 is not considered to be very fast at all, and much faster (and much larger) mirrors are readily available. If coma is bothersome to you then a Paracorr really does the job.

Edited by dpwoos (01/10/13 09:44 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Gray]
      #5615107 - 01/10/13 09:23 AM Attachment (17 downloads)

Quote:

Ed D, that's an interesting idea. I haven't actually found pricing for such a thing except getting a re-coat job done which was under $100 for an 8" I think... It seems the practical solution is to get the newt out and do some tests before making any purchases. I've been manly concentrated in using imaging equipment thus far after a bad experience with an ES AR152 refractor and selling my Z12 dob. I thank you for your input, that is also an excellent option although I'm still leaning towards a longer focus instrument. I will definitely make note of that.




Graham:

A few random thoughts/observations:

- The most important factor in getting the good planetary views, is the seeing... it takes a stable atmosphere, excellent seeing.

- Preparation of the scope is also critical. Thermal equilibrium, actively cooling the scope, these are the biggies. Setting the scope outside for an hour or two doesn't get it, a good quality, vibration free fan cooling the mirror and the scope is most important. Collimation needs to be spot on.

- Aperture is important, focal ratio is of much lesser importance. I have a fair number of telescopes and consider my old 12.5 inch F/6 Equatorially mounted Newtonian my best planetary scope but I rarely use it because it is massive (around 300 lbs) and requires a ladder. Instead, when I want the good planetary views, I generally use my generic 10 year old, 10 inch F/5 Dobsonian that has been small modifications to optimize it for higher magnifications. This includes a custom Floyd Blue fan, a modern GSO Crayford and reworking the bearings with Ebony Star-Teflon. I wear gloves to help control my body heat and on an excellent night, this scope is capable of 800x when splitting double stars.

With your 8 inch F/5, I would recommend a fan, Floyd recently made one for my 8 inch F/5, and making sure it is properly collimated. Since it will be on a tracking mount a Paracorr is not needed but "rotating rings" are a necessity, they make it so much easier to view comfortably.

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
george golitzin
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 02/24/06

Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: Jon Isaacs]
      #5615396 - 01/10/13 12:07 PM

Quote:


I see that Gray/Graham already has an 8 inch F/5 Newtonian as well as an Atlas Mount. I suspect that this is at least as good and probably a better planetary scope than any of the three smaller scopes. I can see two ways to proceed. First would be a longer focal length 8 inch such as George suggests. The second would be to make sure the 8 inch F/5 has good mirrors, have both tested and reworked/replaced as needed.

The Skywatcher 100mm F/9 ED has the virtue that it will cool down much quicker than the others...Besides, everyone needs a decent 4 inch refractor, that's just how life is.

Jon Isaacs




Ah, I didn't see the 8-inch f/5 in the signature. Yes that would be better--if the optics are good, such a newt is capable of outstanding planetary views.

But I find a long focus 4-inch refractor, while fun to look through, basically useless by comparison. Just not enough light for the planets--you're down to 0.5 mm at just 200 power--and no wider a view than the 8-inch f/5. At this point, my only uses (visually) for a refractor, as opposed to a larger newt, are 1. birds 2. solar, and 3. extreme widefield. For that, I'm perfectly happy with my 80ED.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rflinn68
Carpal Tunnel


Reged: 03/09/12

Loc: Arkansas
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: george golitzin]
      #5615813 - 01/10/13 04:13 PM

The 8" f/5 newt you already have would be my choice followed by the 4" ED. I myself wouldnt even consider the iOptron 6" Mak. The one I looked through didnt impress me at all.

Of the scopes I own the Orion 10" newt puts up the best planetary images after doing the modifications. Listen to Jon about the collimation and thermal equalibrium being extremely important for planetary views. I came very close to selling this scope and now I am so glad I didnt! I did the mods (Destiny 3 vane curved spider, Protostar flockboard, and Antares Optics secondary) all at once so I cant say which helped the most but they all helped to improve the scope immensely. The addition of binoviewers has also helped improve my views on planets and doubles.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jeff Morgan
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 09/28/03

Loc: Prescott, AZ
Re: Planet scope decision new [Re: careysub]
      #5615836 - 01/10/13 04:26 PM

Quote:

If you are really, really looking for a planet-optimized telescope, and are willing to go the full $1000, then you might take a look at this:

http://www.optcorp.com/product.aspx?pid=67-12025

It is an 8" F/9 with a 15.6% central obstruction.




Of course I would just take the money and build my own scope - but limited to commercial choices I would have voted for #1 or #2. Then I followed the link in your post. I would take the larger and longer mirror in a heartbeat! Grab a few good orthos and a barlow, good to go.

Just bear in mind that a a mass-market optic is a *BLEEP*-shoot. Long mirrors are easier to make well than short ones, but a mass-producer can always screw that up too.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | (show all)


Extra information
17 registered and 19 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  ausastronomer, Phillip Creed, JayinUT, okieav8r 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 4047

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics