143 replies to this topic

[IDONTSEEIT]

Hey guys,

If you were to put a dob high enough to extend out over the railing, wouln't "you" need to be on the other side of the railing to look into the eyepiece?

[Norvin]

Hope he has a big enough balcony. If not, he'll have to buy a car and take it out to the country.

Seriously, there will be times he won't be able to stand on the balcony to see something no matter what type of telescope he chooses. I just hope to guy chooses the right one (hint).

Norvin
Post #128

[Victor Kennedy]

Victor

I've checked out APM and the prices do look pretty good compared to UK prices (what wouldn't?). Not sure how the tax thing works though. How long did it take them to deliver to you from Germany?

Phil

My binoviewer arrived within a week. I didn't have t pay any extra charges when I received it. I checked their web site price list again. It appears they include a 16% VAT when shipping within the EU, but drop that when they ship to the U.S., but it's a little confusing in that they have so many different price lists where it is sometimes included, other times not.

Anyway, when you order you deal with the owner, Markus Ludes, who speaks and writes English, so you can clarify everything before you finalize the order.

[Norvin]

I am gonna stick with my guns and still recommend the Dobsonian for all the same reasons I have mentioned in previous posts in this thread.

Norvin
Post #133

[Norvin]

QuickSilver: What in the blue hell are you talking about? I have made no anti-refractor sentiments. The original poster did ask about a refractor to buy. I simply made a suggestion that he go with a Dobsonian due to his light pollution.

The myth of light pollution affecting Dobsonians and Newtonians more than refractors and other types of telescopes is B.S. In fact, if height is a problem due to the railing of his balcony, he could simply make taller side mounts for the Dobsonian mount.

Here's another fact...

If light pollution is a big problem for anyone, I would think you would want more apature. You would want to gather as much light as possible in order to see the planets, stars, etc. I think this is the problem with the telescope he has now.

I have tried a refractor a long time ago and it wasn't a cheapy Wal-Mart special. I simply didn't like the mount. The Dobsonain mount has spoiled me with its ease of movement.

You need to fully read posts before you comment on them. As anyone can see, I have made absolutely no anti-refractor comments. Geez.

Norvin
Post #134

[Norvin]

LOL!

Well I am 100% sure that the helpful posts here will make your decision easier whatever your choice may be.

I think the refractor I tried once was a friend's Jason. That probably is a Wal-Mart special.

Maybe next year after taxes, I might get one of these...

http://hardinoptical.../starhoc80.html
http://hardinoptical.../starhoc90.html

Norvin
Post #135

[Blair]

After reading all the posts so far I still believe the 127mm Mak is a good choice or the Intes 6 inch Mak as someone suggested is a good choice as well. I think a Mak of some type is your best choice for your space limitations and your seeing conditions and for planetary and Moon use. I do not think a Dob would be a good choice at any price for the type of viewing you can do from your balcony. The person pushing the Dob really hasn't used a refractor nor does he seem to understand your space limitations. I've used both, owned both, and for high power planetary use a refractor on an equatorial mount is best but when space is limited, and you still want the advantage of a long focal length, then a Mak is the way to go. Some of the best views I have had of Jupiter was in the 127mm Mak that I owned a while back. I'm just not much of a planetary viewer so I sold it to buy my 100mm f/6 refractor. But I do not have near the light pollution you have else I may have kept it if rich field viewing wasn't a feasable option. I have some light pollution but I can easily spot many of the Messier objects in my 9X63mm binoculars; I can easily spot the Dumbell Nebula for instance. Go with a Mak and I think you will be happy.

[Norvin]

I do not think a Dob would be a good choice at any price for the type of viewing you can do from your balcony. The person pushing the Dob really hasn't used a refractor nor does he seem to understand your space limitations. I've used both, owned both, and for high power planetary use a refractor on an equatorial mount is best but when space is limited, and you still want the advantage of a long focal length, then a Mak is the way to go.

I have used a refractor once, but I think the Dobsonian is better.

Norvin
Post #144

[summitlake]

I too favor the Orion 127 Mak for limited space apartment living. As you can see here, even the balcony is crowded. I took the Mak off the equatorial mount and set it up INDOORS for the Nov 8 total lunar eclipse. It rained cats and dogs for the entire duration, and I never got even a short glimpse of the moon. The thinking was that if an opportunity presented itself, I could have opened the slider for a quick shot, without getting myself or the equipment wet. That's a digital SLR mounted at prime focus, waiting for the shot that never came.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[Ron B[ee]]

Norvin, as I looked at your two choices below, it's perhaps the choice of cheap refractors as to why you have never like refractors. If and when you're ready to choose a refractor, I would advise you to get a good quality ED/APO (a 4" Vixen APOs are very attractively priced) as some are greatly bothered by the chromatic aberrations or long focal length achromat such as the Vixen. Or wait for the possibility of an Orion 100ED .

In my opinion, I like both Dob and refractor, but for a totally different purpose and reasons. I think they complement each other. For Phil's requirement and purpose of use, I still think a refractor of at least 4-inch in aperture or a 6" MCT on driven EQ mount is more pleasurable. (In fact, though I love refractor, if I were to observe from the balcony I would actually prefer one of those 6" Intes(/Micro) with a fan. Alas, the TEC-6 is no longer made . Now may those who have no love what soever for a mirrored scope be the first one to cast the stone ).

Ron the 4-inch Tall Evangelist B[ee]

[IDONTSEEIT]

PhilD,

FWIW, I vote for the mak also, I happen to own the 102mm Orion mak, as well as a 90mm(close to 4"...lol) f11 refractor. While the views in the refractor are arguably a bit more crisp, and "refractor like"(there's a reason this term is used alot), the views in the mak are by no means poor. I believe you'd have to use them side by side, for quite some time, to really see a big difference.

Where the difference becomes apparent is when your setting up, and using the scope. The refractor, including dew shield and diagonal is around 3.5 feet long(little over 1 meter). I view from a deck/balcony that is approximately 10 feet by 12 feet(3 meters by 4 meters), and the refractor puts me in some uncomfortable viewing positions. The mak, on the other hand, is about 1/2 a meter long, including dew shield and diagonal(about the size of two coffee cans/tins end to end). It's much easier for viewing at zenith, and due to it's short length, it also is less susceptible to vibrations caused by wind(I would think the face of an apartment building would have some intersting up-drafts), and can be handled more easily by a smaller/lighter mount. It would also be easier to store, and transport, and could easily be mounted on a robust photo tripod for travel.

The cool-down difference shouldn't be a big issue, you can just put it out on the balcony, sit down, have dinner, and after dessert, you're ready to go.

Of course this is just one philistine's opinion, YMMV!

[Norvin]

QuickSilver: What insult??? I simply said that I made no anti-refractor comments. And I misspelled "aperture"... it happens.

PhilD: I am starting to think there is too much of a problem with not only the balcony but the light pollution as well. With a small balcony, I doubt you are ever gonna find a "comfortable" telescope to use.

There are too many turn ons and turn offs to your situation. You could get a Dobsonian, but then the railing and size of the balcony become an issue. You could get a refractor, but if you are looking at something parallel to the ground, wouldn't it require as much room at the Dobsonian? If you go with a MCT, then you would have to wait 2 hours for cooling time (going by other posts) which is a bad thing if you want to see something quickly on the "spur of the moment".

As I said in an earlier post, I am thinking about buying a refractor next year after taxes, but I don't want one that is gonna mess up colors. I would also want a telescope that shows things right side up. I know there is no true up or down in space, but I still would want one that showed it as I see it from Earth.

I would want one that lets me see as “deep” into space like my Dobsonian. I think the 2 big reasons I went with the Dobsonian as my first telescope were…

1) Seeing deep.
2) High magnification (about 450X on an 8” Dobsonian).

Norvin
Post #145

[Victor Kennedy]

Phil, another consideration (I'm not sure it hasn't already been mentioned).

If your balcony is tight for space, you might be better off with an alt-az mount instead of an equatorial. I often view from my balcony (west view) or open bedroom window (east view) with either a C8 or a short refractor on an equatorial mount. While the eq mount is fine for outdoor viewing, it often requires some contortions as I move it around, and indoors the counterweight is always hitting the wall.

If you buy a compact Mak or refractor, an alt-az mount would be a fine, compact complement to it. No tracking, but then you're not going to do long-exposure astrophotography from your balcony anyway.

My two tolars worth.

[IDONTSEEIT]

Phil,

I wouldn't suggest leaving any scope outside permanently, moisture is a scope's, or any optical instrument's worst enemy! Just put it outside while you have dinner, run an errand, whatever. That should be enough for it to thermally stabilize.

As to tracking with a photo tripod, a better quality fluid head tripod may work ok, it depends on how much patience you have. At higher powers, say over 100X, I, personally, find it frustrating, however(I don't recall your budget limit) an option is to get a decent tripod, one capable of handling about 10-15 kg, and a "geared" head. I have the Orion paragon hd(heavy duty) tripod, I bought it as a 2nd for around US-$100, and a bogen/manfrotto 410 geared head about US-$150, it can support 11lbs/5kg,and probably a bit more(it's quite solid and well made). I've only used the 410 once, but I had my scope over 200X on it, and had very little trouble tracking things like saturn and the pleiades. There's even a way to position the 410 head so that it works in a pseudo-equatorial fashion.

So if you were to get the 127mm mak, as an OTA(the Apex spotter version, same scope)a good tripod, and a geared head, I think you may be in the ballpark of approximately US-$700-800. That would be a great portable, relatively high power planetary setup. It would also give you some great overall performance at a darker sight. The ota comes in it's own travel bag, that's about the same size as a large-ish, video-camera bag, with pockets for small items like red flashlight, eyepieces, diagonal, etc..

Good luck in your quest though, Sometimes,I think the search is as fun as actually using the scope one chooses in the end!!

Good Luck & Have Fun!!!!

[IDONTSEEIT]

One more thing Phil,

You'll need a dewshield, Orion has flexible ones for about US-$20.