New to Refractors Question
Posted 23 November 2003 - 01:39 PM
What I am looking for is a scope that has reasonable capture ability, very good "go to" capabilities and is "portable" enough to be used more often. Interfacing with "The Sky," "Starry Nights" or "Mega-Star" is a definate plus.
The 16" light bucket is fantastic and I lucked out with optics that figure to <1/10 wave. However, that level of performance means colimating it before each use. Yes, it is a touch heavy.
The Ultima is quick to set up, is ok for deep sky but is lacking in the planetary dept. However, am planning to add a CCD at some point and the drive system, mount and optics (for an SCT) on an the Ultima are way above par.
Posted 23 November 2003 - 01:48 PM
Posted 23 November 2003 - 07:46 PM
As to the TOA-130, I love it. It is very portable and takes me just a little longer to setup, but I can do it all myself. The Optics’ are perfect and if I can just develop better skills at CCD imaging I think the TOA is a better overall scope.
SCTs have their place though and are great for high power but they just suffer the portability issue as far as I'm concerned. If I had a home observatory I would love a 12.5 RC, but I don't so I like the portability and wider field of view for imaging the 5" refractor gives me.
Posted 23 November 2003 - 08:29 PM
The LXD55 is a much lighter mount, not in the same class as the 650 or 750. It's well built and functions as advertised. Some need the crud cleaned out of them to smooth them out, but that's no big deal to perform. You might have to tighten a gear or two as well.
My jury is still out on the Autostar coupled to the LXD55 as a package. The Foreman may come to a verdict by next Monday. We'll see.
I've read more than once that the optics are better in the AR-5 than the -6. I've not looked through an AR-5 to be able to say. It may be because of the f/ being higher than the R-6. The AR-6 has great optics for an achro and pulls in more light than the -5. You'll be able to see fainter objects with more clarity in the -6.
Color isn't bad except for on all but the brightest objects. I'm mostly a deep space observer, so I don't notice any color at all on DSO's. Mars looked good if you like looking at planets. Frankly, (except for Saturn or Jupiter) when you've seen one, you've seen them all. They bore me.
Posted 23 November 2003 - 09:09 PM
I've read more than once that the optics are better in the AR-5 than the -6. I've not looked through an AR-5 to be able to say. It may be because of the f/ being higher than the R-6. The AR-6 has great optics for an achro and pulls in more light than the -5.
I've looked through both quite a bit. I wouldn't say the 5" optics are better. There is less chromatic aberration which I agree is due not to better optics but to the slower focal ratio and smaller aperture. The 6" is a bunch heavier; I think it's worthwhile for the deeper views.
Posted 23 November 2003 - 09:54 PM