Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Orion Atlas 10 EQ Vs. Orion SkyQuest XT10 Intelli

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
25 replies to this topic

#1 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 08 February 2004 - 06:06 PM

Hello, I want either the Orion Atlas 10 EQ or the Orion SkyQuest XT10 IntelliScope. But I can't find a difference other than the price. Their specifications are almost identical. One is on a tripod the other is on a base. The Atlas 10 EQ is $1,299 and the SkyQuest XT10 is $649. So I really need help deciding between these and what the difference is. I need one of these for deep space viewing as well as good details on planets and the moon. Maybe the sun. Can someone help me out? Also, if you have pictures taken of deep space/planets or a website with pictures taken with one of these?? Thank you all so much for your help!

#2 litespeed

litespeed

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 984
  • Joined: 31 Oct 2003

Posted 08 February 2004 - 06:14 PM

One is designed for ease of use and is a Dobsonian based unit.

The other is on an EQ type mount. With the EQ setup you can track objects in the sky more accurately and with less effort. Also if you ever plan to do any imaging the EQ type mount will prove to be much easier to deal with. However the EQ will have a little longer setup time and is much heavier.

It really depends more on what you plan on using the scope for.

AJ

#3 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 08 February 2004 - 06:16 PM

Oooops! AJ beat me...:grin:...sorry I type slow...

The reason someone would want the 10 EQ is so they can track an object as it goes across the sky with motors.

The IntelliScope is called a dobsonian, and requires alot easier setup and takedown. Dobsonian's are known for their easy point and shoot capabilities that tripods are limited by.

ALSO! With this kind of 'dob' you can add a hand controller that gives you a database of deep sky objects. This controller will tell you were to move the scope after the proper alignment procedures.

I'd go with the dobsonian unless you want tracking. Oh, and refractors are usually suited better for planets, but any dob will do well if it has decent optics.

#4 erik

erik

    telescope surgeon

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,858
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2004

Posted 08 February 2004 - 06:18 PM

hi kutibah, there is no difference other than the mounts. they're both identical tubes. one thing to consider though, both are much bigger than they appear in the pictures, and the atlas mount is massive and very heavy. if you want to do a lot of high power viewing though, the mount would obviously allow you to track, whereas the intelliscope is a manual pointing system with no tracking or go-to motors. the other thing, the 10" is a little short on focal length(f/4.7), if you're going to do mostly planetary work, but it's excellent on deep sky.it's not bad on planets either, but it's definitely more of a deep sky scope. hope that helps.

#5 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 09 February 2004 - 12:02 AM

Well, I don't really care about tracking that much but what I really do care about is the database in the controller that can move my teliscope to the object I want. So would the Atlas be better for me for finding objects automatically? Also, I'm not really worried about the weight or size.

#6 Charlie Hein

Charlie Hein

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 12,661
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2003

Posted 09 February 2004 - 09:04 AM

So would the Atlas be better for me for finding objects automatically?


Nope. The Atlas mount isn't Go-To. You'd choose this setup for astrophotos, and also if you have other (non-astronomical type) people viewing through the scope, like at a star party or a night with some friends.

Otherwise, the dob's a lot cheaper!

Charlie

#7 Paul Lennous

Paul Lennous

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 303
  • Joined: 05 Feb 2004

Posted 09 February 2004 - 09:48 AM

So would the Atlas be better for me for finding objects automatically?


For finding objects automatically, you should consider the Intelliscope ™ version of the SkyQuest. While it is NOT goto, it will guide you to the object you are looking for.

Although the Atlas is not goto, it does have setting circles. I have an old C8 with setting circles, and after getting comfortable with the setup, I have been able to find objects using its setting circles almost as fast as I can with my ETX's goto. I've had the same success using the setting circles on my 80ED.


#8 erik

erik

    telescope surgeon

  • *****
  • Posts: 24,858
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2004

Posted 09 February 2004 - 10:57 AM

also, there are aftermarket companies that make go-to systems for the atlas mount, but i think that they're quite expensive(at least that's what the orion salesperson told me). as for the intelliscope, i had an earlier version of the manual pointing system(the sky wizard 3), and i had a lot of problems with it.i know that orion has been working on the intelliscope system for a long time, so maybe they've gotten the bugs worked out. most of the problems i had with it were related to the gears slipping, and the cheap connecting pins not having a good connection. i also paid a lot more than the $149 that they're charging now. my hand controller alone cost $349, and i also had to buy the connecting kit for $179. and now all of it is sitting in my closet somewhere.guess it pays to wait sometimes.... however, if you buy the intelliscope and don't like it, orion is good about returns and exchanges.(i never returned mine because i spent monthes trying to get it to work, so it was obviously past the 30 day window.) also, keep in mind yhat the pointing system works best when the mount is leveled, which is sometimes difficult to do with a dob.

#9 F.Meiresonne

F.Meiresonne

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 7,810
  • Joined: 22 Dec 2003

Posted 18 February 2004 - 07:00 AM

I think that an EQ mount is more suitable if you want to use high power viewing eg planetary nebula, globular clusters. Using high powers with an dobsonian is not easy.This was for me the main reason to choose for an HEQ5 mount (little brother of the EQ6 mount= Atlas). Of course the automatic tracking feature is also a great thing and if fact setting up an eq HEQ5 is really no such a big deal...


Freddy

#10 nreid

nreid

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,256
  • Joined: 06 Mar 2004

Posted 07 March 2004 - 04:32 PM

Neither one are that easy to set up. I have the dob and the thing is heavy. So if you are strong and brave you can carry it in one piece if not, two trips for you. One thing about the dob is that on high power planet views, they move acoss the FOV real fast. So you are always moving the scope. It isn't that bad if you are by ourselve but it is a pain when other are standing around and you get up to show them and the **** planet has moved so fast that they don't see anything. I
can't image the type of pictures you could take with the 10" atlas! They would look great. But you are going to be doing to much of that with a dob. I am even looking at a altas mount for my dob so I can move into that realm.

#11 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 07 March 2004 - 04:40 PM

Nreid

Keep an eye in the clearnace section - once in awhile orion has a returned atlas mount that they let go for 100 to 150 off. Thats how I upgraded my 10xt dob to EQ set up.

The 10 XT is a good OTA for the price but I would warn those who are just starting out to see one in person before you but as it is a bit much to move. Mine will not fir in the back seat of my saturn - thank God I got the wagon and not the sedan.

Tim

#12 Todd

Todd

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,674
  • Joined: 23 Feb 2004

Posted 07 March 2004 - 05:10 PM

A local store has a 10" Sky-Watcher on an EQ-6, which is nearly identical to the scope you're thinking of.

It is _big_. I would not want this setup unless I had it stored in an observatory. Putting the 10" reflector into the cradle rings would not be the easiest of tasks if one was alone. It can be done, but with two people it would be much easier.

At one time I had an EQ-6 mount. By itself it's _heavy_.

I've not looked through the 10" on the EQ-6 at night but it isn't that steady. Weight-wise the 10" is fine but with it's length, it becomes a little unstable. Vibrations don't dissapate very quickly. I would suspect that any little gust of wind would really make this setup difficult to use at high powers too.

BTW, neither of the two scopes are well-suited for solar viewing.

Todd

#13 Simon Chung

Simon Chung

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 64
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2002

Posted 07 March 2004 - 10:26 PM

Hello Kutibah,

Let me share my experience with you on the EQ vs. a dobsonian mount (e.g. XT10). I do not own either the Atlas 10EQ nor the XT10 but I do own a 10" f4.8 reflector which has been mounted on an equatorial mount and a dobsonian mount.

For visual use, I would only consider the XT10 (dobsonian). It already has GOTO, so you'll endup seeing more objects (potentially) than the EQ version. An equatorial mount (e.g. Atlas 10EQ) is going to have the eyepiece position in awkward places, depending on which part of the sky you are pointing and how you have oriented the OTA in the rings. An equatorial mount is also more hassle to setup...much more so that the dob.

For astrophotography, the EQ is better suited because it can track the sky. Well, it depends on what kind of astrophotography you may want to do. If this is your first telescope, I would put aside your astrophotography aspirations (temporarily). Taking deepsky astrophotos with 35mm film (at prime focus) through a telescope of this class is a challenge not to be taken lightly :). You'll have to purchase a whole lot more accessories to accomplish that. If you are serious about starting in astrophotography, I would start off with a camera + lens piggybacked on the telescope. Leave the prime focus photography later when you are more experienced :).

Simon


#14 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,161
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 09 March 2004 - 01:34 AM

Why would anyone carry a dob? That's what dolly's are for. Would you carry a fridge? A large bookshelf? From my experience moving around a good sized dob, it just takes a few minutes to move, set it up on dolly/cart, roll, then take it off. Very easy IMO.

.......Curtis

#15 desertstars

desertstars

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 45,797
  • Joined: 05 Nov 2003

Posted 10 March 2004 - 05:11 PM

Why would anyone carry a dob? That's what dolly's are for. Would you carry a fridge? A large bookshelf? From my experience moving around a good sized dob, it just takes a few minutes to move, set it up on dolly/cart, roll, then take it off. Very easy IMO.

.......Curtis


Ya know, he's got a point there. . . :foreheadslap:

#16 Tom L

Tom L

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31,061
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2004

Posted 10 March 2004 - 06:17 PM

Got a 4-wheel drive version? I have a swamp in the back yard most of the year...

#17 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,161
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 10 March 2004 - 06:46 PM

Your going to laugh, and of course I haven't tried it, but, ever consider a hydrofoil platform? Just an idea, dont' kill me! LOL


.......Curtis

#18 Tom L

Tom L

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31,061
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2004

Posted 10 March 2004 - 07:00 PM

:lol:

#19 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 10 March 2004 - 07:03 PM

Build a hovercraft, so you can use it when the back yard is dry, and use the propeller to cool the primary mirror ;)

#20 Tom L

Tom L

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31,061
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2004

Posted 10 March 2004 - 07:04 PM

Don't start me thinkin'...:smirk:

#21 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 10 March 2004 - 07:06 PM

lol

#22 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,161
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 10 March 2004 - 07:22 PM

Did I say hydrofoil, duh I meant hovercraft, thanks.


.......Curtis

#23 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,161
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 10 March 2004 - 07:24 PM

Oh yea, I remember where I got this idea.

http://www.techtv.co...forhelp/print/0,23102,3379909,00.html


LOL

.........Curtis

#24 Relativist

Relativist

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,161
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2003

Posted 10 March 2004 - 07:28 PM

Someone quick, photoshop themselves riding the platform with their dob down the airport road at Stellafane!


........Curtis


Lets try the link again:

http://www.techtv.co...3379909,00.html



#25 Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*

Guest_**DONOTDELETE**_*
  • -----
  • topic starter

Posted 10 March 2004 - 07:46 PM

lol! now that's what I need to build as a new azimuth bearing for my dob...bet it's much smoother than teflon on ebony star :lol:


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics