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.

Photo

Meade LX600-ACF 12" f/8 or CPC1100

This topic has been archived.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

#226 WardyNew

WardyNew

    Messenger

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 415
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2013

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:12 PM

Going back to a previous point about f/# vs. focal length. The Orion Optics (different company to the Orion telescope manufacturer in the US) Newtonian in the UK I mentioned in my last post have have a 14” Newtonian with a f/4.7 ratio but a focal length of 1600mm (compared to the 500mm FL mentioned for imaging larger objects earlier in this thread)…would this mean it would have a narrow FOV and be hard to guide due to focal length or not due to the f/#?

Another question to all relating to FOV vs. FL. It was mentioned that focal length (rather than F/#) is what impacts FOV. Just reading up on it I found something that said this is also dependent on chip size in the CCD. Is the 500mm FL mentioned to image large galaxies and nebulae earlier in this thread based on a certain chip size or is it possible to go longer with a larger chip (and even if so, does the budget for such CCD devices make it not worth even thinking about)!

#227 Stew57

Stew57

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,787
  • Joined: 03 May 2009

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:20 PM

http://www.newastro..../camera_app.php

That will answer a lot of your questions on FL, chip size, and FOV.

A good read on F ratio;
http://www.stark-lab...tioAperture.php

#228 WardyNew

WardyNew

    Messenger

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 415
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2013

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:29 PM

Thanks Stew

#229 Spacetravelerx

Spacetravelerx

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,529
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2012

Posted 30 September 2013 - 04:53 PM

Andrew, thanks for this and look forward to seeing the live video!

I have a couple of (possibly very foolish) questions.

When you say f/4 and f/5 is this again due to a focal reducer or something that performs this function? (thought LX850 and LX200 were f/8 and f/10)

In terms of Starlock and you mentioning set-up will be "very, very easy", on the meade web page it says it performs 'lightswitch fully automated alignment' in alt-az mode. With the LS lightswitch models I believe the ECLIPS module is pre-attached and aligned to allow it to align without any intervention but reading the manual for the LX600 I believe, at least initially, there is a need to just centre 2 stars that it finds and this seems a similar process to the LX200 (and also the Celestron StarSense module). I think this may not be the same for the LX850 as obviously this doesn't have alt-az mode but based on your experience of using the LX200 could you confirm whether my interpretation of this is correct? (not a big deal, as I think even I could do this but the geeky gadget appeal of it doing this completely automatically appeals...didn't know if the Starlock finds the brightest star and centres as I assume the ECLIPS on the LS does).

Not really a question but I think if I went down the GEM route it would have to be the Celestron CGEM or CGEM DX as budget precludes me going for the LX850 or, I think, the Mach 1 (based on USD prices, I'm not sure this is available in the UK and import taxes, etc + remote support would put me off buying from a dealer in the US direct). I think the only other option would be an EQ8 but wouldn't have much left for the telescope, although a less expensive newtonian might be an option on this mount i guess, as the mount looks very solid (rate to 50kg so maybe the wind issue not so bad? Also f4.7 so maybe good for imaging?...although not for storage!).


Paul,

No such thing as a foolish question! Always good to ask all of us here in CN. Then again, you might get 10 different answers ;)

First off, I do not have a magic LX200 or LX850 - I used the focal reducer with the MallinCam.

The Lightswitch function does not work on the LX850, but it is a fun feature on the LX600! Near as I can tell, it gets the each alignment star close, you tweak it up with your controller and confirm it is centered. I find it funny reading the warning to stay clear while the LX600 does its automatic operations, lol.

The Mach1 is more expensive than the LX850 mount.

Newtonians - been there, done that. Just say no...

#230 Spacetravelerx

Spacetravelerx

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,529
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2012

Posted 30 September 2013 - 05:05 PM

In terms of what was said to image large objects like M31, it was mentioned I'd need something like 500mm focal length for normal CCD ship size. Looking at different APOs online, a lot of these above 80-90mm aperature have 550-660 focal length. Does this mean to compliment a big aperature telescope I should actually be going for the smaller APO's like an 80mm one that have this very short focal length?


Generally speaking, yes.

I purchased my 80mm APO to compliment my 14" ACF for the wide field goodies. It is mounted along side my 14" ACF OTA - LX850 allows for this. The plan was for the 80mm to then double as an "on the road" grab and go.

The view was so moving through that little APO, and with the excellent build quality and feature set I purchased the 130mm as the more "grab and go" unit and for middle FOV images. The 80mm is now mostly relegated to just being mounted along side the 14" ACF, though depending on my mood and photo session, I will swap out the 14" with the 130mm.

#231 WardyNew

WardyNew

    Messenger

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 415
  • Joined: 17 Sep 2013

Posted 30 September 2013 - 05:30 PM

Thanks Andrew (& Wes)...is the LX600 different to the LX200 in terms of alignment then? Is it closer to LS series or LX200? Realise this might not be fair question to ask bearing in mind you have the LX850.

#232 alrosm

alrosm

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 727
  • Joined: 27 Jul 2010

Posted 03 October 2013 - 04:25 AM

If I had to make a choice I'll say CPC, the reason is that the CPC has been around for some time now.


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