544 replies to this topic

[Terra Nova]

More yet! The eyepiece with no label on the top is the Celestron (V) 18mm Kellner. The label is on the side. All of the eyepieces were in original boxes and will provide a very nice range of magnification. There is also an oldstyle barlow that will stay wrapped. (It was never unwrapped) nice tool kit, manual, 3/8" attachment bolts, and the power cord. The slow motions are very smooth and the setting circles quite lovely.

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 
• 

Edited by terraclarke, 11 April 2016 - 01:13 PM.

[Terra Nova]

And I just picked this up to support it. I had one of these wedge-pods for the C8 I used to own and found it quite convenient. I was going to build a wedge myself, but I thought, why bother? when I found this available.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[Terra Nova]

I can't get over how much smaller and handier this thing is compared to the orangetube C8 of similar vintage that I used to have. Even the trunk is so much smaller and easier to move around. I read that when these first came out, they were meant to be airline portable with the trunk being able to fit in the overhead bin. I wonder how many of them were used as eclipse chasers.

[albert1]

That's a beauty, Terra and in extraordinary condition as you initially described. Another time capsule C5, congratulations. Nice little set of orthos too 😊. I use mine for white light solar often as well. Just wonderful little scope.

[Terra Nova]

Thanks Albert!

[A6Q6]

I can't get over how much smaller and handier this thing is compared to the orangetube C8 of similar vintage that I used to have. Even the trunk is so much smaller and easier to move around. I read that when these first came out, they were meant to be airline portable with the trunk being able to fit in the overhead bin. I wonder how many of them were used as eclipse chasers.

The C5 is going to look great on that wedgpod .

Edited by A6Q6, 11 April 2016 - 05:54 PM.

[wrpspeed16]

Some more!

very nice. looks like it is in very good condition

[Terra Nova]

Thank you both

[Celestronman]

I have a White tube C5,  StarBright Coating, Single Fork Mount, #53557 with hardcase.  It came with a black 8x20 finder scope that looks original (not sure).

 

 

Not clear on the production dates of the White tubes??

Edited by Celestronman, 01 September 2016 - 03:59 PM.

[svenk123]

I have an orange tube #500887 with 110V/60Hz motor drive from 11/1979.

 

And it is still in use for astrophotography. 

 

 

 

 

Edited by svenk123, 04 January 2017 - 06:42 AM.

[Dartguy]

I have a black C5 Telephoto, 750mm Special Coatings  #799

 

Bought in Evansville, IN at auction.

[Tarzanrock]

Terra:

    What are those "patent numbers" under the "special coatings" sign on your scope identified in the photograph in your post # 74 above?  I can't make them out.

Bill

[Chuck Hards]

I have two white-tube C5s.  One is an OTA only, the other is on the single-arm fork/base (no hand control version).  I have a factory hardcase but keep the mounted one in a custom-made mahogany box made by the previous owner.   Outstanding imagery for an SCT.

 

Do you want serial numbers for these (if any, I need to look) or is this just for orange-tubes?

[Tarzanrock]

Chuck:

     Not the "serial numbers" -- the "patent numbers" if they are listed on the scope.  They may or may not be.  I have a Black 1978 C5 Telephoto and it has the "patent number" listed on the OTA itself in a different location than that which is listed on the front of Terra's C5.  The patent number on mine reflects what I believe to be a design revision(s).  I am interested in learning more about it and when I get some free time I may well contact the U.S. Patent office about those documents.

Bill

[Terra Nova]

Terra:

    What are those "patent numbers" under the "special coatings" sign on your scope identified in the photograph in your post # 74 above?  I can't make them out.

Bill

P/N = 3837124 and 3837125

 

Also not the label with the serial number. It is most unusual in that it states "Schmidt Aspheric Photo-Catadioptric Lens" and not the customary "Schmidt Telescope".

 

S/N = 2 3040 7

 

The images are extremely sharp with perfect star test (concentric circular Newton's rings and round Airy Disk inside and outside of focus).

[Tarzanrock]

Hi Terra:

     Thanks.  Interesting; and, different from the others which I have heard about especially with that language:  "Schmidt Aspheric Photo -- Catadioptric Lens."

      In the Manuel which accompanied  your scope, are there any indications of the publishing date?

      Mine it a Celstron International C5 Telephoto Lens from 1978-1979.  It does not contain that aforesaid language on the scope.  The patent number on mine also differs in that it has the initial number:  3837124 (which I suspect is the initial patent number for Celestron's basic Schmidt Cassegrain design) and then it states, following that above stated initial number, this number:  "RE 29878" -- which are likely represents and references the patented design changes for the "revisions" which were made to this particular C5 Telephoto lens which I have.

     Your instrument likewise has that same initial patent number (i.e. 3837124) followed by that 3837125 number which differs from mine.

I now wonder just how different the measurements of the scope itself are? 

    Mine is 10 inches in length and +/- 3.5 inches in diameter on the front side and a only slightly wider on the back side as its back end is completely different than the one you have -- for example, there is no place to install a finderscope. 

    I'm pretty certain that the "Schmidt Aspheric Photo -- Catadioptric Lens" will produce a likely flatter visual and photographic view than an other corrector plate.

    Mine is much more like a camera lens; and, it only came with the factory camera "T" adapter.

    One thing which I have been thinking about is whether anyone (Piekiel or anyone else) done a patent search on these instruments?  I don't have Piekiel's book and I am wondering if such information is already contained somewhere in it?  Maybe you or someone else knows or has that book.

Bill

[Chuck Hards]

Chuck:

     Not the "serial numbers" -- the "patent numbers" if they are listed on the scope.  They may or may not be.  I have a Black 1978 C5 Telephoto and it has the "patent number" listed on the OTA itself in a different location than that which is listed on the front of Terra's C5.  The patent number on mine reflects what I believe to be a design revision(s).  I am interested in learning more about it and when I get some free time I may well contact the U.S. Patent office about those documents.

Bill

My OTA has no numbers on it at all.  My mounted C5 has this number on the base of the drive unit, no others.

 

 

How certain are you that these numbers relate to optical patents, and not overall product patents?

[Tarzanrock]

Chuck:

    Not 100% certain but I have seen it, as well as the revisions in patents, in product designs and in design changes of machine tools in products liability cases which I have handled so I have surmised that this is what numbers like "RE 29878" which appear on my C5 Telephoto lens which numbering which differs from the numbering which appears on others (such as Terra's C5) refers to and references.  That's why I was wondering whether anyone has acquired any of the patents on their scopes or whether Piekiel mentions them in his literature or has copies of them published in his book.  It makes no sense to expend the time and energy looking for something which perhaps has already been found.

Bill

[CHASLX200]

Does anyone have the rare Black fork mounted C5?

[Terra Nova]

Hi Terra:

     Thanks.  Interesting; and, different from the others which I have heard about especially with that language:  "Schmidt Aspheric Photo -- Catadioptric Lens."

      In the Manuel which accompanied  your scope, are there any indications of the publishing date?

      Mine it a Celstron International C5 Telephoto Lens from 1978-1979.  It does not contain that aforesaid language on the scope.  The patent number on mine also differs in that it has the initial number:  3837124 (which I suspect is the initial patent number for Celestron's basic Schmidt Cassegrain design) and then it states, following that above stated initial number, this number:  "RE 29878" -- which are likely represents and references the patented design changes for the "revisions" which were made to this particular C5 Telephoto lens which I have.

     Your instrument likewise has that same initial patent number (i.e. 3837124) followed by that 3837125 number which differs from mine.

I now wonder just how different the measurements of the scope itself are? 

    Mine is 10 inches in length and +/- 3.5 inches in diameter on the front side and a only slightly wider on the back side as its back end is completely different than the one you have -- for example, there is no place to install a finderscope. 

    I'm pretty certain that the "Schmidt Aspheric Photo -- Catadioptric Lens" will produce a likely flatter visual and photographic view than an other corrector plate.

    Mine is much more like a camera lens; and, it only came with the factory camera "T" adapter.

    One thing which I have been thinking about is whether anyone (Piekiel or anyone else) done a patent search on these instruments?  I don't have Piekiel's book and I am wondering if such information is already contained somewhere in it?  Maybe you or someone else knows or has that book.

Bill

My manual is dated January 1978.

[TSSClay]

Does anyone have the rare Black fork mounted C5?

I don't know that it is rare but I have a black tube fork mounted C5 that I keep out in Tucson.  I purchased it used and can't tell you much about it except that it works well.  I use it when I am visiting my Mom and Sister and my Sister uses it occasionally.

 

Clay

[Tarzanrock]

Thanks, Terra.

Interesting legal dogfight long ago between Celestron and Criterion over the patent for the corrector.  I won't bore anyone with the subtle details of the law but what is interesting is the Court's description of how the corrector plate is fashioned in the manufacturing process, to wit: 

"The language of the '124 patent describes the invention as follows:

    A method for making replica contour block masters for use in producing and checking accuracy Schmidt correctors wherein a glass spindle master is ground and polished to an accurate flat. An oversize but otherwise finished Schmidt corrector plate to be duplicated which is flat on one side and figured on the other is apertured at the optical center thereof and shallow grooves ground into the corrector on the curve side. The corrector plate is placed flat side to flat spindle master surface and a thin piece of glass to constitute a replica piece is placed on the corrector plate with a vacuum drawn therebetween to conform their surfaces. The replica piece is ground and polished flat on its free upper surface. The corrector plate and replica piece are then removed from the spindle master and the replica piece alone placed flat side to flat surface of the spindle master in optical contact in a semi-permanent bond therewith and constituting together a contour block master."

     I'm going to cross-post this over on the other thread.

http://law.justia.co...52/612/1526173/

[CHASLX200]

 

Does anyone have the rare Black fork mounted C5?

I don't know that it is rare but I have a black tube fork mounted C5 that I keep out in Tucson.  I purchased it used and can't tell you much about it except that it works well.  I use it when I am visiting my Mom and Sister and my Sister uses it occasionally.

 

Clay

 

I never saw one in the flesh, but in a ad around 1985 shown with all the Celestron black SCT line up.

[Chuck Hards]

The history of the Celestron vs. Criterion corrector-plate litigation is well-known, and has been discussed in this forum many times over the years.  It's what many people consider to be the ultimate reason why the Dynamax scopes are such poor performers, and what ultimately drove Criterion to sell-out to B&L, and in the end, their demise.

[Tarzanrock]

I stuck it up there for the newbies and because the actual case law interested me.  I'm far more interested in the patents themselves (and patent revisions) as they relate to the design and configuration of the optical glass which is used in the corrector plates which is why I mentioned above that my C5 Telephoto has a numbering change listed on the scope itself, i.e. "RE 29878."  Glass is made all kinds of different ways with all kinds of different ingredients for all kinds of different applications.  The better the optical glass the more expensive it usually is to produce especially glass which utilizes rare earth ingredients.