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

Mak Newt coming soon

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 starman876

starman876

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16758
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 16 May 2018 - 01:11 PM

https://www.telescop...eyword=dovetail

 

will be the model above.  Thought I would see what the Chinese version would be like compared to the Intes versions.  I had a MN61 and a MN71 wish at times I still had.  Wonderful scopes.  



#2 howardcano

howardcano

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 311
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Olathe, KS

Posted 16 May 2018 - 02:12 PM

That's a pretty large central obstruction... at least compared to the MN61.  Different intended uses, I suppose.

 

And yes, it did hurt when I sold my MN61, and still does.  The views were as impressive as the weight!


Edited by howardcano, 16 May 2018 - 02:14 PM.


#3 starman876

starman876

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16758
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 16 May 2018 - 02:39 PM

That's a pretty large central obstruction... at least compared to the MN61.  Different intended uses, I suppose.

 

And yes, it did hurt when I sold my MN61, and still does.  The views were as impressive as the weight!

this one only weighs 15 lbs.  Might have kept the Mn61 or MN71 had they had carbon fiber tubes.  Also, not sure if the tube is baffled in these Chinese models. will find out in a few days. And yes 30% versus about 20% for the Intes is difference.  However, we are going from F6 to F4.8 here so I would expect the secondary to be larger. 


Edited by starman876, 16 May 2018 - 02:44 PM.

  • rolo likes this

#4 Exnihilo

Exnihilo

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Tempe, AZ

Posted 16 May 2018 - 03:07 PM

According to the AgenaAstro site, it is baffled.  Will be interesting to hear what you think.



#5 JakeJ

JakeJ

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2659
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2004

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:07 PM

I think they are nice.  Had the chance to look through one last fall.  Not quite the planetary instrument like the Intes scopes, it is designed for low power flat fields, which it does very well.  Look forward to see what you think of it.


  • rolo likes this

#6 starman876

starman876

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16758
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 16 May 2018 - 08:06 PM

I think they are nice.  Had the chance to look through one last fall.  Not quite the planetary instrument like the Intes scopes, it is designed for low power flat fields, which it does very well.  Look forward to see what you think of it.

I am looking for a flat field scope that has decent aperture and does not weigh that much and still can provide some decent power.  I am hoping that this scope will fit that bill.   Also, at 15 lbs I can mount it on a lot of mounts.  We will see how I like it.   Will try and do some imaging with it. Another reason I wanted a carbon fiber tube. 


  • JakeJ, rolo and Exnihilo like this

#7 Exnihilo

Exnihilo

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1076
  • Joined: 02 Aug 2010
  • Loc: Tempe, AZ

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:34 AM

I am looking for a flat field scope that has decent aperture and does not weigh that much and still can provide some decent power.  I am hoping that this scope will fit that bill.   Also, at 15 lbs I can mount it on a lot of mounts.  We will see how I like it.   Will try and do some imaging with it. Another reason I wanted a carbon fiber tube. 

You actually got that one from Orion?  I had thought the only place you could get them was Woodland Hills.  All the other retailers show "out of stock."


Edited by Exnihilo, 17 May 2018 - 09:35 AM.


#8 John P

John P

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 438
  • Joined: 27 Jan 2004
  • Loc: Irondequoit, NY USA

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:57 AM

You are going to love this telescope.  Mine has excellent optics ranging from low power, wide field to fairly high power for double stars and planetary.  I never understood why man-newts were never all that popular as they come very close to being the perfect "do all" telescope.  After many years and having several large telescopes, I personally have settled in on 6" as my most used aperture and the mak-newt being the best, for me, optics.



#9 starman876

starman876

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16758
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 17 May 2018 - 10:19 AM

You actually got that one from Orion?  I had thought the only place you could get them was Woodland Hills.  All the other retailers show "out of stock."

No

 

got it from the telescope warehouse.   



#10 starman876

starman876

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16758
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 23 May 2018 - 09:59 AM

The scope came in yesterday along with the thunderstorms following it mad.gif

 

Tonight will be the Caps/Tampa game so I doubt I will be using the scope.

 

I did view with it quickly at the power transformer across the street and was able to read the fine print on the labels easily.

 

However, a quick test showed that as I moved the label of center axis that the label did not stay in sharp focus. I inserted a coma corrector and that did help.

 

I was using the supplied 25mm widefield 2" eyepiece.  I will try the same test using a TV eyepiece when I have time.

 

I should DPAC the scope which will tell me a lot.  



#11 starman876

starman876

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16758
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 24 May 2018 - 04:24 PM

well, the Caps won beating Tampa 4-0.  Now I really don't care if the scope is a bust lol.gif


Edited by starman876, 24 May 2018 - 04:25 PM.

  • Procyon and Exnihilo like this

#12 BlueTrane2028

BlueTrane2028

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 229
  • Joined: 25 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Bala Cynwyd, PA, USA

Posted 24 May 2018 - 04:39 PM

I think it would be a hoot if the Golden Knights won the cup.



#13 Phil Cowell

Phil Cowell

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5154
  • Joined: 24 May 2007
  • Loc: Southern Tier NY

Posted 24 May 2018 - 05:38 PM

I think it would be a hoot if the Golden Knights won the cup.

They going to parachute in?



#14 JakeJ

JakeJ

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2659
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2004

Posted 24 May 2018 - 07:16 PM

Suprised at the coma.  My Intes is sharp across the field, which is what I thought was the point of the Mak-Newt design.  


  • Richard Whalen likes this

#15 JeffreyAK

JeffreyAK

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 88
  • Joined: 20 May 2018
  • Loc: Livermore California

Posted 24 May 2018 - 07:45 PM

I reckon it's the supplied eyepiece that's giving you coma, not the scope.  I love my MN76 that I've had for 20 years, it also has a CF tube and is much lighter than the Russian version.



#16 starman876

starman876

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16758
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 24 May 2018 - 08:06 PM

I reckon it's the supplied eyepiece that's giving you coma, not the scope.  I love my MN76 that I've had for 20 years, it also has a CF tube and is much lighter than the Russian version.

we will find out as soon as I get to use the scope and check it out under the stars with some different eyepieces.  



#17 starman876

starman876

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16758
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 24 May 2018 - 11:15 PM

Looked at Jupiter and the moon tonight.   This is not a bad scope.  Saw some nice detail on Jupiter. Red spot was visible.  It is a lot more red that in previous years.   Was using a 5mm Radian.   The moon showed some nice detail.  Of course I do not recall a scope that did not look good on the moon.  even binoculars look good while viewing the moon.  

 

The coma I was seeing was the 25mm eyepiece that came with the scope.   Guess I wont be using that much.  

 

The ES 100 degree eyepieces are wonderful in this scope.  What a star sweeper it is.  Can not wait to try this scope in a dark sky site.   when I get better at imaging I am going to use this scope to see what can be done from a light polluted suburb of washington DC.  


  • Exnihilo likes this

#18 rkayakr

rkayakr

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1381
  • Joined: 27 Oct 2010
  • Loc: Northeast Ohio

Posted 25 May 2018 - 04:20 PM

I have it's big brother, a Skywatcher MN-190 and it's my favorite scope.



#19 Eddgie

Eddgie

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 22669
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 25 May 2018 - 04:58 PM

50% Of the magic in the Intes Micro Mak Newts is due to the absolutely world beating optics. No one does Cats like Intes Micro (Ok, Astro-Physics too, but ok, it is Astro-Physics so that means hard to get).

 

The other 50% of the magic of the Intes Mak Newts (except for the MN-56) is the small obstruction.  Now this obstruction size does mean that there is pretty noticable illumination falloff when using eyeiece like 41mm Pan, but for contrast, the larger MNs stand head to head with the best Apos made.

 

Not that the ES scope will be bad because it probably won't be, but if the ES Apos are any indication to quality, they will lack the greatness of the Intes scopes and the larger obstruction will rob a bit of additional contrast.

Again, it probably won't be bad at all, and maybe it will be hard to see much difference, but the Intes MNs are the best Cats I have ever owned, period.  Intes Micro scopes are scalpel like in their ability to dissect planetary detail.  I have my doubts that the ES will be as good. 

 

(And before anyone complains about me dissing ES scopes, this comes from my direct ownership experience of both an ES Apo and Intes Micro Mak Newts (2).   My ES 127ED had between 1/5th and 1/6th wave of SA in a 33% obstructed star test, and there was an easy to see central zone.   Not terrible at all, but we are not talking TEC, TAK, or AP levels of quality for sure for sure.  The MNs were pristine, with literally textbook perfect optics.  These were TEC, TAK, and AP optical quality). 


Edited by Eddgie, 25 May 2018 - 05:06 PM.

  • stuart keenor likes this

#20 starman876

starman876

    Hubble

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 16758
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 25 May 2018 - 05:44 PM

i have had a few Intes Mak newts and I agree the optics are much better and the smaller central obstruction makes a better visual scope.   However, I bought this scope do try my hand at imaging.  Hopefully it will excel at that.  From the fact that I had to use two extensions to use it visually I can tell this scope is set up for imaging. 



#21 Phil Barker

Phil Barker

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 597
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2009
  • Loc: hokitika New Zealand

Posted 25 May 2018 - 06:51 PM

agree re large obstruction but one of the issues with the intes maknewts was a dim image and the small secondaries were partly responsible for this surely.  Ok for planets but not deepsky.

 

my old 715 intes micro was like this hopelessly undersized secondary for deepsky.  I know its a mak cass but same principal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  

That's a pretty large central obstruction... at least compared to the MN61.  Different intended uses, I suppose.

 

And yes, it did hurt when I sold my MN61, and still does.  The views were as impressive as the weight!



#22 JakeJ

JakeJ

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2659
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2004

Posted 29 May 2018 - 10:57 AM

agree re large obstruction but one of the issues with the intes maknewts was a dim image and the small secondaries were partly responsible for this surely.  Ok for planets but not deepsky.

 

my old 715 intes micro was like this hopelessly undersized secondary for deepsky.  I know its a mak cass but same principal.

 

My MN66 is an excellent deepsky scope.  I think a better statement would be "not optimized for 2" eyepieces".  Not really a problem as the focal length is only 912mm.  Gives great widefield views with a 24mm eyepiece.  Much wider than my C11 can do with any combination of reducer/eyepiece/2" eyepiece, etc.  Incidentally, I have found the Intes Mak-newts to not be "ok for planets", I have found them to be excellent planetary instruments, in the same class as premium apochromatic refractors.


  • Exnihilo and howardcano like this

#23 Phil Barker

Phil Barker

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 597
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2009
  • Loc: hokitika New Zealand

Posted 30 May 2018 - 06:23 PM

Just out of interest do you get 100% illumination at edge of the 24mm widefield?

I know with a standard newt you can't have such a small obstruction without sacrifice but wonder if primary is oversized in mn which would help illuminate better?

 

Have you done a side by side with a good 6 inch newt?  I did once at a starparty with a mn61 and a 6 inch f-8 newt and thought the newt was  brighter.  optics were great in both scopes.

 

 

 

 

My MN66 is an excellent deepsky scope.  I think a better statement would be "not optimized for 2" eyepieces".  Not really a problem as the focal length is only 912mm.  Gives great widefield views with a 24mm eyepiece.  Much wider than my C11 can do with any combination of reducer/eyepiece/2" eyepiece, etc.  Incidentally, I have found the Intes Mak-newts to not be "ok for planets", I have found them to be excellent planetary instruments, in the same class as premium apochromatic refractors.



#24 stuart keenor

stuart keenor

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 74
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2011

Posted 10 June 2018 - 12:16 PM

I’ve just gone back to a Mak Newt having sold 2 Mak’s a newt  and Cass 10” 5 years ago that was a mistake I wouldn’t make again just acquired another 10” Mak Newt needs a clean up etc but it’s a keeper they are going to get very rare with intes micro not at the moment making them Regards stuart 


  • Tyson M likes this

#25 JohnH

JohnH

    Mercury-Atlas

  • ****-
  • Posts: 2741
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Squamish BC Moved!!!!!

Posted 10 June 2018 - 01:18 PM

Just out of interest do you get 100% illumination at edge of the 24mm widefield?

I know with a standard newt you can't have such a small obstruction without sacrifice but wonder if primary is oversized in mn which would help illuminate better?

 

Have you done a side by side with a good 6 inch newt?  I did once at a starparty with a mn61 and a 6 inch f-8 newt and thought the newt was  brighter.  optics were great in both scopes.

My MN 61 had excellent wide field views.

 

I bought myself an N26mm and a Pan41mm eyepieces just for this




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