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

Orion Maks: 6" or 7"?

  • Please log in to reply
16 replies to this topic

#1 JoeBftsplk

JoeBftsplk

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 340
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2007
  • Loc: North of the Fingerlakes-NY

Posted 09 November 2018 - 09:36 AM

Looking at Orion's two bigger Maksutovs. The planets, moon, and double stars are the viewing goals. My favorite mount is the Portamount. If the 6" works well on the Porta, I'd probably buy that as the setup would be almost grab-n-go and would see more use.
 
OTOH, if the Mak, with its narrow FOV and high magnifications, needs tracking and a sturdier mount, then I'll have to drag out a GEM (probably a SVP) and might as well get the bigger 7" Mak.
 
So has anyone used a 6" Mak on a Portamount? How did it work for you? Was lack of tracking a big annoyance?

#2 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5424
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 09 November 2018 - 10:06 AM

I have a longer 6" telescope, an f/5 Newonian, on this alt-azimuth...

 

6 f5r.jpg

 

The salt-shaker there is to give a hint as to the scale.  It would be perfect for a 6" Maksutov...

 

https://agenaastro.c...ltaz-mount.html

 

Incidentally, when I last looked at that listing, about a month ago, ten were in stock, now four.  I don't know, however, if it would support a 7"; possibly.  It supports that longer 6" telescope quite well.

 

As it is, a 6" Maksutov comes with a rather lengthy acclimation period, not to mention the focal-length; a 7" would naturally take and be longer, respectively.


  • Jaimo! likes this

#3 Taosmath

Taosmath

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 721
  • Joined: 21 May 2014

Posted 09 November 2018 - 10:34 AM

I had a skywatcher 6" Mak.  It was great optically.  I tried it on a NEXSTAR Mount designed for an 8" SCT but I found the MAK wobbled too much for me to enjoy using it.

 

The 6" Mak was most happy on my CG5 mount, so my expectation would be that it wouldn't matter if you used a 6" or a 7", you'd still need to use your SVP.  A one armed Alt AZ mount is not likely to be beefy enough.



#4 JoeBftsplk

JoeBftsplk

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 340
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2007
  • Loc: North of the Fingerlakes-NY

Posted 09 November 2018 - 10:51 AM

Thanks, Muse. Maybe the smart thing would be to figure out how to disassemble my ETX125 5" Mak without destroying it, find some rings for it and give that a try. It always was optically excellent. Mechanically and electronically is a different story, but it did work as well as those things do.

Anyone got a link to ETX disassembly instructions?

Edited by JoeBftsplk, 09 November 2018 - 10:54 AM.


#5 Jaimo!

Jaimo!

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 2713
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Exit 135 / 40° North

Posted 09 November 2018 - 06:25 PM

I have a longer 6" telescope, an f/5 Newonian, on this alt-azimuth...

 

attachicon.gif 6 f5r.jpg

 

The salt-shaker there is to give a hint as to the scale.  It would be perfect for a 6" Maksutov...

 

https://agenaastro.c...ltaz-mount.html

 

Incidentally, when I last looked at that listing, about a month ago, ten were in stock, now four.  I don't know, however, if it would support a 7"; possibly.  It supports that longer 6" telescope quite well.

 

As it is, a 6" Maksutov comes with a rather lengthy acclimation period, not to mention the focal-length; a 7" would naturally take and be longer, respectively.

I had the AT Voyager branded version of this mount and It worked very well with my MK-67 6" Mak, I particularly liked the slow motion knobs, this was my grab and go rig for years.  I don't think the AT Voyager could support the weight of the 7" Mak, although I have no data to back that up.  I also don't think I would be happy with the performance of a 6" Mak on a Porta Mount, as the Porta has a lower weight capacity than the AT Voyager.  In fact, I would not put a Makustov over 5" on the Porta.

 

IMG_1205 - Small.jpg


  • terraclarke and Sky Muse like this

#6 Freezout

Freezout

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 324
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2017
  • Loc: North Europe, Bortle 4 zone, altitude 11 meters

Posted 09 November 2018 - 07:54 PM

My 6 inches Mak was very stable on my Skyview Pro, but I intend to go Altaz. I will purchase a Skytee 2 (rated 13 kg). The lighter ones are very attractive (especially the one shown by Sky Muse) but don't look sturdy enough for me, I have been used to rock solid!

#7 JoeBftsplk

JoeBftsplk

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 340
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2007
  • Loc: North of the Fingerlakes-NY

Posted 09 November 2018 - 08:24 PM

Well I got the ETX off its fork mount. Wasn't hard, I don't think I hurt it any. I'll order some rings and a dovetail and give the ETX a try on the Porta when they come in. If it works well, I'll have another grab-and-go rig. If it works really well, I might still buy a bigger Mak to use on the SVP.

Happy to get the ETX going again. It's about 20 years old and hasn't been used for over a decade. Used to really like the sharp images it would put up at high magnifications.
Bob

Edited by JoeBftsplk, 09 November 2018 - 08:25 PM.

  • 3 i Guy and Conaxian like this

#8 3 i Guy

3 i Guy

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 372
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Tampa, FL

Posted 09 November 2018 - 08:56 PM

Here you go Joe

 

 

 

Mark



#9 JoeBftsplk

JoeBftsplk

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 340
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2007
  • Loc: North of the Fingerlakes-NY

Posted 09 November 2018 - 09:33 PM

BTW, from reading another thread I discovered that Orion puts the mounting dovetail on their Maks on the bottom of the scope tube. This would put the finder bracket at about the 7:30 position (near the bottom) of the scope if the dovetail is attached to a sidearm mount like the Porta.

#10 Sky Muse

Sky Muse

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5424
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012
  • Loc: Mid-South, U.S.

Posted 09 November 2018 - 09:37 PM

I had the AT Voyager branded version of this mount and It worked very well with my MK-67 6" Mak, I particularly liked the slow motion knobs, this was my grab and go rig for years.  I don't think the AT Voyager could support the weight of the 7" Mak, although I have no data to back that up.  I also don't think I would be happy with the performance of a 6" Mak on a Porta Mount, as the Porta has a lower weight capacity than the AT Voyager.  In fact, I would not put a Makustov over 5" on the Porta.

 

attachicon.gif IMG_1205 - Small.jpg

My own is the Astro-Tech Voyager I.  I got it back in 2006 or '07, or perhaps before then; I really don't remember as it's been so long.  I had gotten the pier and the eyepiece-tray for it as well.  Someone at Astronomics wanted to give me a discount on the tray, as it was used, according to them, but I couldn't tell that it was used, so I refused the offer.



#11 JoeBftsplk

JoeBftsplk

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 340
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2007
  • Loc: North of the Fingerlakes-NY

Posted 09 November 2018 - 09:38 PM

Here you go Joe
 
 
 
Mark


Great! They're sure cheaper than Parallax rings. Guess I'll give 'me a try.
Thanks, Mark.

#12 Jaimo!

Jaimo!

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 2713
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Exit 135 / 40° North

Posted 09 November 2018 - 11:17 PM

My own is the Astro-Tech Voyager I.  I got it back in 2006 or '07, or perhaps before then; I really don't remember as it's been so long.  I had gotten the pier and the eyepiece-tray for it as well.  Someone at Astronomics wanted to give me a discount on the tray, as it was used, according to them, but I couldn't tell that it was used, so I refused the offer.

I also had the pier and eyepiece tray, I picked the mount up at NEAF, on Sunday but cannot remember the year for $175 new...  I miss that mount.



#13 Jaimo!

Jaimo!

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 2713
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2007
  • Loc: Exit 135 / 40° North

Posted 09 November 2018 - 11:22 PM

My 6 inches Mak was very stable on my Skyview Pro, but I intend to go Altaz. I will purchase a Skytee 2 (rated 13 kg). The lighter ones are very attractive (especially the one shown by Sky Muse) but don't look sturdy enough for me, I have been used to rock solid!

I ended up with a WO EZTouch, which is now made by AKO Swiss.  I was a little hesitant about not having slow motion controls, but this mount is easily adjustable and the movements are so fine, I can easily observe above 200x with out slow motion controls.  And I can load up a second scope for wider field viewing, this is my current "grab and go".

 

IMG_20180608_230104-small.jpg

 

Jaimo!



#14 3 i Guy

3 i Guy

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 372
  • Joined: 23 Sep 2005
  • Loc: Tampa, FL

Posted 10 November 2018 - 10:36 AM

Great! They're sure cheaper than Parallax rings. Guess I'll give 'me a try.
Thanks, Mark.

Get the felt too.



#15 Rock22

Rock22

    Vostok 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 152
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2017
  • Loc: Diamond Bar, California

Posted 10 November 2018 - 11:12 AM

My 180mm Orion mak works in my Porta II, but I’ll only use that set up for a quick look and not all night. My mak is insulated and difficult to mount sideways in the Porta II, but it works. A 5” or 6” mak would likely work much better, but I agree what everyone else on this thread is saying - better to not undermount such a fine scope.

The Porta II is such a versatile and easy to transport and use mount, I should have picked one up much earlier. I can’t keep my mounts out and extended because I don’t have the space at home, but if I did, I would get a dual-Scope alt-az like the ES Twilight II or Omegon dual-scope mount. Those would hold the mak and a wide field refractor just fine.

#16 PowerM3

PowerM3

    Explorer 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 65
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2010

Posted 10 November 2018 - 11:41 AM

I have had the privilege of owning both the 6 and 7" Orion Maks. The 7" is much larger and heavier. Optically they where both excellent. If I was limited to a lighter mount I would defiantly go with the 6". I used it on a twilight 1 and it worked relatively well. There was no way that the 7" would ride on that mount. My LXD75 was barely sufficient for the 7". Best, Vlad. 



#17 Phil Barker

Phil Barker

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 606
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2009
  • Loc: hokitika New Zealand

Posted Today, 03:25 PM

the 6 will give a much wider field of view and be more portable.  i own the 7 inch sw and its a fantastic instrument optically but f15 restricts it for dso's.




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