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

Thinking of a C14

  • Please log in to reply
75 replies to this topic

#1 Jeffmar

Jeffmar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 738
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2012
  • Loc: salt lake city, utah

Posted 21 August 2019 - 06:12 PM

I might have a line on a C14 which has been my dream scope for a long time. The only problem is my mount would be loaded to the max with that OTA. I am not going to do astro photography with it and I can put up with a bit of wobble. I have three 17 pound counter weights plus some 11 pound weights if I need them. I also have my CGX mounted on the CGE tripod which is a pretty hefty chunk. Have any of you out there tried what I am thinking of and how many counter weights did it take if you did. I have no problems astro imaging with my C11 edge, the .7 focal reducer on an 80mm f/5 scope, and a full frame camera hanging off the back. If any of you have tried the CGX with a C14 I would love to know how it turned out. Expert options, which we all love to give, without actual experience is welcome, but I am really looking for feedback from someone who has tried it. 

 

Let's say I don't have the money this year to buy an expensive monster mount. Not even a CGX-L.

My biggest set up.

 

My setup


Edited by Jeffmar, 21 August 2019 - 06:13 PM.

  • denis0007dl likes this

#2 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 17287
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 21 August 2019 - 06:24 PM

CGX/CGE tripod should be fine for visual

For my C14 I need 2 X 23lbs CW's to balance however they are near the bottom of the CW shaft

so adding another11lbs would be preferable (total 55 lbs)


  • Jeffmar likes this

#3 WadeH237

WadeH237

    Aurora

  • *****
  • Posts: 4932
  • Joined: 24 Feb 2007
  • Loc: Snohomish, WA

Posted 21 August 2019 - 07:03 PM

I say "go for it".  I used a C14 on a CGE for 15 years and was happy with it.  A couple of years ago, I upgraded the CGE to an AP1100, and it is much better.  The CGE had the shakes and was problematic in the wind, but I still really enjoyed the telescope.  Your CGX should be at least as good.

 

My one caution is to make sure that you understand the commitment that a C14 takes.  It's bulk and weight put it way beyond the "grab and go" range.  I rarely set mine up at home, and prefer to save it for dark sky sites, especially when I can set it up for a few nights of viewing.


  • stevew, Erik Bakker, Sarkikos and 4 others like this

#4 carolinaskies

carolinaskies

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1712
  • Joined: 12 Dec 2014
  • Loc: Greenville SC

Posted 21 August 2019 - 08:20 PM

If you go the C14 weight be aware of the 'table wonder' technique owners are using.  Staging the 14" on a table next to the mount so you're not actually lifting the OTA but more positioning it to line up with the saddle.  This seems to work well in eliminating the 'fear' of toppling the 14" OTA onto the ground.  

It's likely that you'll wind up putting the two big weights as far in as possible and let your 3rd weight be the finesse adjuster.   


  • Jeffmar and gfstallin like this

#5 dr.who

dr.who

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 14546
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2012

Posted 21 August 2019 - 08:32 PM

I use my EdgeHD 14 on my CGX all the time. It is fine for visual. Celestron even said so (I have the email to prove it from their tech support). So go for it. I want to say I use 3x17lbs and 2x11lbs. But I can't remember. Sorry about that. 

 

What Paul is referring to is this:

 

post-218387-0-14829200-1495936226_thumb.

 

Image credit: DismalScientist member CN


  • Scott Beith, ATM57, mumbles and 4 others like this

#6 Cali

Cali

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1088
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2018
  • Loc: Bay Area

Posted 21 August 2019 - 11:24 PM

When I first saw a C14 at a star party I swear I thought someone had spray-painted a garbage can DayGlo Orange and had it mounted.

 

It was that big.

 

- Cal


Edited by Cali, 21 August 2019 - 11:25 PM.

  • Scott Beith, Sarkikos and mumbles like this

#7 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 30936
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 22 August 2019 - 07:43 AM

I've never thought seriously about getting a C14.  Just too big and heavy and cumbersome for me.  I'm 5' 7" and 148 lbs.  For me, a C14 would be more trouble than it's worth.  liftup.sml.gif

 

YMMV

 

Mike


Edited by Sarkikos, 22 August 2019 - 07:45 AM.


#8 JoeR

JoeR

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2800
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2010
  • Loc: Columbus, OH

Posted 22 August 2019 - 08:03 AM

Yes it takes you by surprise at first how big is. But I was also surprised at the manageable weight its not as heavy as it looks. However its definitely not 45 lbs I don't know why Celestron advertises it as such mine is 60 lbs with two dovetails and visual back attached. I was apprehensive to upgrade at first thinking it can't be much different than the 11" but it is quite a noticeable improvement. When I took it under dark skies I was blown away at how much I can see. Recently I had a night of excellent seeing and the C14 really lived up to its planet killer reputation then. I'd say the one negative that takes getting used to is the very long 3910mm focal length. I almost always use my 30mm 82° EP for 130x magnification. I also have a CCDT67 telecompressor what brings it down to 87x with the same EP and makes full use of the clear aperture. I first used the CGX-L and it handed it just fine now using the AP1100 for flawless performance. I've read people using the CGX and G11 with the C14 and it works fine for visual as long as you accept the limitations and vibration dampening times.


  • Jeffmar likes this

#9 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 30936
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 22 August 2019 - 08:16 AM

My EdgeHD 8" will probably be the largest Cat I'll ever own.  I think an 8" hits the sweet spot for SCTs.  After that I go on to Newts.

 

Mike


  • BGazing likes this

#10 yellobeard

yellobeard

    Mariner 2

  • *****
  • Posts: 296
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2013
  • Loc: Netherlands

Posted 22 August 2019 - 10:51 AM

I have a C14 with top optical performance.
Would I have that C14 if I did not have 2 C11's, 3 C8's and 3 C5's standing next to it ??? Probably not...

Indeed, a C14 is not quite a 'grab and go' type of scope..
  • Erik Bakker, Sarkikos, eros312 and 2 others like this

#11 dr.who

dr.who

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 14546
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2012

Posted 22 August 2019 - 11:51 AM

The vibrations are not bad with the CGX. Vibration Suppression Pads help too. But again nothing terrible. The main external difference between the CGX and CGX-L is the tripod. The internals are the gearing and a few other things. Nothing to address the vibrations. The tripod does that.

 

And a Losmandy GM811G with the large tripod is on par with the CGX-L. If you are really concerned about the minute vibrations you can always buy a Losmandy HD tripod and get a mating adapter made for a CGX to fit a Losmandy tripod. I use the Berlebach Planet with Losmandy fittings so I had one made for my CGX so I could use it on the Planet. It was about $360 with shipping. If I remember right TPI made it for me. He had it within two weeks. Easy peasey.


  • Jeffmar likes this

#12 Jeffmar

Jeffmar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 738
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2012
  • Loc: salt lake city, utah

Posted 22 August 2019 - 12:50 PM

I use my EdgeHD 14 on my CGX all the time. It is fine for visual. Celestron even said so (I have the email to prove it from their tech support). So go for it. I want to say I use 3x17lbs and 2x11lbs. But I can't remember. Sorry about that. 

 

What Paul is referring to is this:

 

post-218387-0-14829200-1495936226_thumb.

 

Image credit: DismalScientist member CN

Great idea! Thanks.



#13 starman876

starman876

    Nihon Seiko

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 20378
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2008
  • Loc: VA

Posted 22 August 2019 - 12:53 PM

The C14 is a great scope.  I got rings for mine.  Sure makes it a lot easier to put on the mount.   


  • Jeffmar likes this

#14 Jeffmar

Jeffmar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 738
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2012
  • Loc: salt lake city, utah

Posted 22 August 2019 - 12:55 PM

Yes it takes you by surprise at first how big is. But I was also surprised at the manageable weight its not as heavy as it looks. However its definitely not 45 lbs I don't know why Celestron advertises it as such mine is 60 lbs with two dovetails and visual back attached. I was apprehensive to upgrade at first thinking it can't be much different than the 11" but it is quite a noticeable improvement. When I took it under dark skies I was blown away at how much I can see. Recently I had a night of excellent seeing and the C14 really lived up to its planet killer reputation then. I'd say the one negative that takes getting used to is the very long 3910mm focal length. I almost always use my 30mm 82° EP for 130x magnification. I also have a CCDT67 telecompressor what brings it down to 87x with the same EP and makes full use of the clear aperture. I first used the CGX-L and it handed it just fine now using the AP1100 for flawless performance. I've read people using the CGX and G11 with the C14 and it works fine for visual as long as you accept the limitations and vibration dampening times.

It is pretty important to know how much a scope weighs. Sometimes I wonder why Celestron can't be a bit more honest about the C14 and why Meade won't publish how much their big scopes weigh. 



#15 dr.who

dr.who

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 14546
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2012

Posted 22 August 2019 - 07:07 PM

I will weigh mine. It don't think it's 60 lbs. Though it might be. I believe the tube with nothing on it is likely 45 lbs. But add in 5 lbs for the Losmandy D rail and then another 3 for the Vixen top rail and another 2 lbs for the 2" diagonal and Ethos EP I use and it is up at about 55 lbs or so. It isn't light, that is for sure.



#16 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 30936
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 22 August 2019 - 07:23 PM

55 lbs.  That's over 1/3 of my total weight.

 

Mike



#17 TG

TG

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2385
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2006
  • Loc: Latitude 47

Posted 23 August 2019 - 12:39 AM

I weighed both a C14 and C14HD with a luggage scale. They were 44lb and 48lbs "bare" respectively.

Tanveer

#18 jeremiah2229

jeremiah2229

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1529
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2015
  • Loc: Illinois, USA N 37° W 89°

Posted 23 August 2019 - 01:25 AM

Yes it takes you by surprise at first how big is. But I was also surprised at the manageable weight its not as heavy as it looks. However its definitely not 45 lbs I don't know why Celestron advertises it as such mine is 60 lbs with two dovetails and visual back attached. I was apprehensive to upgrade at first thinking it can't be much different than the 11" but it is quite a noticeable improvement. When I took it under dark skies I was blown away at how much I can see. Recently I had a night of excellent seeing and the C14 really lived up to its planet killer reputation then. I'd say the one negative that takes getting used to is the very long 3910mm focal length. I almost always use my 30mm 82° EP for 130x magnification. I also have a CCDT67 telecompressor what brings it down to 87x with the same EP and makes full use of the clear aperture. I first used the CGX-L and it handed it just fine now using the AP1100 for flawless performance. I've read people using the CGX and G11 with the C14 and it works fine for visual as long as you accept the limitations and vibration dampening times.

Are you attaching the CCDT67 to the eyepiece or the diagonal? Really want to know how you use this so I can give it a try.

 

Thank you...



#19 JoeR

JoeR

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2800
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2010
  • Loc: Columbus, OH

Posted 23 August 2019 - 10:41 AM

Are you attaching the CCDT67 to the eyepiece or the diagonal? Really want to know how you use this so I can give it a try.

 

Thank you...

Threaded onto the diagonal. It will not flatten the field or correct coma like the Celestron f/6.3 does but it has 44mm clear aperture and Astro-Physics designed it to be used with slower OTA like the f/11 C14. So even with a large wide field eyepiece it delivers a nice field of view. I also use a 56mm Plossl and it work well but with a more narrow 52° AFOV.

 

 

I will weigh mine. It don't think it's 60 lbs. Though it might be. I believe the tube with nothing on it is likely 45 lbs. But add in 5 lbs for the Losmandy D rail and then another 3 for the Vixen top rail and another 2 lbs for the 2" diagonal and Ethos EP I use and it is up at about 55 lbs or so. It isn't light, that is for sure.

Yes that's where the extra weight comes in. The Losmandy dovetails are bit heavier than the Celestrons. Plus the Astro-Physics visual back is 12oz and a wee bit more weight added with mirror locks, three cooling fans, the feather touch focuser, dew strip, and flocking paper in the interior.


  • Jeffmar and jeremiah2229 like this

#20 Bill Barlow

Bill Barlow

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4411
  • Joined: 03 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Overland Park KS

Posted 24 August 2019 - 10:12 AM

I previously owned a couple of C14’s and they both weighed about 52 pounds, which included a Losmandy rail/mounting blocks an AP visual back and an AP 2” diagonal.  

 

Bill


  • Jeffmar likes this

#21 Jeffmar

Jeffmar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 738
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2012
  • Loc: salt lake city, utah

Posted 24 August 2019 - 01:39 PM

I weighed both a C14 and C14HD with a luggage scale. They were 44lb and 48lbs "bare" respectively.

Tanveer

I am little surprised at your results. I guess Celestron isn't weighing their scopes with even mounting rails nor diagonals. Thanks. Good to know.



#22 Jeffmar

Jeffmar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 738
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2012
  • Loc: salt lake city, utah

Posted 24 August 2019 - 01:47 PM

I guess the next question would be whether I should spend a fair amount extra for the C14 edge model. I am only asking that because my C11 edge seems to be a very good one visually and for doing photos. I don't know if that has anything to do with the edge optics, just a bit of luck, or if Celestron has better quality control than in the past.



#23 Eddgie

Eddgie

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 25001
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2006

Posted 24 August 2019 - 02:45 PM

I have owned and I did enjoy my C14, but that being said, this was a long time ago when Go2 dobsonians were not avialable and these days, unless you are imaging or transporting it is a small car, I would say that a 14" dob is a better scope in almost every way.

 

I thought that the CGE was about right for the 14 and I don't know your mount, but if the capacity is about the same, then it should be OK, though the GGE was not rock solid at 350x. 

 

The biggest issue I had with the C14 was dew.  I had to run two dew straps on mine sometimes, and this meant that I had to be within reach of an outlet.

 

The second biggest issue was the field of view.  Yeah, a lot of things are more than small enough to fit into the field of a C14, but at the same time, many amazing objects on the Milky Way sit in glorious star fields and the star fields around them add tremendously to the view.  Also, you top out on FOV and exit pupil with a 41mm Panoptic or 55mm Plossl, and the issue here is that if you are using LPR filters, these do dim the image to some degree, and being able to get a bigger exit pupil than one can get with a 55mm Plossl is quite helpful when looking for larger, dimmer nebula or galaxies.

 

The next issue was setup.   Lots of trips out of the door.  By comparison, I can move my dob out in one trip using a hand truck.  I can literally be observing in less than 2 minutes from the time I walk out the door.

 

The last big issue for me was the field curvature and coma.   Now with shorter focal lengths, you could use Naglers, but with longer focal length, I had to rely on Panoptics.  The EdgeHD version would fix this though. 

 

The dew though was a major pain to me.   I had nights where I had to run hair dryers to stay ahead of the game, but this coupled with the long setup time eventually drove me away from the C14.

 

One place the C14 excelled for me was planetary imaging.  At f/22, you could get some nice, large, detailed images.  It was just so much work to do though, with the setup and everything, I stopped doing it.

 

(These days, I would recommend a 10" dob and an image intensified eyepiece! The stuff you can see, even from the city!!!!.  Like using a 20" dob, without the pain of setup!!!)


Edited by Eddgie, 24 August 2019 - 02:48 PM.

  • JMP, Sarkikos, Starman81 and 2 others like this

#24 Jeffmar

Jeffmar

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 738
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2012
  • Loc: salt lake city, utah

Posted 24 August 2019 - 03:58 PM

I have owned and I did enjoy my C14, but that being said, this was a long time ago when Go2 dobsonians were not avialable and these days, unless you are imaging or transporting it is a small car, I would say that a 14" dob is a better scope in almost every way.

 

I thought that the CGE was about right for the 14 and I don't know your mount, but if the capacity is about the same, then it should be OK, though the GGE was not rock solid at 350x. 

 

The biggest issue I had with the C14 was dew.  I had to run two dew straps on mine sometimes, and this meant that I had to be within reach of an outlet.

 

The second biggest issue was the field of view.  Yeah, a lot of things are more than small enough to fit into the field of a C14, but at the same time, many amazing objects on the Milky Way sit in glorious star fields and the star fields around them add tremendously to the view.  Also, you top out on FOV and exit pupil with a 41mm Panoptic or 55mm Plossl, and the issue here is that if you are using LPR filters, these do dim the image to some degree, and being able to get a bigger exit pupil than one can get with a 55mm Plossl is quite helpful when looking for larger, dimmer nebula or galaxies.

 

The next issue was setup.   Lots of trips out of the door.  By comparison, I can move my dob out in one trip using a hand truck.  I can literally be observing in less than 2 minutes from the time I walk out the door.

 

The last big issue for me was the field curvature and coma.   Now with shorter focal lengths, you could use Naglers, but with longer focal length, I had to rely on Panoptics.  The EdgeHD version would fix this though. 

 

The dew though was a major pain to me.   I had nights where I had to run hair dryers to stay ahead of the game, but this coupled with the long setup time eventually drove me away from the C14.

 

One place the C14 excelled for me was planetary imaging.  At f/22, you could get some nice, large, detailed images.  It was just so much work to do though, with the setup and everything, I stopped doing it.

 

(These days, I would recommend a 10" dob and an image intensified eyepiece! The stuff you can see, even from the city!!!!.  Like using a 20" dob, without the pain of setup!!!)

I have had tunnel vision for a long time thinking the C14 is the best way to go. I guess I am looking for something larger than my C11 that would be great on faint fuzzies. I can make out dust lanes on m51 with my C11 in dark skies but I always thought the C14 would be better. Perhaps a 14 or 15 inch goto dob would be better. I haven't checked prices and I don't know how much dob I can get for the price of a C14. I have very little experience with dobs other than being impressed looking through other scopes at star parties. I am not that concerned with setup time. It takes maybe fifteen minutes to set up or tear down my C11 not including calibrating things. 



#25 Sarkikos

Sarkikos

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 30936
  • Joined: 18 Dec 2007
  • Loc: Per sylvam ad astra

Posted 24 August 2019 - 08:50 PM

 

(These days, I would recommend a 10" dob and an image intensified eyepiece! The stuff you can see, even from the city!!!!.  Like using a 20" dob, without the pain of setup!!!)

:waytogo:  Now all I need is the image intensified eyepiece!  wink.gif 

 

Mike


  • Jeffmar likes 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