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

Canadian Telescopes CT 152 vs. Celestron 150

  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

#1 dara_t

dara_t

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 10 May 2016
  • Loc: I.R.I

Posted 02 July 2020 - 06:12 AM

Hi there,
I'm almost new here!

 

I think it's been a while since Canadian Telescope is out of business. But I've found a CT152 - f/5.9 (the same as Warren Maguire has fully reviewed here) recently, which I believe is in a good condition.

Before I ran into this CT152, I had something like Celestron Omni 150 (reflector) in my mind, but this new option is very tempting and it's getting really hard for me to decide.

By the way, this is my first choice on telescopes. I've been under the sky with my 15x70 for a while, and now I'm thinking about moving to next level.

 

I was thinking if anyone has experience with these scopes and can help me getting out of the flood of thoughts!

 

Thanks in advance laugh.gif



#2 SteveG

SteveG

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,655
  • Joined: 27 Sep 2006
  • Loc: Seattle, WA

Posted 02 July 2020 - 12:27 PM

That will not be a good scope on many objects, and the Omni will blow it away on planets, bright stars and the moon. In addition, the very heavy 6” refractor will require a mount that should cost no less than $1000.


  • dara_t likes this

#3 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 19,190
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 03 July 2020 - 05:47 PM

For ease of use and little hassle the CT 152 will be a nice option however only for DSO's.

The newt will be more of an all-arounder but does require a few extra steps (Collimation), rotation within the rings, Etc.

 

Both require some sort of Mount.


  • dara_t likes this

#4 LDW47

LDW47

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,157
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 03 July 2020 - 07:02 PM

That will not be a good scope on many objects, and the Omni will blow it away on planets, bright stars and the moon. In addition, the very heavy 6” refractor will require a mount that should cost no less than $1000.

What objects won’t it be good on and why ? Might as well tell your whole story while your at it !


  • dara_t likes this

#5 Carl N

Carl N

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,701
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2012
  • Loc: San Diego, CA

Posted 03 July 2020 - 07:23 PM

What objects won’t it be good on and why ? Might as well tell your whole story while your at it !


That refractor is an achromat meaning it will not focus all color at the same time. You will get purple and/or yellow fringing and color on very bright objects like the moon and major planets.

However dont let the purists dissuade you. You can use filters to knock down the CA,chromatic aberration (fancy name for the color fringing), and many people dont mind it. For equal aperture, I'd prefer the refractor, some wouldn't.
  • doctordub and dara_t like this

#6 LDW47

LDW47

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,157
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 03 July 2020 - 08:00 PM

That refractor is an achromat meaning it will not focus all color at the same time. You will get purple and/or yellow fringing and color on very bright objects like the moon and major planets.

However dont let the purists dissuade you. You can use filters to knock down the CA,chromatic aberration (fancy name for the color fringing), and many people dont mind it. For equal aperture, I'd prefer the refractor, some wouldn't.

You are right none of my 8 achros of various sizes show color that I would call annoying. And anything, like you mention, can easily be corrected with a #8 or similar filter. I just like to hear what others have to say when giving advice ! For that size scope the mount is the key !


Edited by LDW47, 03 July 2020 - 08:02 PM.

  • Carl N and dara_t like this

#7 dara_t

dara_t

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 10 May 2016
  • Loc: I.R.I

Posted 04 July 2020 - 01:09 AM

First, thanks for all replies.

 

Now it's getting more interesting! I'm kinda familiar with how CA would be like in refractors, but I have no idea how bad it's gonna be in this particular scope. Besides CA, is there any advantages to go for a reflector? I mean it's being said that Omni's have parabolic mirrors w/ XLT coatings and stuff, but I guess it can't be aberration free.

 

Both of them come with mounts; CT with EQ5 and Omni with CG-4. So mount is not my concern now.



#8 LDW47

LDW47

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,157
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 04 July 2020 - 06:46 AM

First, thanks for all replies.

 

Now it's getting more interesting! I'm kinda familiar with how CA would be like in refractors, but I have no idea how bad it's gonna be in this particular scope. Besides CA, is there any advantages to go for a reflector? I mean it's being said that Omni's have parabolic mirrors w/ XLT coatings and stuff, but I guess it can't be aberration free.

 

Both of them come with mounts; CT with EQ5 and Omni with CG-4. So mount is not my concern now.

I am not an eq fan, with some viewing you have to almost be a contortionist but if you want to be able to manually track then an eq it is !  And if you get into the larger eq’s they are heavier / bulkier and usually more expensive ! On average the reflector won’t be as pin point sharp on those great seeing nites but there is nothing wrong with a reflector, I have owned 4 or so and I still keep a 6” dob at my remote camp !  Clear great skize !



#9 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 19,190
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 04 July 2020 - 08:06 AM

First, thanks for all replies.

 

Now it's getting more interesting! I'm kinda familiar with how CA would be like in refractors, but I have no idea how bad it's gonna be in this particular scope. Besides CA, is there any advantages to go for a reflector? I mean it's being said that Omni's have parabolic mirrors w/ XLT coatings and stuff, but I guess it can't be aberration free.

 

Both of them come with mounts; CT with EQ5 and Omni with CG-4. So mount is not my concern now.

CA is going to be Strong in the Achromat.  Some people are ok with it, some are not.

IMO the Reflector is going to be better for ANY Lunar viewing as well as Planetary (save Saturn which isn't too bad in an Achro).

 

Also, the Reflector will benefit from some sort of Coma Corrector but at F5 it's possible to enjoy the views without one.

However the big buzz-kill for me with the Reflector is the need to rotate it to orient the eyepiece when viewing different areas of the sky.

 

You never stated if the CT152/EQ5 deal was new or used?  If new then (IMO) you'd be better off with something like this for the same cost

 

Other options at various costs:

 

$280

 

$565



#10 dweller25

dweller25

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,050
  • Joined: 30 Aug 2007
  • Loc: Lancashire, UK

Posted 05 July 2020 - 04:53 AM

Will the CT152 be undermounted on the EQ5 ?


  • dara_t likes this

#11 vkhastro1

vkhastro1

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,321
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Vankleek Hill, Ontario, Canada

Posted 05 July 2020 - 05:36 AM

Will the CT152 be undermounted on the EQ5 ?

In my opinion, yes.

Hope you have enough counterweights to balance the heavy OTA.

 

I would suggest a Losmandy GM8 or similar on the weight capacity size.


  • dara_t likes this

#12 junomike

junomike

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 19,190
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 05 July 2020 - 03:19 PM

Will the CT152 be undermounted on the EQ5 ?

Seeing as I  wouldn't be using it for high magnification Planetary/Lunar work (due to CA), I'd say yes, however  everyone has a different opinion of "stable".



#13 dara_t

dara_t

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 10 May 2016
  • Loc: I.R.I

Posted 06 July 2020 - 12:04 AM

I am not an eq fan, with some viewing you have to almost be a contortionist but if you want to be able to manually track then an eq it is !  And if you get into the larger eq’s they are heavier / bulkier and usually more expensive ! On average the reflector won’t be as pin point sharp on those great seeing nites but there is nothing wrong with a reflector, I have owned 4 or so and I still keep a 6” dob at my remote camp !  Clear great skize !

Contortionist grin.gif 
Thanks anyway. Seems it's all about sort of a trade-off between CA and sharpness.
 

 

CA is going to be Strong in the Achromat.  Some people are ok with it, some are not.

IMO the Reflector is going to be better for ANY Lunar viewing as well as Planetary (save Saturn which isn't too bad in an Achro).

 

Also, the Reflector will benefit from some sort of Coma Corrector but at F5 it's possible to enjoy the views without one.

However the big buzz-kill for me with the Reflector is the need to rotate it to orient the eyepiece when viewing different areas of the sky.

 

You never stated if the CT152/EQ5 deal was new or used?  If new then (IMO) you'd be better off with something like this for the same cost

 

Other options at various costs:

 

$280

 

$565

I'm ok with collimation. But I never thought about that other issue - rotating the scope. I'm imagining it and it can be annoying!

The CT152/EQ5 is used. Since taxes are higher in my area Celestron is gonna cost a little bit more as well. So both CT152 and Omni 150 will be at almost same price (with mounts included).

Yeah, Dobs are definitely good options! But again, I assume I can't find a real Skywatcher here in my area. I'm afraid there are some cheap copies which don't have the same quality.
And as vkhastro1 mentioned as well, sounds like I should think of a new sturdier mount for that CT152, which I can't afford probably. I guess it's slowly going out of my list...



#14 dara_t

dara_t

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 10 May 2016
  • Loc: I.R.I

Posted 06 July 2020 - 12:22 AM

In my opinion, yes.

Hope you have enough counterweights to balance the heavy OTA.

 

I would suggest a Losmandy GM8 or similar on the weight capacity size.

I just noticed that you've already sell a CT152, right?
Were you satisfied with that?



#15 LDW47

LDW47

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,157
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 06 July 2020 - 05:59 AM

One other way of looking at it is that if the price is right get it and enjoy it the way it is, you will still get some great views on those dark clear nights and everything will fall into place over time ! Maybe the ca won’t bother you or maybe you will fix it through the use of some fairly cheap filters, ca never bothers me I accept it or use a filter usually a #8 lite yellow. There are ways to work around the trivial things, at least you will have it, you may end up kicking yourself down the road when you realize you might have missed out on ...... !  Clear Skize !



#16 vkhastro1

vkhastro1

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,321
  • Joined: 21 Aug 2005
  • Loc: Vankleek Hill, Ontario, Canada

Posted 06 July 2020 - 06:15 AM

I just noticed that you've already sell a CT152, right?
Were you satisfied with that?

Yes, mine has the 3” Crayford focuser.

Excellent well corrected optics.

It takes magnification very well, 200X on most nights and over 300x (50x/“) on steady nights.

A fantastic RFT - either mono mode or with binoviewer (with 1.25X Baader glasspath corrector).

Definitely agree on using the Baader Longpass 495nm filter to reduce the CA.


  • doctordub likes this

#17 dara_t

dara_t

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 10 May 2016
  • Loc: I.R.I

Posted 08 July 2020 - 12:11 AM

One other way of looking at it is that if the price is right get it and enjoy it the way it is, you will still get some great views on those dark clear nights and everything will fall into place over time ! Maybe the ca won’t bother you or maybe you will fix it through the use of some fairly cheap filters, ca never bothers me I accept it or use a filter usually a #8 lite yellow. There are ways to work around the trivial things, at least you will have it, you may end up kicking yourself down the road when you realize you might have missed out on ...... !  Clear Skize !

Feels like these words pushing me forward and I'm getting even more excited!

Yeah you're right. It's getting too long for me to decide and this bothers me a lot more than some CA ! I have to choose. Thanks a lot for your help.

 

 

Yes, mine has the 3” Crayford focuser.

Excellent well corrected optics.

It takes magnification very well, 200X on most nights and over 300x (50x/“) on steady nights.

A fantastic RFT - either mono mode or with binoviewer (with 1.25X Baader glasspath corrector).

Definitely agree on using the Baader Longpass 495nm filter to reduce the CA.

I see...sounds I would be happy for years. I'm not sure if my case will come with a 3" focuser, but anyway seems it's a decent choice - specially for me as a beginner. 

-----

I've read a little bit more, and now the mount is getting back to concern. I'm a little confused with the numbers: Celestron Omni 150R weighs about 16 lbs (as well as Skywatcher 150/750). But this CT 152 seems to weigh around 25 lbs. I thought all should be around a same weight, but seems there'e something that I'm missing.
If all these are correct, then I would have some serious difficulties with its mount.



#18 Supernova74

Supernova74

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 761
  • Joined: 25 May 2020
  • Loc: Epsom surrey near (London)

Posted 08 July 2020 - 05:36 AM

personally I cannot comment on the Canadian based telescope on the outside looks very nice indeed and internal bafferling in the OTA is a nice touch I used to own a celestron 6” refractor it was ok-ish.however now the celestron 6” achromatic refractor with the suppied AVX mount is way over priced and is not any better than a Sky-Watcher achromatic especially putting into the equation there is a brand called acension here in the the uk a clone of the Exsplore scientific E127 Triplet for £1000 and something like the EQ5 or HEQ5 to mount the scope on for around £1800 admittedly an inch aperture difference still a Triplet of good quality and superior views compared to celestrons list price for the advanced AVX of a shade under of £1600 I know where my money would go on the Triplet.


  • dara_t likes this

#19 LDW47

LDW47

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,157
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 08 July 2020 - 07:24 AM

Feels like these words pushing me forward and I'm getting even more excited!

Yeah you're right. It's getting too long for me to decide and this bothers me a lot more than some CA ! I have to choose. Thanks a lot for your help.

 

 

I see...sounds I would be happy for years. I'm not sure if my case will come with a 3" focuser, but anyway seems it's a decent choice - specially for me as a beginner. 

-----

I've read a little bit more, and now the mount is getting back to concern. I'm a little confused with the numbers: Celestron Omni 150R weighs about 16 lbs (as well as Skywatcher 150/750). But this CT 152 seems to weigh around 25 lbs. I thought all should be around a same weight, but seems there'e something that I'm missing.
If all these are correct, then I would have some serious difficulties with its mount.

The problem with listening to mount talk on a site like this that there are lot of great astronomers out there that are fixated with the notion that they want, have to have ‘zero’ movement in their mount while visually observing at very high powers, I am not talking astro photography, a different story with a different set of requirements. My 20lb 127mm refractor is mounted on a Porta II mount and is more than acceptable for my work, it does get a bit shaky at higher powers but settles down fairly quickly and the views are worth every shake. Then again I don’t push my luck with the high powers because I don’t like the dim, muted views in my scopes, my preference, not pushing it to anyone else. A highly stable scope is a great idea but then you get into some pretty heavy mounts, forget just the weight of the scope and some pretty high costs buts its where you want to put your $, I guess ! You may find you don’t like lugging around 40+lb on those quick viewing sessions, those spur of the moment peeks into those black, clear star filled skize ? I have seen photos on here of fellow astronomers who have very light, small diameter scopes mounted on some pretty big and heavy mounts ! Really ! You have to look at the big overall picture, weigh your needs but don’t wait too long like some have done. The choice will, should be yours !  Clear ahead skiys !   PS: As I mentioned if you don’t like your mounts workings you can always move up down the road, then again you might not mind what you see in the dark !


  • dara_t likes this

#20 Cotts

Cotts

    Just Wondering

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 10,432
  • Joined: 10 Oct 2005
  • Loc: Madoc, Ontario

Posted 08 July 2020 - 09:42 AM

I had a CT 152 and it was a terrific performer with some limitations....  On any objects fainter than about 4th-5th magnitude the CA was not visible.  My recollections as a general use scope:

 

By observing category:

 

Planets/lunar.  A great deal of of CA.  But the scope still resolved lots of detail.  The detail was embedded in a purple wash of light..  Great?  No.  But decent enough to clearly show the GRS and festoons in the cloud bands of Jupiter, craterlets on the floor of Plato, cloud bands on Saturn, etc.  After a while your brain sort of 'disregards' the purple noise and allows you to see more than you would think....  6/10  

 

Bright stars:  I'm not sure why anyone would look at bright stars like Vega or Aldebaran in and of themselves...But the CA is brutal!   3/10

 

Double Stars.  This is a very much "it depends" category for the CT 152.  On bright pairs like Albireo  the CA overwhelms  the colour contrast.  On pairs with one bright companion and one faint one - e.g. Delta Cyg - the CA of the brighter component will bury the faint component.  BUT for pairs where both components are 5th mag or fainter, like the vast, vast majority of double stars, the CA gets out of the way entirely and the CT152 displays a text-book diffraction pattern and can split right down to its Rayleigh limit.  Superb!   8/10

 

Wide-field Deep Sky:  Marvellous!!  A 31 Nagler gives a 2.9 degree field at 29x!   Milky Way sweeping, open clusters, dark nebulae, Veil Neb with UHC filter, larger galactic nebulae like M42 etc. are fabulous!  Views not very much distinguishable from APO refractor.. And the scope bears high magnification very well..... 9/10

 

Narrow-field Deep Sky:  Resolves quite a few of the brighter globulars (it is, after all, only a 6-inch scope).  Carbon Stars like T Lyrae showed the deepest red with no CA.... Planetaries with O III filters are great.  Galaxies look the same as in pretty much any other similar-sized scope.  (I got almost 300 of the Herchel 400 with my CT152.....)  8/10   

 

Astrophotography:  Don't laugh!  With narrowband filters, nice monochrome images can be had!  Or three-colour composites with careful re-focusing for each colour filter....  Bit of a PITA but worth the experimentation if you have an EQ mount.  (Mine was on the Discmount DM6 so I'm only relating what i heard of others doing....)

 

Considering you can get one used for maybe $600-$700 it's not a bad choice...

 

I might even look for one....

 

Dave


  • doctordub, stevew and dara_t like this

#21 dara_t

dara_t

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 10 May 2016
  • Loc: I.R.I

Posted 11 July 2020 - 01:31 AM

@LDW42 
@Cotts
Thanks for you detailed answers. These two last replies helped indeed!

 

 

The problem with listening to mount talk on a site like this that there are lot of great astronomers out there that are fixated with the notion that they want, have to have ‘zero’ movement in their mount while visually observing at very high powers.

Well said. It's one of my big questions all the time. "what is a shaky mount?" "what is a GOOD scope?" I'm not a professional, and I guess I can't have clear image of these issues unless I go through various equipment. 

 

 

 

I had a CT 152 and it was a terrific performer with some limitations....  On any objects fainter than about 4th-5th magnitude the CA was not visible.  My recollections as a general use scope:

 

By observing category:

 

Planets/lunar.  A great deal of of CA.  But the scope still resolved lots of detail.  The detail was embedded in a purple wash of light..  Great?  No.  But decent enough to clearly show the GRS and festoons in the cloud bands of Jupiter, craterlets on the floor of Plato, cloud bands on Saturn, etc.  After a while your brain sort of 'disregards' the purple noise and allows you to see more than you would think....  6/10  

 

Bright stars:  I'm not sure why anyone would look at bright stars like Vega or Aldebaran in and of themselves...But the CA is brutal!   3/10

 

Double Stars.  This is a very much "it depends" category for the CT 152.  On bright pairs like Albireo  the CA overwhelms  the colour contrast.  On pairs with one bright companion and one faint one - e.g. Delta Cyg - the CA of the brighter component will bury the faint component.  BUT for pairs where both components are 5th mag or fainter, like the vast, vast majority of double stars, the CA gets out of the way entirely and the CT152 displays a text-book diffraction pattern and can split right down to its Rayleigh limit.  Superb!   8/10

 

Wide-field Deep Sky:  Marvellous!!  A 31 Nagler gives a 2.9 degree field at 29x!   Milky Way sweeping, open clusters, dark nebulae, Veil Neb with UHC filter, larger galactic nebulae like M42 etc. are fabulous!  Views not very much distinguishable from APO refractor.. And the scope bears high magnification very well..... 9/10

 

Narrow-field Deep Sky:  Resolves quite a few of the brighter globulars (it is, after all, only a 6-inch scope).  Carbon Stars like T Lyrae showed the deepest red with no CA.... Planetaries with O III filters are great.  Galaxies look the same as in pretty much any other similar-sized scope.  (I got almost 300 of the Herchel 400 with my CT152.....)  8/10   

 

Astrophotography:  Don't laugh!  With narrowband filters, nice monochrome images can be had!  Or three-colour composites with careful re-focusing for each colour filter....  Bit of a PITA but worth the experimentation if you have an EQ mount.  (Mine was on the Discmount DM6 so I'm only relating what i heard of others doing....)

 

Considering you can get one used for maybe $600-$700 it's not a bad choice...

 

I might even look for one....

 

Dave

Tha's some decent valuable information. Thanks a lot!

----

 

To sum up, I guess I might go for that CT152. Probably I would be happy for couple of years, and then I would think of a better scope.

Thanks all for your kindness and help everyone!



#22 LDW47

LDW47

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,157
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2012
  • Loc: North Bay,Ontario,Canada

Posted 11 July 2020 - 07:38 AM

@LDW42 
@Cotts
Thanks for you detailed answers. These two last replies helped indeed!

 

 

Well said. It's one of my big questions all the time. "what is a shaky mount?" "what is a GOOD scope?" I'm not a professional, and I guess I can't have clear image of these issues unless I go through various equipment. 

 

 

 

Tha's some decent valuable information. Thanks a lot!

----

 

To sum up, I guess I might go for that CT152. Probably I would be happy for couple of years, and then I would think of a better scope.

Thanks all for your kindness and help everyone!

Or it may last you a lifetime but there is a certain sickness that can go with this great hobby and that is the hunger that comes with it for another scope, another eyepiece, another mount etc., always something more to go with everything else, lol ! Enjoy what you have !  Clear Skies and good luck, I am sure we will hear from you again during the journey !


  • dara_t likes this

#23 dara_t

dara_t

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 10 May 2016
  • Loc: I.R.I

Posted 13 July 2020 - 11:46 PM

Or it may last you a lifetime but there is a certain sickness that can go with this great hobby and that is the hunger that comes with it for another scope, another eyepiece, another mount etc., always something more to go with everything else, lol ! Enjoy what you have !  Clear Skies and good luck, I am sure we will hear from you again during the journey !

Haha yeah...I think it's like kind of an addiction and it's never gonna end. Who cares, we love this addiction! tongue2.gif

Thanks for your help. Looking forward to get more involved here on CN. Clear skies!


  • LDW47 and Echolight like this

#24 Echolight

Echolight

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 616
  • Joined: 01 May 2020
  • Loc: Texas

Posted 14 July 2020 - 10:55 AM

Get the refractor. No muss no fuss.

 

I have a bigger telescope on a similar class mount, the C6R 6 inch f8 achro on an AVX. The mount handles it fine.

Although I haven't had it out in a windstorm. And it is about 80 pounds fully assembled with 24 pounds of counterweights. So not easy to move around. And correct balancing is paramount.

 

As far as CA, my achro a little longer. So not sure how different it will be. But about two thirds of the population warned me about everything being colorful. And at least one said it made him nauseous! But I bet about two thirds of those two thirds still have an achromat in their stable.

 

Personally, I have not been negatively affected by CA if it is even there. Although it must be there because there have been dozens of scientific calculations proving it is, even without an eyeball to an eyepiece on my scope.

 

Still, it is a general purpose scope for me. Not a one trick pony by any means. I view EVERYTHING through it!


Edited by Echolight, 14 July 2020 - 10:57 AM.

  • dara_t likes this

#25 dara_t

dara_t

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 19
  • Joined: 10 May 2016
  • Loc: I.R.I

Posted 16 July 2020 - 12:12 AM

I have a bigger telescope on a similar class mount, the C6R 6 inch f8 achro on an AVX. The mount handles it fine.

Although I haven't had it out in a windstorm. And it is about 80 pounds fully assembled with 24 pounds of counterweights. So not easy to move around. And correct balancing is paramount.

 

So you mean EQ5 and AVX is on the same class? I was wrong then - I thought EQ5 is something like CG-4 . 

 

 

 

But about two thirds of the population warned me about everything being colorful. And at least one said it made him nauseous! But I bet about two thirds of those two thirds still have an achromat in their stable.

 

Personally, I have not been negatively affected by CA if it is even there. Although it must be there because there have been dozens of scientific calculations proving it is, even without an eyeball to an eyepiece on my scope.

 

Nice one! grin.gif

If you do know it's gonna be some CA in the scope you use, then you shouldn't be surprised. I was just wondering how bad it would be, but from all the decent answers I kindly got here, seems it's not such a big problem - at least to my untrained eyes. I'll find a way to deal with it!




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