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

Vintage Telescope Finds

  • Please log in to reply
2589 replies to this topic

#2576 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 28,073
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 23 September 2022 - 02:34 PM

Looks just like the one i had.



#2577 clamchip

clamchip

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,234
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Seattle

Posted 23 September 2022 - 02:39 PM

Celestron plugged the unused fork mount holes with screws.

This scope is from the Vixen years, when accessories came from Vixen, good stuff.

Soft tip screws for the finder, it's about time. These were good years. Celestron

also introduced Fluorite refractors. The Vixen connection was a smart move.

 

IMG_0986.jpg

IMG_0981.jpg

IMG_0988.jpg


  • tim53, jim kuhns, steve t and 2 others like this

#2578 clamchip

clamchip

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,234
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Seattle

Posted 23 September 2022 - 02:43 PM

It's in  great condition but something's really wrong with the optics, I'm hoping its just

collimation crutch.gif fingerscrossed.gif 

Ah the sun just came out I'm going to find a glint so I can check collimation.

 

Robert


Edited by clamchip, 23 September 2022 - 02:45 PM.

  • steve t likes this

#2579 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 28,073
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 23 September 2022 - 04:30 PM

Celestron plugged the unused fork mount holes with screws.

This scope is from the Vixen years, when accessories came from Vixen, good stuff.

Soft tip screws for the finder, it's about time. These were good years. Celestron

also introduced Fluorite refractors. The Vixen connection was a smart move.

 

attachicon.gifIMG_0986.jpg

attachicon.gifIMG_0981.jpg

attachicon.gifIMG_0988.jpg

Only good scopes they sold really was from Vixen. I mean if you got real lucky you would luck into a good SCT. But out of around 60 SCT's only 5 i would call very good.


  • steve t likes this

#2580 JamesMcClain

JamesMcClain

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2022

Posted 25 September 2022 - 09:00 PM

Hello,

 

This is my first post here and this is also my first telescope purchase.  I am having trouble finding information on this telescope and am hoping you all may be able to shed some light on what I have. I am new to this so I would also appreciate any suggestions on things I should check over and look at so I can keep it on top shape.

 

The things I know is it says Bausch and Lomb Optical Co. Rochester NY.  Near the eye piece it has a number 1012, which is the only number I have found on it.

 

It is about 68" long end to end and the tube is about 5" in diameter.

 

I do not know for sure, but I suspect it came out of the observatory at the local college.

 

It did not come with a tripod or mount, so advice on what to look for would also be appreciated.

 

Thank you for any help you can offer.  I'm looking forward to seeing how it can perform.

Attached Thumbnails

  • PXL_20220923_201040865~2.jpg
  • PXL_20220923_201122481~2.jpg
  • PXL_20220923_201125396~2.jpg

  • Jon Isaacs, tim53, jim kuhns and 11 others like this

#2581 sdedalus83

sdedalus83

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,364
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2016

Posted 25 September 2022 - 09:21 PM

That’s certainly an impressive first scope. Finding the original mount is going to be a major challenge. Look up Berry mounts for examples of how people typically get large refractors up and running without spending an arm and a leg.

 

I found this, maybe Dave Trott can help you out.

Attached Thumbnails

  • 38832188-C41A-4BFC-A4B4-600535117F4F.jpeg

  • tim53, jim kuhns, steve t and 1 other like this

#2582 RichA

RichA

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,163
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Toronto, Canada

Posted 26 September 2022 - 01:35 AM

Only good scopes they sold really was from Vixen. I mean if you got real lucky you would luck into a good SCT. But out of around 60 SCT's only 5 i would call very good.

Well, variations impact all mass-market scopes, they vary from sometimes (not often) unacceptable to ok to good.  But in my opinion, most people fail to get the most out of scopes over six inches aperture because they don't observe at the best times and they don't allow the scope to really reach acclimation.   Many who migrate from small refractors may have read what is needed to maximize larger scope performance but don't follow-through to get it.  I've often looked though SCTs and noticed they're not in collimation.  Plus there are things about  the views through larger scopes that people fail to understand.  They see pristine little star images in refractors, and assume the same should be true of a large scope.  However, with the larger scope you've got larger exit pupils at the same power as a smaller scope which emphasize the errors in the eye lens and the star images are much brighter.  What the result is is star images are bloated in appearance.  But if you have a properly collimated scope, the seeing is excellent and you compare them, you'll see the 8 inch SCT you'll see they are 1/2 the diameter of a 4 inch refractor.  EXCEPT for the fact the first and second diffraction rings are a lot brighter.  So there is a lot to consider when moving up in size to an SCT.


  • steve t likes this

#2583 RichA

RichA

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6,163
  • Joined: 03 Jun 2010
  • Loc: Toronto, Canada

Posted 26 September 2022 - 01:53 AM

I've been wondering why camera lenses have so much better CA, despite unreasonably fast optics (by telescope standards).

 

although I suppose its all easy when you use 5 or 6+ elements,

 

It was only recently that camera lenses have achieved low CA.  Lenses from the 1990s and earlier (except for some high priced units) have noticeable CA (and spherical aberration) when used wide open.  Newer lenses incorporate a lot of ED glass and some Canon lenses have more than one fluorite element.  Also, a lot of CA (and other aberrations) are removed by in-camera firmware.  Having said that, lenses are used at prime focus or at best, double that unlike telescopes which operate at much higher magnifications visually.


  • Jon Isaacs and Terra Nova like this

#2584 sdedalus83

sdedalus83

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,364
  • Joined: 30 Oct 2016

Posted 26 September 2022 - 02:30 PM

When I was 11 or so, I saw what still sticks out in memory as the coolest scope ever - the white tube C5+ with a declination drive and Astromaster DSCs. Nearly 30 years later I finally picked one up. The dsc is an old white Sky Commander and the dec drive and hand controller appear to be JMI, so it’s not completely original. The encoders do appear to be 8000 tic and the whole setup looks extremely well cared for. It might get here in time for a weekend shakedown.


  • steve t, Terra Nova and AstroKerr like this

#2585 39cross

39cross

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 425
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2017
  • Loc: Beverly, MA

Posted 27 September 2022 - 08:24 AM

...But if you have a properly collimated scope, the seeing is excellent and you compare them, you'll see the 8 inch SCT you'll see they are 1/2 the diameter of a 4 inch refractor. 

Hi Rich, I thought what you wrote was very interesting, but I'm not sure what is 1/2 the diameter, you lost me there - what is it you were referring to?

 

I recently acquired an SP C8 (very much like Clamchip's a few posts above) that I have wondered about the quality of  the optics.  The inside focus image was lopsided.  However, the other night after several hours both the inside and outside of focus images had concentric rings, so it must have been an acclimation issue.  Collimation seems pretty much dead on.  But even after the scope was fully cooled, and bright stars were tighter (less bloated), close-ish doubles were still not very nicely separated.  My ED81S has no problem with these same doubles, like the 4" you mention as a yardstick.

 

So if I understand what you wrote above, perhaps it's an issue with my eyes with the 8" SCT.



#2586 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 28,073
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 27 September 2022 - 08:49 AM

Well, variations impact all mass-market scopes, they vary from sometimes (not often) unacceptable to ok to good.  But in my opinion, most people fail to get the most out of scopes over six inches aperture because they don't observe at the best times and they don't allow the scope to really reach acclimation.   Many who migrate from small refractors may have read what is needed to maximize larger scope performance but don't follow-through to get it.  I've often looked though SCTs and noticed they're not in collimation.  Plus there are things about  the views through larger scopes that people fail to understand.  They see pristine little star images in refractors, and assume the same should be true of a large scope.  However, with the larger scope you've got larger exit pupils at the same power as a smaller scope which emphasize the errors in the eye lens and the star images are much brighter.  What the result is is star images are bloated in appearance.  But if you have a properly collimated scope, the seeing is excellent and you compare them, you'll see the 8 inch SCT you'll see they are 1/2 the diameter of a 4 inch refractor.  EXCEPT for the fact the first and second diffraction rings are a lot brighter.  So there is a lot to consider when moving up in size to an SCT.

 A good Newt is BAM, dead sharp planets in my super steady seeing.  Most every SCT is just mush in and out of focus and some were just mush no matter what i did. That one freaky sharp 1984 C8 was as close to a 8" F/8 newt you could wish for on the planets.  500X on Jupiter and it asked for more. Last 2004 made C8 was a total mush dog. My friend got a mint 1982 C11 back in 1999 and it was about worst SCT ever. We did every trick in the book and did no good.   My orange C14 was no good as well.  It's a lotto buying SCT from any year.



#2587 JamesMcClain

JamesMcClain

    Lift Off

  • -----
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2022

Posted 27 September 2022 - 11:03 PM

Hello,

 

This is my first post here and this is also my first telescope purchase.  I am having trouble finding information on this telescope and am hoping you all may be able to shed some light on what I have. I am new to this so I would also appreciate any suggestions on things I should check over and look at so I can keep it on top shape.

 

The things I know is it says Bausch and Lomb Optical Co. Rochester NY.  Near the eye piece it has a number 1012, which is the only number I have found on it.

 

It is about 68" long end to end and the tube is about 5" in diameter.

 

I do not know for sure, but I suspect it came out of the observatory at the local college.

 

It did not come with a tripod or mount, so advice on what to look for would also be appreciated.

 

Thank you for any help you can offer.  I'm looking forward to seeing how it can perform.

I'm now suspecting it may be a 4" aperture, which makes more sense since no one seems to have actually seen a 5" other than special order mentions in the catalog. 

 

I pulled the shade off tonight and the OD of the pipe is just under 5", but the actual visible area of the lense is pretty close to 4".  Attached are 2 pics. Any thoughts?

 

I am also in the works of getting this into an EQ mount.  I may need to source some 1-1/8" eyepieces, which look like they'll be hard to find, or convert to a more normal size.  I only have a fully functioning 1" one right now.  My .5" is missing parts and 1.25" is missing entirely.

 

Thanks

Attached Thumbnails

  • PXL_20220928_034307705.jpg
  • PXL_20220928_034344093.jpg

  • jim kuhns, steve t and Bomber Bob like this

#2588 rob1986

rob1986

    Apollo

  • -----
  • Posts: 1,273
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2020

Posted 27 September 2022 - 11:03 PM

It was only recently that camera lenses have achieved low CA.  Lenses from the 1990s and earlier (except for some high priced units) have noticeable CA (and spherical aberration) when used wide open.  Newer lenses incorporate a lot of ED glass and some Canon lenses have more than one fluorite element.  Also, a lot of CA (and other aberrations) are removed by in-camera firmware.  Having said that, lenses are used at prime focus or at best, double that unlike telescopes which operate at much higher magnifications visually.

Dad had a nice olympus for years and years. But this was also an slr. Nothing digital about it as far as i know.



#2589 Kasmos

Kasmos

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,213
  • Joined: 19 Aug 2015
  • Loc: So Cal

Posted Yesterday, 01:47 AM

I'm now suspecting it may be a 4" aperture, which makes more sense since no one seems to have actually seen a 5" other than special order mentions in the catalog. 

 

I pulled the shade off tonight and the OD of the pipe is just under 5", but the actual visible area of the lense is pretty close to 4".  Attached are 2 pics. Any thoughts?

 

I am also in the works of getting this into an EQ mount.  I may need to source some 1-1/8" eyepieces, which look like they'll be hard to find, or convert to a more normal size.  I only have a fully functioning 1" one right now.  My .5" is missing parts and 1.25" is missing entirely.

 

Thanks

There seems to be very few B&L refractors out there with most being 3 inchers. I could only find referrences to a handful of 4"s on Cloudy Nights. 

 

Here's a similar Alt-Az mounted example

https://www.cloudyni...efractor-1920s/

 

 

and a EQ mounted example

https://www.cloudyni...50-bausch-lomb/

 

It's kind of a handful for a first scope and you will probably need to get an adaptor made to use modern and common 1.25" eyepieces. They will likely both cost less and be better to use.

 

Perhaps you can contact the members of the above telescopes for help.



#2590 Russell Smith

Russell Smith

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,545
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2017
  • Loc: 76645

Posted Yesterday, 10:58 AM

There seems to be very few B&L refractors out there with most being 3 inchers. I could only find referrences to a handful of 4"s on Cloudy Nights. 

 

Here's a similar Alt-Az mounted example

https://www.cloudyni...efractor-1920s/

 

 

and a EQ mounted example

https://www.cloudyni...50-bausch-lomb/

 

It's kind of a handful for a first scope and you will probably need to get an adaptor made to use modern and common 1.25" eyepieces. They will likely both cost less and be better to use.

 

Perhaps you can contact the members of the above telescopes for help.

Or, you could just send it to me.😁 

Welcome to cloudy nights. 


Edited by Russell Smith, Yesterday, 11:00 AM.



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