68 replies to this topic

[LukaszLu]

After cleaning the finder and fixing the finder lens cell falling out due to the damaged thread, I could finally put everything back together.

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 

[LukaszLu]

Some more...

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 
• 

[clamchip]

That's the best 60mm mount I've ever used.

 

Robert

[LukaszLu]

In terms of construction, the mount is very similar to Kenko TA 910. The care for aesthetic reasons, however, resulted in some compromises in the sphere of functionality. I mean giving all the plastic knobs the same form, even though they have a different function, which leads to confusion in the dark. I happened to grab the cradle mounting bolt to unlock one of the axles ...

 

The knobs that allow you to use slow motion without using slow motion controls are super convenient in Kenko. It seems that this solution has been abandoned here for the sake of an elegant, simple form. The same applies to the tilt locking screw for the entire mount. To minimize its appearance, an awkward hex key has been used.

 

These are all minor issues, but all of them together make the Kenko mount still my favorite when it comes to comfort.

[photiost]

Looks great !!

[LukaszLu]

Thanks Frank, I also like it very much. I am a professional (graphic) designer myself, so I respect the fact that someone tried to make design an asset - it was not very common in early 1970s. Personally, however, I believe that good design is one that is subordinate to function, and the better it is done, the better the aesthetic effect. Bending a function to improve aesthetics is a bit of the opposite. Among the "classic" astro-products, however, it is an absolute rarity. Design as a weapon in the competitive struggle between telescope manufacturers began to be reached in earnest twenty-something years later. The more valuable this example is for me as a designer!

 

Yesterday I cleaned the included Barlow lens and looked at the Moon with a magnification of over 180x. The image remained very precise, the details on the slopes and inside Aristarchus were beautifully visible. Barlow lens itself is terrible of course - as is usually the case with those 0.96 '' long-tube barlows. It gives such a glow in the center of the field of view that the image is only viewed near its edges :-)

 

I have failed to photograph Newton's rings. They are quite delicate now, maybe 1/3 the diameter of the lens, similar in size to these examples:

https://www.cloudyni...7-newton-rings/

https://www.cloudyni...-c102-achromat/

Edited by LukaszLu, 27 March 2021 - 06:35 AM.

[clamchip]

I no longer own this made by Carton for Swift version.

The rock steadiness, even with aluminum legs, and best of all the RA flex drive

was so extremely precise tracking and keeping the object centered in the field

was why this was my favorite of all 60mm class mounts.

Unfortunately we sometimes don't find how good something is until it's gone! 

Robert 

 

Edited by clamchip, 27 March 2021 - 10:53 AM.

[LukaszLu]

It is a pity - beautiful, unusual color of the tube! Robert, will you reveal how many specimens are left in your collection? I have already admired dozens of your photos, almost every time you perform with a different, amazing telescope. Where do you exhibit them all?

Edited by LukaszLu, 27 March 2021 - 11:19 AM.

[clamchip]

It is a pity - beautiful, unusual color of the tube! Robert, will you reveal how many specimens are left in your collection? I have already admired dozens of your photos, almost every time you perform with a different, amazing telescope. Where do you exhibit them all?

All is not as it appears!

My collection is basically clamchipped craig's list rescues!

Most are not functional by themselves, but with the help of the other scopes they can be made

to work. I keep careful records of where the parts belong, and I'm always on the look out for

parts to finish what I have, this is the fun of the hobby!

I love each and every one of them.

 

Robert

[LukaszLu]

(...)  I'm always on the look out for

parts to finish what I have, this is the fun of the hobby!

I love each and every one of them.

 

This means that you must have a heart as big as the future exhibition space - so that you can enjoy the view of all these jewels! :-)

[LukaszLu]

I've just made first Moon shot with this scope and it seems it performs quite good. here it is: https://www.cloudyni...imaging/page-19

[oldmanastro]

I've just made first Moon shot with this scope and it seems it performs quite good. here it is: https://www.cloudyni...imaging/page-19

A really nice moon shot. These Cartons perform very well. I have two Carton objective based refractors a 60mm f/17 and  100mm f/13 . They perform excellent on the moon and planets. Star tests show that the optics are very good too. Your Carton looks great.

[LukaszLu]

Thank you very much. Recently, I came across the 60/1000 mm version. Unfortunately, I could not buy it, but I am very curious how such F16.6 works. This telescope was also produced in a version with a focal length of 710 mm - I tried to buy one too, but unfortunately someone else was faster ...

Edited by LukaszLu, 16 June 2021 - 03:09 AM.

[oldmanastro]

I got the 60mm f/17 Carton objective and cell from Sheldon Faworski some years ago and assembled a "Carton" telescope. If my memory doesn't fail me, the tube was also from Sheldon. I added a 1.25" focuser and dew shield. The optics on this one provide excellent star tests with green filter and sharp images of the moon and planets. The 100mm f/13 Carton lenses came from the same source. The tube and focuser were from Crawmach. This one is my long cannon. The optics are just as good as those of the 60mm f/17. I think this was 10 years ago or more. Here's the 60mm on the Sears 6305 equatorial mount and the 100mm on the Astroview mount.

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 

[LukaszLu]

WOW - 100mm Carton sounds very tempting! I have read a review of this "fast" 60/710 model, in which the author claimed that the optics were much better than in the Unitron model he compared (I'm not sure which Unitron model he meant, I don't know any 60 mm Unitron model with a focal length near 700 mm).

 

Unfortunately, the optics of these 60 mm telescopes also have a disadvantage, which is the economical approach of the manufacturer to anti-reflective layers. Compared to the fully coated optics, my lens is simply quite dark, and I found the same remarks in the mentioned review. The image is precise, but worse when it comes to bringing out subtle details in the shadow. It is difficult to understand such savings in the case of astronomical equipment, but the same applies to similar Kenko lenses ...

Edited by LukaszLu, 16 June 2021 - 04:39 AM.

[GreyDay]

Compared to the fully coated optics, my lens is simply quite dark, and I found the same remarks in the mentioned review. The image is precise, but worse when it comes to bringing out subtle details in the shadow. It is difficult to understand such savings in the case of astronomical equipment, but the same applies to similar Kenko lenses ...

 

I've found coatings on 60mm objectives to be quite variable, some are coated on all four surfaces and others just on the outer two. One overiding truth is no amount of coating will make a poorly polished glass outperform a well polished glass.

 

I've never trusted reviews as there are usually too many variables unless the scopes are side by side using the same diagonal, ep's etc. Some differences in performance can be extremely subtle and theres always the possibility of having a poor example of any particular brand/model of scope.
 

 

[LukaszLu]

 

I've never trusted reviews as there are usually too many variables unless the scopes are side by side using the same diagonal, ep's etc. Some differences in performance can be extremely subtle and theres always the possibility of having a poor example of any particular brand/model of scope.
 

I will say more - I do not trust my own tests too much, even if I place several instruments next to me. I often find that each time I look, I get a different impression, especially if the eyepiece is replaced. This is understandable because even when terrestial tests are carried out, the influence of air movements and even the position of the eye in relation to the eyepiece is enormous. In fact, micro-moments of very good visibility are assessed, while the rest of the time spent with eyepiece is waiting for those moments.

 

Of course, I always try to find a subtle detail and evaluate its visibility. After a longer time, it can be determined objectively if and to what extent it is visible in individual telescopes. However, I keep a considerable distance from such tests.

 

Probably there will be supporters of objective testing methods, but I have to admit that I'm skeptical here as well. I recently described my test of several 60mm refractors in which the Unitron 114 clearly won, despite the fact that its broken lens would not pass any objective test, it was not even able to show the correct Newton rings, it showed an impossible to completely correct coma, it gave secondary reflections etc... however, the detail was the most perfect!

Edited by LukaszLu, 16 June 2021 - 04:29 AM.

[oldmanastro]

Reading about the coatings in classic objective lenses I became curious and checked up some of my own. On two 60mm Towa objectives, an f/11 and f/15, I found only one surface coated with MgF2. It was the back of the flint element. The concave side was uncoated. There was no coating on the crown element surfaces at all in either objective. I found no indication of coating de-lamination which would indicate that these surfaces were ever coated. An interesting find.

Edited by oldmanastro, 17 June 2021 - 08:58 AM.

[LukaszLu]

This seems to be the norm, although it is worth saying that Towa seems to be one of those producers who save the least on anti-reflective coatings. I remember the shock of comparing the basic Towa 60/700 model with the Vixen 60/800 refractor. I was convinced that Vixen would crush a typical 'department store' Towa in competition. It turned out that the image from Towa was definitely more precise and much brighter. As it turned out, the Vixen also only had partially coated lens elements ...

Edited by LukaszLu, 16 June 2021 - 04:40 PM.

[GreyDay]

 I remember the shock of comparing the basic Towa 60/700 model with the Vixen 60/800 refractor. I was convinced that Vixen would crush a typical 'department store' Towa in competition. It turned out that the image from Towa was definitely more precise and much brighter.

Towa are a bit of an anomaly when it comes to quality. Older varieties with metal focuser knobs tend to be better than the newer plastic versions. Though saying that i haven't found a 60x700 that has been a real "performer" and i've had about a dozen.

 

It's worth noting that they're also the most consistent, when i was slimming down my collection i had five 60x700 ota's side by side and couldn't see any differences in performance. i use my 60x1000 Carton as a benchmark to judge 60mm scopes as i consider it a "good" scope in it's own right.

[LukaszLu]

The strange thing is that this Towa copy I am talking about has plastic knobs and a round JTII sticker, which indicates the end of the 70's. And yet this is definitely one of my best performers. I think I will be tempted to have a photo session with Towa in the role of the camera operator and the Moon in the lead role :-)

[apfever]

Here is a 60mm f=910mm  F/15.2 Carton lens.  The spacers are all single slab pieces 0.005" thick. Each spacer is precision placed and glued to the flint. I find no reason to believe this has ever been taken apart. I used a finer loupe for microclose examination.  Beautiful bevel, clean contacts from the micro dot of adhesive, no markings on the edges. The crown was lightly tacked to the spacers due to time and came off during careful measurement with a feeler guage. My 0.003" thick crowbar did not apply damaging contact. Very clean interior faces and this will go back together as is with some minor attention to the outside faces. 

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 
• 

[apfever]

These pictures are oriented the same for direct comparison. The first shows newton's rings as found, the second shows newton's rings with the addition of 0.0005" to the spacer on the right.  

Due to these not being super easy pictures to take, the second one has been highlighted with red dots to show the original center of the rings (on right) and the center of the rings with the extra spacer (left red circle). 

 

These are very typical from several objectives I've checked like this, across many different makes and models. I can't touch Dave for experience but I've checked dozens.

Measurement characteristics have always been very consistant. Stability of the rings center is very stable against pushing and prodding, AND rotation of the Crown.  This means concentric glass with the shift in centers due to spacer thickness. I've also found offset errors anywhere in the first 50% of radius to be quite common and the average to be about 25% radius. I have doubts about this amount of shift being any visual concern.

The shift in centers due to the addition of 0.0005" to one spacer remains very consistand at a about "a whopping jump across the lens".  I've added this thickness to other lens (easy test) and the center of Newton's Rings jumping 1/3 to 1/2 the Diameter is easy to do.   

 

I use a diffused laser with a black background and variable ambient light. Moving the laser or your eye does not affect the ring positions. An installed lens is an ideal environment with blackened interior. The laser will easilly illuminate rings to the edges of the objective. 

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 

[apfever]

It is missing a lot of stuff and has fatal issues that I think can be overcome in a practical manner.  Questions welcome before I put it away, it will not be on a top burner yet. The mount moves smooth, controls work, grease is typical slow motion stuff now. Many parts abused, many parts like new, the light works perfect and looks like it was never touched.  

 

That is all for here unless asked. I look forward to checking back. 

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 
• 

[Kasmos]

Towa are a bit of an anomaly when it comes to quality. Older varieties with metal focuser knobs tend to be better than the newer plastic versions. Though saying that i haven't found a 60x700 that has been a real "performer" and i've had about a dozen.

 

It's worth noting that they're also the most consistent, when i was slimming down my collection i had five 60x700 ota's side by side and couldn't see any differences in performance. i use my 60x1000 Carton as a benchmark to judge 60mm scopes as i consider it a "good" scope in it's own right.

I have a 60/700mm 9TE from IIRC '63. It was fairly sharp but had lots of disturbing color (purple & yellow) that showed up in daylight in the background and foreground out of focus parts of the images. I thought it needed a new objective until I replaced the metal ring spacer with three .003 foil spacers and it improved the CA considerably. My previous bias made it hard to admit that it might be slightly sharper than both of my SYW Mayflower 814s and my 60/700 Manon. The first time I looked at Jupiter it wowed me. Up to this, I was a Towa doubter.

 

That said, as complete kits the others have far superior focusers, mounts, and don't require tweaks to bring out great performance.