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

I want a 6 inch refractor. What can I see?

  • Please log in to reply
127 replies to this topic

#51 25585

25585

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 13,045
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the SW UK. Dark end of the street.

Posted 18 April 2021 - 04:45 AM

Go down to 140mm & its still a lump, but easier to handle & less expensive mounts. 140mm is where I would stop.


  • Heywood and rerun like this

#52 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 22,738
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 18 April 2021 - 05:51 AM

A 120mm Sky watcher ED was grab and go to me on a GP mount. Once i went to a 150mm ED it was whole new world in size and size of mount needed.  I am a planet viewer only so a big super well made Newt is my choice.

 

Now with my 18" Obsession i can roll it out in a mins time and be viewing without lifting a thing. And with my super steady seeing a 18" mirror is gonna beat a smaller APO- ED everytime.


Edited by CHASLX200, 18 April 2021 - 05:54 AM.

  • jjack's, dagadget, RubyCruxis and 1 other like this

#53 dagadget

dagadget

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,034
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Avon Park, Florida

Posted 18 April 2021 - 08:20 AM

A 120mm Sky watcher ED was grab and go to me on a GP mount. Once i went to a 150mm ED it was whole new world in size and size of mount needed.  I am a planet viewer only so a big super well made Newt is my choice.

 

Now with my 18" Obsession i can roll it out in a mins time and be viewing without lifting a thing. And with my super steady seeing a 18" mirror is gonna beat a smaller APO- ED everytime.

You have had 6 inch refractors before as we chatted about comparing them. I still have the AT 152EDT and I have found that it is easier to mount than my previous AT 130EDT because of the top Vixen handle it has on it. But Aperture is still King and that 18 inch Monster of yours on great seeing nights is certainly impossible to beat. 

 

at152gem45.jpg


Edited by dagadget, 18 April 2021 - 08:20 AM.

  • BRCoz, Bomber Bob, STE411 and 2 others like this

#54 teashea

teashea

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,520
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2020
  • Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Posted 18 April 2021 - 10:07 AM

I like refractors. I don't want to mess up with a big Newtonian, so I am wondering if a six inch refractor could still give some nice views, also on deep sky. What about clusters and nebulae? What can I expect to see? Any experiences there? I could reach a bortle 4 sky in 30min and bortle 3 in one hour.. otherwise I am in a city pulluted area..
Thanks

That would be a pretty heavy telescope.  You need to consider the mount.  The mount is as important as the telescope and will cost about as much for a good one.  Do not make the mistake of undermounting your telescope.  


  • jjack's and 25585 like this

#55 teashea

teashea

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,520
  • Joined: 20 Dec 2020
  • Loc: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA

Posted 18 April 2021 - 10:11 AM

An achromatic six inch refractor does not make much sense to me.  If you are going to get a telescope of that size it would not be cost effective to get a cheap telescope.  You would be better off with a different type of telescope or a small high quality refractor.  The mount for a cheap six inch is going to as much as for a good six inch.  You are going to need a high quality mount regardless of the quality of the telescope.


  • Joe Bergeron, Astrojensen, jjack's and 2 others like this

#56 2112_Mike

2112_Mike

    Explorer 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 73
  • Joined: 24 May 2009
  • Loc: Kuna Idaho

Posted 18 April 2021 - 10:26 AM

My 6"  F/5.9  achro works fine on my current Celestron AVX, visual use only of course.  I had it mounted on a Meade LX75 for several years and it worked fine as well.  My 6" actually weighs less than my 130mm triplet.  I use a red dot finder on the 6".  

Short tube and very manageable. My tube weighs ~20 pounds not including 2" diagonal or eyepiece. Depending on how you store your mount it can be as little as three trips to set it up.  

 

As has already been mentioned, the views through a large refractor are different in a great way. Considering the portability of a scope this size, matched with a couple of nice high performance 2" eyepieces the views are hard to beat.

 

I will mention that my 130mm - to me - performs better all around and does seem to reveal images of DSO's very close to par with the 6" achro with the added advantage of planet and moon viewing.  But at a higher cost due to the lens deign.

If the 130mm was my only scope forever I believe I would be totally happy.


  • kmparsons, weis14, fsphotography and 2 others like this

#57 StarAlert

StarAlert

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,274
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2019

Posted 18 April 2021 - 10:43 AM

An achromatic six inch refractor does not make much sense to me.  If you are going to get a telescope of that size it would not be cost effective to get a cheap telescope.  You would be better off with a different type of telescope or a small high quality refractor.  The mount for a cheap six inch is going to as much as for a good six inch.  You are going to need a high quality mount regardless of the quality of the telescope.

 

This gave me a good chuckle, Thomas.

Exactly how many 60mm-120mm Taks have you purchased in the past four months? Eight? Ten? Twelve?

I've lost count. lol.gif


  • doctordub, 25585 and teashea like this

#58 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,039
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 18 April 2021 - 10:44 AM

I'll second that you can use a 6" doublet (achro or ED) on an AVX. It's a little squirrely but not bad enough to drive me to purchase another mount yet.


  • Heywood and Steve Cox like this

#59 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14,125
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 18 April 2021 - 11:30 AM

I'll second that you can use a 6" doublet (achro or ED) on an AVX. It's a little squirrely but not bad enough to drive me to purchase another mount yet.

Personally, I would strongly suggest getting a much stronger mount. One of the main attractions of a 6" refractor, especially an ED, is that it usually allows one to operate at much higher magnifications than reflectors typically do. I very regularly use 255x on my 6" APM and often 510x. I've used over 700x on some planetary nebulae and even on M13, "just for the heck of it" and the image held up remarkably well. 

 

My C8 would very rarely allow me to get a sharp view at 255x, even though it actually had good optics, but the 6" APM can do it on almost any evening. This means I can resolve clusters in the 6" APM, that were just fuzzballs in the C8, despite the latter giving brighter views. Loved the compactness of the C8, though.

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark


  • doctordub, payner, Bomber Bob and 3 others like this

#60 John Fitzgerald

John Fitzgerald

    In Focus

  • *****
  • Posts: 9,813
  • Joined: 04 Jan 2004
  • Loc: near Elkins and Pettigrew, Arkansas

Posted 18 April 2021 - 11:44 AM

The minimum mount for a 6 inch refractor, in my opinion, is an EQ6  or equivalent.  Some triplets need larger than that.  In my experience, for my triplet, the EQ6 was a bit light, so obtained a G11.   I'm a visual observer, so the triplet doesn't have any guide scopes and heavy cameras, only a 50mm RA finder, a lightweight laser sight, and four place turret.


  • teashea likes this

#61 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,039
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 18 April 2021 - 01:18 PM

I've used my Skywatcher 150ED over 300x on that AVX. Yeah, it can be a tiny bit tricky to focus, but you can do it. You'll want to use anti-vibration pads.

 

Question to the doubters; have you actually tried placing a 6" refractor on an AVX? I find that the people who say an AVX cannot handle a 6" refractor (and an 10-11" SCT, for that matter) rarely have actually tried to do it. I use my AVX for both the 6" refractor and my 10" Meade SCT and it's acceptable for both. I do want a larger mount for the refractor someday (the AVX works well enough to enjoy but is not optimal) but honestly it's totally fine for the 10" SCT, something people told me it would be totally unable to do.


Edited by Mitrovarr, 18 April 2021 - 01:19 PM.

  • dnrmilspec likes this

#62 payner

payner

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,539
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2007
  • Loc: Bluegrass & SW Appalachian Regions, Kentucky

Posted 18 April 2021 - 01:28 PM

I'm going to echo what has been said, your mount for any telescope is critical. I'd venture every bit as critical as the quality of telescope. It is your telescope's foundation and its sometimes joked that something is over mounted, but really that is the way to go, a skosh extra capacity. The lightest 6-in refractor I have owned was a Tak FS-152SV. I would not have been happy with anything less than my Vixen New Atlux. That mount is comparable to a G11 or CGE; the tripod is equally important.

 

Best,

Randy


  • doctordub and teashea like this

#63 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,039
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 18 April 2021 - 01:58 PM

 I would use my 6" refractor a whole lot less if I had to lug an 80 lb. mount out to use it.


  • kksmith likes this

#64 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14,125
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 18 April 2021 - 02:06 PM

I've used my Skywatcher 150ED over 300x on that AVX. Yeah, it can be a tiny bit tricky to focus, but you can do it. You'll want to use anti-vibration pads.

 

Question to the doubters; have you actually tried placing a 6" refractor on an AVX? I find that the people who say an AVX cannot handle a 6" refractor (and an 10-11" SCT, for that matter) rarely have actually tried to do it. I use my AVX for both the 6" refractor and my 10" Meade SCT and it's acceptable for both. I do want a larger mount for the refractor someday (the AVX works well enough to enjoy but is not optimal) but honestly it's totally fine for the 10" SCT, something people told me it would be totally unable to do.

No, but I've used my 6" f/8 achromat on an EQ-6 and found it to be the bare minimum I would accept - and that is with an upgraded tripod. The stock tripod is NOT good, if you need to extend the legs - and with a 6" f/8, you're going to have to extend them. 

 

I use my APM 152 ED on a Vixen Saturn, which is a step up from an EQ-6. Something like halfway between an EQ-6 and a Takahashi NJP, I guess. I find this to be a good combo, though I would actually like to have something even more solid, but that would necessitate an observatory. 

 

If it's even a little tricky to focus, and you need anti-vibration pads to make it even acceptable, the scope is undermounted. Period. 

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark



#65 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,039
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 18 April 2021 - 02:14 PM


If it's even a little tricky to focus, and you need anti-vibration pads to make it even acceptable, the scope is undermounted. Period. 

Why is that?

 

Yeah, it is a little tricky to use... but why would it be better to have a giant overwhelming mount that I never want to take out? I have to carry my AVX up or down three flights of stairs to go from observing in the field to observing at home. If I had a CGX or something, I would never, ever want to do that. It would gather dust. Also, I don't have the space to store it.

 

The AVX / ED150 is a good enough setup that I use it for planetary photography and all my planetary observation. I would say that an EQ6-R would probably be a little better, but going above that, your setup is no longer worth carrying the weight it requires. A 6" refractor is not worth carrying out 120 lbs into the field unless you're doing photography with it.



#66 dagadget

dagadget

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,034
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Avon Park, Florida

Posted 18 April 2021 - 02:42 PM

I'll second that you can use a 6" doublet (achro or ED) on an AVX. It's a little squirrely but not bad enough to drive me to purchase another mount yet.

I had a AT 115 EDT and an AT 130EDT I used on AVX when I got the AT 152EDT I ordered the CGEM II I have now for that scope and it handles it well. Granted it is a triplet and very nose heavy but that mount handles it well. I have a new Ioptron GEM 45 that the AT 152 EDT will be on soon as I have the counter weight extension bar and another counter weight on order for it. A doublet six in refractor would be borderline for Visual on an AVX. I tried the Triplet 6 inch on the AVX before I sold it just to be certain and it was not pretty.

 

Clear Skies

 

David



#67 dagadget

dagadget

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,034
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Avon Park, Florida

Posted 18 April 2021 - 02:45 PM

No, but I've used my 6" f/8 achromat on an EQ-6 and found it to be the bare minimum I would accept - and that is with an upgraded tripod. The stock tripod is NOT good, if you need to extend the legs - and with a 6" f/8, you're going to have to extend them. 

 

I use my APM 152 ED on a Vixen Saturn, which is a step up from an EQ-6. Something like halfway between an EQ-6 and a Takahashi NJP, I guess. I find this to be a good combo, though I would actually like to have something even more solid, but that would necessitate an observatory. 

 

If it's even a little tricky to focus, and you need anti-vibration pads to make it even acceptable, the scope is undermounted. Period. 

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark

Yes I have I tried it with both a Triplet Refractor and a C11. Then I tried both on the CGEM II I liked the CGEM II better for those scopes and I had a buyer on hand local for the AVX so it was an easy switch.



#68 Sketcher

Sketcher

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,638
  • Joined: 29 Jun 2017
  • Loc: Under Earth's Sky

Posted 18 April 2021 - 03:11 PM

The plan for me is buy an iStar lens and make the OTA myself. I was looking at the 6inch f6.3 apo triplet for a focal length of 910mm.
Also my intention was to fork mount it.

The first question was about DSO since planets and moon should be fine with the app, just wondering if I can get good views of some DSO like for example m13 M27 m31 M42 m45 m51 etc.. the show pieces...

Details like this are significant!  A fork (alt-az I presume) mount isn't a GEM.  A triplet isn't an achromat.  An f/6.3 isn't an f/8, an f/12, etc.  A home-made OTA will likely balance differently than commercially made OTAs -- even if built around the same objective.  So a lot of the previous chatter was of little relevance.

 

I have a GEM for my 6-inch f/6.5 achromat; but I also have a home-made (I suppose you could call it a fork) alt-az mount that I can use with it -- if I so desire.  But being home-made for a specific telescope -- and being designed to accommodate the telescope without having to take the scope out of the mounting rings (that are used with the GEM and has an integrated handle), it's a one-of-a-kind fork mount.  The point being, if you design and construct your mount to work well with your specific OTA, then it's going to work well -- assuming you know what you're doing.  That being said, I prefer using my 6-incher with its GEM over using it with my alt-az, most of the time -- not that it's all that relevant to this discussion . . .

 

Then there's the DSO question.  As Thomas pointed out, we can't predict YOUR satisfaction (or lack thereof) in YOUR views.  We have different observing skills.  We don't all observe from similar sky conditions.  And even if all of our views were identical, we would have differing criteria concerning what's "good" and what's not.  It's an unanswerable question.

 

Thomas's excellent sketches show what he can see with his 6-inch refractor, using his eyes, from his location, when observing some of the objects you've specified.  Will you be able see the same level of detail?  Again, that's an unanswerable question -- at least until you've gone out and looked at seriously studied those objects for yourself.

 

Someone pointed out that 6-inches is still only 6-inches.  That's certainly true, but it's also true that for some of us there's absolutely no need to ever look through a larger aperture telescope.  A 6-inch telescope can show more than enough to keep us busy and happy; under our sky conditions, with our experience levels, our attitudes, etc.  But this means nothing to all those people who are not us and observe under different sky conditions, etc.

 

You're just gonna have to look through a 6-inch refractor for yourself, with your eyes, under your sky conditions, in order to find your own personal answer to that question.

 

On the other hand, if your attitude is:  "I want to see all that I can see with my 6-inch refractor; and as long as I'm seeing all that I can see with this telescope, with my eyes, from my location -- then I'm going to be a happy camper."  then you're going to be a happy camper!

 

Being pleased in this hobby has more to do with one's attitude than it does with how much we can (or cannot) see.  So it's up to YOU.  Are YOU going to be happy with your views through a 6-inch refractor?


  • daquad, Astrojensen and eblanken like this

#69 gjanke

gjanke

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 560
  • Joined: 27 Aug 2016

Posted 18 April 2021 - 03:15 PM

This gave me a good chuckle, Thomas.

Exactly how many 60mm-120mm Taks have you purchased in the past four months? Eight? Ten? Twelve?

I've lost count. lol.gif

Matt,

 

Whats so funny about the advice he gave and what does it have to do with the number of scopes he bought?

 

Actually its sound advice. 


  • mtminnesota likes this

#70 junomike

junomike

    ISS

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 21,568
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Loc: Ontario

Posted 18 April 2021 - 03:21 PM

For DSO's a CG5 class Mount will be fine.  For Planetary/Lunar, It's a little tricky.

Either way you'll want an ext. pier to avoid tripod collisions.

 

6" F9/SW EQ5P w/20" Antares Pier

152EDEQ5P.jpg


  • lwbehney likes this

#71 Steve C.

Steve C.

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 872
  • Joined: 24 Jan 2008
  • Loc: Sugar Land, TX

Posted 18 April 2021 - 03:49 PM

A six inch refractor will give you great images, but bear in mind that for objects near the zenith, you're going to spend some time genuflecting.


  • BRCoz, dagadget and lwbehney like this

#72 Astrojensen

Astrojensen

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 14,125
  • Joined: 05 Oct 2008
  • Loc: Bornholm, Denmark

Posted 18 April 2021 - 04:17 PM

A six inch refractor will give you great images, but bear in mind that for objects near the zenith, you're going to spend some time genuflecting.

Not if he gets a suitable tripod and maybe a low stool, as I have. 

 

This is one of the things that really makes me scratch my head in bewilderment. Why do people buy a good refractor, but then skimp on a suitable tripod for it? I just don't understand it at all. It's like getting a fine car, but then insisting on driving it on wheelbarrow wheels... If the owner of said car was asking why it didn't perform very well, everyone would laugh at him and point out that he should invest in some better tires. Apparently the same logic doesn't apply to refractors. Here it's just pointed out, that that's the way things are with refractors. You just have to get down in the mud and get your knees dirty. I have seen comments like this countless times. 

 

That's just plain stupid. Pardon my French, but that's a fact. 

 

If you can't observe the zenith relatively comfortably with your refractor, THE TRIPOD/PIER IS TOO SHORT. GET A TALLER ONE. 

 

And get an adjustable chair, for flip's sake.

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark


Edited by Astrojensen, 18 April 2021 - 04:20 PM.

  • Joe Bergeron, Paul Hyndman, BRCoz and 6 others like this

#73 Mitrovarr

Mitrovarr

    Skylab

  • *****
  • Posts: 4,039
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2004
  • Loc: Boise, Idaho

Posted 18 April 2021 - 04:31 PM

Yeah, if at all possible, you want a mount extension or a half-pier.



#74 StarAlert

StarAlert

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,274
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2019

Posted 18 April 2021 - 04:54 PM

The plan for me is buy an iStar lens and make the OTA myself. I was looking at the 6inch f6.3 apo triplet for a focal length of 910mm.
Also my intention was to fork mount it.

The first question was about DSO since planets and moon should be fine with the app, just wondering if I can get good views of some DSO like for example m13 M27 m31 M42 m45 m51 etc.. the show pieces...

M42 and M45 will be fabulous in a 6” refractor. M31 will be fabulous, too, from a dark site. I just sit and stare at M31 with my AR152 and a pair of 24 pans in the binoviewer. M13 is very nice, too, with higher powers. 
 

 

 

Not if he gets a suitable tripod and maybe a low stool, as I have. 

 

This is one of the things that really makes me scratch my head in bewilderment. Why do people buy a good refractor, but then skimp on a suitable tripod for it? I just don't understand it at all. It's like getting a fine car, but then insisting on driving it on wheelbarrow wheels... If the owner of said car was asking why it didn't perform very well, everyone would laugh at him and point out that he should invest in some better tires. Apparently the same logic doesn't apply to refractors. Here it's just pointed out, that that's the way things are with refractors. You just have to get down in the mud and get your knees dirty. I have seen comments like this countless times. 

 

That's just plain stupid. Pardon my French, but that's a fact. 

 

If you can't observe the zenith relatively comfortably with your refractor, THE TRIPOD/PIER IS TOO SHORT. GET A TALLER ONE. 

 

And get an adjustable chair, for flip's sake.

 

 

Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark

Just for you, Thomas...

2F6D125E 2A23 4FA5 B637 DE2F9709BD77
6980F101 6718 48C3 B10C F0B8B8DCAC7F
D95C06EE 3EED 4548 B309 F00D9950297D
Adjustable chair optional. 

  • BRCoz, Bowmoreman, Jeff B and 8 others like this

#75 ris242

ris242

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • Posts: 362
  • Joined: 01 Feb 2017
  • Loc: Wellington, New Zealand

Posted 18 April 2021 - 05:09 PM

Because people tend to underestimate just how big those things are.

 


Clear skies!

Thomas, Denmark 

Cause there aren't many photos online of anyone holding their beasts........so when you see one for real ........its big. lol.gif


  • Astrojensen 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