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

AT92 and Baader Maxbright II

  • Please log in to reply
26 replies to this topic

#1 gul1337

gul1337

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 08 May 2017
  • Loc: Roanoke, VA

Posted 14 September 2021 - 09:19 PM

Did anyone use Astro-Tech AT92 with Maxbtight II?

 

Will it come into focus with 1.7x corrector? or does it need 2.6x ?

 

I'm waiting on my AT92 to arrive, and I'm thinking what OCS to buy.

 

2.6x OCS together with pair of Baader Zoom would make nice 55x-160x magnification

 

Best Regards,

Adam



#2 Codbear

Codbear

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,167
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2016
  • Loc: Novato, CA

Posted 15 September 2021 - 12:43 AM

Adam,

 

Shoot...I just came in from my second session with my new-to-me AT92, which was fantastic btw, and used my Televue binoviewers. I don't know what magnification the corrector was, but judging from the fact that the image of the Moon and Jupiter was larger with the TV binoviewer and 19mm Panoptics than with a monoview using an 8mm Ethos, I would presume the corrector was over 2x magnification. 

 

I will try my Maxbright II's tomorrow night, weather permitting, which has the 1.7x corrector in it and I'll let you know.

 

Even with a gibbous Moon washing out so much of the sky, it was very pleasurable sweeping the Milky Way with the binoviewers. Last night I used a 55mm Plossl on the Milky Way and it was an insanely wide FOV at about 9x.

 

Out of curiosity what tripod are you going to use?

 

Sam



#3 jprideaux

jprideaux

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 848
  • Joined: 06 May 2018
  • Loc: Richmond, VA

Posted 15 September 2021 - 05:50 AM

I don’t have the Maxbright II but I do have the AT92 and both the Williams Optics BV (with 1.6x corrector) and the Orion Linear BV.

The AT92 is not all that BV-friendly and with the WO BV, I could not reach infinity focus with the 1.6x corrector screwed into the BV but I can reach infinity focus with the 1.6x corrector screwed in a 1.25” diagonal earlier in the light-path and I calculated that it functioned at that location as a 2.1x corrector.

So in all probability, a 2.6x OCS screwed directly in the BV should get you infinity focus with the AT92 with your BV.

I can also reach infinity focus with my AT92 with my linear BV without needing any corrector but I am more limited with eyepiece selection. I use my WO BV mainly for when I want higher power and the Linear for when I want lower power. I love my AT92 and almost always use it visually with one of my BVs. I much prefer using both eyes!

#4 gul1337

gul1337

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 08 May 2017
  • Loc: Roanoke, VA

Posted 15 September 2021 - 07:59 AM

Thanks! I was thinking about linear binoviewers for some time, maybe I just should get one.

 

I can't wait for my AT92 to arrive :) I have WO 2xOCS so it is good to know that It will work before the diagonal.

 

What eyepieces do you use for binovieweing?

 

I have Baader Zoom and Baader 10mm and 18mm Ortho and I liked them a lot with my Mak. I wonder how they perform in fast F/5.5

 

As for mount and tripod I'm using Stellarvue M2 mount with Nexus DSC on Inorell RT90 tripod - this is a great lightweight combo ( although I use two 1 galon milk bottles to put some more weight on it so it is more stable)

 

I also have SkyTee2 on Skywatcher pier tripod - also nice grab'n'go. I used it with my 140mm mak on one side and 80mm apo on other side. It works really nice like that.

 

Adam



#5 jprideaux

jprideaux

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 848
  • Joined: 06 May 2018
  • Loc: Richmond, VA

Posted 15 September 2021 - 07:03 PM

I have my AT92 on a Manfrotto 116B tripod with an Oberwerk xl—240 fork which I swapped out the side-pieces from Oberwerk with longer ones to get better vertical balance.  Oberwerk sells binocular setups and I reto-fitted one for my refractor set-up.  I then had to buy a vixen saddle and drill some holes to get my AT92 (with a longer vixen dovetail) to mount.  I did all this because I wanted a lighter fork mount but it was a bit of bother to get it all figured out.  Another option for a slightly bigger fork would be just to get the one sold by Orion which already has the vixen saddle.

 

Below is a picture of my set-up with my linear binoviewers.  I can also use a .66 reducer with my linear since there is plenty of back-focus available for lower magnification.   I mainly use Badder 18mm Orthoscopics with the linear since they are matched well to the internal field-stop of the linear.  I typically use the 20mm that came with my WO BV when I use the WO.  When I want to go higher power, I also have a pair of Celestron Ultimal Edge 10mm that I use with either BV.  I have a couple different 1.25” 45 degree diagonals so I can get true up-down, true left-right with either BV for terrestrial viewing.  I also have a 2” 90 degree diagonal for near zenith astronomy.

 

BA941B91-1D7F-4470-94A1-E59D3E8CC751.jpeg

 

I have not yet got into Astro-photography but I probably will get a suitable mount and camera at some point.


  • David I likes this

#6 gul1337

gul1337

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 08 May 2017
  • Loc: Roanoke, VA

Posted 16 September 2021 - 09:37 AM

This is a very nice setup, I have to think about this linear binoviewer.

 

I see that you use Baader 18mm Ortho, I like this eyepiece a lot it I think it is my most used eyepiece, in my 5,5" Mak it is my primary eyepiece. There is a lot that I like about them. Eye relief is perfect for me, I get no blackouts with it, and they are sharper than Baader Zooms or ES 24mm 68*, they are lightweight - perfect for bino!. I use Baader Zoom a lot, and sometimes things are just not as sharp, then I put in Baader 18mm Ortho and it is like clouds have disappeared! Ok, maybe the difference is not that big, but I for sure will sacrifice little FOV to sharpness. Interesting thing is that in my 80mm APO difference is not that big as in my 5,5"Mak. Maybe smaller aperture has less details, and no central obstruction, so it is little sharper already


  • jprideaux likes this

#7 dagadget

dagadget

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,176
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Avon Park, Florida

Posted 16 September 2021 - 12:10 PM

focuser.jpg

 

I have a AT 72 EDII now and an AT 92 coming tomorrow I have a TS Supercharged Bino Viewer with a Burgess 1.9 oca that I screwed into the nose and 25mm Celestron Plossl eyepieces in the Bino Viewer I could focus on trees a few hundred yards away and the focuser was most of the way in.  It is going to be interesting to see how well the AT 92 does with the Bino viewer.


  • iKMN likes this

#8 jprideaux

jprideaux

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 848
  • Joined: 06 May 2018
  • Loc: Richmond, VA

Posted 16 September 2021 - 03:32 PM

attachicon.giffocuser.jpg

 

I have a AT 72 EDII now and an AT 92 coming tomorrow I have a TS Supercharged Bino Viewer with a Burgess 1.9 oca that I screwed into the nose and 25mm Celestron Plossl eyepieces in the Bino Viewer I could focus on trees a few hundred yards away and the focuser was most of the way in.  It is going to be interesting to see how well the AT 92 does with the Bino viewer.

Yeah, it is really just a matter of getting the appropriate OCA for the scope/diagonal/BV. 

 

if your 1.9 oca can't quite get focus with your AT92, then you could try teh following:

1.  put the 1.9 oca before your diagonal making it effectively a higher power oca

2.  buying a higher power oca

3.  Or reducing light path with buying a T2 diagonal (assuming your BV has a removable nose-piece).

 

You might get lucky and your 1.9 oca may just work.  My 1.6 did not work screwed directly into my WO BV, but perhaps 1.9 would have worked for me.


Edited by jprideaux, 16 September 2021 - 03:35 PM.


#9 dagadget

dagadget

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,176
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Avon Park, Florida

Posted 16 September 2021 - 08:56 PM

Yeah, it is really just a matter of getting the appropriate OCA for the scope/diagonal/BV. 

 

if your 1.9 oca can't quite get focus with your AT92, then you could try the following:

1.  put the 1.9 oca before your diagonal making it effectively a higher power oca

2.  buying a higher power oca

3.  Or reducing light path with buying a T2 diagonal (assuming your BV has a removable nose-piece).

 

You might get lucky and your 1.9 oca may just work.  My 1.6 did not work screwed directly into my WO BV, but perhaps 1.9 would have worked for me.

OK I just might have hit the jackpot with this. Number 1 I pulled out the 1.25 diagonal and the OCA screwed right into the front of it. Do not know how much more powerful it makes it but I am going to test it tomorrow (cloudy now) so I can't do anything till the clouds go away. I have not found any higher power screw on OCA's like the Burgess 1.9 and number 3 no removable nose piece so number 1 or 2 has to be it.



#10 dagadget

dagadget

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,176
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Avon Park, Florida

Posted 17 September 2021 - 08:37 AM

20210917_091947.jpg

OK I just might have hit the jackpot with this. Number 1 I pulled out the 1.25 diagonal and the OCA screwed right into the front of it. Do not know how much more powerful it makes it but I am going to test it tomorrow (cloudy now) so I can't do anything till the clouds go away. I have not found any higher power screw on OCA's like the Burgess 1.9 and number 3 no removable nose piece so number 1 or 2 has to be it.

It works I have no clue to the magnification but it rocked it 



#11 jprideaux

jprideaux

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 848
  • Joined: 06 May 2018
  • Loc: Richmond, VA

Posted 17 September 2021 - 05:22 PM

Do you really have around 82mm of focus travel still available at infinity?  If so, you may be able to also reach focus with the oca screwed directly to the BV.  If not, at least you have a solution that works with screwing the oca to the diagonal!.



#12 dagadget

dagadget

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,176
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Avon Park, Florida

Posted 17 September 2021 - 06:21 PM

Post 7 was with the OCA screwed into the Binoviewer. Post 10 was OCA screwed into the nose of the Diagonal and looking at the exact same target as post 7 what a difference in magnification and what a difference on the focuser 5mm in post 7 and  82mm in post 10 who would have seen that?


  • jprideaux likes this

#13 gul1337

gul1337

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 08 May 2017
  • Loc: Roanoke, VA

Posted 17 September 2021 - 10:13 PM

I got my AT92 today! it is a excellent scope! I managed to have a quick look through the clouds,maybe 10 minutes before clouds were everywhere. With William Optics 2.0x OCS screwed into front of Maxbright II I had around 30mm of back-focus left. I would estimate magnification around 2.5x.

 

Optical train looked like this:

AT92->2"T2 adapter->32mm Baader Prism-> 1.25" eyepiece holder -> WO 2x OCS -> 1.25" T2 adapter -> Maxbright 2

 

I was testing with Baader Zoom. It works great! no need for finder - just zoom out to 24mm :)

 

Can't wait for a clear night!


  • jprideaux likes this

#14 MarMax

MarMax

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,761
  • Joined: 27 May 2020
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 18 September 2021 - 10:57 AM

I got my AT92 today! it is a excellent scope! I managed to have a quick look through the clouds,maybe 10 minutes before clouds were everywhere. With William Optics 2.0x OCS screwed into front of Maxbright II I had around 30mm of back-focus left. I would estimate magnification around 2.5x.

 

Optical train looked like this:

AT92->2"T2 adapter->32mm Baader Prism-> 1.25" eyepiece holder -> WO 2x OCS -> 1.25" T2 adapter -> Maxbright 2

 

I was testing with Baader Zoom. It works great! no need for finder - just zoom out to 24mm smile.gif

 

Can't wait for a clear night!

Congratulations on the new scope. You should consider a small finder or laser pointer. It's a very helpful piece of kit. The 24mm EPs in my 92mm are not enough to find my way around. And remember, it's not 24mm if you are using an OCS.



#15 gul1337

gul1337

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 08 May 2017
  • Loc: Roanoke, VA

Posted 18 September 2021 - 11:12 AM

True, 24mm is still not as wide as a finder, I will probably mount Rigel finder on mine. I spent lots of time with my 140mm f14 Mak, so coming from this claustrophobic setup on a manual mount, with AT92 it seems like FOV is so wide smile.gif

 

I wonder how Baader Zoom will work with 5x Powermate. I was thinking ultimate grab and go setup - one eyepiece, two barlows, and it covers mags

from 21x-300,ok I know over 160x EP is too small, but on the moon still I may see something if my floaters don't cover it all grin.gif

 

I hope for no clouds today smile.gif Wanted to test out Baader Zoom 2.25x barlow inserted into Maxbright 1.25" nosepiece - it gave nice 4.2x  With zooms it would cover 80x-266x ideal for planetary and double stars

 

edit: fixed typo


Edited by gul1337, 18 September 2021 - 11:13 AM.


#16 jprideaux

jprideaux

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 848
  • Joined: 06 May 2018
  • Loc: Richmond, VA

Posted 18 September 2021 - 01:43 PM

I ended up preferring the following finder with my AT92.

https://www.astronom...r.html?___SID=U
  • dagadget likes this

#17 dagadget

dagadget

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,176
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Avon Park, Florida

Posted 18 September 2021 - 05:54 PM

Congratulations on the new scope. You should consider a small finder or laser pointer. It's a very helpful piece of kit. The 24mm EPs in my 92mm are not enough to find my way around. And remember, it's not 24mm if you are using an OCS.

I have the Astronomics multi reticule red dot for this scope I also use it for the AT 72 and the AT 152 and it works great for all three. 



#18 dagadget

dagadget

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,176
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Avon Park, Florida

Posted 18 September 2021 - 05:54 PM

I ended up preferring the following finder with my AT92.

https://www.astronom...r.html?___SID=U

exactly what I have


  • jprideaux likes this

#19 gul1337

gul1337

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 08 May 2017
  • Loc: Roanoke, VA

Posted 24 September 2021 - 03:46 PM

Yesterday finally I had a clear night, and took the scope out for for few hours. I have to admit that AT92 is a great scope! I just love it so compact and easy to setup!

 

I observed The Moon and Jupiter, Seeing was not the best, but good enough, With WO 2x OCA Maxbright binoviewer worked at approx 2.5x and with Baader zoom at 8mm gave nice view of Jupiter, As usual I switched to my favorite 18mm Baader Ortho,View was very nice at 70x , but magnification was not enough, so I switched to 10mm Baader Ortho, I ralery use them in my binoviewer - eye relief is too short for me, but this time it was great!. I had no problems merging the view (maybe OCA increased eye relief?) View at 140x was very nice, even better than at 160x wih Baader zoom. Difference was not that big, but it had this small "punch" that was missing.

 

When Jupiter got behind trees, moon rose up, it was still low, but it is a perfect target for 2.25 Barlow in binoviewer! (4.5x) I tried it with Baader Zoom at first  I was stunned how good view was, I t was as good as in my 140mm Mak. I went all the way to 280x seeing did not support it, but I had no blackouts, there was no strain on the eyes, overall very good, I also tried 10mm Ortho and 18mm Ortho view was even better.

 

One disappointment was ES 24mm 68deg, I did not try them in a binoviewer in a long time, and I know why - they are little to wide, and I cannot fit my nose in.

Does anyone have some experience with 24mm APM UFF in binoviewer and AT92 or some other fast refractor? is it good?  I have read only good things about this eyepiece. Maybe I will sell ES 24mm and get APM UFF.

 

Clear Skies!

Adam



#20 MarMax

MarMax

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,761
  • Joined: 27 May 2020
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 24 September 2021 - 04:18 PM

trim

 

One disappointment was ES 24mm 68deg, I did not try them in a binoviewer in a long time, and I know why - they are little to wide, and I cannot fit my nose in.

Does anyone have some experience with 24mm APM UFF in binoviewer and AT92 or some other fast refractor? is it good?  I have read only good things about this eyepiece. Maybe I will sell ES 24mm and get APM UFF.

 

Clear Skies!

Adam

If you can't use the ES 24mm comfortably (I can't either), you will not like the 24mm APM fit either. I can't even use the APM 18mm UFFs comfortably and I just bought a pair from Don at eyepiecesetc.com. Most reviews I have seen of the APM 24mm UFFs are fantastic . . . but they are too wide for me. I went with the 24mm Panoptics and they are very comfortable.



#21 jprideaux

jprideaux

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 848
  • Joined: 06 May 2018
  • Loc: Richmond, VA

Posted 24 September 2021 - 04:28 PM

That is great that you are enjoying your AT92.  I sure enjoy mine.  Many that use binoviewers tend not to use extremely wide afov eyepices since you don't quite have the same flexibility to move your head around like looking through a port-hole as you do with a single extremely wide eyepiece.  For example, I have a ES 100 degee 5.5mm 2" eyepiece that I sometimes use (cyclops style, not using binoviewer) and you do get this port-hole effect where you can "look around" in the field-of-view.  You don't really get that as much with binoviewers but with two-eyes, you can actually enjoy better a more narrow FOV.  



#22 betacygni

betacygni

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 358
  • Joined: 06 Feb 2011

Posted 24 September 2021 - 09:52 PM

As mentioned above you’ll not like the 24mm UFF. However, just being a wide eyepiece isn’t the only factor in binoviewer comfort, eye relief is also extremely important and I think sometimes under appreciated. For example I couldn’t use the 24mm UFF, however I can very comfortably use the much wider baader 17.5mm Morpheus due to their large fully usable 24mm eye relief. The UFFs have long eye relief on paper, but the eye lens is very recessed cutting down on the effective eye relief substantially.

So basically short eye relief is ok if eyepieces are narrow, if eyepieces are wide, you’ll need longer eye relief. Essentially more eye relief gives you more nose clearance. For these reasons I’ve found my favorite wide field eyepiece to be the 17.5mm Morpheus, though the 24mm panoptics are also quite good if you can handle the bad pincushion distortion (I can’t).

#23 gul1337

gul1337

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 08 May 2017
  • Loc: Roanoke, VA

Posted 25 September 2021 - 06:41 AM

Thanks for feedback, In that case I will skip UFF 24mm, Maybe I will get one Panoptic or Morpheus, test how I like them and then buy second one for bino



#24 gul1337

gul1337

    Sputnik

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 46
  • Joined: 08 May 2017
  • Loc: Roanoke, VA

Posted 29 September 2021 - 07:51 AM

I could not resist APM UFF eyepieces, I got 18mm clones on amazon, so in case they do not work I could return them without any problems.

 

They work nice with bino, eye placement is very comfortable, and they have a good sharpness. I compared them with my Baader 18mm Ortho, and it was close, sometimes I was thinking that Badder was sharper, sometimes UFF... but it could be seeing. It worked nice with Baader zoom 2.25x Barlow.

 

When I look on Pictures online I've seen that 18mm and 24 are similar on top, biggest difference is length of eyepiece. 

I've seen Meade version has a long taper, maybe it would be better for bino...  Did anyone seen APM/Meade version and could comment on that?

 

I start to wonder, maybe I should get 24mm and try them... but I hate to buy and return stuff...

 

Adam



#25 Spikey131

Spikey131

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,583
  • Joined: 07 Feb 2017

Posted 02 October 2021 - 09:19 PM

If you buy a pair of 24mm Panoptics, and try them in binoviewers, you won’t be returning them.....grin.gif




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