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

What classics you still wanna buy?

  • Please log in to reply
123 replies to this topic

#51 bobhen

bobhen

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,694
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2005

Posted 24 December 2021 - 07:37 AM

If telescopes were free and I had to use them within my current living situation/location and at a my current age, I could still easily manage and would love to own a classic…

 

1. Brandon 130mm refractor on a Unitron alt/az mount.

 

2. OTI Quantum 4” Maksutov

 

3. Astro-Physics Traveler on the Carton alt/az mount that Astro-Physics used to market.

 

I still have all the brochures (there in there somewhere) and at one time gave each serious consideration.

 

 

 

Bob

Attached Thumbnails

  • IMG_0269.jpg

  • deSitter, Exnihilo and Defenderslideguitar like this

#52 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    ISS

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 25,392
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 24 December 2021 - 07:41 AM

A pre mint and complete 1965 or older Unitron 3 to 5" would be on my list as well. But finding a old one that does not have the black paint going bad or a non fogged up lens is getting harder to find.  Never had a 3" yet other than the RFT version. The 4" i had was mint as could get minus the lens had to be cleaned and still some fog left on it. 



#53 Bomber Bob

Bomber Bob

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 20,785
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2013
  • Loc: The Swamp, LA (Lower Alabama)

Posted 24 December 2021 - 09:24 AM

Taking a break from wrapping...

 

Thanks BB!  Your SxS is consistent with how I imagined they would compare.  On deep-sky, it makes sense that the Questar might pull ahead, having a bit more aperture and slightly faster focal ratio (15.8 vs 14.4).  Did you ever have need to tweak the Questar's collimation?

 

I don't have a line on a Questar.  Being somewhat frugal, I would probably use that kind of cash for some other purpose or project.  I certainly appreciate fine engineering though, in telescopes and many other categories, too....

Yes, my Q needed collimation:  Questar put a slash mark on the corrector's edge, and that has to be aligned.  And, my 1958 uses a Bakelite retaining ring to hold the corrector.  Over the years, it had deteriorated (which is why the corrector slipped in the first place).  I removed the ring, planed it (I can hear the gasps of Q Owners, but I'm talking about onion-skin thin shavings), cleaned it, and now it holds the lens down securely.  While it was open, I used my puffer & brush to clean the interior.  What really needs attention is the Control Box, but that'll have to come off -- and I am Very Reluctant to do that.  I've cleaned all the optics I can reach from the outside, but the inner face of the Barlow needs cleaning.  I don't use it.

 

Otherwise, it doesn't require much care.  I have it on display in our prettiest guest room, and it just seems to fit there:  Small, beautiful, and unassuming.  I got it originally as my Over-The-Hill scope, but I need to use it more often than just in the Spring...


  • Terra Nova, rcwolpert and Bonco2 like this

#54 jim kuhns

jim kuhns

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 966
  • Joined: 12 Dec 2007
  • Loc: southeast GA.

Posted 24 December 2021 - 09:57 AM

A classic orange Celestron C-11 on an original sand cast mount with all the bell and whistles. waytogo.gif  


  • Brent Campbell and Exnihilo like this

#55 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 26,190
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: 39.07°N, 229m AMSL, USA

Posted 24 December 2021 - 11:02 AM

An interesting and surprising admission.  It seems that everyone in the forums drops on one knee when speaking about their Questars....    I've never looked through one.   I'd love to read of a shoot-out between a Questar and Royal Optical 76.2 f/15.7 or even a well figured and collimated 11TE-5.  I'm sure the Questar impresses with its mechanical precision, attention to ergonomic detail, general execution in a small package, and outstanding consistency in optical quality.    But does the observer really see more?   I think I know the outcome -> my failing is wanting to see it in writting.....

I’ve seen Jupiter and Saturn with an RAO Tasco 10TE (my brother-in-law’s) side by side with Questar Standard with Cervit mirror (my brothers) and they are very close with a slight nod going to the Questar with regard to color fidelity, contrast, AND sharpness. I did the same thing with my late 1950s 3” F16 Unitron and my Questar Standard with BroadBand coatings, and the Questar again was slightly ahead. Also there was a quantum difference in portability and setup (My Unitron was on the heavy 142 Unitron mount). In fact, that’s why I sold the Unitron. I only decided to sell my Questar because I started using my Tak FC-76 on my Vixen Porta Mount instead of a heavier GEM. Suddenly the FC-76 became a very easy transport and setup. The images were pretty-much equal and I think only differed with momentary changes in seeing if at all. Plus the Tak was capable of much wider fields being F8 instead of F14. And I had a lot of money invested in the Questar. So for me, the Questar experience is in no way matched with a 3” F15 to 18 achromat, no matter if its RAO or even Goto (yep, had one of those too). With the Questar you are getting optical, mechanical, and portability excellence. Get a premium medium focal length apo and you will give it a run for its money, but other than that and the Quester earns the respect it deserves.


  • deSitter, Urban Observer, Exnihilo and 6 others like this

#56 clamchip

clamchip

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11,781
  • Joined: 09 Aug 2008
  • Loc: Seattle

Posted 24 December 2021 - 12:28 PM

The more I think about this the more telescopes come to mind.

Here's a few more I'd like:

 

Porter Garden Telescope https://americanhist...ct/nmah_1184878

I would like the real thing of course but I would be happy with a accurate reproduction or

better yet a casting kit.

 

Porter Springfield

Again a casting kit of raw castings I can machine.

I especially like this one because the eyepiece remains stationary while the telescope moves

about the sky. Perfect for me because I love observing seated.

Robert

 

1544706148-img.jpg


Edited by clamchip, 24 December 2021 - 12:42 PM.

  • deSitter, tim53, jim kuhns and 4 others like this

#57 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    ISS

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 25,392
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 24 December 2021 - 12:34 PM

A classic orange Celestron C-11 on an original sand cast mount with all the bell and whistles. waytogo.gif  

My friend got a 1982 C11 and it was like new in 1998 and it was total mush.  But i would love a freaky sharp C11.



#58 Bomber Bob

Bomber Bob

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 20,785
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2013
  • Loc: The Swamp, LA (Lower Alabama)

Posted 24 December 2021 - 01:30 PM

I’ve seen Jupiter and Saturn with an RAO Tasco 10TE (my brother-in-law’s) side by side with Questar Standard with Cervit mirror (my brothers) and they are very close with a slight nod going to the Questar with regard to color fidelity, contrast, AND sharpness. I did the same thing with my late 1950s 3” F16 Unitron and my Questar Standard with BroadBand coatings, and the Questar again was slightly ahead. Also there was a quantum difference in portability and setup (My Unitron was on the heavy 142 Unitron mount). In fact, that’s why I sold the Unitron. I only decided to sell my Questar because I started using my Tak FC-76 on my Vixen Porta Mount instead of a heavier GEM. Suddenly the FC-76 became a very easy transport and setup. The images were pretty-much equal and I think only differed with momentary changes in seeing if at all. Plus the Tak was capable of much wider fields being F8 instead of F14. And I had a lot of money invested in the Questar. So for me, the Questar experience is in no way matched with a 3” F15 to 18 achromat, no matter if its RAO or even Goto (yep, had one of those too). With the Questar you are getting optical, mechanical, and portability excellence. Get a premium medium focal length apo and you will give it a run for its money, but other than that and the Quester earns the respect it deserves.

Yeah, I hate to say it, but I can see a high-quality 3" APO on a light-weight platform beating my old Questar...  should'a kept my Vixen FL80S.  I lurv my C80 on the Mizar SP, but it doesn't have the Q's Cool Factor.  Now... an FC-76 or Mizar FA-80 Blue Tube... that could be the ticket!


  • Urban Observer, Terra Nova, Tenacious and 1 other like this

#59 Bowlerhat

Bowlerhat

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,715
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2019
  • Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Posted 24 December 2021 - 05:00 PM

My days have really slowed down but there are still many scopes i would love to try out. Top on my list is another shot at a fork mounted C14 with freaky sharp optics. Mine was a total dud when i bought it in 1996.  So what is on your wish list to buy guys and gals?

An atlas 60mm, or a nagamitsu 60. Which means I probably won't see a listing of it ever anyway

 

I won't be buying anything else!!

That's what they said...



#60 Bomber Bob

Bomber Bob

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 20,785
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2013
  • Loc: The Swamp, LA (Lower Alabama)

Posted 24 December 2021 - 05:55 PM

An atlas 60mm, or a nagamitsu 60. Which means I probably won't see a listing of it ever anyway

 

That's what they said...

Do you mean... this Atlas 60mm:

 

Atlas Restore T63 - OTA Complete (RS FL).jpg


  • photiost, jim kuhns, Urban Observer and 3 others like this

#61 Bowlerhat

Bowlerhat

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,715
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2019
  • Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Posted 25 December 2021 - 12:25 AM

Do you mean... this Atlas 60mm:

 

attachicon.gifAtlas Restore T63 - OTA Complete (RS FL).jpg

Yer' really rubbing some lemons on my wound, bob.crazy.gif


  • Bomber Bob likes this

#62 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,252
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 25 December 2021 - 01:27 AM

The only scopes that would tempt me would be a like new RV-6 and C9.25, both I have owned and loved in the past.

Oh yes! That C9.25 is the only SCT I want. But my next scope is a 7" Mak. It is curious why the C9.25 even exists, and why it is so good!

 

-drl



#63 deSitter

deSitter

    Still in Old School

  • *****
  • Posts: 12,252
  • Joined: 09 Dec 2004

Posted 25 December 2021 - 01:30 AM

The more I think about this the more telescopes come to mind.

Here's a few more I'd like:

 

Porter Garden Telescope https://americanhist...ct/nmah_1184878

I would like the real thing of course but I would be happy with a accurate reproduction or

better yet a casting kit.

 

Porter Springfield

Again a casting kit of raw castings I can machine.

I especially like this one because the eyepiece remains stationary while the telescope moves

about the sky. Perfect for me because I love observing seated.

Robert

 

attachicon.gif1544706148-img.jpg

Clarence Custer, M.D. - the dude I wanted to be when I was 10 smile.gif Notice the elbow scope finder! The Telrad of 1965!

 

-drl

Attached Thumbnails

  • Untitled.jpg

Edited by deSitter, 25 December 2021 - 01:32 AM.

  • tim53, photiost, weis14 and 7 others like this

#64 Paul Sweeney

Paul Sweeney

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 738
  • Joined: 19 Feb 2018
  • Loc: Heidelberg, Germany

Posted 25 December 2021 - 01:51 AM

I had that book too when I was a kid. How I drooled over that scope. Made me realize how small my 60mm Tasco really was.
  • deSitter likes this

#65 CHASLX200

CHASLX200

    ISS

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 25,392
  • Joined: 29 Sep 2007
  • Loc: Tampa area Florida

Posted 25 December 2021 - 07:43 AM

Oh yes! That C9.25 is the only SCT I want. But my next scope is a 7" Mak. It is curious why the C9.25 even exists, and why it is so good!

 

-drl

I think the mirror is a slower speed and not as fussy as normal SCT's. I had a 6" SW Mak and it was a killer so a 7" that is just as good would be a great scope.
 



#66 Bomber Bob

Bomber Bob

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 20,785
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2013
  • Loc: The Swamp, LA (Lower Alabama)

Posted 25 December 2021 - 08:24 AM

Yer' really rubbing some lemons on my wound, bob.crazy.gif

Sorry!!  I honestly didn't know these oddballs were desirable...  Mine is 99% a Display Scope... almost a Novelty Scope with its tiny barrel eyepieces, and nearly impractical balancing design...

 

Yet, it's made very well.  Makes No Sense!!


  • Bowlerhat likes this

#67 Jacques

Jacques

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 610
  • Joined: 11 Aug 2002
  • Loc: Belgium

Posted 25 December 2021 - 11:10 AM

Okay, it makes no sense, and is border-line insane given that I have a near-perfect Tak FC-100, but...

 

Carton CST-100KX F13:   https://www.cloudyni...-2#entry6230624

 

I just wanna look through one -- that might break the fevre dream...

That one or an Antares 105 (95 actually)mm F13.



#68 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 26,190
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: 39.07°N, 229m AMSL, USA

Posted 25 December 2021 - 03:15 PM

Clarence Custer, M.D. - the dude I wanted to be when I was 10 smile.gif Notice the elbow scope finder! The Telrad of 1965!

 

-drl

I have always moved that picture since I first saw it over fifty years ago in the Sky Observer’s Handbook:

Attached Thumbnails

  • 231185A9-AAFD-4ABA-BB19-2A3BACC020A4.jpeg

  • deSitter, photiost, jim kuhns and 4 others like this

#69 Bowlerhat

Bowlerhat

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,715
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2019
  • Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Posted 25 December 2021 - 05:32 PM

Sorry!!  I honestly didn't know these oddballs were desirable...  Mine is 99% a Display Scope... almost a Novelty Scope with its tiny barrel eyepieces, and nearly impractical balancing design...

 

Yet, it's made very well.  Makes No Sense!!

Maybe not so much, but novelty is desirable to me. I love oddballs!


  • Bomber Bob and GreyDay like this

#70 Bomber Bob

Bomber Bob

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 20,785
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2013
  • Loc: The Swamp, LA (Lower Alabama)

Posted 25 December 2021 - 08:56 PM

Maybe not so much, but novelty is desirable to me. I love oddballs!

I'm glad I'm not the only one!!

 

Since you're an admirer of the ATLAS, what do you think of these improvements:

 

- Paint the eyepiece cap interiors flat black -- that shiny metal hurts the views.

- Have my local machinists repair / patch the chunk of pot metal that snapped off the lens cell in shipment; or, if that's not practical, have them make a new machined aluminum cell for it -- with the same dimensions.

- Have JD powder-coat the tube back to its original white.  (My rattle-can cranberry didn't turn out that well on the short tube.)  I'll paint the trim parts satin or flat black.

 

I don't have the original mount, so for now it's on that cheap old Carton yoke alt/az with the ludicrously thin wood-slat legs; which, oddly enough, is in mint condition.  This Oddball is a actually a very good F15 refractor -- it performs in spite of its goofy traits.  It rides well on the Mizar SP, too.



#71 oldmanastro

oldmanastro

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 974
  • Joined: 17 Nov 2013
  • Loc: San Juan, Puerto Rico-US

Posted 25 December 2021 - 09:32 PM

Yep!

You were lucky. I couldn't get my siblings interested at all and neither my son.frown.gif  My hopes are now in my granddaughter. I'm working on it. 


  • Terra Nova and Bomber Bob like this

#72 oldmanastro

oldmanastro

    Viking 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 974
  • Joined: 17 Nov 2013
  • Loc: San Juan, Puerto Rico-US

Posted 25 December 2021 - 09:56 PM

Clarence Custer, M.D. - the dude I wanted to be when I was 10 smile.gif Notice the elbow scope finder! The Telrad of 1965!

 

-drl

I saw this telescope in 1966 for the first time in the Henry E. Paul book "Outer Space Photography" 1963 edition. It was impressive. Being 13 years old at the time I could just imagine sitting in that chair at the Springfield focus of this behemoth. The only telescope I had was my 2.4" refractor. Here's the page from the book with the telescope image and two photos that Dr. Custer took with that instrument.

Attached Thumbnails

  • CPCustertelescope.JPG

  • tim53, photiost, jim kuhns and 4 others like this

#73 Terra Nova

Terra Nova

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 26,190
  • Joined: 29 May 2012
  • Loc: 39.07°N, 229m AMSL, USA

Posted 25 December 2021 - 10:14 PM

I saw this telescope in 1966 for the first time in the Henry E. Paul book "Outer Space Photography" 1963 edition. It was impressive. Being 13 years old at the time I could just imagine sitting in that chair at the Springfield focus of this behemoth. The only telescope I had was my 2.4" refractor. Here's the page from the book with the telescope image and two photos that Dr. Custer took with that instrument.

I love still having most all of my old books from when I first started in our wonderful hobby.


  • deSitter and Bomber Bob like this

#74 Bowlerhat

Bowlerhat

    Surveyor 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,715
  • Joined: 05 Jun 2019
  • Loc: Melbourne, Australia

Posted 26 December 2021 - 01:15 AM

I'm glad I'm not the only one!!

 

Since you're an admirer of the ATLAS, what do you think of these improvements:

 

- Paint the eyepiece cap interiors flat black -- that shiny metal hurts the views.

- Have my local machinists repair / patch the chunk of pot metal that snapped off the lens cell in shipment; or, if that's not practical, have them make a new machined aluminum cell for it -- with the same dimensions.

- Have JD powder-coat the tube back to its original white.  (My rattle-can cranberry didn't turn out that well on the short tube.)  I'll paint the trim parts satin or flat black.

 

I don't have the original mount, so for now it's on that cheap old Carton yoke alt/az with the ludicrously thin wood-slat legs; which, oddly enough, is in mint condition.  This Oddball is a actually a very good F15 refractor -- it performs in spite of its goofy traits.  It rides well on the Mizar SP, too.

-Hmm..somehow though, since the atlas eyepieces are shiny..but for practicality, maybe yes

-I think new cell would be better

-100% yes, but cranberry is an odd colour, I love old scopes with colour schemes-and the plum is clever throwback to the name. So 50/50 on this one. white for faithful restoration, plum for own scheme.


  • Bomber Bob likes this

#75 Bomber Bob

Bomber Bob

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 20,785
  • Joined: 09 Jul 2013
  • Loc: The Swamp, LA (Lower Alabama)

Posted 26 December 2021 - 10:34 AM

Thanks!

 

I repainted the tops of a few antique eyepieces where the original (enamel?) faded / rubbed off.  The glass in these 3 Atlas units is good; but in use, the least bit of incidental / external light is distracting (all those reflections!) -- especially when splitting doubles...

 

Yeah, the pot metal lens cell is thin -- and brittle.  The Shipping proved it.

 

Next month, I'll check with JD on plum colors -- see what he can do.  (I got inspired on colorful old refractors from photos of some Victorian-era scopes.  Some makers made their products real works of art.)


Edited by Bomber Bob, 26 December 2021 - 10:36 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