2307 replies to this topic

[Anony]

Posting again this morning to clarify that I really do agree with KWB’s point about being cautious in reporting results from cheap refractors. 
I figure in the main the audience here on Cloudy Nights is experienced enough to know about the importance of steady mounts. 
It always makes me laugh when a you tube video will feature a title like ‘Yes, you can do astro photography with a $39.99 telescope.’ Then bolt it to 10K worth of mountings and auto guiders. 
Right…..

To me cheap astrophotography is a homemade barn door mount, manually operated, your DSLR or mirrorless and a fast and not too long lens. No telescope required. 
Even that exceeds my personal computer skills, would rather just look. 

Good point. When I posted I was going with the idea that everyone here knew the deal -- these scopes likely don't have the greatest mounts, and we can't even be sure how they are optically. Not until we get more feedback anyway.

 

I believe one person here has purchased the 90mm refractor and stated it was decent optically, and the mount wasn't super terrible, usable, albeit a little shaky, when paired with it. But that's kind of all we have to go on as far as the refractors go. The 70mm Mak has a lot more info on it over in the Cat section.

 

And in regard to the 60mm... that mount kind of looks scary bad. But you know this. And also have a better mount to use waiting in the wings.

 

Once my Mak arrives I can at least test out the mount a bit. I own a 102AZ as well as a 90mm F/10 refractor -- I can swap them over and see if the mount/tripod holds up at all. 102AZ may have a chance to be at least at the Omni mount level (usable, with some flaws), 90mm... not expecting so much.

[MGAR]

With a 3 year warranty you can't go wrong!

[grif 678]

There is a Celestron C102 OMNI , with a mount that looks something like the Vixen porta 11, for $150. It looks like new. It is on CN, but the OMNI seems to always cheap to be a 4 inch, but have never heard anything bad about them.

Edited by grif 678, 11 February 2023 - 09:28 PM.

[Anony]

There is a Celestron C102 OMNI , with a mount that looks something like the Vixen porta 11, for $150. It looks like new. It is on CN, but the OMNI seems to always cheap to be a 4 inch, but have never heard anything bad about them.

I'm seeing one at $140, pickup only. And if it's the same as what you saw, that's the mount these scopes come with.

 

Price is cheap, but brand new they were cheap. Around christmas they were $160, brand new, from Costco -- which is like a forever warranty.

[gnowellsct]

 

 

I realize many here are looking for Apos and pricey scopes. But figured I'd just mention these prices... again, seem so low that I expect they are temporary. If anyone buys one of these and thinks they are decent, they may be good options to recommend to beginners with limited budgets.

 

The 90mm seems like a good candidate for beginners, probably okay-ish with that mount, yet still decent aperature. And pretty cheap.

 

 

Quite to the contrary.  The usual query is someone who has $300 to go all in and wants to do astrophotography with a tracking mount.

 

I can't recall anyone saying "Looking for 92mm minimum price $3,000."   Greg N

[Jon Isaacs]

Posting again this morning to clarify that I really do agree with KWB’s point about being cautious in reporting results from cheap refractors. 
I figure in the main the audience here on Cloudy Nights is experienced enough to know about the importance of steady mounts. 
It always makes me laugh when a you tube video will feature a title like ‘Yes, you can do astro photography with a $39.99 telescope.’ Then bolt it to 10K worth of mountings and auto guiders. 
Right…..

To me cheap astrophotography is a homemade barn door mount, manually operated, your DSLR or mirrorless and a fast and not too long lens. No telescope required. 
Even that exceeds my personal computer skills, would rather just look. 

 

I think somewhat differently. The participants in this thread are very likely experienced enough to know the importance of a solid mount. But the audience is much wider and includes people who have no experience and are googling Spectrum Optical's telescopes.

 

We'll be done with this thread and move on but it'll be there for anyone to find for years to come. 

 

In 2004, I bought a 60 mm F/11 at Walmart and put it through it's paces. I wrote a short piece called Fifty Dollars at Walmart which Rod Mollse published in his online magazine Skywatch and was later published in Amateur Astronomy, a small journal.

 

I described what I was able to do with the scope but clearly started the issues like the mount and that I did not recommend it.

 

Jon

[Thomas_M44]

Just thought I'd mention that Spectrum Optical is running a sale right now, if you order direct, and use their SPR25 discount code. Some folks over in the Cat section ordered the 70mm mak and have stated the mount is actually somewhat okay. 

 

Prices I am seeing:

 

60mm refractor (cheaper mount)-- $27

80 f/11 (slow motion mount) -- $94.49

70 f/10 (slow motion mount) --  $75

90 f/7.33 (slow motion mount) - $109.49

102 f/6.5  (EQ mount) -- $150

 

I realize many here are looking for Apos and pricey scopes. But figured I'd just mention these prices... again, seem so low that I expect they are temporary. If anyone buys one of these and thinks they are decent, they may be good options to recommend to beginners with limited budgets.

 

The 90mm seems like a good candidate for beginners, probably okay-ish with that mount, yet still decent aperature. And pretty cheap.

 

Although for $27 I'm tempted to get that 60mm even though I know I'd have absolutely no use for it. But it's sooooo cheap....

 

Edit: Code now is SPR15, 15% off. Not quite as good, but still decent.

If that 80mm f/11 is a refractor, and assuming it has at least marginally passable optics, it then may *potentially* be overall the best telescope among those you listed.

 

Personally, I’d tend to think a better idea might be to avoid all scopes in this price range, simply take a bit more time and save up to around  $400,  and use this to  buy a decent 6-inch f/8 Dobsonian, which would have vastly greater overall capability (except maximum TFOV) as compared all of the $150 and cheaper scopes mentioned. 
 

Also: if $150 is your actual chosen limit, then you will find you can easily get a much better used scope from shopping in the online astronomy forums personal ads, or on Craigslist or similar forums.

 

Frankly, virtually  anything less than perhaps $200 new in the current market can pretty much be rightly considered “disposable junk”.

Edited by Thomas_M44, 12 February 2023 - 05:10 AM.

[John R.]

If that 80mm f/11 is a refractor, and assuming it has at least marginally passable optics, it then may *potentially* be overall the best telescope among those you listed.

 

Personally, I’d tend to think a better idea might be to avoid all scopes in this price range, simply take a bit more time and save up to around  $400,  and use this to  buy a decent 6-inch f/8 Dobsonian, which would have vastly greater overall capability (except maximum TFOV) as compared all of the $150 and cheaper scopes mentioned. 
 

Also: if $150 is your actual chosen limit, then you will find you can easily get a much better used scope from shopping in the online astronomy forums personal ads, or on Craigslist or similar forums.

 

Frankly, virtually  anything less than perhaps $200 new in the current market can pretty much be rightly considered “disposable junk”.

“Virtually anything less than perhaps $200….”

Ah, ‘virtually’ and ‘perhaps’, that leaves just enough room for some exceptions. 
While generally I’d tend to agree with your assessment of the current market at least part of the purpose of this thread was to determine if there are any hidden gems in the low priced market. 
And, as it has turned out, there are. Especially is this true for the 5 lb. Spectrum AZ mount found on several of their scopes. 
I paid $111 for mine, sales tax included for this mount with their 70mm mak and a few folks have purchased it for even less. It is definitely NOT ‘disposable junk’. 
So, for those noobs determined to not spend more than $100-150 it will be a good choice. And they can still save up for that 6 inch dob. 

[Anony]

If that 80mm f/11 is a refractor, and assuming it has at least marginally passable optics, it then may *potentially* be overall the best telescope among those you listed.

 

Personally, I’d tend to think a better idea might be to avoid all scopes in this price range, simply take a bit more time and save up to around  $400,  and use this to  buy a decent 6-inch f/8 Dobsonian, which would have vastly greater overall capability (except maximum TFOV) as compared all of the $150 and cheaper scopes mentioned. 
 

Also: if $150 is your actual chosen limit, then you will find you can easily get a much better used scope from shopping in the online astronomy forums personal ads, or on Craigslist or similar forums.

 

Frankly, virtually  anything less than perhaps $200 new in the current market can pretty much be rightly considered “disposable junk”.

Not so sure I agree that anything less than $200 new is 'disposable junk'. There are exceptions.

 

The Omni 102AZ, $160 new (seemingly only at christmas time) isn't junk. I own one. Mount isn't the greatest, but it's serviceable... scope is perfectly fine. 

 

And the Mak as mentioned, at least based on reviews so far, seems to hit above its weight.

 

We see plenty of people here (and even more over at deal sites like slickdeals) with budgets $100ish or less. And many outside of places like here don't save up for a better and more expensive scope ... they just want something to buy for their kids, or something to try for the first time. Basically the key is to find something at least okay to start with... if they catch the bug, then they save up... if not, then they probably wouldn't have enjoyed spending $400+ on a dob in the first place.

 

As for the refractors here... they may all be junk for all I know. But it's possible one or two at least pass the 'decent' test. So far review-wise I have seen: one user here who has stated the 90mm scope is decent... if so, it may be small enough to work with the AZ mount.

 

There are a couple of revews on amazon liking the 102mm (EQ mount supposedly is so-so)... and someone else stating the 70mm is plastic junk. The 80mm may be a nice scope... theoretically, but it likely will be pushing the limits on that mount.

 

My best guess is 90-102 scopes are decent, with usable, albeit flawed mounts for those size scopes. Smaller and... well... we'll see. The 60mm may be interesting just due to the super low price, but that mount looks horribly bad. It may be more of a toy pirate-style scope in the end, if it's at least okay optically.

 

Edit: I do agree with you as far as the used market goes however. That is where I bought most of my scopes (hence why I have a pile of refractors in my signature)... sometimes they are ridiculously cheap. But I've also found that folks don't always go that route, even when it's recommended to them ... either due to simply wanting new, or bad local markets.

Edited by Anony, 12 February 2023 - 12:05 PM.

[John R.]

The whole problem I have with the used market is; 

1. A new to the hobby person would still need the knowledge to evaluate the scope. 
2. Due to breathtaking shipping costs the offering would need to be within a reasonable pick-up distance. 
Maybe that is due to my local area’s weather and clouds but I’m not sure. 

[Anony]

The whole problem I have with the used market is; 

1. A new to the hobby person would still need the knowledge to evaluate the scope. 
2. Due to breathtaking shipping costs the offering would need to be within a reasonable pick-up distance. 
Maybe that is due to my local area’s weather and clouds but I’m not sure. 

 

Good points.

 

A lot of newcomers probably don't have enough knowledge as to how to evaluate a scope. Now with a little research they probably can figure it out, but many are scared off from even trying.

 

We can see this simply by sale ads too. We've all noticed reflectors upside down in ads. A lot of folks don't even know how telescopes work.

 

As for shipping, yeah, used is pretty much limited to smaller scopes. Mailing a dob simply doesn't work for most people. So it's local only... some are scared away from facebook/craiglist due to reputation and are afraid of them entirely... and some areas have slim pickings.

Edited by Anony, 12 February 2023 - 12:33 PM.

[erin]

Thanks Anony for posting this! I picked up a 90mm as a gift for a friend. She has an older 60mm Meade refractor kit, so this will be a nice step up. I started with a similar scope/mount and enjoyed it. No, the ota isn’t built like a tank, but it’s lightweight, portable, and fun. My friend is not the type who would want to take the time to collimate, so a refractor is perfect in this case.

[Jon Isaacs]

A few thoughts from an life-long bargain hunter:

 

- Some people are comfortable buying used, some aren't.  Do your research, ask questions in the forums, be patient, there are deals to be had.  Craigslist has a low signal to noise ratio but it's local and if someone is interested in a used scope, they can always PM someone like me who has a great deal of experience with buying second hand scopes.

 

- There are some workable scopes under $200.   Orion has a number of scopes under $200 that are reasonable beginners scopes.  They have an ST-80 on an EQ mount with a couple of eyepieces for $120. They have a 114 mm F/4.4 Newtonian on an EQ mount with a two Plossls for $150.  They have the 3 inch F/9.3 Newtonians.  I actually have one of those. Orion includes decent eyepieces with their entry level scopes. 

 

https://www.telescop...160/pc/1/25.uts

 

Jon

[CBM1970]

I am hoping someone will post a review of the 90mm refractor. One of those may be in my future as a bargain basement grab and go. 

 

There were some favorable reviews of the Meade Infinity 90mm f6.7 back when it was a thing. The same OTA (with the same MA eyepieces that Meade bundled with them) is currently being sold by Amscope, along with other small refractors. They are also marked down from the 2022 prices, but not as much as the Spectrum Optics scopes. 

 

Orion has had a 600mm f6.7 for ages, and I think Celestron even has a Costco version

Other than the Meade Infinity, I have heard very little about these other scopes. Reviews are very few and far between, it seems.

 

The 90mm Explorapro from Spectrum Optics seems to be a different OTA with a 660mm fl and corresponding f7.3 focal ratio. I am thinking that gives it a slight edge for reducing CA, but then you lose a bit of max TFOV with a 1.25 inch focuser.

 

I have always felt that these 90mm OTAs (if not the mounts) have potential as first time scopes at reasonable prices, especially for young people. I understand that they will not equal the 130/650 f5 parabolic reflectors, but with prices in the neighborhood of $150, I feel like they are in the realm of reality for limited budgets, or just parents who would scoff at spending close to $300, and seem to be as close to "all rounders" as possible for small achromat refractors. When I think of the shortcomings of my first two scopes (a 60/700mm achro and an Orange tube f11 C90) I can think of several ways in which ease of use and versatility of these 90mm refractors would have been advantageous. Also, the MA eyepieces that come with these (either the Spectrum Optics version, or the Meade clones) are probably better than what came with my first scopes. (There are certainly more of them...)

[Jon Isaacs]

 

The 90mm Explorapro from Spectrum Optics seems to be a different OTA with a 660mm fl and corresponding f7.3 focal ratio. I am thinking that gives it a slight edge for reducing CA, but then you lose a bit of max TFOV with a 1.25 inch focuser.

 

On paper, the 90mm F/7.3 looks interesting.  I suspect the mount is a wobbly piece of work what a scope this size.  How much plastic there is, the quality of the diagonal etc, the quality of the optics, that would have to be established.  The eyepieces seem to be the Aspheric's, the 4mm is apparently quite poor, the other two are OK.. 

 

If they sent me one, I would put it through it's paces but $150 is a little more than I want to spend on a scope I would eventually give away.

 

Jon

[John R.]

One thing to note. Although I’m impressed with the Spectrum AZ mount that comes with the 70mm mak, it does work best with a short telescope. When I put my ancient 60mm f11.7 refractor on it that is 2.6 lbs and 29 inches long it took longer to damp, maybe 3-4 seconds. The shorter ST80, although 4 lbs. was 2-3 seconds and the 11 inch long, 2 lb. mak was 1-2 seconds. 
So….at least with my sample, the longer scopes do not work as well but normally this mount will only carry the 70mm or 90mm mak’s or the ST80 and that’s all I can see packing for a car trip. 
These damp times were with moderate power eyepieces, 60-90x. 
I have hope that the 60mm f8.3 on order will be short enough to damp in 2 seconds. That would make a featherweight 7lb. combo to have always ready, sitting by the back door. Or, if I leave the ST80 on it then a 9 lb. rig. 

 

edit; Keeping in mind KWB’s post one thing I will do differently when I receive this scope is try it out with the supplied eyepieces and tripod. Usually I haven’t bothered to do that, going directly to my better eyepieces and AZ mount….this should be interesting. 
 

edit of the edit; I do have one inexpensive homebuilt accessory to the supplied tripod in mind. I’ll cover that in a later post. 

Edited by John R., 13 February 2023 - 11:15 AM.

[John R.]

A few thoughts from an life-long bargain hunter:

 

- Some people are comfortable buying used, some aren't.  Do your research, ask questions in the forums, be patient, there are deals to be had.  Craigslist has a low signal to noise ratio but it's local and if someone is interested in a used scope, they can always PM someone like me who has a great deal of experience with buying second hand scopes.

 

- There are some workable scopes under $200.   Orion has a number of scopes under $200 that are reasonable beginners scopes.  They have an ST-80 on an EQ mount with a couple of eyepieces for $120. They have a 114 mm F/4.4 Newtonian on an EQ mount with a two Plossls for $150.  They have the 3 inch F/9.3 Newtonians.  I actually have one of those. Orion includes decent eyepieces with their entry level scopes. 

 

https://www.telescop...160/pc/1/25.uts

 

Jon

I bought that Orion 3 inch Space Probe 2 reflector and unfortunately mine was a dog. I just don’t see how they can mess up a spherical mirror but they managed. It sat in the corner of the closet for 6 months then I shortened  the tube and mounted a 3in f6 mirror I had from years ago. At least I salvaged something. I bought mine with the EQ mount, another piece of equipment that is tucked away on the ‘I forgot whats up there…’ shelf in the garage. I’ve had it up to 75x and it holds up well, much better than the smeared mess presented by the original mirror at the same magnification. 

[Anony]

I am hoping someone will post a review of the 90mm refractor. One of those may be in my future as a bargain basement grab and go. 

 

 

Someone did buy this... think they posted in the mak thread, or maybe a small refractor thread here... forget who it was. I think he said it was decent, but didn't really elaborate. Maybe see if you can find his post, or maybe he reads this thread and decides to contribute.

 

I can test out how a longer refractor works with the mount eventually ... once my Mak arrives. But I have no clue how the scope itself is.

 

Edit: And found his post (rocco13) ... not really a review, but at least he didn't say it was horrible or anything.  It's not really enough to go on as far as deciding to buy the scope or not though.

 

 

It's about what you'd expect for $160. It did come with the usual stuff... a red dot finder, the throwaway plossls, plus a cellphone holder to take pics through the eyepiece. The tripod is usable, but as expected, not the most stable. Every time I use the slow motion controls I have to wait several seconds for those vibrations to die down before viewing. And the scope has a certain degree of CA. Again, not unexpected for a basic achromat/tripod setup. The good news is that the tripod has the standard dovetail, which allows me to use the 90 Mak I originally planned on using with it, so that is a plus.

 

I'm aware this is a 'toy' compared to all of this thread's expensive telescopes, but I have no regrets on this purchase. It's not going to replace my other scopes for serious stuff, but it is light, quick and easy to set up and use, and so far I'm just having fun with it.

Edited by Anony, 13 February 2023 - 11:35 AM.

[John R.]

As promised, initial impression of Spectrum 60mm f8.3 refractor with tripod. 
A $34 hidden gem? Or not…..

Well, as with many things, a mixed bag. Ok, first some stats.

1 lb. 8 oz. Weight of OTA with diagonal and 20mm eyepiece and finder. 
2 lbs. 9 oz. Weight of tripod.

4 lbs. 1 oz. Total.  
22 inches  Length overall at infinity with 20mm eyepiece.

Focuser, all plastic, very smooth with no lash or shift in or out. Probably due to grease fit, the lube is viscous and generous. The inside of the focusing tube was flat simi matte. 
The main tube appears to be plastic. The vixen style dovetail is 47mm long and with 20mm eyepiece balance is 20mm to the rear of end of dovetail. (Probably need to wrap an ankle weight around tube to balance it.)

The all plastic finder is about what one would expect. Even I could not make it work, a new to hobby person would not stand a chance. 
The tripod is surprisingly rigid. With the scope attached, with 20mm eyepiece (25x) focused on pine needles about 400 feet away a slap on the tripod damped in less than 2 seconds. 
The azimuth and altitude are plastic on plastic with locks and are not quite smooth, no surprise. With the unbalanced scope altitude adjustment is problematic. 
Ok folks, I’m trying to approach this as an amateur just starting out and was trying to get into that mindset, but it’s not so easy. 
I believe the neophyte would be most frustrated by the finder scope and the altitude adjustment unbalance. They would probably finally find what they were trying to look at and then lock the movement, then have it drift out of the field. I would hope that they view the setup video on youtube. At least Spectrum recommends they start with the 20mm eyepiece. The scope seems serviceable, especially for $34, but a new person would probably need one of us helping them out. 
However that could be said, to some extent, whatever they buy. 

 

As I said, a mixed bag. Fine for me, maybe not so fine for new ones. 
 

It *might* be clear enough after dark to see Jupiter setting in the west….or not. 

 

Edit; Full extension of focusing tube is 98mm 
Edit; Nope, solid overcast tonight, too bad. Once I’m able to confirm image quality I’ll be starting modifications on this featherlight scope. 
Remove the finder studs and dovetail, black masking tape on holes. 
Finish cradle for tube so scope can be rotated and balanced. 
See if I can make adapter for tripod so that scope can be rotated in altitude around its center of gravity. 

Fun times! 

 

Edited by John R., 13 February 2023 - 10:04 PM.

[Anony]

So….at least with my sample, the longer scopes do not work as well but normally this mount will only carry the 70mm or 90mm mak’s or the ST80 and that’s all I can see packing for a car trip.  

 

 

I received my Mak 70 today. I had a brief window to test things out before the clouds rolled in.

 

I did get a chance to try my 102AZ on the spectrum mount.

 

Plus side: It holds the scope fine, and the slow motion controls are rather nice and smooth. The tripod itself seems a touch better than the Omni mount even, decent legs. It's a relatively solid mount/tripod (for the price).

 

Negative side: *wobble wobble*

 

I suppose it's the arm, but there was definitely more wobble with the 102AZ on the spectrum mount compared to the Omni mount. Pretty much any movement, slow motion changes, etc. would introduce wobble. And it wasn't even windy when I was testing it.

 

That said, the Omni mount isn't exactly rock solid either, it has some wobble too. Just less.

 

So... to me, it's likely usable for something like the 60mm scope. Or the short 70mm (but those 70/400 scopes don't tend to have the best reviews, even from Celestron or Orion). The 90mm probably is usable, but will require some patience. I wouldn't suggest going for the 80mm/F11 scope on this... too long.

 

It's definitely not the worst mount I've used with a refractor -- Meade Infinity takes that honor. I had to bring a wrench with me everytime I used that mount.

 

So it beats the Meade Infinity mount (not difficult to do)... but loses to the Omni.

 

As for beginners, not sure how they'd feel about it. The 90mm is the scope on paper that would seem probably the best for newcomers (or at least have the best chance of being a decent scope + usable mount), but that wobble may annoy them. Hard to tell, as my 'bad mount' tolerance is pretty high.

 

Edit: I should add that the mount works great with the 70mm Mak. But that thing is tiny.

Edited by Anony, 13 February 2023 - 09:54 PM.

[John R.]

I received my Mak 70 today. I had a brief window to test things out before the clouds rolled in.

 

I did get a chance to try my 102AZ on the spectrum mount.

 

Plus side: It holds the scope fine, and the slow motion controls are rather nice and smooth. The tripod itself seems a touch better than the Omni mount even, decent legs. It's a relatively solid mount/tripod (for the price).

 

Negative side: *wobble wobble*

 

I suppose it's the arm, but there was definitely more wobble with the 102AZ on the spectrum mount compared to the Omni mount. Pretty much any movement, slow motion changes, etc. would introduce wobble. And it wasn't even windy when I was testing it.

 

That said, the Omni mount isn't exactly rock solid either, it has some wobble too. Just less.

 

So... to me, it's likely usable for something like the 60mm scope. Or the short 70mm (but those 70/400 scopes don't tend to have the best reviews, even from Celestron or Orion). The 90mm probably is usable, but will require some patience. I wouldn't suggest going for the 80mm/F11 scope on this... too long.

 

 

Yep, part of the reason I bought this little 60mm was because it is 500mm, 200mm shorter than than my old 60mm. Once I mount it on a cradle so it can be balanced it should work fine on the Explorapro AZ mount, it’s only 22 inches long. 
So far it is a good deal. My standard daytime target, about 400 feet away, is a fur tree. At 25x with the 20mm eyepiece the needles stood out in crisp detail. I’ll try it at 50x tomorrow but it looks promising. 

This is the advantage of never having looked through a kilo buck APO. You are more satisfied with the simple things. IOW, if you can’t get what you like, like what you can get. 

[John R.]

Further exploration of the Spectrum 60mm x 500mm refractor. 
CORRECTION: The main tube is aluminum. 
CORRECTION: The tripod head is NOT plastic but instead cast metal on both axis. 

CAUTION: The tripod screw might be too long for some cameras, it could damage a camera with a shallow tripod tap. 
I have already opened the tube and removed the finder studs and dovetail, it now sits on a saddle with hose clamp and cushioned by felt and can be balanced. 

Today I will construct an ‘L’ arm to place the center of altitude rotation on axis. Since it will put the telescope to one side of the tripod it will have a counterbalance. Yes, I know, this adds weight to the whole rig, with the counterbalance maybe 2.5 lbs. additional weight but I believe it will improve functionality. 
Should be clear tonight, we shall see. 
 

[Jon Isaacs]

Further exploration of the Spectrum 60mm x 500mm refractor. 
CORRECTION: The main tube is aluminum. 
CORRECTION: The tripod head is NOT plastic but instead cast metal on both axis. 

CAUTION: The tripod screw might be too long for some cameras, it could damage a camera with a shallow tripod tap. 
I have already opened the tube and removed the finder studs and dovetail, it now sits on a saddle with hose clamp and cushioned by felt and can be balanced. 

Today I will construct an ‘L’ arm to place the center of altitude rotation on axis. Since it will put the telescope to one side of the tripod it will have a counterbalance. Yes, I know, this adds weight to the whole rig, with the counterbalance maybe 2.5 lbs. additional weight but I believe it will improve functionality. 
Should be clear tonight, we shall see. 
 

 

A decent 60 mm should be good for 120x, I typically go up to about 160x.

 

I wonder how the mount will work at those higher magnifications.

 

Jon

[John R.]

A decent 60 mm should be good for 120x, I typically go up to about 160x.

 

I wonder how the mount will work at those higher magnifications.

 

Jon

I doubt I’ll go that high. My plan is; 

20mm MA,  25x

10mm MA,  50x 

10mm MA with a 2X barlow,  100x 

I also have a 4mm aspheric, 125x, and I might try that, just for kicks.

If seeing permits that is. 

[rocco13]

I purchased the 90mm f/7.3 refractor. Here's a mini-review of it..

 

https://www.cloudyni...3#entry12484958

 

I have since learned the eyepieces are not plossls, but even lower quality MA's. No biggie since I use some of my other and slightly better EPs in this scope but the MAs aren't terrible.

 

EDIT: I just saw Anony's post #43 quoting my summary of this scope after I'd posted this. Apologies for the redundancy.

Edited by rocco13, 14 February 2023 - 10:03 AM.