849 replies to this topic

[Echolight]

Here is the TV-101 on the Manfrotto 161MK2B tripod with the recently arrived Stellarvue M002C alt-az head.

 

 

The tripod with head is easily carried. It's rock solid with the telescope onboard, but the combined mount and scope is not something I would hand carry.  The motions are buttery smooth. We will see how that holds up at high magnification -- I'm guessing skies here won't support enough magnification for the lack of slow motion controls to matter. 

 

I will say that I much(!) prefer top mount to side mount designs. I would never leave the TV-101 configured on this mount for storage, where I routinely leave it on the iOptron/Tri-pier/Bino-bracket setup (top mount). I've wondered whether an iOptron HAZ31 head would be added to my collection, but the fact that it can be configured for top mounting versus side mounting will likely push that decision over the top. 

 

Here is the Celestron 6SE.

 

 

This set up is so light and easily managed, every other telescope configuration I have is a nuisance by comparison. 

 

The sky was a mess last night, but some stars and the moon were visible, so I did a quick sanity check to ensure that it focuses properly and to align the red dot finder (which had to be adjusted to its extreme down limit -- not a great thing). The red dot finder is what I would characterize as minimally functional. I foresee an upgrade on that front.

 

I did not do a star alignment, just used the hand paddle to slew, and was easily able to center bright stars like Capella and Theta Aurigae. It would have been fun to take a quick peek at M 37 or M 36, but clouds got in the way.

 

I had innocently imagined using an Explore Scientific 68* 24mm eyepiece for a low magnification "finder" eyepiece, but that is a nonstarter because the diagonal set screws are near the top of the holder and interfere with seating eyepieces that have wide bases. So fat-bottomed eyepieces do not make the 6SE rockin' world go round.  One of the set screws can be seen in this image.

 

 

 

Fortunately from years back I have multiple smaller 1.25 inch eyepieces, including a Meade 40mm Super Plossl, Televue 25/20/15mm plossls, 13/7/5 Nagler Type 6 eyepieces, and an excellent Celestron barlow. And a more recently acquired Takahashi TPL 18mm 1.25" eyepiece. So I won't have a problem managing a range of magnifications with the 6SE. 

 

Despite the minor annoyances with the diagonal set screws and the red dot finder, there is something extremely satisfying about a 6-inch SCT. It's just so light and easily managed compared with larger SCTs. Really an eye opener. We'll see how it stands up in comparison with a 120mm APO, if something like an EON 120 should somehow arrive at my doorstep...

 

You make fat bottomed eyepieces sound like a "royal" pain! In a girly kind of way.... 

 

Clicklock is nice.

 

Don't tell anyone, or the telescope police might be after me. But a D&R'd C6 aint bad. Maybe I can escape persecution with code.

Need to pay attention to backspace for best results.

 

About one point seven with sixty-eight twenty-eight. The safe way.

 

Er one point nine with twenty benji. The wild side.

 

Here's a closeup of the assembly, with required lock ring. Notice that no visual back or nosepiece are utilized. A GSO 2 inch diagonal also has internal SCT threads, and could be used instead of a Baader.

This is a C5. A little more focuser clearance with C6.

 

 

Edit for addendum....

I hear a new movie is coming out. Made for Imax. From two shows in Montreal in the 70's.

Edited by Echolight, 30 November 2023 - 04:14 PM.

[Fiske]

Working on my first 6SE upgrade. 

 

A brief web search turned up a youtube video showing how to fix the adjustment on the 6SE red dot finder by slipping a cardboard shim under the back of the dovetail base. It's amazing that this has been a known issue for years and Celestron hasn't fixed it. The red dot finder that came with it really is crap. Makes you appreciate the quality of the red dot finders that Kevin offers for the Oberwerk XL BTs. 

 

I noticed my Orion CC8 Cassegrain has two dovetail finder bases, and I'll only ever need one on it. And I have an older Orion EZ Finder, that is much(!!) better than what they are selling now. Similar to the Oberwerk red dot. So it will be a trip to the hardware store tomorrow for a few machine screws to replace the cheesy RDF base on the 6SE with the Orion base, which fits the screw holes perfectly.

 

Here are the other items on my upgrade list, which I'm still mulling over:

 

Blue Fire Ball Eyepiece Holder / SCT Back -- a badge of honor now. 

 

Celestron 90° Dielectric Star Diagonal with Twist-Lock 
Opinions on this? Looks to be good quality and coordinates with the 6SE, of course.

 

Celestron f/6.3 Reducer/Corrector 

Looks to be another quality item. Not junk. And, of course, coordinates with the 6SE. Actually looks to be better quality than the other optical reducers I have found.

 

 

 

Edited by Fiske, 01 December 2023 - 06:43 AM.

[Fiske]

Also on my list is a decent dew shield -- which is really for shielding the front corrector plate from stray light -- an advantage of urban astronomy is pretty much zero dew.  I've seen the flexible Celestron option, and am not impressed. Looking for something sized precisely for the 6SE that is light and a hard shell.

 

[norvegicus]

The Celestron reducer is a good one, but I don't get why everyone wants one.  The point of having that scope is the long focal length (as well as aperture of course).  In my mind, reducers are for astrophotography, not observing.  It's extra glass for no benefit if you have a nice BT for wide field viewing.

 

I have the AstroZap flexible dew shield for my C9.25 and like it.  It's easy to handle and is stiff enough when assembled.  Here's the 6" version:  https://www.astronom...with-notch.html

 

there is a Celestron aluminum one:  https://www.astronom...cover-cap.html?

Edited by norvegicus, 01 December 2023 - 08:05 AM.

[Fiske]

The Celestron reducer is a good one, but I don't get why everyone wants one.  The point of having that scope is the long focal length (as well as aperture of course).  In my mind, reducers are for astrophotography, not observing.  It's extra glass for no benefit if you have a nice BT for wide field viewing.

 

I have the AstroZap flexible dew shield for my C9.25 and like it.  It's easy to handle and is stiff enough when assembled.  Here's the 6" version:  https://www.astronom...with-notch.html

 

there is a Celestron aluminum one:  https://www.astronom...cover-cap.html?

Thank you, Norvegicus! 

 

I've decided to hold off on the focal reducer for now. I get the argument for it -- without one it's hard to get an FOV much over one degree, which can be problematic when trying to center something in the field. Yeah, I know it's goto, but a bit more field doesn't hurt when getting stuff in the view or slewing around. 

 

I'm going with the AstroZap shield. The Celestron aluminum one just looks like it would be too much on that cute little 6SE. 

[norvegicus]

Maybe a proper finder scope then instead of a red dot.  Or add another shoe and do both.  I have this inexpensive one on an FS-60Q and really like it:

 

https://www.amazon.c...uct/B09BQCVXKV/

[Fiske]

The Mini Borg 60ED finder scope (mounted on the TV-101 in the image below) has pretty much ruined me for standard RACI finders. And I can't see mounting that on the 6SE.  I'm going to make do with the better quality red-dot and GoTo for now, and will maybe try a focal-reducer if I feel like a more generous FOV would be helpful. I've never used a focal-reducer, and am curious about them.

 

[norvegicus]

Definitely do a double star or planet comparison with and without the reducer if you get one.

[norvegicus]

I use this vintage Eikow Night Hawk 60mm f/5 as a finder on my FS-128 or C9.25 sometimes.  It definitely blows away all smaller ones.  Here is the Eikow with a gun red dot, which turned out to not be necessary.

 

 

 

Sometimes I use the Night Hawk in pirate mode.  Pretty fun.

 

[Fiske]

An awesome support telescope. 

 

  

[dmorrow]

You are tracking my old set up.   You can see it here in my ad back in 2018.  Someone got a great deal as that was one of “freaky sharp” SCTs you sometimes read about.

 

https://www.cloudyni...nd-accessories/

Edited by dmorrow, 01 December 2023 - 09:57 AM.

[dmorrow]

Quick correction of an earlier post, I had the blue fireball with my C8.  It was easier to use than the Antares visual back I sold with the C6.

 

if I was going to stick with a C6 or C8 for the long run, I would spend the $ on the Baader.

Edited by dmorrow, 01 December 2023 - 10:08 AM.

[MT4]

I was surprised too.

Not that I have a suggestion for a support telescope. I do not have enough experience splitting doubles to know what would be a good choice for you.

My choices for telescopes are the Takahashi FOA-60Q and μ-180C, and the Agema SD-120. Figure I am covered with 60, 120, and 180 mm of aperture, and can always use my Maven binoculars and the FOA-60Q while I wait for the larger scopes to cool down.

Our choices are not always rational. Despite the difference in aperture, I used the FOA-60Q far more often than the AT102EDL. The only issue I had with the AT102EDL was the finder and that was more to do with my inexperience aligning finder scopes than any real issue with the scope. See, here I am using past tense and I still own the scope.

For me, it was the Takahashi green/blue that I struggled to accept (much like my dislike of the color of the Meade Masterclass Pro). I originally planned on building an FC-76DCU from components and using a FeatherTouch focuser, so I could avoid the color. The color no longer bothers me. Instead, I have to stop myself from buying additional Takahashi scopes.

Have you ever looked through a Takahashi?

 

What's the issue with Tak green/blue colors?   I love them.   

 

On aligning a finder scope to the main scope, I've struggled with this too.    My latest "solution" is low-tech but it works for me.   I simply use transparent adhesive tape to pad the sides that need to be padded in order for the the finder scope to be reasonably aligned to the main scope.  It's a trial and error procedure but I can typically quickly figure out which sides to pad with adhesive tape. 

 

Another consideration is that the finder scope's FOV should be no less than 5 degrees.

 

I actually use an RDF in conjunction with a finder scope.

 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by MT4, 01 December 2023 - 08:04 PM.

[Bill Barlow]

Fiske I have the AstroZap flexible dew shield with the notch cut out for the mounting rail for my C6.  Works great and is fairly light so it won’t make the scope too front heavy.  I have never used a focal reducer in any of the SCT’s I’ve owned.  I have read from others who used them that they tend to reduce the aperture a bit.

 

Bill

[Fiske]

Fiske I have the AstroZap flexible dew shield with the notch cut out for the mounting rail for my C6.  Works great and is fairly light so it won’t make the scope too front heavy.  I have never used a focal reducer in any of the SCT’s I’ve owned.  I have read from others who used them that they tend to reduce the aperture a bit.

 

Bill

Thanks, Bill! 

 

The AstroZap has been ordered.

 

Plus, I will soon be joining the Blue Fireball Club. 

[aznuge]

...

 

 

Sometimes you feel like a TOA

 

...

 

 

 

Love that pillar!  On 2nd thought I can envision a TOA 130 or 150 on a pillar in my backyard (jus' my 'magination).  Why limit supporting telescopes to a grab and go category?  Even with a heavier fixed position refractor, it would still be supporting the lion's share of observing done with binoculars and BTs in my case.  But it would be awesome!

[jrazz]

I get where Fiske is coming from. He compares instruments and usually has several to look at the same target. It makes a lot of sense to have a high magnification instrument when you are looking at doubles. Sometimes you see something that is just looking like a double and you want to make sure you have the right target. Sometimes you just want a clearer view.

 

It makes a lot of sense for double hunting especially from a LP observing spot.

 

 

I, OTOH am a very monogemistic telescope user. I pick one and just use it. Usually I also pick a magnification and don't change out eyepieces even. I want to be immersed and messing with equipment takes me out of the moment.

 

Neither is right or wrong but it does impact our instrument choices and observing styles. 

 

 

 

This being said, a pier is a HUGE quality of life improvement. Especially if you leave the mount or even the telescope outside covered. 

[Echolight]

The Celestron reducer is a good one, but I don't get why everyone wants one.  The point of having that scope is the long focal length (as well as aperture of course).  In my mind, reducers are for astrophotography, not observing.  It's extra glass for no benefit if you have a nice BT for wide field viewing.

 

I have the AstroZap flexible dew shield for my C9.25 and like it.  It's easy to handle and is stiff enough when assembled.  Here's the 6" version:  https://www.astronom...with-notch.html

 

there is a Celestron aluminum one:  https://www.astronom...cover-cap.html?

To me, the point of a C6 is having a small telescope with big aperture.

 

I certainly didn't buy one just because of the focal length.

[Fiske]

Finder upgrade complete (for the price of a few stainless machine screws). It's actually my second upgrade because I took advantage of a Black Friday deal to get the wifi adapter (for about 1/2 off) so the 6SE can be controlled with SkySafari. 

 

Edited by Fiske, 01 December 2023 - 04:43 PM.

[norvegicus]

To me, the point of a C6 is having a small telescope with big aperture.

 

I certainly didn't buy one just because of the focal length.

I was speaking of Fiske's use case, wanting a high magnification instrument to complement his binoculars, with secondary benefits being more aperture than his 4" refractor and the compact easy to handle form factor.

 

It's all good, we all have individual use cases.  

Edited by norvegicus, 01 December 2023 - 10:03 PM.

[Echolight]

I was speaking of Fiske's use case, wanting a high magnification instrument to complement his binoculars, with secondary benefits being more aperture than his 4" refractor and the compact easy to handle form factor.

 

It's all good, we all have individual use cases.  

Oh. I thought the small scope with big aperture that had goto and tracking in an easy grab and go package was the primary consideration 

....because he already had the CC8,.... that was too big.

And it wasn't the short focal length of the TV-101 that was inhibitory, but the clunkiness of the mounting contraption and the lack of goto and tracking with the proposed alternative mount.

 

My bad

Edited by Echolight, 01 December 2023 - 10:57 PM.

[MT4]

Seeing was a little better tonight so I decided to try going higher in mag.   Here’s my setup:

 

1. SkyRover 120mm BT with a pair of Morpheus 9mm’s for 73x.  
2. Tak FC-100DZ with Leica ASP zoom plus Powermate 2x giving 90-180x.  
 

Both instruments were supported by an Askar 14.4x40 finder scope and an RDF. 
 

Despite the partly cloudy sky, I had great views of Saturn in both instruments.   Sharpness was amazing in the SkyRover at 73x.  The Tak was just phenomenal giving great images virtually through the whole zoom range.

 

I’ve mentioned on a few occasions that if I were to keep just one eyepiece it’d be the Leica plus Powermate 2x.

 

To circle back to the main topic of this thread, which instrument was supporting which?   Hard to tell tonight since I enjoyed both equally.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by MT4, 02 December 2023 - 06:08 AM.

[Jon Isaacs]

+1 on a higher quality SCT visual back and your existing 2" diagonal.  The Celestron VB/ diagonal are cheap "freebies" as you can see; particularly the thin two piece VB.  There are quality SCT VB options from Baader, AP and TV as well as the inexpensive Blue Fireball options. 

 

https://agenaastro.c...sual-backs.html

 

The Celestron SCT diagonals are generally prisms and quite good. The visual backs do the job and on an alt-az mount only need to be secured once.

 

Jon

[Erik Bakker]

For a support scope to my 7-18x binoculars, I often enjoy a small lightweight alt-az scope, easy to carry one-handed mounted, more than my bigger scopes. It makes for an easy to use, similar to my binoculars, complementary scope, taking things further where my binoculars have shown what they can. With my bigger scopes, I generally find the gap between binoculars and scope on the big side. For going deep, the bigger scopes are the instruments of choice, with often one binocular in a supportive finder/context role.

 

Just my 2 cents 

[Rich V.]

The Celestron SCT diagonals are generally prisms and quite good. The visual backs do the job and on an alt-az mount only need to be secured once.

 

Jon

Yeah, the prism diagonal is optically pretty good; it's just that Fiske's problem was with the set screws that are short and large in diameter that interfered with some wider based eyepieces.  I do prefer diagonals and visual backs that have compression rings rather than just set screws pressing directly onto the eyepiece's barrels and the diagonal's nosepieces.  Just my preference, YMMV.