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

Any cat owners also own a dob and/or a refractor?

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
20 replies to this topic

#1 Lunartic

Lunartic

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 322
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2004

Posted 17 June 2004 - 08:03 PM

If so, why? I myself own an LX90 but was wondering if I would benefit from a second type of scope to compensate for any shortcomings of the LX90, which admittedly, I haven't really found yet. But then again, I do not have much experience with either of these other types and so I don't know if I'm missing anything. Any input or suggestions are most welcome.

#2 Tom L

Tom L

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 31061
  • Joined: 07 Jan 2004

Posted 17 June 2004 - 08:12 PM

Or you could rephrase that to read "Any of you Dob or refractor owners also own a Cat?" :D

Welcome to CN...

#3 wilash

wilash

    Fairy Godmother

  • *****
  • Posts: 5746
  • Joined: 30 Sep 2003

Posted 17 June 2004 - 08:32 PM

I have an 80mm f/5 refractor mounted sidi by side with my Mak for wide-field viewing.

#4 John Hoare

John Hoare

    I is who I is

  • *****
  • Posts: 10761
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004

Posted 17 June 2004 - 08:32 PM

Yes. My Ranger is a wide field f/6.8 refractor, the NexStar 4 is f/13, soon to be replaced by an f/10 C5 SCT. It's a case of different strokes.

#5 Lunartic

Lunartic

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 322
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2004

Posted 17 June 2004 - 08:56 PM

The wide field however could be achieved with a cat using the right ep and focal reducer though. I guess I'm wondering if I would benefit at all from picking up a refractor and perhaps piggybacking it. Then again my hard earned $$ may be better spent on some nice ep's and a binoviewer. :waytogo:

#6 bierbelly

bierbelly

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11544
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2004

Posted 17 June 2004 - 09:00 PM

The wide field however could be achieved with a cat using the right ep and focal reducer though. I guess I'm wondering if I would benefit at all from picking up a refractor and perhaps piggybacking it. Then again my hard earned $$ may be better spent on some nice ep's and a binoviewer. :waytogo:


Welcome to the site. The longer you're around, you're likely to find that there isn't any reason not to buy more scopes, at least none that anyone on here will provide.

#7 Lunartic

Lunartic

    Ranger 4

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 322
  • Joined: 14 Jun 2004

Posted 17 June 2004 - 09:16 PM


[/quote]Welcome to the site. The longer you're around, you're likely to find that there isn't any reason not to buy more scopes, at least none that anyone on here will provide. [/quote]

Hehe, thanks for the welcome. Yeah, I can see this is going to get ugly. At least as far as my bank account is concerned.

#8 Oldfield

Oldfield

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 6662
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2002

Posted 17 June 2004 - 09:54 PM

Other than my C8, I have a Ranger and a Sky90. Cat is the jack of all trade but master of none, so one would need one more at least. :)

Don't hit me...

#9 Digital Don

Digital Don

    Mercury-Atlas

  • *****
  • Posts: 2534
  • Joined: 20 Jan 2004

Posted 17 June 2004 - 11:26 PM

Despite what telescope manufacturers will tell you, no optical design or type of telescope is 'perfect'.

Each type has both good and bad aspects when you consider everything - light gathering ability, resolution, spurious color or lack of it, portability, physical size, price, etc.

Sure a 6" apo will give great planetary images, but a 12" Schmidt-Cassegrain will show more when it comes to deep sky objects. That doesen't make either one "superior" though.

The main reason to think about any particular type of telescope as a first, second, or third scope is what its best attributes are. That may mean portability, cost, the ability to show faint deep sky objects, or whatever is important to you.

Good luck!

Don :usa:

#10 David Knisely

David Knisely

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 16933
  • Joined: 19 Apr 2004

Posted 17 June 2004 - 11:48 PM

If so, why? I myself own an LX90 but was wondering if I would benefit from a second type of scope to compensate for any shortcomings of the LX90, which admittedly, I haven't really found yet. But then again, I do not have much experience with either of these other types and so I don't know if I'm missing anything. Any input or suggestions are most welcome.


Sure, I own a 80mm f/5 and a 100mm f/6 scope for wider-field viewing. The maximum field of view in my NexStar 9.25 is around 1.1 degrees (even with the focal reducer), so I sometimes want a bit more on the low-power and wide-field end of things. Both of the refractors can produce fields of view up to around 4 degrees, so that gives me a lot of field to play with. Even the 4 inch is also easier to set up on a moment's notice, so the portability and "quick look" aspect also comes into play here. Clear skies to you.

#11 matt

matt

    Vendor (Scopemania)

  • *****
  • Posts: 10991
  • Joined: 28 Jul 2003

Posted 18 June 2004 - 01:46 AM

I second everybody's motions here, especially Bierbelly's. I have an 8" SCT for general viewing at home, but also a 16" dob for deep-sky viewing from dark places. I've owned a variety of refractors both for their quick setup, their looks (I admit), the clarity of their images (not to confused with resolution) and their mechanics.

#12 gazerjim

gazerjim

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8370
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2004

Posted 18 June 2004 - 01:57 AM

Oldfield's comment about SCT's is largely true. I have a Celestron 9.25 and an 8" f/8 with top quality optics and cooling fan. Both are good scopes. If you don't mind sitting in the stratosphere to reach the eyepiece, the newt. is capable of slightly better planetary images.

#13 John Hoare

John Hoare

    I is who I is

  • *****
  • Posts: 10761
  • Joined: 25 Apr 2004

Posted 18 June 2004 - 03:07 AM

My name is John. I think I'm becoming a scopaholic...

#14 TOMars

TOMars

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 233
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2004

Posted 18 June 2004 - 04:42 AM

Ive had an AR-6 for a year but just elected to buy a C-8 for planetary work. The DSO's are brighter in the C-8, too, but stars arent that great in a cat if you ask me. After having the C-8 for a few weeks now, I know the view in the refractor will be welcome. Its hard to quantify, but its almost sharper on certain objects.

#15 werewolf6977

werewolf6977

    Lord High Smasher

  • *****
  • Posts: 9034
  • Joined: 15 Dec 2003

Posted 18 June 2004 - 05:42 AM

It's not a Dob, but I do have the Spaceprobe 130EQ. I use it when I want wider fov than the N8. Did get a focal reducer though, and will compare fov's with the Newt. Pete

#16 Topcat

Topcat

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 394
  • Joined: 25 Feb 2004

Posted 18 June 2004 - 07:05 AM

The wide field however could be achieved with a cat using the right ep and focal reducer though. I guess I'm wondering if I would benefit at all from picking up a refractor and perhaps piggybacking it. Then again my hard earned $$ may be better spent on some nice ep's and a binoviewer. :waytogo:


Welcome to the site. The longer you're around, you're likely to find that there isn't any reason not to buy more scopes, at least none that anyone on here will provide.


Amen to that!

Before I found this sight, I thought I was happy with my old Celestron refractor. But fortunately, I see the light now and realize that I need to fill al those empty voids in my house with telescopes of every possible configuration. :) I think we are all equipment junkies at heart.

#17 bierbelly

bierbelly

    Voyager 1

  • *****
  • Posts: 11544
  • Joined: 23 Jan 2004

Posted 18 June 2004 - 07:15 AM

WARNING!!! NEVER do the "ok, how much has my new telescope cost me on a '$/nite viewed' basis". My Vixen, which I acquired shortly after joining here, is currently at about $300/nite... :mad: :roflmao:

#18 Stelios

Stelios

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Moderators
  • Posts: 6510
  • Joined: 04 Oct 2003

Posted 21 June 2004 - 07:18 PM

I have a 9.25 and a 6" achro. I find I prefer the achro from my light-polluted home site from where I usually watch planets and double stars. It takes less time to cool down, and there's something about refractor images that if you haven't seen, you will not understand. "More pleasing" seems like a phrase to justify spending (or having spent... :( ) more money, but believe me, it has truth in it.

If I could afford to I would have a relatively short-focus 6" APO at home (say an FS-152). For darker skies it's no contest, the 9.25 wins. If I had to keep one scope, again no contest, the 9.25 wins.

OTOH, the other night I was at a dark site and had a chance to look (multiple times thanks to a VERY gracious owner) through an 18" Obsession. THAT is a *SCOPE*. Not only a superb light bucket, but incredible sharpness of images at high (over 200x) powers.

So now I have decided: The best combination is a FS-152 (or equivalent) for home and a 18" Obsession or 20" Starmaster and a slave to carry it and put it together for dark sites... :D Anyone want a 9.25????

#19 jrcrilly

jrcrilly

    Refractor wienie no more

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 35396
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2003

Posted 21 June 2004 - 08:05 PM

My "main" scope is an SCT but I have a larger Dob for field use and a 4" APO for widefield viewing and photography. The SCT still gets the most use visually.

#20 Trever

Trever

    Gemini

  • *****
  • Posts: 3152
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2003

Posted 22 June 2004 - 09:51 PM

I was thinking of getting a 127mm Mak to view and photograph the planets with. I am not so sure my refractor is ideal for planetary use. But for deep sky it rocks. Deep sky phtography though will have to wait until I get an Atlas....

#21 Scott Beith

Scott Beith

    SRF

  • *****
  • Posts: 47255
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2003

Posted 23 June 2004 - 11:37 AM

Trever,
Are you copying my scope selections???
:lol:

The Starmax 127 does a great job on Planets. I have not used it for photography yet, except for the Venus transit. I have not had the film developed yet. I have seen some good images produced by other people's 5" Maks though.
Let me know if you have any questions.


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