Classic Scopes

[Rkonrad]

Is it possible to have a dedicated Classic telescopes section I am sure many have them say from 1950 to 1980 ?

[Logieberra]

Aren’t there Yahoo groups of that vintage already in place?

[Kal]

Cloudynights forums has a dedicated Classic scope section if you are looking for likeminded people? It is a bigger community (108k members vs 16k members here) so with a larger base it can support the more niche conversation areas.

[alocky]

It would be nice to have an Australian centred group though, there are far fewer classics here in Oz than in the US. The instruments forum would be the place to start, though. Plus not everyone agrees on what constitutes a 'classic'.
cheers,
Andrew.

[Tropo-Bob]

Good idea!

[Wavytone]

As previously I'd suggest you head to CloudyNights for this as there are a LOT more users with "classic" scopes.
There is no reason why IIS should mirror established groups on CN when there is nothing to gain by doing so.

What qualifies as a "classic" scope is another matter.

1880 Thomas Cook 4.5" refractor on bronze clockwork mount ... definitely.
Anything brass that is a genuine antique pre 1920 - yes (not the fakes, which are many).
A 1960's Questar... yes.
Any Unitron/Polarex scopes - yes.

1970's Orange tube C8 - they were junk then and still are. "classic"... but still junk.
A 60mm Tasco from 1975 - fuggedaboudit, it was junk then and still is.

My Santel... borderline classic.

[LewisM]

How about a Criterion SCT Wavy? :lol: :lol: :lol:

Now THAT is junk extra-ordinaire!

[alocky]

First I've heard of orange tube C8s from the 70s being junk. Mine's got diffraction limited optics and is no better or worse than the newer ones I've used at the observatory, and I don't think it is particularly special.
But if you're looking for help or parts refurbishing a classic - particularly if you want a 220V 50Hz motor, someone local with a lathe or a part you might want to copy, then you might have more luck here on IIS. Although I have found the Cloudy Nights folk to be a great resource, they are a long way away. Unfortunately since the OP is in Jo-berg it's not much help for him.
The awesome thing about the internet is; if you don't want to be involved, you don't have to!

[torana68]

Not enough interested people on here to do it.

[Kunama]

I would rather we have "Classic Scopes" section than the "General Chat" one ..

I think there are actually more people interested than is apparent from the current equipment section.

What defines a "Classic", well that would be a minefield to navigate but suffice to say that a scope that was ahead of its time or had a major impact on this pastime..... Things like the Unitrons, Cave, Pentax refractors, early AstroPhysics, first generation Taks, Tasco..... Orange tube C8s

[N1]

I understand the existence of this site is partly (or mostly?) thanks to people using it and the web traffic that this generates so I'm not sure referring local users elsewhere (or losing the obviously popular "general chat" section) would achieve much for keeping it up and running. I am sure there are Chinese, Argentinian or Swedish astro fora, yet we still have IIS, so a classics section on here would be perfectly fine by the same logic. Whoever doesn't see the benefit won't need to use it...simple.

I'd consider classic anything that has had a profound impact on the hobby/subject and 60mm refractors of yore have definitely done that, as have old SCTs and even the humble dob (preferably built in the spirit of John Dobson). I'd also like to see people's views on potential classics in that section.

[xelasnave]

Perhaps you could open a thread "Post photos of your classic scope here" in the equipment section and request the moderators to mark the thread sticky.
Alex

[LewisM]

A classic scope is a scope that I would class made pre-2000. No need to be judgemental about it. I started with a 60mm Tasco (Toya) and loved it. Bought another recently and restored it and it performed very well. Whilst never owning an orange tube C8, I have looked through a few and classify them as ok. Not spectacular but not awful either.

Perhaps a classic also is a scope that appreciates in value and collectibility over the years.

[raymo]

I would include the Coulter sonotube dobs that made scopes of
unprecedented size available to amateurs. I have used their 17.5"
which was optically pretty good, and they did a 29" at the very cheap price
of approx. US$3000 in the mid eighties. I don't know why or when they
ceased production.
raymo

[torana68]

Let’s not forget Australian made telescopes, mounts and early electronics ��

[FlashDrive]

Here's one ;)

Then and Now ....:thumbsup:

[brian nordstrom]

:D My old 1970's Mizar ( Japanese ) 80mm f 12 refractor in its beat up clothes as I got it off Gumtree locally for $150 , its only scrapes and scratches so easily fixed and optically its superb :thumbsup: easily as good as my 90mm f10 Saxon but not as good as the 102mm f10 .

The eyepieces are ok for .965 Japanese supplied .

The mount is awesome , looks like those cheep chinese EQ,s ( EQ3.2 ? ) but trust me it is not the same ! its very solid , almost as good in use as my Vixen SP with a solid tripod holding it all up .
As a bonus it came with a brand new :eyepop: RA drive that had never been opened or fitted , quite the bonus on a $150 scope .

It will be my next project ;) .

Brian.

[brian nordstrom]

:shrug: Here is the drive in its box.

Brian.

[doppler]

Hi Raymo, Coulter optical is still going, well sort of, I replaced the mirrors in my Cave 8"f6 newt a few years ago with one of their mirror kits. http://www.e-scopes.cc/Murnaghan_Instruments_Corp56469.htm l

Found this bit of history as well.
https://sites.google.com/site/coulterodyssey/index

I'll have a look through some of my old space magazines to see if I can the find 29" mirror add. I can remember dreaming about getting one of those big mirrors.

[LewisM]

I have a hammertone green Vixen VC-200L on a green Vixen GPD - does that count? :)

[FlashDrive]

Green's out .... Sorry :D

[rrussell1962]

Green is the new black Col! Green VC200L on green GPD, classic combo Lewis.

[FlashDrive]

:(

[LewisM]

It's even got the OLD Vixen decals, so nar ne nar ne nar nar Col. :P

[raymo]

Thanks very much Rick. I wonder why they didn't continue with the
large models, perhaps there weren't many buyers for difficult to transport
29" scopes. A friend of mine has a Meade DS16; its a two big man or
three average man job to load and unload the equatorial mount from
his one ton ute.
raymo

[Kal]

Thats actually a great suggestion Alex, it would allow the moderators to gauge the interest as well

[sharpiel]

I believe the correct pronunciation is: nar nar ne nar nar

[ausastronomer]

Whilst not astronomical, a genuine 1885 Stanley of London pocket telescope. Solid brass and leather bound. Still very useable with pretty sharp clear optics. Folded up it's about 75mm long.

Not worth a lot but a family piece having now been in the family for 5 generations.

[xelasnave]

Thank you Andrew and we could mention it on cloudy nights as I am sure folk who are interested would take pleasure in posting here as well...

I think it could run much like the post photos of your equipment where obviously folk post photos but a lot of discussion takes place as well.
There need not be any rigid definition ...I think my lxd 150 is a little classic, however as you correctly observe the activity will indicate if there is a need for a special section.
It surprises me the activity so far in this thread so a sticky thread would be nice to consolidate posts re classics.
Alex

[Wavytone]

Gawd... everything will be “classic”...
Let’s see... I have

- a classic Celestron achro refractor;
- a classic Russian 10x50 finder scope;
- a classic 8x50 finderscope;
- a classic maksutov;
- a bunch of classic eyepieces;
- a classic equatorial mount;
- a classic wooden tripod;
- a classic Skywatcher metal tripod.

Seems the word “classic” is meaningless if not pretentious.

[N1]

Then the obvious purpose of the thread/section or whatever could be to add meaning to it. I for one would debate the "classicness" (not the performance!) of some of the stuff above. There are bound to emerge true classics as opposed to the pretentious classics ;)

[Rkonrad]

Thanks for all the relies I am aware of CN section , just thought it could be relevant here in the South , but I have just just joined and not even from AU so my apologies if I upset anyone , we dont even have a proper forum here in RSA

[Rkonrad]

Absolutely I would love that

[ZeroID]

Always had an interest in Classic scopes, I watch the CloudyNights one with a bit of envy of their choice and range. I've seen two Polarex scopes go through our TradeMe site. Both I would have loved to acquire but finances and space tend to preclude that. All the same I keep my eyes open in case of a bargain to restore and show.
I'm surprised by just how many of you have spoken up in favour of a Classic Scopes forum. Quite a few of you already have budding collections. The range over here in NZ is even more limited than Aust but if a forum or section starts in IIS I'd certainly be keeping an eye on it, ...

[Kunama]

I don't know if this is a classic but it sure is a rare one, all my endeavours to find another one with the Berry&Mackay name have come to zilch....

Berry & Mackay (Aberdeen) 3.25" F15 brass refractor c1890.

The only one I have found that looks just like it is the Sir John Monash Refractor at Monash University and that one is made by Watson & Sons.

My enquiries indicate that B & M didn't actually make the scope but marketed it with their name on the OTA focuser plate.

[LewisM]

The FOA makes a great finder for the B&M... :P