Go Back   IceInSpace > Beginners Start Here > Beginners Equipment Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #21  
Old 11-12-2018, 07:27 PM
D44bond (Dragos)
Registered User

D44bond is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 7
I was looking at a 100mm short tube achromat skywatcher online but im starting to drift towards the explore scientific 80mmAPO. Based on reviews its high quality and crystal clear and sharp.
I have 2 little babies with 2 carseats in the back and a boot full of prams n stuff.... so i know what you mean.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 11-12-2018, 09:02 PM
Madanie7 (Brendan)
Registered User

Madanie7 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by astro744 View Post
You're pretty much set then. I also have the 90 deg Everbrite and it is more convenient for higher altitude objects but the 60 deg pretty much lives in my focuser. The 90 is perfectly fine for terrestrial viewing if the 'scope is lower on the tripod.

The 13mm Nagler is a great choice also and probably a better step from the 24mm Panoptic. The 6-3mm Nagler zoom is highly recommended to provide variable power. The 4-2mm is very useful too if you can find one used as they were discontinued. 6-3 is probably more versatile.

Note if you want to mount the TV-60 on your SCT you can get an X-Y mount from Tele Vue. This also includes the parts required to mount to a Tele Vue clamshell which is what I have done when I want to pair it with the TV-101.

See http://www.televue.com/engine/TV3b_page.asp?id=67
Thanks for the advice.
Pity Bintel have none in stock. Would love one before Christmas before I go away.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 11-12-2018, 09:05 PM
Madanie7 (Brendan)
Registered User

Madanie7 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 64
Quote:
Originally Posted by D44bond View Post
I was looking at a 100mm short tube achromat skywatcher online but im starting to drift towards the explore scientific 80mmAPO. Based on reviews its high quality and crystal clear and sharp.
I have 2 little babies with 2 carseats in the back and a boot full of prams n stuff.... so i know what you mean.
Your hobbies take a backseat very quickly haha.

Nice choice.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-12-2018, 12:10 PM
N1 (Mirko)
Registered User

N1 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Dunners Nu Zulland
Posts: 999
Quote:
Originally Posted by astro744 View Post
The 60 deg. Everbrite diagonal is great for low altitude objects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madanie7 View Post
Thankyou.
I have a 24mm Panoptic and 13mm Nagler but 90 deg everbrite diagonal already.

I'll add that not all 1.25" diagonals allow the light cone to pass without vignetting. The Everbrite is a good choice for that reason - it's designed to work with TV's maximum TFOV eyepieces such as the 24 Pan or 32 PL. It replaced my WO Dielectric, which added a fuzzy black vignette just inside the field stop in those EPs.


With a 90 diagonal already in the mix, it would seem most economical just to leave that out at low altitudes and observe straight-through, with the added benefit of an even cleaner image (at least on paper).
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-12-2018, 12:40 PM
astro744
Registered User

astro744 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 787
Straight through will be upside down and for terrestrial that is not ideal. Also without diagonal in place an extension tube may be needed. Not sure if the TV-60 will come to focus without diagonal or extension; I'll have to try it.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 12-12-2018, 12:45 PM
N1 (Mirko)
Registered User

N1 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Dunners Nu Zulland
Posts: 999
Quote:
Originally Posted by astro744 View Post
Straight through will be upside down and for terrestrial that is not ideal. Also without diagonal in place an extension tube may be needed. Not sure if the TV-60 will come to focus without diagonal or extension; I'll have to try it.
That's correct, so depends on priorities.
Yes the length of the diagonal's light path will have to be replaced by an extension tube or compensated by the focusser.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 14-12-2018, 12:43 PM
Madanie7 (Brendan)
Registered User

Madanie7 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 64
Ordered myself a TV60. Now the wait begins
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 01-01-2019, 01:24 PM
Kerber1955 (Ross)
Registered User

Kerber1955 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Canberra ACT
Posts: 7
[QUOTE=astro744;1407900]

I have an ED80 (f7.5 with ED glass) but don't use it as much as my little Tele Vue 60 (f6) which provides me far more enjoyment.


Question: why does the 60mm give you "far more enjoyment" than the 80mm, assuming both are ED glass? No attack here, just wondering....

Is it the light and small convenience of the 60mm? - though I'd not think an 80mm f/7.5 (600mm focal length) is particularly large or heavy.

Personally, I find 60mm a bit too small - light-starved, I'd say - and prefer 80mm as a grab'n'go. About 78% increase in light-gathering (80 over 60, and goes by area) is very noticeable on DSO, and the 33% extra resolution is useful for the Moon, planets, double stars.

Your experience and thoughts?
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 01-01-2019, 01:49 PM
Wavytone (Nick)
BigBanger

Wavytone is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Killara, Sydney
Posts: 3,710
IMHO the little 102mm SW Mak that bigjoe listed in the classifieds would be better choice than both the small ED refractors. More aperture and more magnification. For a beginner it's a bargain, complete with some eyepieces.

In my experience small refractors only serve two purposes - as finders on a much larger scope, and for imaging. But these two aren't ideal for imaging...
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 01-01-2019, 05:52 PM
astro744
Registered User

astro744 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 787
I bought the Tele Vue 60 because I wanted to know what such a small aperture would give me and I have been pleasantly surprised. I wanted to get the TV-76 but it was double the cost and I would have have likely wanted buy a TV-60 in due course anyway because I'd still be curious of the small aperture capability. The TV-76 does have the advantage of accepting 2" eyepieces as well as having that largest true field of any Tele Vue telescope.

I also bought the Tele Vue TelePod which is a perfect match for the TV-60. I did buy a used 4" clamshell which fits my ED80 but it is more stable on a Tele Vue Gibraltar than on the TelePod even though the head is the same.

Since having the TV-60 I have found that I mainly use it on planets in the evening and morning twilight and in general I favour planetary observing no matter what telescope I am using for this gives me the greatest viewing pleasure. Using the TV-60 I can be set up in minutes and this is also the time it takes the telescope to reach ambient conditions. It is because of the quick setup that I tend to use the TV-60 more than other telescopes but I do also enjoy my TV-101 when mounted on my Gibraltar or when I want tracking, my Losmandy GM-8.

The TV-60 rides nicely on the TV-101 too and is great for making comparisons. I enjoy testing the limits of my telescopes and will look out for objects on the limits of visibility. If I can detect a faint galaxy in 101mm I will then see if 60mm will show it and if so I look for an even fainter one. Of course varying magnifications and exit pupils come into play and having the Nagler zooms helps here.

I also enjoy nature viewing whether it be birds or bugs. Watching a Christmas beetle chewing on a gum leaf from about 30-40m one year was entertaining and even during daytime the 6-3mm Nagler zoom provided a bright and sharp image between 60 and 120x. I generally use a 16mm T5 Nagler for bird watching giving me 22.5x although I often favour a 19mm Panoptic at 19x but the same true field. I find that for daytime use I prefer the smaller apparent fields and the 68 deg of the Panoptic is just about ideal.

If I had to sum it up with one word then that word is convenience. The TV-60 is a very convenient telescope. It is also a very capable telescope and sometimes (often) I just like to see for myself what 60mm is capable of seeing rather than relying on text or the word of others that may say a larger telescope is needed. Sure something will look better in larger aperture but is it detectable in less. It brings me joy to prove in the affirmative.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 02-01-2019, 10:52 PM
Kerber1955 (Ross)
Registered User

Kerber1955 is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Canberra ACT
Posts: 7
astro74, thanks for the detailed reply. Makes excellent sense.
As part of a collection of a few scopes it can fit a particular niche useage well. And I recall long ago when some of the Questar advertising, frequent in Sky & Telescope 50 years or so ago, included using the scope for nature study as a bonus use. Good refractors of manageable size also fit that equation.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 06:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
Meade Australia
Advertisement
Nitecore
Advertisement
SkyWatcher Australia
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Lunatico Astronomical
Advertisement
OzScopes Authorised Dealer
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement