Gso rc 16" F8

Tandum (Robin) · #1 30-04-2013, 03:27 AM

Prices are up on Andrews. $5K for CF.

brian nordstrom (As avatar) · #2 30-04-2013, 05:10 PM

Woaw ! Robin thats a lot of scope for not much money , hope some one here gets one soon so we can hear all about it .
Brian .

LewisM · #3 30-04-2013, 05:33 PM

Being impressed by the results of Allan Gould's 10" GSO, I am tempted myself... 10", not 16"

Peter.M · #4 30-04-2013, 05:33 PM

There is one issue with this scope that I think GSO may have shot themselves in the foot with. Anyone with a mount capable of carrying it will also probably prefer to put a more premium scope on it

.

allan gould · #5 30-04-2013, 05:42 PM

Not necessarily. The SW eq8 would be a great platform especially running eqmod. I keep tempting myself with this option.

h0ughy (David) · #6 30-04-2013, 05:52 PM

wow now that is an option - i have the titan and soon the eq8. taking the 14" meade lx200R but another 2 inches........

Paul Haese · #7 30-04-2013, 06:03 PM

Good price and no doubt the optics will be good. Where I think GSO need to go though is teaming up with a decent focusor and using truss designs for scopes in the 12" and up sizes. As many will know I have an RC12" and I think while the scope is good for the price it could be much better. Some structural enhancements such as I have mentioned could really draw patrons away from the more expensive manufacturers.

BTW I will not be buying a 16", someone else will have to do that.

Peter.M · #8 30-04-2013, 06:11 PM

The million dollar question, do we think the eq8s pe will be up to the task at 3200mm?

Satchmo · #9 30-04-2013, 06:14 PM

I think the EQ8 will probably handle the RC12 well ( which so far doesn't seem to have fired a shot in the market ). A mount capable of handling the 16" is probably a few years off ( EQ10 ?)

Paul Haese · #10 30-04-2013, 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satchmo

I think the EQ8 will probably handle the RC12 well ( which so far doesn't seem to have fired a shot in the market ).

Are you referring to the mount or the scope? If the scope then we have been through this. Click here for an image. If the mount then I have not heard of anyone buying one yet or much less imaging with one.

Satchmo · #11 30-04-2013, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Haese

Are you referring to the mount or the scope? If the scope then we have been through this. Click here for an image. If the mount then I have not heard of anyone buying one yet or much less imaging with one.

Yes hardly any sold and comparing to shots with Newts the results are pretty average

Imaging at 2500mm focal length is not a popular passtime.
You have a Paramount to mount yours on - most people who can afford a GSO RC cannot afford a Paramount.
I expect that more RC12's will sell when the EQ8 comes out , but that the EQ8 won't adequately hold a 16" RC .

allan gould · #12 30-04-2013, 06:59 PM

There is this from a Dutch site where those in cloudy nights forum were alluding to it being the new GSO 16" RC.
http://www.robtics.nl/product_info.p...94&language=en
You can see on the Robotics home page that they are claiming the 10" GSO RC under their own brand name
http://www.robtics.nl/

Should sattisfy your requirements Paul.

h0ughy (David) · #13 30-04-2013, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satchmo

Yes hardly any sold and comparing to shots with Newts the results are pretty average

Imaging at 2500mm focal length is not a popular passtime.
You have a Paramount to mount yours on - most people who can afford a GSO RC cannot afford a Paramount.
I expect that more RC12's will sell when the EQ8 comes out , but that the EQ8 won't adequately hold a 16" RC .

but it is built for 50kg - so lets go the 2/3 rule - thats over 30kg

the 14" meade is 24kg i think

Peter.M · #14 30-04-2013, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by h0ughy

but it is built for 50kg - so lets go the 2/3 rule - thats over 30kg

the 14" meade is 24kg i think

I have read the GSO rc12 is 22kg. Add a camera to that and all your other bits and bobs and your probably getting close to 30kgs. Another 4 inches of mirror and the additional tube weight I would hazard a guess the RC16 weighs quite a lot.

Paul Haese · #15 30-04-2013, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by allan gould

There is this from a Dutch site where those in cloudy nights forum were alluding to it being the new GSO 16" RC.
http://www.robtics.nl/product_info.p...94&language=en
You can see on the Robotics home page that they are claiming the 10" GSO RC under their own brand name
http://www.robtics.nl/

Should sattisfy your requirements Paul.

If only they had bodies for a RC12. That would suit me. I might have to contact Brett to see who he got to build his Vixen into a truss.

clive milne · #16 30-04-2013, 07:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul Haese

Are you referring to the mount or the scope? If the scope then we have been through this. Click here for an image.

Come on Paul, that image is hardly a convincing validation.
Considering the gear you have at your disposal, you should be able to do way better than that.

For example, have a look at this image taken by David Plesko using the same camera and mount. David had the advantage of slightly more aperture (14" versus 12") but took this from a location where the galaxy doesn't rise more than 35 degrees above the horizon where as for you it should come close to directly over head.

http://www.billionsandbillions.com/i...C253_large.jpg

David's image is in a different league... this is not consistent with what you are hoping to imply.

Paul Haese · #17 30-04-2013, 07:53 PM

That is funny Clive. This goes to show little you actually know about imaging.

First off, that scope is close to 20K and I never said these scopes were as good an RCOS. Secondly, and importantly this image was taken with an AO-L. My image is taken without an AO-L. If you knew what an advantage this has in imaging at long focal lengths you would not have embarrassed yourself Clive. He also uses focusmax for his focus. I did not do that for my image and am working on this for my RC12 now. Not only that this image you put up has had a lot of deconvolution applied to it and I can see it because I know how to process images, not seen you do that before. For the equipment David uses go to this site. Off you hop now and go back to where it is you came from.

Tandum (Robin) · #18 30-04-2013, 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by allan gould

The SW eq8 would be a great platform especially running eqmod. I keep tempting myself with this option.

I read on another forum that Skywatchers facebook page says the mounts are ready to go so we should see some soon.

netwolf · #19 30-04-2013, 08:37 PM

Awesome price.

Wow and so much cheaper than US, 2000 less.

http://www.cloudynights.com/ubbthrea.../o/all/fpart/1

bert (Brett) · #20 30-04-2013, 08:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satchmo

Yes hardly any sold and comparing to shots with Newts the results are pretty average

Imaging at 2500mm focal length is not a popular passtime.
You have a Paramount to mount yours on - most people who can afford a GSO RC cannot afford a Paramount.
I expect that more RC12's will sell when the EQ8 comes out , but that the EQ8 won't adequately hold a 16" RC .

I would have to disagree with this point. The paramount second hand is getting down (on astromart) to around 8k. This present excellent value for money. I imaging a lot of prospective 16 owners will be buying paramounts.

I expect to pull the trigger on a rc16 when they are due to be released. Can't wait, in fact I have most of the imaging train sorted out ready to go on one of these babies.