New Scope advice (help)

[Aquartos]

Hi All,
Just after some advice to what telescope would suit my needs the best.

I've been looking at:
.: William Optics FLT 110 F7 refractor with Vixen Sphinx SXD or EQ5 mount
.: Meade LX200GPS 10"
.: A good 8" or 10" Newtonian (Meade or Celestron) to put on a Sphinx SXD or EQ6

Main use will be for astrophotography (nebula & some planetary) with casual observational use. Portability would be good, hence the refractor option, however I want to know what you experts would recommend me getting as I'm fairly new to the hobby.

I've been hearing that the fluorite triplet apos are awesome... The resolving power is apparently better than most reflectors on the market. I also hear there's no replacement for Aperture... The bigger the better. More light in, longer focal ratio, brighter images and better bang for buck).

I'm leaning towards the W/O FLT 110 for the fluorite technology in it, however I thought I'd post on here to get some feedback from you guys are using.

Any help would be much appreciated.

Cheers,
Shev

[TrevorW]

Vixen 200 Schmit Cassegrain and lasmondy G8 mount

[ausastronomer (John Bambury)]

Hi,

You may want to consider another option considering you want to double for visual and imaging.

A 6"/F6 Maksutov Newtonian may be a better compromise for you. You could consider either the MN 61 (6"/F6) from Intes in Russia or the MN 66 (6"/F6) from Intes Micro in Russia. Very similar, but different scopes, different companies and each as good as the other. The MN61 was also sold in the USA by Orion as the Orion Argonaut. These scopes make excellent imaging platforms and are superb visual instruments of very high quality. Quality wise these scopes are light years ahead of the Meade and Celestron scopes and on a par with the FLT 110. Excepting you're getting a lot more aperture over the APO.

Intes MIcro no longer produce scopes but you can certainly still buy the MN61 as a new scope and both pop up reasonably frequently on the second hand market. A new MN61 will cost less than the FLT 110 and easily outperform it.

Eddie Trimarchi who is an IIS forum member and one of Australias best imagers uses an Intes MN61 exclusively.

http://www.astroshed.com/observatory/equip.htm

Cheers,
John B

[montewilson (Monte)]

Aperture and focal length are desirable but don't get ahead of yourself. I am not sure from your post if you are just getting started but if you are don't go much above 500 mm FL to start with. It is not easy and long focal length scopes claim their fair share of enthusiastic imaging beginners.

[jase (Jason)]

Welcome Shev,

The pick of the bunch would be the WO FLT 110. If you can get one with TEC optics instead of TMB you'll never regret it. Actually the TEC versions of the FLT 110 sell second hand for much higher than the original purchase price! Keep in mind TEC used oil spaced, not air. The TMB optics are equally well corrected - still a very good instrument.

You'll also need to decide early on what you intend to image. The requirements for Deep Sky Objects (DSO) vs. Solar System (planetary) imaging are different. You should also take into considering the telescope and camera combination so you obtain the correct sampling (arcsec/pixel).

If you want to hit some DSO's and you've never done any type of imaging before, I would suggest you get started with a short focal length instrument. Demands are much less (it is fun and forgiving). With the monster focal length of an SCT, you'll be pulling your hair out and cursing why you ventured down this path.

[Aquartos]

Thanks for all the feedback guys.

Yes, this will be my first attempt at astro imaging so your advice on keeping focal length short when starting off is appreciated.

I'm really keen on nebula photography. Thought the long focal length would give me easier results, hence the consideration of a SCT or big newtonian.

I'll be using my EOS 20D for the imaging. Will possibly modify it when I get another backup camera.

Looks like I'll keep my eyes on the WO FLT 110 after all. Never knew the TEC oil spaced version was more popular. Thanks for the heads up Jase.

Now to figure out what mount... HEQ5 goto or the more expensive Vixen Sphinx SXD.

Thanks again for the help guys

Cheers,
Shev

[ausastronomer (John Bambury)]

Shev,

If your primary focus is on imaging the FLT 110 is the right choice. Just don't lose sight of the fact that a 4" telescope will only ever be a 4" telescope, irrespective of cost, type, design or quality. In other words "a very small telescope" whose visual performance whilst aesthetically nice, will be clearly inferior to larger aperture instruments.

In respect of the mount. For good imaging a high quality mount is critical and equally as important if not more important than the telescope. In this regard the Chinese mounts are inadequate IMO. The Losmandy GM8 or the Vixen Sphinx are clearly better choices than an EQ anything. The Losmandy GM8 would be my choice of the two.

http://www.losmandy.com/gm8.html

The Losmandy GM8 is middle ground, lying miles above the Chinese mounts and a mount in keeping with the quality of your intended scope purchase. It is cheaper and inferior to the top shelf mounts including the Paramount, Takahashi and Astrophysics mounts which are infinitely more expensive and overkill at this stage.

The FLT 110 on either a GM8 or the Vixen Sphinx would certainly take you a long way as an imager and give you a lot of hours of visual enjoyment.

Cheers,
John B

[beren]

If your thinking about a WO 110FLT maybe consider a Takahashi TSA102

[Kokatha man]

Hi Shev, I'm just dipping my toes into the imaging waters too at present: waiting for my modded 20D from Eric Ezystyles, and am paying a keen interest in any info on the subject too.

It's important to remember when listening to advice that you pay attention to the actual experience/track record of the people giving that advice and their credibility: assastronomers comments about the EQ mounts, and their suitability, are typical uninformed, throw away remarks that aren't based on any authoritive credibility.

To infer that they "are inadequate" (quote) is offensive and derogatory to 2 of the best of our IIS imagers: Mike (Iceman) Salway and his excellent planetary imaging, and Eric (Ezystyles) Lo with DSI's that have a far-reaching reputation for their amazing quality.

Both of these gentlemen use EQ6 mounts; sure there are superior mounts (and often) incredibly priced; but there results have been obtained with aforesaid units and bespeak their capacity. There's an old adage that "a fool and his opinions are freely dispensed" - fortunately you (and I) can find many IIS members that actually have a lot to offer in this imaging etc department.

Lots of success with your imaging when you decide on your chosen equipment: I'm sure you'll be posting before me, even though I've got my mount etc already - an HEQ5, which although not as capable with the load demands of the heavier scopes, is well capable as an imaging/tracking and autoguiding unit, as many good IIS DSI ers and planetary images will confirm.

Cheers, Darryl.

[ausastronomer (John Bambury)]

Originally Posted by Kokatha man

Hi Shev, I'm just dipping my toes into the imaging waters too at present: waiting for my modded 20D from Eric Ezystyles, and am paying a keen interest in any info on the subject too.

It's important to remember when listening to advice that you pay attention to the actual experience/track record of the people giving that advice and their credibility: assastronomers comments about the EQ mounts, and their suitability, are typical uninformed, throw away remarks that aren't based on any authoritive credibility.

To infer that they "are inadequate" (quote) is offensive and derogatory to 2 of the best of our IIS imagers: Mike (Iceman) Salway and his excellent planetary imaging, and Eric (Ezystyles) Lo with DSI's that have a far-reaching reputation for their amazing quality.

Both of these gentlemen use EQ6 mounts; sure there are superior mounts (and often) incredibly priced; but there results have been obtained with aforesaid units and bespeak their capacity. There's an old adage that "a fool and his opinions are freely dispensed" - fortunately you (and I) can find many IIS members that actually have a lot to offer in this imaging etc department.

Lots of success with your imaging when you decide on your chosen equipment: I'm sure you'll be posting before me, even though I've got my mount etc already - an HEQ5, which although not as capable with the load demands of the heavier scopes, is well capable as an imaging/tracking and autoguiding unit, as many good IIS DSI ers and planetary images will confirm.

Cheers, Darryl.

Darryl,

Firstly let me point out that of the two people you mention, Mike Salway is predominantly doing very short exposure high resolution planetary imaging, with long focal lengths, where the demands on the mount are less than critical. So you can immediately remove him from the list. Eric Ezystyles has obviously been lucky and got a good EQ6 mount. Yes some of them are ok, but you take pot luck. Unfortunately with respect to the EQ6 mounts the quality control is not great and they are not all created equal. On some, the tolerances are poor and the periodic error high and unsuited to long exposure imaging. Now that isn't so critical when using the 20D camera which Shev intends to start with, but I am prepared to bet it won't be long before he graduates to a CCD camera where quality of the mount will be far more critical. He is better starting off with a mount he can keep forever for a few extra $$$ initially. For every two people you find happy with their EQ mount for imaging, you will find 5 that weren't happy and subsequently upgraded the mount as their imaging skills improved. In 99% of cases the EQ series mounts represent a means to an end for people who are budget constrained. Be rest assured "NONE" of the worlds' best imagers are using an EQ anything mount. Shev is starting off with a high grade APO refractor, should he not buy a mount in keeping with the quality of the scope he is buying?

I am also prepared to bet that it won't be too far into the future that both Mike Salway and Eric Ezystyles upgrade their mounts as finances permit. I can guarantee you that if you offered both Mike Salway and Eric Ezystyles a free upgrade on their EQ mounts to something better, both would jump at the opportunity. I know for a fact having observed with Mike Salway on countless occasions, he bought what he could afford that had the load capacity to carry his scope. Had Mike had a spare $20K lying around he wouldn't have bought an EQ6.

Cheers,
John B

[ausastronomer (John Bambury)]

Darryl,

You also need to be aware that not everyone has a mortgage, 3 screaming kids and a whineing missus that severely restricts their available astronomy equipment budget.

If James Packer came to the forum and posted:

"I want to buy an equatorial mount to start astrophotography with my new 4" APO refractor".

Would you recommend he buy a sub $1,000 Chinese mount? I should hope not. Not everyone is budget limited and some people can afford top quality equipment. While the Synta EQ mounts are adequate for some and offer good value for money, there are clearly better mounts available that others can afford. Not everyone is restricted to being "a budget astronomer".

You can also be rest assured that if you asked everyone currently imaging with an EQ6 mount, "Would you like a FREE Paramount ME, the answer would be yes in 99.9% of cases, if not 100% of cases"

Cheers,
John B

[montewilson (Monte)]

There are good points coming from all directions. What is important to appreciate is that while the EQ series are not of the same ilk as the top end mounts they have made astrophotography accessible.

Its great to see so many people using a DSLR with an ED80 and an EQ5/6. The results are encouraging and many will make the next step to more refined equipment.

Without this intermediate equipment astro-imaging would still be a dark art practiced by few.

Caveat emptor - John is right, it is pot luck with these mounts and a lot of them have a high PE that will preclude long exposures at higher focal lengths.

[TrevorW]

Sorry I'll come in here and give an opinion as like someone said they are free.

As an amatuer astronomer who has been budget constrained for 30 years, my wife never worked full time, mediocre salary, haven't won lotto and had 2 kids and still have a mortgage you buy the best you can with what you can afford.

However thinking back over the years I've wasted more money on cars with little or no return and wasted money on my hobbies as well never being happy with what I had as I always had to settle for second best.

So in hindsight if I was starting out again I'd borrow $10,000 buy the best scope and mount I could get with the money and still have something of value to show for it after 30 years and in that time enjoyed my hobby knowing I had good equipment compared to all those other amatuers out there.

Happy star hunting.

[westsiderailway]

A good discussion, pity one or two people went overboard in IMHO.

When buying equipment like this , only the person buying can say what they can offord and when. it is no good other people saying that they should wait untill they can offord better stuff, as the person will never get into the hobbie. You have to start somewhere.

You buy what you can offord and use it for a while, either you are happy with it or you can upgrade at a later stage. Which means that you will sell it on the second hande market, so that someone else can either upgrade or start in the hobbie.

[AstralTraveller (David)]

I can see Trevor's point. It is very easy to get caught in the upgrade spiral. You keep deciding that what you bought recently (often too recently) is no longer adequate and you could use a bigger shinier toy. So you upgrade and sell off some old gear to help fund it. The trouble is you never get what you paid for it, often not even half. Just look at the prices in the IIS classifieds. And the plummeting price of astro gear doesn't help the resale values. I've heard some very good and well equipped observers lament along the same lines.

On the other hand it can be hard to know what your future needs will be. I recently refurbished my old bass guitar. I practiced pretty diligently for a few weeks and then the enthusiasm gradually wained. It hasn't been touched for a couple of weeks now. Pity. But just as well I didn't splash out on a good case and a serious amp.

Perhaps there is no good answer here, but food for thought.

cheers,
Dave