Despite protests from the "Minister for Finance", I am planning the purchase of a new scope, and would love to get some feedback from those of you who may have had some experience with the various options that plague me.
While I will primarily do visual work with it, I want to be able to move into some astrophotoghy as well in the future. Nothing obsessive (yet). I also need the scope to be portable, as 3 or 4 unfortunately placed street lights make observing from my house a pipe-dream.
I already own a 4" newt which I have had since 1986 (no prizes for guessing why), and am comfortable with an equatorial mount. I used one of my club's loan-a-scopes, and found out that I really don't like fork mounts - some of the things I can locate without a GOTO happen to be very close to celestial south, and my neck doesn't stretch that far!
My budget is $2500-$3000, and research to date indicates the following candidates:
Skywatcher 10" (SW252Sky) - $2995 from Sirius Optics. Includes GOTO EQ6 mount.
Meade LXD-75 10N - $2750 from Star Optics. This is a Schmidt-Newtonian, which I have never seen.
C10N from York Optical on a CG-5 Equatorial. $2550.
I have also been told that Orion make a 10" Newt which is better than the Skywatcher, but about $1000 more.
Can anybody comment on these, especially the quality of the mounts, which reading these forums certainly confirms is as important as the optics.
Note I have steered away from equatorially mounted SCTs mainly because they seem more expensive, but if anybody has suggestions in that regard, I am open to ideas.
Last edited by DaveO; 10-03-2006 at 09:14 PM.
Reason: Reflecting mutation in thread discussion
ok, top first a c9.25 is a rippa, but really up there in price say $6000 including a really solid mount.
i have a 10" dob which is great and very portable as it is on a mick pinner buggy. it is now motorized, so for $2500, you would have change left over. you would have to fiddle to install etc.
Not many guys i know have reflectors on eq mounts apart from bird, but his bohemoth really needs a titan mount and that is really expensive.
so i know i have not really answered your question, but dob mounts seem to be very flexible and cheap, hence leaving money for cameras for planetary work etc????
I saw another forum where the 9.25 was recommended. But the price is really outside the budget when you add a solid mount.
My main concern with a dob is that there are fundamental problems with tracking, which affect the use in photo work. I know you can motorise them, but the word "hassle" springs to mind.
I'll stay tuned - maybe there are some other ideas out there.
While on the subject of 10" Newts and Dob mounts, can someone give me a few details on the pushto's available for dobs. Something that could perhaps be taken off a 10", and then used on a "big mother of all newts" latter on.
I really have limited time to search the skies, so something that lets me align with a couple of stars, check the database, and push until I'm told to stop.
I simply couldn't afford a large EQ6 mount, motors, etc. That might come when I win the lotto and want to get into photography. At this moment - visual only.
Oh, and P.S. - I wouldn't use a Newt on a Dob mount for any photography
The Meade LXD-75 is a really, really nice scope out of the box. I used one last year and it got a double thumbs up from me. If anything the mount may let it down if you get very ambitious astrophotographically. The EQ6 is a great mount that will take a lot of weight should you plan to hang lots of equipment off it and do autoguiding - but be aware, it probably requires a bit of tweaking to get it up to scratch (my heq5 is fine for a 10" visually).
So, if you just want it to work and give you a good experience, get the Meade.
If you are a practical sort of chap, then the skywatcher/eq6 has plenty of potential (but is a lot larger than the meade and needs a pier to work best).
The kind of mount you would need to carry a 10" newt effectively becomes very expensive.
Whilst a 10" newt is nice for visual work, you really dont NEED that much aperture to do good astrophotography. Check out what many acheive with just an 80mm refractor.
Inside that budget you could maybe get a 10' dob for visual AND a smaller scope on say a motorised heq5 for your photography needs.
The LXD75 10inch Meade with autostar would be very nice. In the right budget as well.
The Meade LXD75 mount is the equivalent of an EQ5 and is really inadequte for a 10" telescope. An overloaded equatorial mount becomes nothing more than an excercise in frustration IMO. In addition to that, if planetary/lunar viewing/imaging is your main objective (Dave lives in light polluted Sydney so I assume it would be) the Schmidt Newtonians are not a great choice IMO. The Schmidt Newtonians are inferior to a standard newtonian at high power for lunar/planetary viewing IMO. They are much better suited to widefield low power views of DSO's at which they excel. If you were to go the Schmidt Newt route I would limit myself to the 8" model, because of the mount, I would be avoiding the 10" version. That having been said I know several people who are happy with their 10" Schmidt Newts, they obviously have different standards and expectations than I do.
My recommendation within your budget and the options you have listed would be the 10" F5 Guan Sheng OTA on a Synta EQ6 mount. Andrews can do this combo for you and so can Bintel I believe.
Geoff's recommendation of the 10" dob for visual and a smaller Equatorially mounted scope for imaging is another excellent option and is possibly a better choice than a 10" Equatorially mounted Newt IMO.
Yes, I've been taking a good hard look at this system. Really is great for what it does. Best thing is that it is swappable, just buy a different mounting kit. That, plus you can buy motors from the states which support it, and turn your Newt into a "goto".
I love the way it is upgradeable. Me thinks my bank account will be depreiciating shortly.
One thing not mentioned above which may be relevant is the very high central obstruction factor in Schmidt-Newts; up to 40%. Your effective aperture will be much less than the nominal.
Ive got a 10" fork mounted scope.Yep, sometimes you've got some awkward positions to get into for viewing but after a short time, it becomes 2nd nature.Ive also found myself in awkward/uncomfortable positions using dobs & refractors though.
Whilst a 10" newt is nice for visual work, you really dont NEED that much aperture to do good astrophotography. Check out what many acheive with just an 80mm refractor.
Geoff, thanks for the alternative point of view. I have to admit I like the look and portability of the 80mm, but I had been repeatedly told that 8" was a minimum for astrophotography (admittedly this was by people selling me 10" newts!). I will need to investigate further.
The Meade LXD75 mount is the equivalent of an EQ5 and is really inadequte for a 10" telescope. An overloaded equatorial mount becomes nothing more than an excercise in frustration IMO.
Thanks John. This was what I was looking for. I had read some criticism on the LDX mount elsewhere in a different context, and wasn't sure whether it would cope with this size scope.
The EQ6 is a great mount that will take a lot of weight should you plan to hang lots of equipment off it and do autoguiding - but be aware, it probably requires a bit of tweaking to get it up to scratch...
If you are a practical sort of chap, then the skywatcher/eq6 has plenty of potential (but is a lot larger than the meade and needs a pier to work best).
Mmmm.. this is starting to sound ominous. Can you explain further what you mean by "tweaking"? Since owning a house I have become far more "practical" than I ever hoped to be or friends considered possible, but I'm not sure I want to start tinkering with the scope.
One thing not mentioned above which may be relevant is the very high central obstruction factor in Schmidt-Newts; up to 40%. Your effective aperture will be much less than the nominal.
Mark.
Mark,
I already mentioned that the Meade Schmidt Newtonians were a poor choice as a lunar/planetary scope and not as good as a normal newtonian. The large 40% Central Obstruction, which reduces contrast, is one of several factors which contribute to this.
I had been repeatedly told that 8" was a minimum for astrophotography (admittedly this was by people selling me 10" newts!). I will need to investigate further.
Absolute rubbish !
I would suggest 8" as a minimum size visual scope to be satisfying (especially for dso's) and I know many will disagree with that statement, but photography can be done with much smaller apertures, especially for widefield work.
For photography the most important factor is the stability and rigidity of the mount, and for larger scopes the costs can be prohibitive. Much better to comprimise on scope size than the mount.
To prove that Geoff is correct and what you have been told is RUBBISH !!!!
Here are 2 links to some images taken by my friend in the USA Kevin Dixon, with a 60mm (yes 60mm same size as the department store Tasco) Takahashi APO refractor.
As you can see from those images what you have been told is absolute RUBBISH in the 1st degree. Keep in mind that Kevin is using very high end equipment in every aspect of his imaging but notwithstanding it is only 60mm and 106mm of aperture only.
In terms of Geoff's comments about an 8" scope being the minimum size for pleasing visually astronomy, I would also agree with this and add a rider in that a skilled observer under dark skies can achieve a lot with a high quality 6" scope.
Seeking advice on 10" scopes (or is that ED80s?)
