Go Back   IceInSpace > Equipment > Equipment Discussions
Register FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #21  
Old 19-09-2007, 08:52 PM
matt's Avatar
matt
6000 post club member

matt is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Launceston, Australia
Posts: 6,570
Thanks, Ian. Very tempting.

Wouldn't mind seeing some pics of the OTA being described.

Cheers
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 19-09-2007, 08:59 PM
stringscope (Ian)
Registered User

stringscope is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Canberra
Posts: 421
Try this:

http://www.rfroyce.com/DK%20OTAs%20o...%20rep%202.htm
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 19-09-2007, 09:34 PM
citivolus's Avatar
citivolus (Ric)
Refracted

citivolus is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Carindale
Posts: 1,178
Might as well throw the Vixen VMC260L in the ring? 260mm f/11.5, 10Kg OTA. Granted, it has a spider which may kill it for you.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 20-09-2007, 06:35 PM
Dennis
Dazzled by the Cosmos.

Dennis is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 11,783
Hi Matt

Whilst I haven’t experimented with a Mewlon 180 vs C9.25 shootout, I think Robert_T gave the edge to the C9.25 based on light gathering. My limited experience would tend to agree, for hi res planetary and lunar webcam imaging.

I love the M180 as a beautiful visual ‘scope, but the loss in aperture over the C9.25 is a definite handicap when trying to obtain large image scales of the planets.

Like you, I’ve had several idle moments of wishing and to that extent, my thoughts usually veered towards a planetary Newtonian. However, a 10” F6 would probably be a test even for my Tak EM200 mount.

Cheers

Dennis
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 20-09-2007, 06:39 PM
Dennis
Dazzled by the Cosmos.

Dennis is offline
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 11,783
Quote:
Originally Posted by citivolus View Post
Might as well throw the Vixen VMC260L in the ring? 260mm f/11.5, 10Kg OTA. Granted, it has a spider which may kill it for you.

Having owned a Vixen VC200L (200mm F9), I understood these fine instruments were designed for flat, wide field astro photography. The resulting large central obstruction and spider vanes allegedly reduce contrast for hi-res planetary imaging.

Cheers

Dennis
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 20-09-2007, 07:48 PM
Geoff45's Avatar
Geoff45 (Geoff)
PI rules

Geoff45 is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt View Post
I'm going to stick with planetary imaging for a while and that means I don't mind sticking with an SCT. I'd prefer something around the 10" aperture OTA for the sake of portability.

I'm just wondering whether I'd see a marked improvement if I traded to something like a 10" Meade LX200R?

Obviously, the tiny bit of extra aperture is not going to set my world on fire, but what about the so-called 'Advanced Ritchey Cretien' optics? Would they be worth the switch?

I suspect not. I've yet to see planetary pics out of a Meade R or RCX series which would convince me the plunge would be worthwhile.
The thing about RC scopes is that they are designed to take wide field star images, with no distortion of stars at the corners of the frame. This is not an issue with planetary photography, where you're only interested in a centre field image, so for planetary work an RC is a waste of money.
Geoff
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


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 09:16 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement