Posted: 2/7/2016 4:45:07 PM EDT
|
From time to time the thought of a nice refracting telescope enters my mind. I already own a Meade ETX 125 which I have found does a fairly good job (to me anyway) on both planets and deep space objects but is not without it's limitations. Over the years I've thought of getting a larger scope like an LX90 or LX200, but based on the weight and dimensions they seem a little larger than I'd care to handle by myself.
I was thinking a 5" or 6" refractor might be a good alternative. Does anyone here own such a scope? |
|
Quoted: Milling machine. This a small one. http://preview.turbosquid.com/Preview/2014/07/09__21_10_26/1TSBridgeportMillingMachine.jpgf9d97872-0460-4157-bd3c-9c69e6c1494bOriginal.jpg |
|
I have an Astro-Physics 6" APO on their 900 mount and a Takahashi 5" Fluorite. They are the finest instruments of their type available anywhere. Stunning views to planets, moon, sun, comets, etc. I take CCD images of deep sky that smoke any mirror type instrument. Downside is time and $$$. Astrophysics has a waiting list longer than most people are willing to wait. Takahashi can be found. The optics are one piece....dont skimp on the mount. It is as important if you plan to do any imaging. BR, |
|
Quoted:
High quality refractors can be very expensive. What's your budget? You'll get more bang for your buck with a reflector. Aperture is where it's at.  I am budgeting up to 3k for the scope and mount. this is one of the scopes I am looking at http://www.skiesunlimited.com/explore-scientific-ed127-essential-edition-telescope.html |
|
Quoted:
Don't understand the Bridgeport mill ref. That bad? Quoted:
Quoted:
I own a 6" AstroPhysics Apochromatic scope from circa 1991 on a mount that reminds me of a bridgeport mill every time I set it up. It is great for planets, the 20" DOB blows it away for deep sky. Don't understand the Bridgeport mill ref. That bad? The mount weights well into the 90 pound range--and that is before the counter weight is added. |
|
Ok then. Is your primary observing goal planets and such, or deep sky? Five inch refractors can do very well on planets, stars, multiple stars and the like, not so much on extended/deep sky objects. I have an older 5" Meade apo refractor, it's an f/9. It does well as mentioned above. If I want a good look at deep sky stuff, I go with a larger reflector.
If you want an all around scope, you should consider an 8" or so Schmidt-Cassegrain. It will do better on deep sky objects. The increased aperture will reveal dimmer stuff. You can get a very nice scope like a Celestron 8 or 9.25 for your budget. You'll probably find the larger but shorter scope easier to manage than a large refractor. I once did some observing with some guys out in the southern NM desert, they had a 4" f/15 refractor. That scope was a double handful. I had my 8" Celestron, it outperformed the refractor on extended objects. Your budget would get you a very large Dob reflector ideal for deep sky stuff, if that's your thing. It all depends on what you want to do. I will say this--there is something about the view through a good refractor that is unequaled by most reflectors. The optics are unobstructed, the view is clear and sharp, a whole different league. Good refractors cost a lot of money, though. |
|
Quoted:
Ok then. Is your primary observing goal planets and such, or deep sky? Five inch refractors can do very well on planets, stars, multiple stars and the like, not so much on extended/deep sky objects. I have an older 5" Meade apo refractor, it's an f/9. It does well as mentioned above. If I want a good look at deep sky stuff, I go with a larger reflector. If you want an all around scope, you should consider an 8" or so Schmidt-Cassegrain. It will do better on deep sky objects. The increased aperture will reveal dimmer stuff. You can get a very nice scope like a Celestron 8 or 9.25 for your budget. You'll probably find the larger but shorter scope easier to manage than a large refractor. I once did some observing with some guys out in the southern NM desert, they had a 4" f/15 refractor. That scope was a double handful. I had my 8" Celestron, it outperformed the refractor on extended objects. Your budget would get you a very large Dob reflector ideal for deep sky stuff, if that's your thing. It all depends on what you want to do. I will say this--there is something about the view through a good refractor that is unequaled by most reflectors. The optics are unobstructed, the view is clear and sharp, a whole different league. Good refractors cost a lot of money, though. hmmm..maybe i need to give it more thought. i didn't realize that a 4 or 5 " refractor could be that unwieldy. As for my viewing interests, one scope capable of doing both equally well would be nice |
|
Quoted:
hmmm..maybe i need to give it more thought. i didn't realize that a 4 or 5 " refractor could be that unwieldy. As for my viewing interests, one scope capable of doing both equally well would be nice Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok then. Is your primary observing goal planets and such, or deep sky? Five inch refractors can do very well on planets, stars, multiple stars and the like, not so much on extended/deep sky objects. I have an older 5" Meade apo refractor, it's an f/9. It does well as mentioned above. If I want a good look at deep sky stuff, I go with a larger reflector. If you want an all around scope, you should consider an 8" or so Schmidt-Cassegrain. It will do better on deep sky objects. The increased aperture will reveal dimmer stuff. You can get a very nice scope like a Celestron 8 or 9.25 for your budget. You'll probably find the larger but shorter scope easier to manage than a large refractor. I once did some observing with some guys out in the southern NM desert, they had a 4" f/15 refractor. That scope was a double handful. I had my 8" Celestron, it outperformed the refractor on extended objects. Your budget would get you a very large Dob reflector ideal for deep sky stuff, if that's your thing. It all depends on what you want to do. I will say this--there is something about the view through a good refractor that is unequaled by most reflectors. The optics are unobstructed, the view is clear and sharp, a whole different league. Good refractors cost a lot of money, though. hmmm..maybe i need to give it more thought. i didn't realize that a 4 or 5 " refractor could be that unwieldy. As for my viewing interests, one scope capable of doing both equally well would be nice Get the Celestron 8 or 9.25 then. I'd stay away from Meades. Trust me, I've owned a few. 
|
|
Another astrophysics owner here -
6" Starfire with 900 mount. I have the programming and operation of the scope pretty well figured out for astrophotography. With the guide scope and SBIG ST-4 camera, it is pretty easy... Unless you are doing photography, you would be much better served with a dob or other system... A 6" apochromatic refractor produces pristine images but is not so good for visual work. I don't even want to know what a new one would cost - I bought my stuff 16 years ago... 
|
|
Quoted:
Get the Celestron 8 or 9.25 then. I'd stay away from Meades. Trust me, I've owned a few.
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok then. Is your primary observing goal planets and such, or deep sky? Five inch refractors can do very well on planets, stars, multiple stars and the like, not so much on extended/deep sky objects. I have an older 5" Meade apo refractor, it's an f/9. It does well as mentioned above. If I want a good look at deep sky stuff, I go with a larger reflector. If you want an all around scope, you should consider an 8" or so Schmidt-Cassegrain. It will do better on deep sky objects. The increased aperture will reveal dimmer stuff. You can get a very nice scope like a Celestron 8 or 9.25 for your budget. You'll probably find the larger but shorter scope easier to manage than a large refractor. I once did some observing with some guys out in the southern NM desert, they had a 4" f/15 refractor. That scope was a double handful. I had my 8" Celestron, it outperformed the refractor on extended objects. Your budget would get you a very large Dob reflector ideal for deep sky stuff, if that's your thing. It all depends on what you want to do. I will say this--there is something about the view through a good refractor that is unequaled by most reflectors. The optics are unobstructed, the view is clear and sharp, a whole different league. Good refractors cost a lot of money, though. hmmm..maybe i need to give it more thought. i didn't realize that a 4 or 5 " refractor could be that unwieldy. As for my viewing interests, one scope capable of doing both equally well would be nice Get the Celestron 8 or 9.25 then. I'd stay away from Meades. Trust me, I've owned a few.
why do you say that ? for whatever reason I seem drawn to the Meades. |
|
Quoted:
why do you say that ? for whatever reason I seem drawn to the Meades. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Ok then. Is your primary observing goal planets and such, or deep sky? Five inch refractors can do very well on planets, stars, multiple stars and the like, not so much on extended/deep sky objects. I have an older 5" Meade apo refractor, it's an f/9. It does well as mentioned above. If I want a good look at deep sky stuff, I go with a larger reflector. If you want an all around scope, you should consider an 8" or so Schmidt-Cassegrain. It will do better on deep sky objects. The increased aperture will reveal dimmer stuff. You can get a very nice scope like a Celestron 8 or 9.25 for your budget. You'll probably find the larger but shorter scope easier to manage than a large refractor. I once did some observing with some guys out in the southern NM desert, they had a 4" f/15 refractor. That scope was a double handful. I had my 8" Celestron, it outperformed the refractor on extended objects. Your budget would get you a very large Dob reflector ideal for deep sky stuff, if that's your thing. It all depends on what you want to do. I will say this--there is something about the view through a good refractor that is unequaled by most reflectors. The optics are unobstructed, the view is clear and sharp, a whole different league. Good refractors cost a lot of money, though. hmmm..maybe i need to give it more thought. i didn't realize that a 4 or 5 " refractor could be that unwieldy. As for my viewing interests, one scope capable of doing both equally well would be nice Get the Celestron 8 or 9.25 then. I'd stay away from Meades. Trust me, I've owned a few.
why do you say that ? for whatever reason I seem drawn to the Meades. I have owned both. Meade quality and support sucks compared to Celestron. It is unlikely I will own another Meade telescope. If I were to go out tomorrow and purchase a new scope, it would be a C9.25 of some flavor (they make several variations). |
|
Meade suffers from consistency problems; both from an optical and mount perspective. They have well documented issues and quality control problems. This being said, if your budget is $3K, then it is probably the best you will do. An AP or Takahashi 5 inch with mount is ~$9,000 when you total it up and then there is the wait I would consider a Celestron Schmidt versus a Meade refractor any day of the week but that is my opinion only. If you really want to find out about what options are out there for you and a straight no nonsense conversation, call Marty at Company 7. He sells AP, Quester and others. He has been in business for over 30 years and considered one of the greatest resources for knowledge. He does "special" optical systems for the DC crowd. His store in MD is awesome. He will set up a time with you and you can ask all your questions. He will give you no nonsense answers as he doesn't really need your business. However, he performs as he does. He is a man of his word and totally stands behind everything he sells. His link is... My only advice is to be patient otherwise you will likely be disappointed. I don't know everything but I have been doing Astronomy for 35 years and have owned pretty much every type of instrument and have made some of my own as well...reflectors and dobs mostly. The single most important thing you can do is really understand what you want to do with the scope that you're buying....much like shooting. BR, |
|
Quoted:
Don't understand the Bridgeport mill ref. That bad? Quoted:
Quoted:
I own a 6" AstroPhysics Apochromatic scope from circa 1991 on a mount that reminds me of a bridgeport mill every time I set it up. It is great for planets, the 20" DOB blows it away for deep sky. Don't understand the Bridgeport mill ref. That bad? A six inch refactor longer than about f6 is a big scope mounted high up with all the heavy bits on each end so it take a beefy mount. |