6" Celestron refractor for astrophotography?

I'm considering a Celestron Advanced series C6-R (similar to the old?
CR-150?) for astrophotography, primarily of the moon and planets.

The telescope is described he
http://www.celestron.com/prod_pgs/tel/c6r.htm

(Another alternative is to get a Celestron G8 or Celestar 8 -- but I really
like the idea of a 6" refractor.)

Any comments and thoughts appreciated.

Thanks,
Jarle

For astrophotography, the crucial issue will be the stability of the
provided CG-5 mount. However, if you are imaging only the "moon and
planets" (short exposures), that should be less of an issue.

Before purchasing I would try to get feedback re this from someone who
knows this scope .. and maybe you will in reply to your message. I
searched for a review of it with Google and came up empty.

Phil

Jarle Aasland wrote:
I'm considering a Celestron Advanced series C6-R (similar to the old?
CR-150?) for astrophotography, primarily of the moon and planets.

The telescope is described he
http://www.celestron.com/prod_pgs/tel/c6r.htm

(Another alternative is to get a Celestron G8 or Celestar 8 -- but I really
like the idea of a 6" refractor.)

Any comments and thoughts appreciated.

Thanks,
Jarle

For astrophotography, the crucial issue will be the stability of the
provided CG-5 mount. However, if you are imaging only the "moon and
planets" (short exposures), that should be less of an issue.

Thanks, Phil.

Anyone familiar with Sky-Wathcer telescopes?

I can get a similar 6" refractor with a better mount (EQ6:
http://www.skywatchertelescope.com/EQ6.html) for a little more than the
Celestron model (which includes a CG-5 mount).

The 6" Sky-Wathcer refractor is described at
http://www.skywatchertelescope.com/15012EQ5.html

Which one would you choose?

Jarle

"Jarle Aasland" wrote in message
...
I'm considering a Celestron Advanced series C6-R (similar to the old?
CR-150?) for astrophotography, primarily of the moon and planets.

The telescope is described he
http://www.celestron.com/prod_pgs/tel/c6r.htm

(Another alternative is to get a Celestron G8 or Celestar 8 -- but I
really
like the idea of a 6" refractor.)

Any comments and thoughts appreciated.

Thanks,
Jarle



The CR 150 is okay for photography, but the CG5 is _completely_ outclassed
by the bulk and weight of the OTA. This is not to say that there is
anything wrong with the CG5, as this is a very capable mount, it's just that
it lacks the muscle for the heavy CR150. If you must do photography, the
mount which is sold with the C11 is better suited for your needs. BTW, I
own this scope on a CG5 mount and find that it's only a fair combination for
casual viewing only. If you use this rig for high power work, such a
planetary study...you will wish you had a heavier mount. Finally, the mount
on the advanced series is the same as the older CG5 less the GOTO.

Al

I have just perchased an 8" newt on an HEQ5 mount from skywatcher. It took me
weeks to decide, but after looking at all the reviews, including the EQ6 mount,
I thought that the HEQ5 was the better mount. It is a smaller version of the
EQ6, but with some improvements, such as the inclusion of an hour dial on the
polar scope. It is certainly designed to be a better and more ridged mount than
the CG5, and can take a more massive telescope. As for the optics, for the
price most people are more than happy with skywatcher.

Anyway, thats my two cents!

Regards,

Geoff GJ



I can get a similar 6" refractor with a better mount (EQ6:
http://www.skywatchertelescope.com/EQ6.html) for a little more than the
Celestron model (which includes a CG-5 mount).

"Al" wrote in message
. net...
The CR 150 is okay for photography, but the CG5 is _completely_ outclassed
by the bulk and weight of the OTA.

I may be wrong, but it seems like the older CG5 had aluminum legs, while the
new one has 2" steel legs?

"These scopes come on NEW heavy-duty German Equatorial mounts with NEW
ultra-sturdy 2" stainless steel legs and center tray for superior rigidity
and vibration dampening":

http://www.celestron.com/prod_pgs/tel/adv_index.htm

I'm not sure if this makes any noticeable difference?

Jarle

On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 14:48:02 GMT, "Al"
wrote:


You need to understand that the stability of a mount/tripod does not come
from the tripod alone. You could take this mount (latest Celestron version
of CG5) and bolt it up directly to The Rock of Gibraltar and the mount will
_still_ be shaky. Any way you cut it, the mount is not up to photography
with the 6" OTA.

-snip-
Al is absolutley correct. The new 1.5" tubular steel legs do
help things considerably, but it's liek putting a turbo charger on a 4
cyclinder engine. You matter how much you max that 4 banger out with
extras, it wil will not have the torque or towing capacity of a diesel
V8.
Same is true for mounts.
joe



http://www.oneilphoto.on.ca

I am FAR from convinced the EQ6 is a better mount than the CG-5,
given how many horror stories their have been about the EQ6
That, and the fact it looks very unlikely that the EQ-6 will ever be
upgradeable to GOTO...hardly better.....
Orion

"Jarle Aasland" wrote in message
...
For astrophotography, the crucial issue will be the stability of the
provided CG-5 mount. However, if you are imaging only the "moon and
planets" (short exposures), that should be less of an issue.

Thanks, Phil.

Anyone familiar with Sky-Wathcer telescopes?

I can get a similar 6" refractor with a better mount (EQ6:
http://www.skywatchertelescope.com/EQ6.html) for a little more than the
Celestron model (which includes a CG-5 mount).

The 6" Sky-Wathcer refractor is described at
http://www.skywatchertelescope.com/15012EQ5.html

Which one would you choose?

Jarle




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.507 / Virus Database: 304 - Release Date: 8/4/2003

you will have lots of flare up blue around bright stars.. but perhaps some
sort of blue-ultraviolet blocking filter would help a bit.

You could always do tricolor work using 3 filters, but the problem is that
you may never get a sharp blue image.

On 14 Aug 2003 17:42:42 GMT, (Jon Isaacs) wrote:

My concern would be the false color in the 6 inch F8 refractor, it has to be
pretty substantial, after all, that is why people use APOs....

Anybody have any thoughts on the scope itself as being viable for
astrophotography?

jon

Herm
Astropics http://home.att.net/~hermperez

"Tom Davis" skrev i melding
om...
If you want ultimate stability, Orion sells the
8" F/5 Newt on the Atlas mount, which might be your
best combination.

Tom (and others who have replied):

Thank you very much for your time and feedback. Just the kind of answers I
was looking for.

I still have some thinking and reading to do. I'll take a look at the 8"
Orion and other alternatives before deciding anything.

Thanks,
Jarle