First serious scope C6N?

I know you said you want to do photography, but unfortunately I dont
think that C6N will ever do it successfully. At least nothing more than
you couldnt do with any other scope in some rigged up fashion. In fact,
it's not a good scope period, unless you only want to see lots of white
dots in clusters.

My suggestion would be to forget about photography through the scope for
the time being. It's expensive....very expensive and time consuming.

As for CCD using your digital camera, yes you can do this on the
planets. You can do this with almost any scope with some practice,
which is why I'm going to suggest an 8" F6 celestron dobsonian for $350 usd.

With the 8" F6 planets will NOT appear as a tiny dot. You will see the
belts and storms of Jupiter in full glory under good conditions, rings
of saturn (and divisions in the rings), polar caps of mars, etc. The
scope will be ROCK SOLID. As in, you move it and it settles in a second.
It won't shake all over like those cheap tripod scopes.

Forget those cheap equatorial scopes. They are junk until you get in the
$1000 USD range, and even THEN it's a gamble until you get into $1600.

For $350 put that money into gathering light, get a light bucket. Then
for the first set of eyepieces to go with the 25mm buy the following: a
12mm plossl eyepiece and a shorty barlow.

If you want to do some long exposure 35mm film photography, do a search
on "Barn Door" mounts for a 35mm camera. You can build it yourself, no
scope required.

Later you can build an equatorial platform for the dobsonian if you need
some equatorial tracking... but you probably won't.

I've two suggestions. The first is a Hardin 10" DSH Dob. They're
currently $495.00USD, and have gotten very good reviews. The second
is a Konus 6" Refractor on a german equatorial mount. I've seen them
as low as $754.00USD on the internet. This scope has drives on both
axis, but is not a goto. Konus has had some optic problems with their
8" newt, but I've seen nothing but good comments about their 6"
refractor. Deep space imaging would not be possible with the 10" and
a lot of practice would be necessary with the 6" for satisfactory
results.

On Sun, 15 Aug 2004 20:14:52 GMT, Heyme wrote:

Last year I picked up one of those cheap dept. store style scopes.
Celestron Powerseeker 4.5" Newtonian. Actually, it is one of the better
Dept store scopes I've seen once you get rid of the eyepieces that came
with it. It did it's job and wet my appetite for something better, so,
I'm now looking at getting a real scope. Unfortunately my budget is still
on the slim side (I would love to be able to afford a nice Casegrain).
I'm looking in the neighbourhood of something $1000 CDN. I've been
playing a bit with the digital camera and now have the eyepiece coupling
adapter for it, and it seems to work quite well, but I find the objects
(Planets) are very very small and hard to see any detail, even with a
12mm and a 2x barlow. Color images simply do not exist. So, I'm
thinking of moving up to about a 6" Reflector on a decent mount. I've
been looking at the Celestron C6-N as it says I can motorize the mount
and good stuff like that. To do Photography, I know i need to stay with
the equitorial mounts.
There is a fair amount of sky pollution, I'm at the edge of a city of
250,000 people, and have a large city 1mil to the north. Starry night
backyard (v3.2) with light pollution set to small city is a very good
representation of my conditions.

I would love to get some decent images of the planets, and possibly a
little DSO during the summer like this year where the planets are pretty
much gone by dark.

Whats your thoughts? will the C6N do what I expect, or is there
something better out there in the same price range?



(zanes) wrote in news:f30881eb.0408070940.5c2934c6
:

Hi,

I have never used this group, so sorry if I have flouted some faq or
rules or summat.

Question:

What kind of telescope and size should i get?

I am looking to spend £150-£250 ($200-$350.) Looking around it looks
like i would be best with a 80ishmm refractor or a 114mm reflector.
Are there any dud brands I should avoid. what about false colour in
the refractor and the central blind spot in the reflector. I live in
the countryside and so light pollution isn't a prob. Space isn't an
issue.
Should i spend the extra cash and get a 6-inch reflector?

vic20owner wrote in message ...

I know you said you want to do photography, but unfortunately I dont
think that C6N will ever do it successfully. At least nothing more than
you couldnt do with any other scope in some rigged up fashion. In fact,
it's not a good scope period, unless you only want to see lots of white
dots in clusters.

I dunno, mine seems to work pretty well for visual observation.
Obviously, there are better telescopes, but I've seen much worse.

With the 8" F6 planets will NOT appear as a tiny dot.

Given sufficient magnification, they don't appear as tiny dots in the
C6-N--or in 60mm scopes, for that matter.

You will see the
belts and storms of Jupiter in full glory under good conditions, rings
of saturn (and divisions in the rings), polar caps of mars, etc.

I can see that stuff (and more) easily, although obviously it would
look somewhat better in an 8" telescope.

The
scope will be ROCK SOLID. As in, you move it and it settles in a second.
It won't shake all over like those cheap tripod scopes.

While it's true that the tripod is flimsy, after I smoothed out the
focuser, the scope stops shaking after 2-3 seconds while focusing, and
moving the scope (by hand or the controls) hardly shakes it at all.
The only times I ever have an issue with vibration are when there's a
strong gust of wind or when I accidentally bump the scope (with a Dob,
I'd have to find the object again).

Forget those cheap equatorial scopes. They are junk until you get in the
$1000 USD range, and even THEN it's a gamble until you get into $1600.

From what I've seen, it's a gamble until you get into the $3000
range--and that's just for the mount. :-)

For $350 put that money into gathering light, get a light bucket. Then
for the first set of eyepieces to go with the 25mm buy the following: a
12mm plossl eyepiece and a shorty barlow.

If you get a Barlow, be sure to get a good one, like the Celestron
Ultima, and eyepieces with focal lengths that won't duplicate
magnifications. I seriously doubt that a set of 12mm and 25mm
eyepieces is ideal for use with a Barlow, if it's 2X....


- Robert Cook

vic20owner wrote in message ...

I know you said you want to do photography, but unfortunately I dont
think that C6N will ever do it successfully. At least nothing more than
you couldnt do with any other scope in some rigged up fashion. In fact,
it's not a good scope period, unless you only want to see lots of white
dots in clusters.

I dunno, mine seems to work pretty well for visual observation.
Obviously, there are better telescopes, but I've seen much worse.

With the 8" F6 planets will NOT appear as a tiny dot.

Given sufficient magnification, they don't appear as tiny dots in the
C6-N--or in 60mm scopes, for that matter.

You will see the
belts and storms of Jupiter in full glory under good conditions, rings
of saturn (and divisions in the rings), polar caps of mars, etc.

I can see that stuff (and more) easily, although obviously it would
look somewhat better in an 8" telescope.

The
scope will be ROCK SOLID. As in, you move it and it settles in a second.
It won't shake all over like those cheap tripod scopes.

While it's true that the tripod is flimsy, after I smoothed out the
focuser, the scope stops shaking after 2-3 seconds while focusing, and
moving the scope (by hand or the controls) hardly shakes it at all.
The only times I ever have an issue with vibration are when there's a
strong gust of wind or when I accidentally bump the scope (with a Dob,
I'd have to find the object again).

Forget those cheap equatorial scopes. They are junk until you get in the
$1000 USD range, and even THEN it's a gamble until you get into $1600.

From what I've seen, it's a gamble until you get into the $3000
range--and that's just for the mount. :-)

For $350 put that money into gathering light, get a light bucket. Then
for the first set of eyepieces to go with the 25mm buy the following: a
12mm plossl eyepiece and a shorty barlow.

If you get a Barlow, be sure to get a good one, like the Celestron
Ultima, and eyepieces with focal lengths that won't duplicate
magnifications. I seriously doubt that a set of 12mm and 25mm
eyepieces is ideal for use with a Barlow, if it's 2X....


- Robert Cook

(Robert Cook) wrote in
om:

vic20owner wrote in message
...

I know you said you want to do photography, but unfortunately I dont
think that C6N will ever do it successfully. At least nothing more
than you couldnt do with any other scope in some rigged up fashion.
In fact, it's not a good scope period, unless you only want to see
lots of white dots in clusters.

I dunno, mine seems to work pretty well for visual observation.
Obviously, there are better telescopes, but I've seen much worse.

With the 8" F6 planets will NOT appear as a tiny dot.

Given sufficient magnification, they don't appear as tiny dots in the
C6-N--or in 60mm scopes, for that matter.

I figured I would eventually get both sides of the coin here. The
Celestron Dob seems like a pretty good deal. As for eyepieces, I have a
televue 11mm Possel and a Scopetronix 20mm and the celestron Ultima 2x
Barlow, so I would have to agree with Robert about the duplication of
magnifications. Any other suggestions on a good 8" dob that is
comparable in price to the celestron?

In my 4.5" scope right now, This is about the best I can get Jupiter.
http://mikes-home.no-ip.com/space/Juptier/PDR_1241.JPG

This is saturn
http://mikes-home.no-ip.com/space/Saturn/PDR_1210.JPG

Feel free to see the rest of what I have dabbled with starting from
http://mikes-home.no-ip.com/space

I have yet to get proper web pages generated with this images, but they
are there.

The saturn picture is just with the 20mm and the cameras 3x optical zoom
as I didn't have the 11, or the barlow at the time.

Images were all taken with a Toshiba PDR3300 camera

Little to say, seeing any detail of jupiter, or the rings would be a
great improvement on what I have so far.

Heyme wrote in message 19...

(Robert Cook) wrote in
om:

vic20owner wrote in message
...

In fact, it's not a good scope period, unless you only want to see
lots of white dots in clusters.

I dunno, mine seems to work pretty well for visual observation.
Obviously, there are better telescopes, but I've seen much worse.

With the 8" F6 planets will NOT appear as a tiny dot.

Given sufficient magnification, they don't appear as tiny dots in the
C6-N--or in 60mm scopes, for that matter.

I figured I would eventually get both sides of the coin here.

Well, it's not that I disagree with the recommendation of an 8" f/6
Dob--that's an excellent recommendation (for visual observing). But
at the same time, the C6-N (probably identical to the Orion AstroView
6 EQ) is not exactly a pariah. The one I own has a well-corrected f/5
parabolic primary that holds up fine at 300x. The mount is a CG4
(Synta EQ3), which seems to be substantial enough for the telescope,
even with the lightweight tripod. If it were junk, then I'd tell you
in no uncertain terms! :-)

By the way, for some reason (probably laziness) Celestron has a
picture of their defunct C150-HD model on their C6-N page--that's a
telescope I would definitely not recommend.

The
Celestron Dob seems like a pretty good deal. As for eyepieces, I have a
televue 11mm Possel and a Scopetronix 20mm and the celestron Ultima 2x
Barlow, so I would have to agree with Robert about the duplication of
magnifications. Any other suggestions on a good 8" dob that is
comparable in price to the celestron?

It's awfully hard to match that price, but here are a few
alternatives:

http://www.hardin-optical.com/catalog1.html
http://tinyurl.com/hzea
http://www.discovery-telescopes.com/DHQ.html

Note that the Celestron and Hardin Optical Dobs come with 50mm
finders, while the others come with 30mm finders. While the latter is
far superior to the finder on your current scope, 50mm is obviously
even better.

In my 4.5" scope right now, This is about the best I can get Jupiter.
http://mikes-home.no-ip.com/space/Juptier/PDR_1241.JPG

This is saturn
http://mikes-home.no-ip.com/space/Saturn/PDR_1210.JPG
[snip]
Little to say, seeing any detail of jupiter, or the rings would be a
great improvement on what I have so far.

This might be a silly question, but does the view look better using
your eye rather than your camera? Just checking....


- Robert Cook

(Robert Cook) wrote in
m:

Heyme wrote in message
19...

(Robert Cook) wrote in
om:

vic20owner wrote in message
...

In fact, it's not a good scope period, unless you only want to see
lots of white dots in clusters.

I dunno, mine seems to work pretty well for visual observation.
Obviously, there are better telescopes, but I've seen much worse.

With the 8" F6 planets will NOT appear as a tiny dot.

Given sufficient magnification, they don't appear as tiny dots in
the C6-N--or in 60mm scopes, for that matter.

I figured I would eventually get both sides of the coin here.

Well, it's not that I disagree with the recommendation of an 8" f/6
Dob--that's an excellent recommendation (for visual observing). But
at the same time, the C6-N (probably identical to the Orion AstroView
6 EQ) is not exactly a pariah. The one I own has a well-corrected f/5
parabolic primary that holds up fine at 300x. The mount is a CG4
(Synta EQ3), which seems to be substantial enough for the telescope,
even with the lightweight tripod. If it were junk, then I'd tell you
in no uncertain terms! :-)

By the way, for some reason (probably laziness) Celestron has a
picture of their defunct C150-HD model on their C6-N page--that's a
telescope I would definitely not recommend.

The
Celestron Dob seems like a pretty good deal. As for eyepieces, I
have a televue 11mm Possel and a Scopetronix 20mm and the celestron
Ultima 2x Barlow, so I would have to agree with Robert about the
duplication of magnifications. Any other suggestions on a good 8"
dob that is comparable in price to the celestron?

It's awfully hard to match that price, but here are a few
alternatives:

http://www.hardin-optical.com/catalog1.html
http://tinyurl.com/hzea
http://www.discovery-telescopes.com/DHQ.html

Note that the Celestron and Hardin Optical Dobs come with 50mm
finders, while the others come with 30mm finders. While the latter is
far superior to the finder on your current scope, 50mm is obviously
even better.

In my 4.5" scope right now, This is about the best I can get Jupiter.
http://mikes-home.no-ip.com/space/Juptier/PDR_1241.JPG

This is saturn
http://mikes-home.no-ip.com/space/Saturn/PDR_1210.JPG
[snip]
Little to say, seeing any detail of jupiter, or the rings would be a
great improvement on what I have so far.

This might be a silly question, but does the view look better using
your eye rather than your camera? Just checking....


- Robert Cook


Not really a silly question. Jupiter - Not much better even with the 2x
and the 11mm eyepiece, it's just too tiny to see anything. Actually I
detected the cloud bands first in the picture!! The view is brighter,
but that's about it. Saturn is a little sharper of an image and white,
but size is pretty much there.

I really like the idea of the roller bearings on it, and the clutches
seem to be a better idea than the springs that I've seen (probably hold
up over the long run better??)

Heyme wrote in message 19...

(Robert Cook) wrote in
m:

Heyme wrote in message
19...

In my 4.5" scope right now, This is about the best I can get Jupiter.
http://mikes-home.no-ip.com/space/Juptier/PDR_1241.JPG

This is saturn
http://mikes-home.no-ip.com/space/Saturn/PDR_1210.JPG
[snip]
Little to say, seeing any detail of jupiter, or the rings would be a
great improvement on what I have so far.

This might be a silly question, but does the view look better using
your eye rather than your camera? Just checking....

Not really a silly question.

The reason I thought my question might be silly was that under these
circumstances, your eyes should be far more forgiving (adaptable) than
your camera--I expected that there would be a big difference. The
reason I asked was to make sure that your telescope is functioning
properly, especially since the subject is mainly about which new
telescope to get.

Jupiter - Not much better even with the 2x
and the 11mm eyepiece, it's just too tiny to see anything. Actually I
detected the cloud bands first in the picture!! The view is brighter,
but that's about it.

Much depends on atmospheric conditions, of course, but Jupiter should
look a lot better visually than it does in your photo, even in a 4.5"
scope (the contrast of the planet's features, however, is inherently
low).

Saturn is a little sharper of an image and white,
but size is pretty much there.

In my telescope, I can easily see the Cassini Division in the rings,
as well as indications of cloud bands on Saturn itself, using half the
magnification that you used on your photo; the view in a 4.5" scope
shouldn't be too different, since there's plenty of light to work
with. If the view in your eyepiece only looks "a little sharper" than
the photo, then something is rather amiss. If you look straight down
the very center of your telescope's focuser with no eyepiece in place,
can you see in the secondary mirror a reflection of both your eye and
the entire primary mirror? I don't know whether you're familiar with
collimation (the alignment of your optics), but this is a rough check
to make sure that it's not completely out of whack.


- Robert Cook

Heyme wrote in message 19...

(Robert Cook) wrote in
om:

Heyme wrote in message
19...

Saturn is a little sharper of an image and white,
but size is pretty much there.

If the view in your eyepiece only looks "a little sharper" than
the photo, then something is rather amiss. If you look straight down
the very center of your telescope's focuser with no eyepiece in place,
can you see in the secondary mirror a reflection of both your eye and
the entire primary mirror? I don't know whether you're familiar with
collimation (the alignment of your optics), but this is a rough check
to make sure that it's not completely out of whack.

I figured that much of it out in the spring when I got my hands on a
laser collimator and the beam ended up on the other side of the living
room.

I suspected that you were losing most of the light gathered by your
telescope. ;-)

Maybe this fall/winter, I will be able to get a better view of
saturn with the corrected alignment with some better seeing that what I
had in those pictures.

I imagine you would, and that your pictures would turn out better,
too. What you should then do is take multiple pictures in a row, and
"stack" them to produce an even better picture. The following
software will help you to do this:

http://aberrator.astronomy.net/registax

It was only after colliminating, that I was able
to see the jupiter cloud bands at all, and even then, it took me a while
to see them in the small disc that I had.

Jupiter's surface features are never easy to see in a small telescope,
although it does become easier with experience. I like to use 300x
magnification on planets when I can to help bring out details, but the
air is usually not steady enough. Most of the time, something close
to your current maximum magnification of 164x might even provide the
best view, depending on your local sky.

I guess my current thoughts have been that with the poor mount, the 4.5
inch size, being able to create any views that are large enough and
stable enough to see detail in anything but the moon will be very
difficult. Using the 11mm with a barlow on that scope is almost
impossible to deal with.

Yes, the telescope seems to be a bit long and heavy for its mount.

I guess that's why i starting playing with the camera. Set the camera on
self timer, trigger it with the IR remote about 5secs after aiming (or
set it up so that the target moves into the FOV by the time the camera
takes the shot and wait longer), hope that the image stops shaking by the
time the self time finishes, and that the telescope is still pointed at
something then see what detail was to been seen.

By the way, how exactly are you coupling the camera to the telescope?
Using a separate tripod for the camera would be a hassle, but it's
less demanding on the telescope's mount. Your JPEG file of Saturn
indicates that you're using a shutter speed of 1/8 second, which is a
bit slow when vibration is a problem, but now that your telescope is
collimated, you should be able to experiment with higher shutter
speeds.

There is one Celestron dealer about an hour from here that has a
very limited stock, and he apparently now has the dobs in stock. I'm
planning on checking them out in the next couple weeks, and want to get
some oppinions this time before that impulse buying tendancy on me kicks
in.

So I am still debating 8" dob or C6N, Haven't seen his prices yet on
either one.

Obviously, a properly aligned, motorized equatorial mount would help a
lot with astrophotography, since objects would hold still for you, but
an 8" f/6 Dob would provide better views. If you only started
dabbling in astrophotography because you couldn't get good visual
images, then you're probably better off with the Dob.


- Robert Cook