Mount specifications??

I can't find the exact one at the moment, but it was a 10" Newtonian
Reflector (similar to the C10-N which seems to be around 87 pounds).

The C10-N OTA probably weighs about 35lbs. As far as I can see it is just a
XT-10 OTA mounted on a EQ mount, after all, both Celestron and Orion get their
Asian stuff from the same manufacturer, Synta.

The total weight of the mount and the scope including counter weights is likely
87 lbs.

After having mounted my 8 inch F6 OTA on a late model CG-5 with a heavy duty
tripod, I would be think that the Atlas mount is the minimun for the 10 inch
F5. The 8 inch OTA is about 22 lbs as compared to 35lb and a couple of inches
shorter. It was just not steady enough for my taste.

jon

I can't find the exact one at the moment, but it was a 10" Newtonian
Reflector (similar to the C10-N which seems to be around 87 pounds).

The C10-N OTA probably weighs about 35lbs. As far as I can see it is just a
XT-10 OTA mounted on a EQ mount, after all, both Celestron and Orion get their
Asian stuff from the same manufacturer, Synta.

The total weight of the mount and the scope including counter weights is likely
87 lbs.

After having mounted my 8 inch F6 OTA on a late model CG-5 with a heavy duty
tripod, I would be think that the Atlas mount is the minimun for the 10 inch
F5. The 8 inch OTA is about 22 lbs as compared to 35lb and a couple of inches
shorter. It was just not steady enough for my taste.

jon

I can't find the exact one at the moment, but it was a 10" Newtonian
Reflector (similar to the C10-N which seems to be around 87 pounds).

The C10-N OTA probably weighs about 35lbs. As far as I can see it is just a
XT-10 OTA mounted on a EQ mount, after all, both Celestron and Orion get their
Asian stuff from the same manufacturer, Synta.

The total weight of the mount and the scope including counter weights is likely
87 lbs.

After having mounted my 8 inch F6 OTA on a late model CG-5 with a heavy duty
tripod, I would be think that the Atlas mount is the minimun for the 10 inch
F5. The 8 inch OTA is about 22 lbs as compared to 35lb and a couple of inches
shorter. It was just not steady enough for my taste.

jon

Edward Smith wrote in message . ..

I can't find the exact one at the moment, but it was a 10" Newtonian
Reflector (similar to the C10-N which seems to be around 87 pounds).

The 10" Asian Newts go about 35lbs (OTA only). I really can't imagine
the CG-5 being able to handle these very well. As was pointed out
elsewhere, it's not the weight, it's the 48 inches. I wouldn't expect
the CG-5 to handle more than a 6" F8 (also 48 inches), but rock solid
it might be with a 6" F5.

I'm guessing this is part of the reason that SCTs are so popular. An
8" SCT OTA weighs in at 13 lbs, and is only 21 inches long. Not sure
about the 9.25/10/11" SCTs, but some searching will surely turn up a
number.

One ideal inexpensive setup for someone who wants to mess around with
imaging, is an older EQ Fork mounted (manual) 8" SCT and a Starlight
Xpress MX5-C CCD camera with the USB interface and STAR. You won't get
the detail or large vistas possible with higher end equipment, but it
will teach you important first things. Like how to setup an imaging
system (polar alignment, cabling, and software), the difficulty of
achieving focus, and how to process images using software. Or, stated
another way, it will test your committment to getting results. g

I've had this setup for over a year now, and I have less than 10
serious sessions under my belt. There's no hurry, but good results are
dependent on a lot of factors, the atmosphere included.

That said, I also have an Asian 10" F5 Dob that I use for observing,
and I'm planning to trade up for a 13.1" F4.5 sometime this year. My
advice is to not buy one scope that you will use for both imaging and
visual astronomy. Get a Dob to see with, and something else for
imaging. A 10" Asian Dob can he had dirt cheap, as can a used
Celestron Celestar 8 Deluxe, or if you get really lucky, an Ultima
8-PEC (like mine). But those are just examples. Used LX-200 8"-ers are
also going for reasonable coin these days, if you want GoTo for the
imager. (Personally, I wouldn't bother with GoTo for an imaging
platform until you're sure you want to pursue that hobby in earnest.
Finding stuff to image in the beginning just isn't that hard. You
could spend years just working on the Messier objects.)

While I only have experience with the Ultima 8-PEC/MX5-C setup, there
are the Vixen GP-DX and Losmandy GM-8 class GEMs which apparently can
handle any number of OTA's up to 25 lbs depending on length. These
appear to serve well for smaller wide field refractors, and up to 8"
SCT class OTAs (there's also the 5" and 6" Russian Maks to consider
for imaging).

Anyway, there's lots of choices once you start thinking about imaging.
This muddies the waters for visual astronomy, as they are really two
different animals. Someone who pursues imaging in earnest, will
ultimately have a telescope that works _very well_ for visual use
within the limits of its aperture. Someone looking to _see_ stuff in
the sky from their backyard, or nearby dark site, is better served
with the largest aperture scope they can carry. The 10" Asian Dob, is
a good choice for a drag and drop scope.

Good Luck,
Stephen Paul

Edward Smith wrote in message . ..

I can't find the exact one at the moment, but it was a 10" Newtonian
Reflector (similar to the C10-N which seems to be around 87 pounds).

The 10" Asian Newts go about 35lbs (OTA only). I really can't imagine
the CG-5 being able to handle these very well. As was pointed out
elsewhere, it's not the weight, it's the 48 inches. I wouldn't expect
the CG-5 to handle more than a 6" F8 (also 48 inches), but rock solid
it might be with a 6" F5.

I'm guessing this is part of the reason that SCTs are so popular. An
8" SCT OTA weighs in at 13 lbs, and is only 21 inches long. Not sure
about the 9.25/10/11" SCTs, but some searching will surely turn up a
number.

One ideal inexpensive setup for someone who wants to mess around with
imaging, is an older EQ Fork mounted (manual) 8" SCT and a Starlight
Xpress MX5-C CCD camera with the USB interface and STAR. You won't get
the detail or large vistas possible with higher end equipment, but it
will teach you important first things. Like how to setup an imaging
system (polar alignment, cabling, and software), the difficulty of
achieving focus, and how to process images using software. Or, stated
another way, it will test your committment to getting results. g

I've had this setup for over a year now, and I have less than 10
serious sessions under my belt. There's no hurry, but good results are
dependent on a lot of factors, the atmosphere included.

That said, I also have an Asian 10" F5 Dob that I use for observing,
and I'm planning to trade up for a 13.1" F4.5 sometime this year. My
advice is to not buy one scope that you will use for both imaging and
visual astronomy. Get a Dob to see with, and something else for
imaging. A 10" Asian Dob can he had dirt cheap, as can a used
Celestron Celestar 8 Deluxe, or if you get really lucky, an Ultima
8-PEC (like mine). But those are just examples. Used LX-200 8"-ers are
also going for reasonable coin these days, if you want GoTo for the
imager. (Personally, I wouldn't bother with GoTo for an imaging
platform until you're sure you want to pursue that hobby in earnest.
Finding stuff to image in the beginning just isn't that hard. You
could spend years just working on the Messier objects.)

While I only have experience with the Ultima 8-PEC/MX5-C setup, there
are the Vixen GP-DX and Losmandy GM-8 class GEMs which apparently can
handle any number of OTA's up to 25 lbs depending on length. These
appear to serve well for smaller wide field refractors, and up to 8"
SCT class OTAs (there's also the 5" and 6" Russian Maks to consider
for imaging).

Anyway, there's lots of choices once you start thinking about imaging.
This muddies the waters for visual astronomy, as they are really two
different animals. Someone who pursues imaging in earnest, will
ultimately have a telescope that works _very well_ for visual use
within the limits of its aperture. Someone looking to _see_ stuff in
the sky from their backyard, or nearby dark site, is better served
with the largest aperture scope they can carry. The 10" Asian Dob, is
a good choice for a drag and drop scope.

Good Luck,
Stephen Paul

Edward Smith wrote in message . ..

I can't find the exact one at the moment, but it was a 10" Newtonian
Reflector (similar to the C10-N which seems to be around 87 pounds).

The 10" Asian Newts go about 35lbs (OTA only). I really can't imagine
the CG-5 being able to handle these very well. As was pointed out
elsewhere, it's not the weight, it's the 48 inches. I wouldn't expect
the CG-5 to handle more than a 6" F8 (also 48 inches), but rock solid
it might be with a 6" F5.

I'm guessing this is part of the reason that SCTs are so popular. An
8" SCT OTA weighs in at 13 lbs, and is only 21 inches long. Not sure
about the 9.25/10/11" SCTs, but some searching will surely turn up a
number.

One ideal inexpensive setup for someone who wants to mess around with
imaging, is an older EQ Fork mounted (manual) 8" SCT and a Starlight
Xpress MX5-C CCD camera with the USB interface and STAR. You won't get
the detail or large vistas possible with higher end equipment, but it
will teach you important first things. Like how to setup an imaging
system (polar alignment, cabling, and software), the difficulty of
achieving focus, and how to process images using software. Or, stated
another way, it will test your committment to getting results. g

I've had this setup for over a year now, and I have less than 10
serious sessions under my belt. There's no hurry, but good results are
dependent on a lot of factors, the atmosphere included.

That said, I also have an Asian 10" F5 Dob that I use for observing,
and I'm planning to trade up for a 13.1" F4.5 sometime this year. My
advice is to not buy one scope that you will use for both imaging and
visual astronomy. Get a Dob to see with, and something else for
imaging. A 10" Asian Dob can he had dirt cheap, as can a used
Celestron Celestar 8 Deluxe, or if you get really lucky, an Ultima
8-PEC (like mine). But those are just examples. Used LX-200 8"-ers are
also going for reasonable coin these days, if you want GoTo for the
imager. (Personally, I wouldn't bother with GoTo for an imaging
platform until you're sure you want to pursue that hobby in earnest.
Finding stuff to image in the beginning just isn't that hard. You
could spend years just working on the Messier objects.)

While I only have experience with the Ultima 8-PEC/MX5-C setup, there
are the Vixen GP-DX and Losmandy GM-8 class GEMs which apparently can
handle any number of OTA's up to 25 lbs depending on length. These
appear to serve well for smaller wide field refractors, and up to 8"
SCT class OTAs (there's also the 5" and 6" Russian Maks to consider
for imaging).

Anyway, there's lots of choices once you start thinking about imaging.
This muddies the waters for visual astronomy, as they are really two
different animals. Someone who pursues imaging in earnest, will
ultimately have a telescope that works _very well_ for visual use
within the limits of its aperture. Someone looking to _see_ stuff in
the sky from their backyard, or nearby dark site, is better served
with the largest aperture scope they can carry. The 10" Asian Dob, is
a good choice for a drag and drop scope.

Good Luck,
Stephen Paul

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Edward Smith wrote:

SNIP
I've been reading what the "standard" telescope comes with in a
package. Now, Celestron sells a wide variety of their telescopes with
a CG-5 mount. These telescopes weigh anywhere from 25 pounds to over
100. I can't find any information on the load bearing capability of
the mounts themselves, though.

It isn't just Celestron. Orion, Meade, everybody seems to do the same
thing.

So where is there information on mounts? A telescope that wobbles and
vibrates all over the place isn't going to be much good.



Takahashi certainly provide information on their mounts including the load
bearing capacity and, importantly, the tracking accuracy. For
specifications have a look at the takahashi pages at

Adirondack (USA) http://www.astrovid.com/
Optique Unterlinden (France) http://www.optique-unterlinden.com/

The French site gives more technical details than the USA site including
optimum as well as maximum load.

Hope this helps you, I'm sure that AP and SoftwareBisque (Paramount ME)
and indeed some other manufacturers also provide the detailed information
you rightly seek.

Dr Peter R Hobson
Reader, Department of Electronic and Computer Engineering
Brunel University, Uxbridge UB8 3PH G.B.

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Edward Smith wrote:

SNIP
I've been reading what the "standard" telescope comes with in a
package. Now, Celestron sells a wide variety of their telescopes with
a CG-5 mount. These telescopes weigh anywhere from 25 pounds to over
100. I can't find any information on the load bearing capability of
the mounts themselves, though.

It isn't just Celestron. Orion, Meade, everybody seems to do the same
thing.

So where is there information on mounts? A telescope that wobbles and
vibrates all over the place isn't going to be much good.



Takahashi certainly provide information on their mounts including the load
bearing capacity and, importantly, the tracking accuracy. For
specifications have a look at the takahashi pages at

Adirondack (USA) http://www.astrovid.com/
Optique Unterlinden (France) http://www.optique-unterlinden.com/

The French site gives more technical details than the USA site including
optimum as well as maximum load.

Hope this helps you, I'm sure that AP and SoftwareBisque (Paramount ME)
and indeed some other manufacturers also provide the detailed information
you rightly seek.

Dr Peter R Hobson
Reader, Department of Electronic and Computer Engineering
Brunel University, Uxbridge UB8 3PH G.B.

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Edward Smith wrote:

SNIP
I've been reading what the "standard" telescope comes with in a
package. Now, Celestron sells a wide variety of their telescopes with
a CG-5 mount. These telescopes weigh anywhere from 25 pounds to over
100. I can't find any information on the load bearing capability of
the mounts themselves, though.

It isn't just Celestron. Orion, Meade, everybody seems to do the same
thing.

So where is there information on mounts? A telescope that wobbles and
vibrates all over the place isn't going to be much good.



Takahashi certainly provide information on their mounts including the load
bearing capacity and, importantly, the tracking accuracy. For
specifications have a look at the takahashi pages at

Adirondack (USA) http://www.astrovid.com/
Optique Unterlinden (France) http://www.optique-unterlinden.com/

The French site gives more technical details than the USA site including
optimum as well as maximum load.

Hope this helps you, I'm sure that AP and SoftwareBisque (Paramount ME)
and indeed some other manufacturers also provide the detailed information
you rightly seek.

Dr Peter R Hobson
Reader, Department of Electronic and Computer Engineering
Brunel University, Uxbridge UB8 3PH G.B.

On Mon, 12 Jan 2004, Edward Smith wrote:

SNIP
I've been reading what the "standard" telescope comes with in a
package. Now, Celestron sells a wide variety of their telescopes with
a CG-5 mount. These telescopes weigh anywhere from 25 pounds to over
100. I can't find any information on the load bearing capability of
the mounts themselves, though.

It isn't just Celestron. Orion, Meade, everybody seems to do the same
thing.

So where is there information on mounts? A telescope that wobbles and
vibrates all over the place isn't going to be much good.



Takahashi certainly provide information on their mounts including the load
bearing capacity and, importantly, the tracking accuracy. For
specifications have a look at the takahashi pages at

Adirondack (USA) http://www.astrovid.com/
Optique Unterlinden (France) http://www.optique-unterlinden.com/

The French site gives more technical details than the USA site including
optimum as well as maximum load.

Hope this helps you, I'm sure that AP and SoftwareBisque (Paramount ME)
and indeed some other manufacturers also provide the detailed information
you rightly seek.

Dr Peter R Hobson
Reader, Department of Electronic and Computer Engineering
Brunel University, Uxbridge UB8 3PH G.B.