remounting Nexstar

If the weights are too heavy to balance the scope you can just move
them further up the bar, I've had a 120mm f5 refractor on one - semed
OK.

i carry my EQ5 mount, tripod and 150mm refractor out in one trip and
I'm not a big guy, you just collapse the tripod legs, lift the OTA with
both hands you're away. It's the exact same set up as with an EQ3 just
a bit heavier.

Gaz

the mount you linked to at D.Hinds is a bit big for your scope (you'll
get away with a EQ2/3), but it's a good deal and not any dearer than
the smaller EQ2/3 anyway. If you don't mind carrying the extra weight
when you set up I'd get it - it doesn't hurt to over-mount a scope and
if you wanted to get a new scope in the future a bigger mount would
give you more options.

Thanks for the advice, Gaz, I think I'll go for it.

The link looks great, even if it is over there


Can I ask why you just didn't sell the Nexstar 5 secondhand and buy a
equatorally mounted scope with the proceeds? I don't know what they go
for these days but it would seem the be the easiest (and cheapest)
option?

Your easier option isn't easier for me.

I had the scope, which I like, all I needed was to remount it, once I'd
found out how to remove it from the mount.

Transportation is a bit tricky in a top box, there aren't any shops around
here, and visits to CPAC hadn't helped as they were always busy.

I didn't want to sell a mount that I personally had found horrible - I know
it's not down to me, but still - I didn't want to try and find a buyer and
"sell" it, it's not my sort of thing. And p'raps no-one would want it: if
they asked *my* advice, I'd have to say "don't do it".

I only raised it in this ng because I couldn't work out how to remove it,
but breaking a bit of plastic (God knows what size hex keys Celestron use)
made it all a doddle.

Then I was worried about getting rings; I haven't a clue whether they're
highly engineered, or adjustable, but it seems athat a dovetail will do,
and prolly all I need is a specific C5 one, only a bit of pierced metal,
can't be more than 350 squid from Celestron...

Anyhow, it's not my style to be optimistic, but with a bit of luck it'll
work out..

mike

mike

Mike,

I think you'll be presently surprised by the cost....

All you need is the mount (=A3130), a dovetail (=A315) and two tube rings
(about =A330 the pair).

The dovetail attaches to the mount, the rings attach to the the
dovetail and the scope goes in the rings.....voila! You're done!

Gaz

Gaz wrote:
the mount you linked to at D.Hinds is a bit big for your scope

I beg to differ -- IMO it is a very good match indeed. A mount is only
too big for a scope if its physical size impedes access to the eyepiece!

(you'll get away with a EQ2/3)

If you mean an EQ3-2, I agree with you, but the CG5 offers more at not
much price difference. However, if you mean "an EQ2 or EQ3", I have to
disagree wrt the EQ2 - this is what the C5 came on in the G5 package,
and it was seriously undermounted (despite what the S&T review said).


Best,
Stephen

Remove footfrommouth to reply

--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astro Books +
+ (N51.162 E0.995) | http://astunit.com +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

mike ring wrote:
I find the dot dazzling,

They are usually dimmable with the rotating on-off switch -- rotate it
to nearly off.

and on a faint star, like Polaris ;-) I can't quite see through it.

Use both eyes and superimpose images of dot and target.


Best,
Stephen

Remove footfrommouth to reply

--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astro Books +
+ (N51.162 E0.995) | http://astunit.com +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Gaz wrote:
All you need is the mount (£130), a dovetail (£15) and two tube rings
(about £30 the pair).

Why the tube rings? The dovetail can mount directly onto the primary
cell of the C5. Some incarnations of the C5 OTA (e.g. the C5+ and the
G5) have a dovetail; I *think* (but am not certain) that the same holes
are used for mounting the N5 to the Nextar mount.


Best,
Stephen

Remove footfrommouth to reply

--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astro Books +
+ (N51.162 E0.995) | http://astunit.com +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Yup - EQ3-2 is what I meant (lysdexia again...). Also the £100 difference
shows on another website (venturescope). For £129 the CG5 offers excellent
value in comparison to alternate offerings (@ £295.00). I'd not noticed the
'special' price.

Regards


Chris


"Stephen Tonkin" wrote in message
...
Gaz wrote:
the mount you linked to at D.Hinds is a bit big for your scope

I beg to differ -- IMO it is a very good match indeed. A mount is only too
big for a scope if its physical size impedes access to the eyepiece!

(you'll get away with a EQ2/3)

If you mean an EQ3-2, I agree with you, but the CG5 offers more at not
much price difference. However, if you mean "an EQ2 or EQ3", I have to
disagree wrt the EQ2 - this is what the C5 came on in the G5 package, and
it was seriously undermounted (despite what the S&T review said).


Best,
Stephen

Remove footfrommouth to reply

--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astro Books +
+ (N51.162 E0.995) | http://astunit.com +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +

Stephen Tonkin wrote in news:MEiv6oFkHJ
:

They are usually dimmable with the rotating on-off switch -- rotate it
to nearly off.

Have done, still way too bright. The only time it's ok is when the
battery's on it's last legs.


and on a faint star, like Polaris ;-) I can't quite see through it.

Use both eyes and superimpose images of dot and target.

Tried that too, a combiation of pollution and old eyes makes it hard.

I can't always see the full W of Cassiopeia.

Thanks for the earlier comments re the tripod/mount; and I think you are
right about the rings - the starfinder is mounted on a dovetail; it looks
as if it's specific to the scope. The pictures I've seen look as though the
scope mounts on that, so I'll be able to work with 2 dovetails or a set of
rings.

The pount comes with a dovetail, which is confusing, as the dovetail
appears to fit the scope, not the mount.

Guess I'll just have to get one and suck it and see

mike

Stephen Tonkin wrote:
Gaz wrote:
the mount you linked to at D.Hinds is a bit big for your scope

I beg to differ -- IMO it is a very good match indeed. A mount is
only
too big for a scope if its physical size impedes access to the
eyepiece!

(you'll get away with a EQ2/3)

If you mean an EQ3-2, I agree with you, but the CG5 offers more at
not
much price difference. However, if you mean "an EQ2 or EQ3", I have
to
disagree wrt the EQ2 - this is what the C5 came on in the G5 package,

and it was seriously undermounted (despite what the S&T review said).


Best,
Stephen

Remove footfrommouth to reply

--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astro Books +
+ (N51.162 E0.995) | http://astunit.com +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +



Ah, sorry, it is the EQ 3-2, being careless with the numbers (in the
EXACT same fashion) caused me a bit of bother when I was selling mine
last year!!

With the Hinds offer you're are pretty much getting a EQ5 for the price
of a EQ 3-2, so it has to be a good deal!

It's true you don't need the tube rings? I've never used a C5 so I was
kind of generalising with the set up, but my point was Mike won't need
to spend =A3350 on the set up.=20

all the best
Gaz

"Chris Taylor" wrote in message
...
Yup - EQ3-2 is what I meant (lysdexia again...). Also the £100
difference shows on another website (venturescope). For £129 the CG5
offers excellent value in comparison to alternate offerings (@ £295.00).
I'd not noticed the 'special' price.

Regards


Chris
Yes.
I can confirm, that a short dovetail, is available directly from
Celestron, to screw onto the rear cell of the scope. It is only about 5"
long, and bolts directly onto four holes in the cell. I think it was about
£8.
The CG5, is an excellent mount for the C5. The only 'caveat' with it, is
'goo'. In common with most of the manufacturers of the clone mounts of
this sort, the far Eastern company who put this together for Celestron,
seem to have shares in a company selling extremely viscous lubricants. The
result is that in colder climes, it can be over stiff. Taking the mount
apart, is not hard, if you take your time, and stripping this goo off, and
replacing with either a Lithium based grease, or one of the PTFE
lubricants, can improve the mount massively. There are a nunber of
'variants' of the CG5. The original, was an almost direct clone of the
other mounts like this. Then it was improved by adding ball bearings on
the RA axis. Then more recently still, ball bearings were added to support
the worm. The original variant, is like a cheap Vixen GP, and with care
can work well. The 'middle' variant, has more load carrying capacity, but
suffers from having a rubber 'O' ring at the end of the worm shaft, making
it almost imporssible to get backlash down to sensible levels if this
capacity is used, unless this ring is replaced with something stiffer
(nylon). The last variant, can perform very well indeed. The last variant,
also has slightly 'better' lubricant selection than the earlier mounts,
but still stiff enough to be 'annoying'.
For the price being asked, this is a great combination. Realistically, the
CG5, is not 'big for the scope', the weight difference between this and an
EQ3-2, is very small. Generally the load capacities quoted for mounts are
always on the 'generous' side, and while some combinations do get 'silly'
(A Borg 76ED, on an AP1200 for instance), I'd always say that a slightly
heavier mount is the best way to go, _provided it is not too heavy to
comfortably use_. The CG5, is a very easy to handle mount, and should not
cause any problems in this way. :-)
The fact there is some 'reserve capacity', could be useful in the future.

Best Wishes

"Stephen Tonkin" wrote in message
...
Gaz wrote:
the mount you linked to at D.Hinds is a bit big for your scope

I beg to differ -- IMO it is a very good match indeed. A mount is only
too big for a scope if its physical size impedes access to the
eyepiece!

(you'll get away with a EQ2/3)

If you mean an EQ3-2, I agree with you, but the CG5 offers more at not
much price difference. However, if you mean "an EQ2 or EQ3", I have to
disagree wrt the EQ2 - this is what the C5 came on in the G5 package,
and it was seriously undermounted (despite what the S&T review said).


Best,
Stephen

Remove footfrommouth to reply

--
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
+ Stephen Tonkin | ATM Resources; Astro-Tutorials; Astro Books +
+ (N51.162 E0.995) | http://astunit.com +
+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +