[NeoDinian]

Not just the lenght, but the height...

Crude image, NOT to scale...



This is only part of it also. Now rotate the scope 90 degrees. This is where the length comes in.

[Gustavo Pohls]

I know that I sound like a broken record...and I Understand that $ seems not to be an Issue with Dave, but.........

Dave...If I may ask......What type of photography are you looking forward to do?

DSO? Planetary? Solar?????

A word for the wise.....Not all scopes serve for all purposes, I know you might already know that.....BUT it wasnt until I had good experience with Planetary, Solar and DSO that I had a tendency to like more Planetary work than anything.

I was also limited by LP with DSO and Solar is cool, but not my thing...

I would hate for you to love Wide angle DSO imaging and have a RCOS...

If you havent ordered the scope I suggest you find your "thing" first....

It is like offroading....If you like SANDRAILS there is a huhge difference between going to the Dunes than going to the Baja 1000

Seems you are buying a Trophy Truck and maybe you are into Banjees...

If you have time I can gladly help you with a taste of solar and planetary imaging.....I'll be glad to help you hands on my scopes here :wink:

[dbeckstrom]

Gustavo,

I'm open to any discussions and all the help anyone would like to offer! I don't take offense if someone has suggestions or recommendations or other opinions. Don't worry about being a broken record. I'm stubborn and sometimes that's what it takes! LOL!

I am primarily interested in photographing things like:

Horsehead nebula
Whirlpool galaxy
ring nebula
flame nebula
blue lagoon
Spiral galaxy

Other NGC objects.

Other than Saturn, not real interested in the planets.

The RCs seem to be the telescope of choice and produces the best photos (most detail) that I've seen.

Money is always a problem. But I don't want to buy a telescope and then later be wishing I would have bought a better one -- that gets costly when you take a loss on selling the old one.

I like optics where the stars are round all the way to the outside of the field and where the photos have detail and depth. I want to use an SBIG with autoguiding. I also want a telescope that could be totally remote controlled.

[SteveDurham]

I've been in a couple 24 foot domes and even one 32 foot dome. Talk about room to move around!! You could probably do a square dance in these, while slewing the scope!!
The "ED" is "small"....even for my little 4" 102mm refractor on G-11. I often have to walk around the back instead of taking the short cut around the front.

I'd bet it will fit, even if it is close. The thing is, without seeing or using other set-ups, you'll not ever know what you're missing.

me

ps: Thanks for the "winch" link....all worked out.

[Gustavo Pohls]

Dave,

It is clear you want DSO imaging….but make no mistake that by the list of targets you just mentioned, you are looking into 2 kinds of DSO imaging……Wide Field & High Magnification .

No single telescope is versatile enough to do well at everything…..

For example for Wide Field the best pictures come from small aperture high quality apochromatics, but for high f ratio DSO imaging definitely the RC design is awesome.

Limiting yourself to a certain targets can be frustrating in certain seasons of the year….For starters, any given month you only have about 60% of the available nights good for DSO imaging due to the moon.

My Humble opinion is that you need to find your thing…..A better way is to have a shotgun approach. Have the versatility to do everything at least once….

If your concern is the telescope depreciation…that should be no worry. Most telescopes don’t depreciate that much after a while. The typical depreciation from a well taken cared telescope is about 30-50%.

Why not buy good used telescopes? They will not depreciate anymore.

In a nutshell….I would learn Wide Angle DSO imaging with a solid Tak FS-102 or even a FQ-106……

High Mag DSO imaging with a big aperture SCT……The SCT would also be versatile enough for doing planetary when the moon is out .

For Solar I would begin with a PST…

Its better to start by discovering yourself instead of just buying a scope that is very expensive and most likely the best performer in just certain fields.

I am most certain that the best asset in imaging is not the gear, but the imager…..period

[Richard B. Drumm]

So something like a 11" Celestron Schmidt/Cass OTA (for DSOs & planetary) with a TeleVue NP-101 or Tak FS-102 (for autoguiding while doing DSOs with the big scope & widefield imaging with the refractor itself) would give you a taste of everything without breaking the bank.
Then there'd be dough left over for the SBIG camera of Gus' dreams!
Rich :smt003

[NeoDinian]

Some of the BEST images I've seen are not from the BIG SCT's, but rather from smaller refractors... That RCOS would get you great images of the planets, and DEEP SPACE objects... But myself, I love the look of things like the Lagoon and Ring as opposed to those deep images of a galaxy with a 4 digit number for a name...

With the precision of the PE mount, you will find yourself in a world of possibilities...

If I may, I would recomend something (that you can get your hands on now) like the WO FLT110 (The TEC oil spaced triplet if you can find one used!)... Or just look for the TEC flt110... Great images, fantastic scope...

Next, put yourself on the list at Astro-Physics for something like their 160... THAT is a dream scope! And quite achievable.

Obviously, you're budget is large, as you almost ordered a 27,000 scope... But you don't need to spend 27,000... Heck, everyone will eventually have a scope and wish they had another.. But buy quality, and you'll be happy either way.

It's not "who has the best scope wins", but rather if you're happy with what you have, you're a winner...

Get a quality refractor in the 4-5 inch range.. Put your name on the AP list for a bigger one... The mount will easily handle both... (And more if needed!)...

As for the imaging, look into a nice wide-format dedicated CCD and Guider. The images you'll get from that would be astounding...


You'll be happy with whatever choice you make. But you don't need to break the bank doing it.

[NeoDinian]

Oh, and if you're feeling generous, I would be EXTREMELY happy with an Orion ED80 or WO ZS66 to piggyback on my LX200... Thats all I want for my imaging needs..

[dbeckstrom]

Gustavo,

You make a good point and those are things I've thought about.

My concern isn't so much the telescope depreciation. That was only one thing I was thinking about.

I bought a brand new Canon XL2 digital camcorder about 5 months ago. I have about $6,000.00 invested into it with the extra batteries, filters, special bag, various add-ons, etc, etc. After using it, I found out its a real pain in the back side to have to remove the lens (to prevent breakage when hauled), pack it onto the ATV, drive a mile, take it out, install the lens, shoot, remove the lens, pack it away, drive a mile and then repeat the process. I spend a lot of time doing things that have nothing to do with filming.

So I bought a new High Definition Canon XH A1 last week, which has a permanent lens (yet better wide angle and zoom) and which is smaller and easier to pack away. Now that I have no lens to take off and put on I can spend more time shooting and less time fighting the equipment. And the footage is better and higher quality to boot. When I sell the XL2 I will take a beating on depreciation. Not only that...none of the accessories I bought for the XL2 will fit the A1. They all have to be sold, too...at a loss.

Had I bought the right camera the first time, I would have saved money, hassles and frustrations and saved a lot of time.

My concern is that I don't want to buy a telescope and then later have to sell it and take a beating on it. Its not worth the time, hassle, dealing with replacing accessories, shipping it, etc...

I know its not always possible to get the right thing the first time and no matter how hard you try you still may end up selling and replacing. But that usually only happens when I don't spend enough time up front to understand my needs and understand the products well enough. I've very seldom gone wrong when I've tried to buy the best.

The best doesn't mean the one that costs the most, either! I'd prefer not to spend more than $6k or $7k on a telescope and even that is a lot.

You suggested a High Mag SCT for DSO imaging. I'd be happy with that, but here is my concern. The Meade RCX400 won't work on a GEM. The LX200R suffers from image shift problems and its seems to be a matter of luck if you get one where the image shift is minimal. Here is one (of many) quotes I've read about the Meade problems:

[quote]
So I decided to get the LX200R, which also has good optics, but is mechanically the same or worse that the LX200 design. I can't tell you how disappointed I was. The optics are pretty good, but the image shift is intolerable. The mirror lock DOES NOT WORK! Even with the mirror in full lock position, the focus changes with elevation, and probably temperature as well. The result is that you have to re-focus with each object.

I have seen a few LX200s with very little image shift, but most of them are excessive, at least for imaging. Be very careful to inspect the tube for image shift before paying any money. The problem is that if you get a bad one, you may have a lot of trouble getting Meade to fix it. A friend bought an LX200 OTA and it has about 6-7 Jupiter diameters of image shift. It has been back to Meade twice, with no noticeable improvement.

I suspect that even though Meade sometimes makes tubes with small image shift, they do not know how they do it. They do not seem to be able to remedy the image shift.

I wished I had got a C-14 because at least you can get the mirror lock that keeps the mirror from changing position.
[/quote

Dr Clay suggested a C14 to me about 2 months ago. I researched it for a few days. Cloudy Nights doesn't have a celestron forum for the C14, there seems to be very little community support for it. I thought the photos from the LX200R were nicer than those I found from the C14. So I was disappointed. Also, there is a rumor about Celestron and their optics going downhill. That seems to be supported, too, by a review a french Astronomy magazine published after they tested the 9.25 optics.

That kind of left Celestron and Meade out of the picture for me. Others have said that the Taks seem to be more of a fad telescope and that they aren't really all that great.

Grrrrrr I know you can't believe everything you read. But I think I read too much!!!! Anyway, I've never heard one negative about the RCOS telescopes. I've heard glowing reports on support and performance.

[dbeckstrom]

Wow....you guys were busy posting while I typed up that huge message! Thanks for all suggestions and food for thought.

Neo - can you tell me about the Astro-Physics 160 and why you think so highly of it? After your post I went to their site to read some about it. I looked for photos taken with it, in their gallery, but didn't see any. Have you seen photos somewhere from it?

[SteveDurham]

I'll jump in again. Here is a link to the best images, or aleast as good as anywhere on the web!!!!
Clik on "Questar" first, and realize the images were taken with a 3.5 questar, just outside of Princeton, NJ. He imaged with this little scope for years!!!
Then check out the images he took with the 10" RC. I think you'll be impressed.

http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/images/

Then, consider a 7 inch Questar....just short of guaranteed to NOT decrease in value. Same with and Astro-Physics....

me

[Stargirl]

http://www.muellersatomics.com/homepage/

And this was one of them on the astro-physics site. Look under the telscope types and they have their customers and their web pages, there is more , Hope that helps

[Gustavo Pohls]

Dave,


Forgive me to be blunt….BUT at our level we wouldn’t notice some of these problems if they came and slapped us in the face.

Image shift can be easily mitigated quite easily by locking the mirror and just focusing it with a crayford focuser.....

Sometimes talking to guys like Ron Wodaski without telling him that this is your 1st scope is maybe a mistake.

I have a LX200 and a C14....I also own Taks....My only issues were mount related and I have somehow fixed them to my skill level with a G11. You have a PE Mount…well some Problems solved there, but expect others that might come due to your inexperience.

I don’t doubt that most scopes might have issues…..Heck, Hubble has ‘em.
I guess my recommendation is not very different than the others from the guys here

[NeoDinian]

Well, off the top you can call me biased. I love AP.. I live only 3 miles from them, and several of the members at my club work there, as well as one of the members made the custom 10" AP in our observatory...

That being said, I think you'll find that most people agree, when it comes to refractors, AP is top. Of all the high-end scopes, there are only 2 companies (That I know of) where their scope retain or GROW in their value over time... AP is one, Televue is the other.

I've looked through them, I have not imaged through them... I don't even know where to guide you to find images through the new 160.... But I'm sure they're out there.

Actually, found...

How about a FULL FRAME image of the Veil Nebula done by Roland himself through the 160...

http://geogdata.csun.edu/~voltaire/roland/veil2.html

Heres a few samples from other AP refractors:

http://www.tzec-maun.com/samplephotos.html

This site has a lot of images with the AP130

http://www.kiroastro.com/index.html


An Ap scope isn't just a nice scope, it's an hierloom... They gain value... People will pay MORE to get one used, rather than waiting several years to get one new...

[SteveDurham]

Yup....a lot of good points.

I especially like the one about used equipment being sold for a "loss" the first time, and then having it hold it's "used" value. I've not ever liked buying used stuff, but astronomy stuff, from the right seller, can be a remarkable deal. (speaking of remarkable deals.....the 12" SCT is still for sale)

Then there is the one about getting into the "hobby" with good equipment, for as little as possible, in order to find out how involved one wants to be. The sky is the limit, but small steps at first can be advantageous.

Also, the "complaint" about image shift with SCT's. Knowing that it is advantageous to "upgrade" to a crayford style focuser before purchasing can be a good thing. It's like the "extra" collimating scope that you hear about after you buy an expensive main scope. At least this is what happened to me. I added a mid'line crayford to the 12" SCT that works quite nicely. With the CCD equipment available nowadays one does not have to "expose" for hours at a time to get good data. Once one is set up to capture photons, the shift is not a problem. And when one can save a few thousand who cares about a little shift. ( The 12" SCT has one.)

Besides, even people with the BEST are upgrading to add crayford style focusers, so to purchase something without image shift will also lead to the upgrade in the focuser eventually. (If the scope does not have it when you buy it.)

In short....I'd like to have your purchasing problems AND purchasing power!!!!

Steve

[Richard B. Drumm]

Sooooo.....
A good first step might be buying one of the TeleVue refractors. You can image & observe with it for now while you size up the options on the main scope.
Rich

[dbeckstrom]

It looks like I'll be getting my first telescope next week. I'll be in Indianapolis for the next several days for a show. After the show, I'll be meeting the owner of the telescope in Ohio and picking it up.

It was disheartening when I found out the telescope that I wanted wouldn't fit my dome. I thought seriously about pulling the dome and roof off my building and putting a new dome and roof on. Of course, that is rather nuts to go through all of that. I kept struggling with the thought that I should do the wise thing, which was to buy an SCT instead of an RC and avoid the work and the cost of replacing the dome.

As luck would have it, I found a 12.5" RCOS that was built in 2002. Back then, the telescope was 36.5 inches long instead of 40/41 inches. It was shorter because the dew shield at that time was separate. It comes with the dew shield and I'm hoping I can just leave it off. The original owner never used it.

It comes with two cases, a TAK collimating scope, the TCC and PIR, and several extensions (for the back).

What are the odds of finding a short version of a telescope (not listed for sale anywhere) just when I needed it? :smt041 :smt026 :smt041











The Strehl Ratio on the optics is .952.

Wish me luck!

Dave

[Geeo]

Hi Dave, Congrats on the new scope. I think you will be sooooo happy with this setup. I don't have the shield on my C11 yet but i do not think it will be any problem. I wonder how much longer the RC is. This is a pic from inside the ED. Clear skies. Geeo[img][/img]

[dbeckstrom]

Geeo,

Thanks. I don't know. It looks like there is plenty of room for the C11. I'm guessing its about 30 inches?

I talked to Software Bisque and if I need to I can slide the scope back a little on the mount and counterbalance with weights.

I'm hitting the road in an hour.

[SteveDurham]

An RC after all!! That is good news. They say patience is a virtue and it seems to have paid off for you this time.

The way things are going it will be difficult to drive more than 8 hours in a cross country trip without stopping to visit a member of the brotherhood. Yours will be a memorable stop, indeed!!

Pics-Pics-Pics!!!!!

Drive Carefully!!

Steve