Posts Made By: Jon Isaacs

>>>In spite of leaping to the defense of those that choose to navigate other than by star charts and asterisms, I will say that I have strong reservations about go-to systems. Whenever I bring this up I always hear from a lot of people who say "they've neve had a problem," with their go-to systems but here goes.

Discussion groups are full of people who have to struggle to make go-to systems work. Stalling, defective gears, worm gaps, upping the battery output to from 12 to 15 or 18 v, cold weather problems, you name it.

I've had some of these problems myself.

So for me, I find digital setting circles are a better way to go. I am very leery of inexpensive go-to systems that are subject to many qc/qa problems and field failure. I am leery of the expensive systems too.
-------

Greg:

Some interesting thoughts/experiences. I too share many of your concerns, getting my CG-5 ASGT up and running as a GOTO mount was a frustrating nightmare.... I have helped frustrated first timers with quality goto scopes get up and running and I have watched from a distance frustrated first timers who did not wish my help. There is a learning curve.

But on the other side, there are plenty of people frustrated with Starhopping and even Intelliscope/DSC's.

So, these days my thinking is this:

The choice of a mount really depends on what each of us wants to do and more importantly enjoys doing.

I really enjoy the simple pleasures of starhopping and just "discovering" objects for myself. This is a big part of the fun I have out there under the stars. For this, simple mounts, either EQ or ALT-AZ seem to work the best.

But many observers have different interests and priorities and the finding of the objects is secondary to the joys of observing a particular object. Rather than being a source of pleasure, some even view it as a task best over as quickly as possible.

For such folks, digital setting circles are certainly a reasonable choice, simple, relatively inexpensive, they can help find targets quickly and easily. Digital setting circles do not preclude one from starhopping or just wandering around the sky...

Manual setting circles are also a possiblility but as we have established, they are not quite what they used to be....

And too, I have come to accept that even for first time scope owner, a full goto system can be the proper choice. I still have some reservations, mostly because I think that GOTO is often over-sold by the manufacturers and it is easy to get the idea that it is painless.
======

A couple of added comments:

Trading optics for electronics is risky. It is better to add electronics to optics...

DSCs are a good middle of the road path, a scope with DSCs is probably quite good for starhopping...

As an aside, my 1978 Meade 12.5 incher has 6 inch diameter manual setting circles, these are big, easy to read with a red light and actually work quite well. The original C-8s had nice setting circles, the RA circle was huge, the Dec circles quite nice as I remember them.

jon

A stock recommendation to get people into astronomy, or to see different kinds of telescopes, is "go to a star party."
-----

A couple of thoughts...

1. It appears as if attending a star party can give one a realistic view of what to expect, ie rain or shine depending on where one lives.

2. Sometimes I am reluctant to suggest going to a star party because I am concerned that the sort of decent equipment that is affordable may not be there. IF someone has a budget of $400 there are good scopes available but going to a star party may be overwhelming because of the lack of "decent" but inexpensive equipment.

Jon

The other afternoon I pulled out my old C-5 and took a look at the sun... I couldn't see any sunspots... Curious if this is a low sunspot activity or if the old eagle eye is just not up to snuff...

jon

Hi:

For the next week or more, Mercury will be visable in the morning sky. It is an easy find as it is only a few degrees below Venus which is very bright.

Mercury is very low on the horizon, about 10 degrees 40 minutes before sunrise but I was still able to clearly see the crescent phase.

Definitely worth doing if you have never seen the phases of Mercury.

Jon

Greg:

I know it is pretty common practice on some other forums, it does have it advantages but I prefer the AM style, you get to know people for what they know and not for what they might have.

Someone like Nils Olof Carlin only has one or two simple scopes but he knows a great deal about collimation and invented the "Barlowed Lazer."

Jon

Last June we spent a few days camping at the Observatory Campground a couple of miles from the Observatory itself. While we were there we met a delightful fellow and I spent the nights observing with him.

Yesterday he sent me a photo he had taken of ME and MY TELESCOPE so I thought I would post it here.

In case you are wondering what I am doing in the photo, there were some Acorn Woodpeckers with a hollowed out tree and I was holding my Coolpix 4500 up against the eyepiece to try to get an image in the failing light.

Nice birding scope but it is not that portable....
8)
Jon

Greg:

I just sent you a "testing" response to your ad.

I happened to see a Titan the other day when I was picking up a finder from a fellow Astromarter. A very nice looking mount and tripod.

Jon

Well, it has been a good year for baseball fans everywhere. Once again, the Yankees and their $200 million dollars have gotten their just due...

Yeah, there are still games to be played but it hardly matters as whomever wins, they will be the "good guys."

8)

Jon

Mark:

An interesting question and one I have considered quite often. Lots of variables here, portability, optics, field of view, ease of setup, viewing comfort...

If you put it all in the equation, for me it would be a tube DOB 52 inches long or less, under 50lbs for the OTA and with decent optics. A scope like this fits in my car nicely and yet has enough light gathering to pull in the deep sky targets. It is easy to haul outside and setup in backyard for some quick views after work but capable of providing some real satisfaction when spending a two week vacation in the dark skies of North Arizona/Southern Utah...

Currently I wooble back and forth between my Asian 10in F/5 DOB and my old Discovery 12.5 inch F/4.06. Both do an nice job, one is easier to haul around, one captures more light. These days I am leaning towards the 12.5 inch. It used to be that it seemed like a real back breaker but since I acquired a Meade 16 inch Starfinder DOB I have decided the Discovery is pretty much "grab and go."

I figure I have something like $1200 invested in this scope and there is little I would do to change it. We have a good working relationship, the optics are good, I am very comfortable sitting for long periods starhopping as well as just wandering around looking at stuff.

I think it's only weak point is the finder, the Telrad and the 8x50 do a decent job but I think an 80mm finder would be a big help. Add something like the 80mm Celestron Onyx as a finder and this would pretty much do it for me.

http://www.buytelescopes.com/product.asp?t=&pid=10884&m=

Of course I would not be adverse to using the Onyx alone on a Tripod if that seemed appropriate.

Jon

Well I have to be honest...

Football is not my game, usually I am a non-fan, I normally follow the games enough to know when the team is in the toilet.

These Chargers, they are missing about half their defense but their offense seem to be hitting on all cylinders in the second half of just about every game.

Going into Denver is always tough, playing when it is 32 degrees is tough, coming back from being 17 points down is tough...

I think these guys are the real thing, Rivers looks to be one of the best to come along for a long-long time. When Merriman gets back, I think they can give Indy run for their money and then some.

Not gloating here, just a bit surprised by the Chargers.

jon