Posts Made By: Greg Nowell

It's an easy load for a G11, Mach 1, certainly an AP900.

Tripod possibilities include Berlebach (better than AP I think), AP, and the Losmandy HD tripod and also the Losmandy FOLDING tripod which is a sweet deal I think.

I use a 42" ATS pier for my C14 and it's a nice thing too.

Although I *could* use the AP900 for my FS128, I ended up using the refractor with the G11. It's extremely solid, and the G11 is *an easier set up.* At least it is for me. My 900 QMD is harder to set up than a G11 because:

1. The altitude adjustment is not very ergonomic (still isn't on the go-to versions, kind of a wrist bender. The Mach 1 solves this problem by using G11 placement style on the altitude knob.

2. On the QMD version, it's a hassle using the polar scope because you have to take off the encoder cup to put on the polar scope and then take off the polar scope to put the encoder cup back on. Not sure how current generation handles that, but I'm sure it's better. Worth asking though. The G11 setup lets the polar scope reside permanently in the mount, the encoders are elsewhere.

3. setting up the G11 on the Berlebach tripod is easier than setting up the AP900QMD on the ATS.

4. The 900 (old and new) both have, compared to a g11, a humongo dec counterweight shaft which is awkward to use and thread in. Haven't checked out the Mach 1 from this perspective.

In any case: Any of these combinations are going to work well and look beautiful.






Greg N

Watch both videos and consider a C9.25 or EdgeHD9.25.

The point is that the videos show off some mount configurations you may wish to consider: one is the g11/Berlebach (standard HD tripod is also excellent); the other is the heavier duty AP900.

Since you had a 12" dob I would think that a 9.25 to C11 category scope would be more to your liking. There isn't much of an issue with "the hoist" with those two OTA's.

A Super Polaris mount will easily carry a c8 and that would put you in business with tracking and a much lighter set up.

super polaris:

http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=824

C14 videos:
1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TBawz69qo_A
2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwVg1M6bURI

I think that you need to consider that the needs of your 7 year old daughters are for quick and easy set ups. That would point to something like your old dob. Astrophotography requires a great deal of precision. Your daughters will get bored while you fuss around.

The other thing is that aperture and beginning photgraphy conflict. You want large aperture for eyeball viewing but short focal lengths in photgraphy make imaging easier, unless you are doing planets.

So the fact is what you might really want is some kind of photgraphic set up (4 or 5" refractor, or an EdgeHD anywhere from 8 to 14", which has both long and short focal length options with fastar) to set up and use when the kids get tired, and a 6 to 8" dob (such as an Orion XT8 or Star Blast 6") to use with the kids.

You could also get a ten inch Newt and use it in dob configuration with the kids or for fast setup and have a set of rings on a good GEM. The thing is, Newtonians pose a number of operational challenges for photography, it can be done, but it always demands more from the mount and photographing with a Newt on an alt-az platform puts all the equipment up where it is highly leveraged and adding field de-rotators and other stuff gets to be very complex and expensive very quickly.

When my son comes out to do astronomy with me he brings his Star Blast and I help him find various objects with it. I try to set up my own rig and help him at the same time.

regards
Greg N

I like the Pan 41 a good deal, but haven't really seen any advantage to it over the XW40.

The XW40 and the XW30 are the only two of the XW line to which you can attach a dioptrx.

Here's the way to put it on.

http://www.astromart.com/articles/article.asp?article_id=612

I was out using my FS128 last night with the XW40 + dioptrx and it was a refreshing. If I didn't share views so much I'd probably put one on my XW30 too.

regards
Greg N

XW30 and XW40. I use them in my FS128 and it is a great way to see the sky.

Greg N

"get away with" is the wrong spirit with which to approach mounting IMHO. I don't use forks but I will say that one of the standard "cheat techniques" for improving performance on a Losmandy G8 is to put it on top of the G11's HD tripod. That increases stability.

By analogy, I reason that your rig will be jittery if you move towards less intrinsic capability rather than more. It is actually a *great* idea to use a 9.25 on a mount designed for a c14. (The G11 was designed with C14s in mind, and it is *wonderful* with a 9.25)

All that said: it is amazing to me how much people are willing to tolerate in terms of mount instability, and if you are disposed to have a higher tolerance, you might be happy with it.

But I'm beginning to think that many users out there have never seen a really stable rig.

regards
Greg N

A super polaris mount with dual drives. Decided I had to get one of those back.

I have purchased 3 star blasts to give away as gifts.

Greg N

Further notes: there is some speculation that this effect may be related to a screw that protrudes part way out the baffles, but I don't have a clear sense as to placement.

The CN thread is here

http://goo.gl/bXsIv

Greg N

Ralph Aguirre said:

The only real way we have been able to deal with him so long, is that he smokes pot, gets stoned, and falls asleep in a chair by midnight, then he leaves us alone till we all tear down and go.

there was an ad many years ago on TV that had a guy smoking pot near the window of his room and talking to someone on the phone. I forget the exact plot but the gist was you think he is grown up but then his mother calls him and asks him to do something.

The tag was "Nothing ever happens to pot smokers."

Which I think is a fair call, seems to take something out of people who smoke it all the time.

GN

Paul Wysocki said:

I was wondering if anyone has compared these two for contrast/resolution on the planets? Now as I understand the Delos may ever so slightly have the edge. For example some folks say that the Pentax 10mm and 14mm XW is out performed by the Ethos, but I found the opposite and sold my ethos and kept the XW's...

Personally I think that cramming 82 or 100 or 100+ degrees through an eyepiece is asking a bit too much, something has to give on the view. Hence my preference for XWs. I would expect that since the Delos designers were trying to compete with the XWs and would have taken advantage of the smaller fov to optimize the entier field better.

Regrettably I don't have the dough to get into Delos, Ethos, etc. and make all the direct comparisons. The Ethos line certainly is magnificent (I have used a number of Ethoi) but I prefer the XWs.

Greg N

James DellaPenna said:

Some time ago I bought a C9.25 equipped with the Celestron orange "D" Losmandy style dovetail and had to make a conversion to a Vixen style dovetail to fit my CG-5GT mount. Eventually, I may sell the Losmandy style dovetail. It measures 17.25" in length to accommodate the long body of the 9.25 scope. Does anybody know if this dovetail also fits the C11 bodies? I would like to advertise it as such but first need to know if it's true. Thanks
Jim

You'll have to look here:

http://losmandy.com/secondary.html

Actually your real problem is being clear in the ad which generation of 9.25 it fits. The hole separation (HS) on the old ones is greater (17.25") than it is on the new ones (16.5). It looks like the D9.25N can be swapped with the D11, but the older D9.25 would only be good on older 9.25s.

Someone with a drill press could drill his own holes, so there is that.

Greg N