Posts Made By: Ed Ashton

I'm going to put in a plug for a used TV 102. It's not exactly "fast" at F/8.6 but can achieve a 3-degree field with a 55mm plossl eyepiece, and an F/6.9 field flattener is available for photography. It's lightweight, not bulky, excellent on planets and double stars, and I've seen them on Astromart for as little as $1650...a lot of bang for the buck, IMO!

Thanks for the tips, guys!

My first "serious" scope was a Criterion Dynamax 8 SCT, Celestron's first competitor until Meade jumped in. I should have sprung the extra $200 for the Celestron. The mechanics were shoddy and it had terrible astigmatism. I didn't realize how bad it was at the time, I just knew it was a chore to use and the images were disappointing, I had more enjoyable use out of my 60mm refractor. Criterion really blew it with these terrible scopes, I think it damaged their previously good reputation and started a downward spiral they never recovered from.

Thanks for the input, everybody. I notice you all have 12.5" Portaballs. I'm wondering if my 10" will have a more difficult time of it with the balancing issues, since it's a smaller scope, but I'll try your suggestions with the weights. This will have to wait until I actually BUY a binoviewer, but this brings up another pertinent question. I am considering getting either the Denkmeier Standard or the Black Knight binoviewer. Would the BK be a better choice due to it's lighter weight, or is the difference too slight to matter?

Televue used to make a 1.8X barlow, and while they are no longer made, you can still occasionally find one used on Astromart. I own one, and like all TV products, it's quality is outstanding.

I've been experiencing another kind of frustration. I'm looking for a used Starmaster 11" F/5.4, but every time one comes up my offer to buy it is ignored, presumably because: A) the seller already sold it but didn't update the ad right away, or B) I don't have a rating because I've never bought or sold anything on Astromart thus far. I haven't tried a "wanted" ad yet, though.

I own a Nagler zoom and use it on a TV 102 on a Gibraltar mount. One point in it's favor you should consider is that if you lose your target object, you merely need to zoom down to reaquire it. Once it's centered, zoom back up. I love how convenient this is.

I, too, extend my condolences, Tom, but you're being too hard on yourself. This sort of thing can happen to anyone. Me, for example. When I first took delivery of my 10" Portaball (my first-ever reflector), I was collimating the secondary with the little screwdriver included for that purpose, and it managed to slip through my fingers. When I heard it crashing into the lower assembly, I was ready to shoot myself over the idea that I had ruined my Zambuto mirror before it had even seen it's first light! Luckily, it missed, or was too light to do any visible damage. I will never make the mistake again of collimating a reflector in a verticle position, and this is how we learn life's lessons. You are definitely NOT a moron, just human.....and I'd like to take this opportunity to offer my gratitude. Your advice in these forums has been invaluable to me, particularly in regards to binoviewers and eyepieces.

I sold my Brandon 94mm F/7 refractor with the Roland Christian triplet objective, which I feel pretty foolish about now, since they command higher prices now used than they did when they were brand new. I might have saved myself the cost of the TV 102 I eventually replaced it with. I'm thinking of selling my 10" Portaball now, and I'm wondering if I might have similar regrets down the road.

It bewilders me that anyone could find the use of the phrase "cyclops mode" offensive in any way. I don't own a binoviewer yet, but I don't feel the least bit demeaned because I don't have one yet....on the contrary, oh, the sweet anticipation! Saying "I viewed it in cyclops mode" is simpler, less cumbersome, and more pleasing to the ear than to say "I viewed it with one eyepiece only", and that's reason enough to use it. Just my .02.