Posts Made By: Mark Mittlesteadt

So, in 40 years you've never seen a single thing you couldn't identify? You always know what something is, even if you've never seen it before? Interesting.

What do you smoke?

Heck, I've been looking up in the night sky for that long too, and there still things I can't identify.

"Oh, so that's what M42 looks like!" 8O

Whether one believes in extraterrestrials or not, the only way anything will ever be known for sure is through open dialogue.

Extinguishing the debate does nothing to advance our knowledge. A UFO is simply a flying object that is unidentified. They are in the sky. Astronomers look to the sky for many reasons, not the least of which are clues about life. It isn't all about imaging M42 for the millionth time.

No proof that alien life exists, does not equate to proof it doesn't exist. So why not discuss it? If not in an astronomy forum, then where? Science is actively pursuing signs of life elsewhere in the universe. For some reason there are still those who feel that life elsewhere (and time/space travel in general) must always mean little green men in spaceships.

The universe is enormous and we haven't even begun to turn the first page in our discovery of all there is. To quote a character in the movie 'Contact', "...I'd say if it's just us...seems like an awful waste of space."

A closed mind is an awful waste of space as well.

God created this awe inspiring universe...Wow, all those galaxies, nebulae and star clusters we are so fond of looking at and imaging.

And we are the pinnacle of His creation? That is kind of deflating news. I don't know about you, but I kind of expected more. For some reason, some fat guy drinking a beer in his underwear while watching reality TV is not my idea of intelligent life.

In all the billions of years the best any life form could do is get to the moon? Someone in God's Quality Control department should have been fired.

It seems every time I get a new scope, or finderscope, I get it set up by focusing on a street lamp down the road a bit. I also like to check out the old porcelain fixtures that were left on the power poles.

And yes, it is interesting to see it up close. Strange how fascinating ordinary, every day things around us are, when you see them in a new way like that.

Yeah, but I bet if you looked at yourself in the bathroom mirror...through your scope, you'd look a lot younger.

Just like when you look at a distant galaxy through your scope, and see it as it was millions of years ago.

Dennis Freeman said:

I'm looking for a pickup and go scope for around the house and on camping trips. Has to be small and relatively light (otherwise I'd bring my 10" XTi ). Since I've spent a bundle on nice lenses over the last nine months, to keep the cost down I'm looking at used scopes. I've got a couple of Naglers (7mm, 12mm, 17mm), several 68 degree lenses (8mm, 21mm, 27mm, 35mm), a few plossls (10mm,25mm), and a 7mm UO ortho. Oh, I also have a TV 8-24 zoom.

Anyone care to explain the issues in deciding between a Mak and a Schmidt? Pros and Cons? I believe the Maks have a longer cool down time and longer focal lengths for a given size. Cool down time is a non-issue since it would be outdoors in a tent and the shorter focal lengths of an SC means a wider field with a given lense-right? What other factors/tradeoffs should I be thinking about?

Go to capability would be nice but not mandatory. BTW, am I correct in assuming the white tube C5 was meant as a spotting scope and the orange for astronomy? If so, does anyone know if there is a difference astronomically?

Thanks in advance.

I've always taken my ETX105 camping with me. And no, you don't need a tripod with it. In fact, if you add some weight on one end of the OTA, you can use it Alt-Az with no 12v power at all...just manual.

Due to it's fork mount, it has a built-in Alt-Az mount with a wide enough base to not need a tripod. I've used tree stumps, boulders and even two stacked coolers to put it on.

The ETX125 is only an inch longer than my ETX105 and would also do nicely for camping trips.

Having said all that, they are both Maks so they aren't for wide field. But I use a TV32mm plossl and get some pretty nice views of Andromeda and the Pleides as just an example. Of course, the Maks are very sharp for planets and the moon.

If you want wide fields get a wide field refractor. Even a used Astroview 120ST from Orion is a fantastic (and cheap) wide field scope. Because it's not an APO you get a lot of false color on bright objects, but you won't have that on wide field objects anyway, so an achro like the 120ST would be my choice for a cheap camping refractor.

As far as cool down time on the Maks, I've never had to let the optics cool down any longer than 1/2 hour tops. You aren't really bringing them out from a heated environment when camping anyway.

My two choices would be either the ETX105/125 or an Astroview 100ST or 120ST, with the latter being sold dirt cheap even new, and greater deals on them used.

Dennis Freeman said:

Any comments, suggestions concerning other issues I may not even been thinking of is appreciated. For example, one posting I read while searching the forum for info. related an experience of the author freezing his face to the side of his refractor. Now there's an problem I would have never thought of .

That would be me...though it was a reflector with a metal OTA on a GEM. I looked through the finderscope to locate an object and the side of my face touched the metal tube. It was 34 degrees below zero (not including wind chill) and I was bundled up good. That was years and years ago. I've lived in this arctic outpost most of my life and I know how to deal with the cold (which now, at my age and priorities means staying inside, thank you very much ).

I'm not sure what to offer in the way of positive suggestions. I don't know how cold it gets by you, but 3/4 of the time January through February here it's well below zero at night. It gets so cold sometimes that I can (and have) taken a scalding hot cup of coffee outside (fresh out of the microwave) and tossed it's contents out on a sidewalk, only to see the coffee hit the ground as ice cubes. If it's that cold and I have a deep desire to observe, I'll stay indoors and go online or play around with my Starry Night Pro. When it's that cold, the grease in the gears of my mount is almost frozen anyway, so it's a moot point.

Of course, I don't have a lot of time to observe and when it's that cold almost all my time to spend observing would be taken up getting dressed and ready to observe...so for me, there's not much point in doing it.

So...my advice? Wait until it's warmer (or at least a bit more tolerable). But if you need to venture out and do it anyway, bundle up in layers. Wear a hat as most of your body heat will be lost through your head. Use some type of dew control like a Kendrick system (or the like) so you can heat the EP, etc. and maybe even heat the IntelliScope controller paddle. If that thing gets too cold it may not function or display properly. I know if I don't use a heater on my Autostar it gets really funky to use below freezing sometimes.

Like what others have mentioned, I think a lot of it has to do with two factors...

1. Expectations.
2. Observational training.

I have a little ETX105 (I also had an 8" SCT). A friend I use to observe with had an 8" Dob and a nice APO. When we would observer together, I would continually see things he didn't. Not because my scopes were better, because I even saw more through his own scopes than he could.

But, I've been a professional artist for over twenty years, and I know that "looking at" things is not the same as "seeing" them. And so it is with the faint, subtle objects we view through our telescopes.

My friend would constantly bounce from one object to another, almost as quickly as he found them. While I, on the other hand, would carefully study the same object for very long periods of time. Sometimes the seeing would be better, even from minute to minute. But also, I was specifically trying to eek out the most amount of visual information I could get out of each object, while he was simply "having a peek" at it, before moving on to the next one.

His APO was technically superior to my ETX (a point he frequently chided me about) though they were similar in size. But to be honest, for the few thousands of dollars more he spent on his, there wasn't much of anything to be seen in his that I couldn't see through my little ETX POS (sic). While some subtle details would be revealled a bit more in his APO, there wasn't that much difference. In fact, his beautiful scope was really wasted on him. This is so similar to the equipment discussions I read in my music forums. The best musicians can make a poorly designed and built bass still sound beautiful, while those with lesser talents can't even make the most expensive intruments sound like anything worthwhile.

Granted there are limitations within the type and size of the optics. Aperture generally rules. But the observer him/herself makes just as much of a difference. I used to be caught up in equipment myself. Then after I read O'Meara's book on the Messier objects, I really spent more time training myself to "see" what I was looking at. Sketching at the EP really does help tremendously.

A lot is in the eye of the beholder. Remember that the earliest of astronomers discovered many things (even discerning quite a bit of detail)...through truly terrible and small optics by today's standards. How on earth did they ever manage to do that? Think that was a case of exagerrating the quality of their equipment?

Are you connecting your computer to the Autostar, or the LX200 directly?

I don't think you can connect the scope directly as the Autostar is the brains..I think.

Someone else may know more than I do about it.

Michael Plishka said:

Hi all!
Bought myself an 8" LX10 a few years ago. Great scope but it's big and bulky and moving it in and out of the house on a winter's evening is a pain here in the Chicago area. I want to get another scope, one that will get used more often(yup learned my lesson the hard way)

I find it hard to back down on aperture but I'm seriously thinking to go to a 100mm (+/- 20mm) refractor to help deal with light pollution issues (even though I'm close to the Wisconsin border where it's nowhere near as bad as my old viewing location 25 miles out of the city). I would also like to go with a GOTO scope as well-I want to have fun seeing all types of things.

Thoughts?

Thanks!

~peace and clear, steady skies~

I once owned an 8" LX50 and like you, (during the winter especially) it was a pain to haul out, though it wasn't terrible...just kind of inconvenient for a quick look kind of thing.

So I bought an ETX105. Granted, I went down in aperture, but I went WAY up in time out observing. What good is a big scope you almost never use? I'm not saying get rid of the 8", but perhaps get a smaller Mak, like an ETX 125 or the Orion 127.

One thing I really like about the ETX line is that you don't even need a tripod. I often (in the early morning when I'm having my coffee before everyone else is up) will take my little ETX out and set it on the brick planter next to my front steps. I don't even turn it on. I have it well balanced and I use the fork mount like a manual Alt-Az, non-GoTo setup and just do quick looks at a few things.

What could be easier than an ETX? You don't even need a tripod. What other scope can do that? Try taking a refractor or reflector out without a tripod sometime and see how fun and easy that is. Even the smallest DOB is more work than an ETX (in manual Alt-Az mode).

I still can see an awful lot with my 105. In fact, I see way more with it than my 8" SCT. But that's mostly because the views of my closet through the 8" aren't very impressive.