Posts Made By: Erik Hammarlund

I've got a Nikon F3 manual camera and a 5 year old celestron cardboard-tube Dob; 200/1200 (f6). I don't have any special focuser.

I'm really only interested in taking pics of the moon, not stars, preferably on the slowest available film speed. to be honest, I usually shoot 100 speed film though I'm sure that won't work (or will it? the moon IS really bright...) but perhaps a moon guy could tell me what upgrades--hopefully cheap ones--I would need to be able to get a few pictures?

What is the slowest shutter speed I can use without getting image blur?

Thanks,

Erik

I'm buying (as a gift) a spotter. the Nikon is a straight body, sadly, while the minox is angled (a plus for me)... but i'm worried I'll be compromising optics. then again, it IS the ED version. Any reports on the Minox?

thanks...

Anyone know a web link to an 80mm ED review? Thanks...

I need advice on a 4" achro long focal length refractor.

Here's the deal:

I am fortunate enough to be married to a woman who likes looking at stars and we got into the hobby together. I'd like to upgrade to a decent 4" refractor on a GEM so we don't have to fight for our 8" celestron dob. I can't afford an apo and want to find a good quality achromatic unit. Portability isn't as much of an issue for me and long focal length is preferred. I'd like good planetary ability (yeah, apos are best, but long focal lengths are probably fine for me) and a mount that will track reasonably well. i have absolutely no plans to EVER do imaging so 'reasonable' tracking is fine... Assuming i choose to go with a GEM, it seems apparent that the cheapest 'acceptable' mount is a used Vixen GP or SP. 'Nuff said on that.

But as for the OTA, what's a decent scope? I've heard a Vixen 102M is good, not that I've seen one for sale. the standard celestron c4 I hear is a crapshoot unless you get lucky. Stellarvues are a little too short a focal length for what I want. APM only has apos (too $$$) or short chinese stuff. the Meade ED scopes seems to have quality control issues, and I haven't seem many (any?) used, if I could even afford one. I don't know my older refractors well, I live in RI (not exactly the astro capital of the world), and I'm a little stuck.

I've seen GP or SP mounts for under $400 occasionally. That leaves about $600 for a used OTA. Preferably less. possibly another $100 more for an extraordinary deal. Scratches, paint chips, etc are immaterial (we'll probably give this scope to our 2 year old in another 10-12 years; it won't be sold).

Any advice on OTAs, or setups, that I might not have considered?

thanks!

Silly question perhaps...
but as I read the ads (and have for years) there are
-Lots of 4" scopes around 200-300 used, be they meade, celestron, or APM achros.

-Lots of 4" scopes around $2000 used.

A few in the middle (Vixen), but not many. And even they are supposedly prone to color, or are damn expensive for a non-apo.

So why is that? Does a single piece of flourite glass actually cost $1500? I mean, you'd think someone could make a decent 4" scope at f9 or so taht would be fine for non-Astrophysics types but would be better than your standard C102. What am I missing?

I live in rhode island. Never been to a start party, but I'd love to... or anything, for that matter. Seems to be nothing here, and my wife and I view alone. Anyone know of contacts?

I like to build boats and I have some epoxy in the basement. So I started thinking (always a bad idea) that if you start with a properly waxed PVC pipe or Sonotube, and a vaccum bag system you could build a gorgeous and strong cold molded tube using 2 layers of veneer. Actually I don't even think you'ds have to bag it though it'd be a little heavier... maybe throw some 5 oz cloth on the outside for extra impact resistance, and possibly run a veneer-covered balsa stringer up opposing sides for added rigidity.

I know it would get heavy compared to a truss system, I'm thinking of it mainly as an at-home 8 or 10" f10. i think I could make it equivalent to or lighter than a sonotube, but lots more rigid.

Anyone else try anything similar? i saw a pretty picture of one with a Mark Harry mirror, but i couldn't tell if it was cored with glass sheathing, or glued thicker strips.

...Anyone know a web page? They're heavily armored waterproof 7x50 porro prism binocss, far above the current "boater" model that's now being offered by Nikon. i'd like to try to find another pair, and have only the serial number to go by.

The only identifying information is "Waterproof 7x50 7.3@ (degrees)" stamped into the rubber armoring.

thanks!

I've finlly got an acre and a half with good viewing, where I can stick a permanent pier in. I remember there was a U.S. company (in Pennsylvania? I can't remember) that makes 'old fashioned' non-APO, long focal length (as in f12 or f15) refractors... anyone know or recall who it was? If I saw the name I'd know right away.

i'm looking for a planetary scope to supplement my older 8"f6 Dob

I'm finally moving to a relatively decent location. Not the darkest skies, nor the clearest (Martha's Vineyard) but I've got a big field and unobstructed views right near my house, so I look forward to viewing a lot more.

So far, I've only owned one large scope---my first: a ~1988 Celestron cardboard tube 8" f6 Dob, single vane. It's functional though sometimes hard to collimate. And the mirror is getting a little dull.

Sadly I learned that my wife and I often like to look at planets, and tracking at high power is a royal pain in the arse. In fact--and this will be no surprise to anyone--ANY tracking is a pain if you're at the wrong angle. Also, I like my kids to look (or other slightly inexperienced friends) and they either bump the tube, try to move the tube and lose the object, or both.

OK... So I need a decent mount, with electric tracking. That's clear.

In terms of the OTA, I want a scope that will allow me to look at planets with high power, and without using 3mm eyepieces and barlows. I've gotten OK results with my 48" focal length dob; i can't see going a whole lot shorter than that; this seems to eliminate most of the short focal length apos. Of course (it's never easy) i _also_ would like to be able to use it to look at smaller deep sky objects, if possible. yes, I know I am asking for two different things. but I'm trying to figure out the 'ideal' focal length is. Even with a 6' scope, i'll be able to view the entire moon using a ~25mm eyepiece (since I can do that now with an 18mm and a 48" scope). Or am I calculating wrong?

OK, that's what I want. now here's what I'm thinking of getting:

I'm leaning heavily towards an Atlas or c6 mount. I don't especially mind the weight, as I don't plan to travel much with my scope. I'm _never_ going to do photo (or if I will i'll just upgrade then). I don't care about goto for now. And I want it to be solid at high mag. Finally, I want to be able to stick other scopes onto it, now or in the future, so I don't have to constantly switch mounts. I know I'd look funny with an 80mm on an Atlas, but I'd rather avoid spending more $$ on a separate mount. I can't afford a gm8. Sensible so far?

For an OTA, I'm really debating between two things: an Intes or Intes Micro maksutov, and a D&G refractor.
Price wise, a D&G 5" is $1600, 6" is $1900, in f12 or f15. The 6" f10 or f12 intes scopes are $1300; the Intes Micro 703 is $2100.

I can imagine the difference in portability, of course--a Mak wins, hands down. But how about cool down? How about viewing? Light transmission? I'm leaning towards the refractors (I am not going to search for a tiny violet fringe to complain about; not my style). I'm guessing that I'll still be able to use a long 2" eyepiece in the refractor to get lower mag, though maybe I'm wrong about that as well...?

i'm guessing there isn't really any mount savings either way. Maybe I could get a GP instead with a 6" mak, but it's not really any cheaper, and I know I don't want a cg5.
Help! Any comparisons or comments would be welcomed.