**ALAN ADLER's binocular article - SUPERB!!!**
Todd Gross
I have the privelege of holding Alan Adler's excellent article on binoculars
on my web page:
http://www.weatherman.com/wxastrob.htm
Please check it out.. really important stuff on there that matches my
experience to a large degree and compliments Jay Reynold Freeman's
article beautifully.
Todd
also.. Darwin Bagley went to town with more ep reviews, and had to dedicate
a whole page to his stuff
thanks Dar!
fan...@worldnet.att.net
In article <toddg.1164...@weatherman.com>,
to...@weatherman.com (Todd Gross) wrote:
>
> I have the privelege of holding Alan Adler's excellent article on binoculars
> on my web page:
>
> http://www.weatherman.com/wxastrob.htm
>
> Please check it out.. really important stuff on there that matches my
> experience to a large degree and compliments Jay Reynold Freeman's
> article beautifully.
I found this article to be fairly good, but I wanted to point out a couple of
things. First, Alan has a list of widest available field for various
magnifications. This appears to be based on binoculars he's seen, not what's
available on the market. For example, there are 10x50's with more than the
6.6 degrees he lists. The Russian 10x50's available from ITE (Internet
Telescope Exchange) which I believe are made by LOMO, have a 7.8 degree FOV.
Celestron has also made 10x50's with around 8 degrees FOV, though I haven't
checked to see if they're still on the market. I have a pair of the Russian
10x50's and my opinion is that they are a very good buy for around $150.
The other thing I found "interesting" is Alan's comments on the Zeiss (and
Leica) models versus Orion's:
>Zeiss 10x56. 6.3 degree field, excellent eye relief, 50 oz
>(too heavy). Sharp (but not visibly better optically than my
>Orions), no tripod socket, astronomically expensive.
>
>Leica 10x50. 6.6 degree field, excellent eye relief, 41 oz.
>Other Zeiss comments (above) apply.
The folks at Orion must be happy to hear comments like these. I haven't
looked through these models so I won't add my opinions of them here. From
my own experience with Zeiss Jena binoculars, though, I would say that
each person must judge whether the "astronomical" cost of the German optics
is worth it.
Thanks for posting the article.
Fan
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/ Now offering spam-free web-based newsreading
Mark Brown
I would appreciate any user comments or anyone's thoughts for that matter on
this telescope
Thanks
Mark Brown
in Calgary
R.D. Elliott
In article <6h0vri$u...@ds2.acs.ucalgary.ca>, Mark Brown
<brown...@usa.net> wrote:
- I would appreciate any user comments or anyone's thoughts for that matter on
- this telescope
So would a lot of people; so would I for that matter. There have been a
lot of requests for info on this scope, but I don't think I've ever seen an
answer...
Now only if we could convince Todd Gross to buy one and review it..:).
R.D. Elliott
Todd Gross
> So would a lot of people; so would I for that matter. There have been a
>lot of requests for info on this scope, but I don't think I've ever seen an
>answer...
> Now only if we could convince Todd Gross to buy one and review it..:).
I think Paul Laughton may have tried (and returned) one.
Thanks though!
I have worked on my web page this morning, on the eyepieces, binoviewer, and 3
dozen scope reviewed article. Re-did a star test on an A/P Traveler.
thanks again
Jeff Medkeff
I am pretty sure that PSrRPd...@ican.net (R.D. Elliott)
said the following, though I may be wrong:
>- I would appreciate any user comments or anyone's thoughts
>- for that matter on this telescope
> So would a lot of people; so would I for that matter.
> There have been a lot of requests for info on this scope,
> but I don't think I've ever seen an answer...
I have heard of one (optically) bad one - very very bad,
according to the owner - and seen one (optically) very good
one.
Not a heck of a lot to go on, one night's look at one and
another user's comments, so I have resisted replying before.
--
Jeff Medkeff | Check out the s.a.a. photos page at
Rockland Observatory | http://shutter.vet.ohio-state.edu/saa.htm
Sierra Vista, AZ |
R.D. Elliott
- > So would a lot of people; so would I for that matter. There have been a
- >lot of requests for info on this scope, but I don't think I've ever seen an
- >answer...
-
- > Now only if we could convince Todd Gross to buy one and review it..:).
-
- I think Paul Laughton may have tried (and returned) one.
-
Well then, why didn't he say anything :)?!?!
- Thanks though!
-
- I have worked on my web page this morning, on the eyepieces, binoviewer,
and 3
- dozen scope reviewed article. Re-did a star test on an A/P Traveler.
Coolness... I'll have to drop by and scope out the changes.
<duck, run, hide>
R.D. Elliott
kev...@cais.com
I admire your discipline Jeff. Mr. Anderson would not even need one night's
look himself. He would draw a conclusion and present it as fact based one
person telling him it was so because they looked through one once at an
observing session somewhere.
Kevin Brown
In article <353a6ec5...@news.goodnet.com>,
med...@NOBULKc2i2.comMERCIAL wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> I have heard of one (optically) bad one - very very bad,
> according to the owner - and seen one (optically) very good
> one.
>
> Not a heck of a lot to go on, one night's look at one and
> another user's comments, so I have resisted replying before.
>
> --
> Jeff Medkeff | Check out the s.a.a. photos page at
> Rockland Observatory | http://shutter.vet.ohio-state.edu/saa.htm
> Sierra Vista, AZ |
>
Jeff Richards
Personally, I would love to see him or Jay Freeman or anybody, review the 4"
Semi-APO kit in described in the Internet Telescope exchange. This thing has
really got my attention.
R.D. Elliott wrote:
> In article <6h0vri$u...@ds2.acs.ucalgary.ca>, Mark Brown
> <brown...@usa.net> wrote:
>
> - I would appreciate any user comments or anyone's thoughts for that matter on
> - this telescope
>
> So would a lot of people; so would I for that matter. There have been a
> lot of requests for info on this scope, but I don't think I've ever seen an
> answer...
>
> Now only if we could convince Todd Gross to buy one and review it..:).
>
> R.D. Elliott
Matt Phelps
>
> This is what I found out.
> Posted with the author's permission.
> Can be read with Microsoft WordPad.
>
> mike
>
> Name: Visac#1.doc
> Visac#1.doc Type: unspecified type (application/octet-stream)
> Encoding: x-uuencode
Please, please post an ASCII version of this. Not all of us
have succumbed to the Microsoft Empire.
--
Matt Phelps
System Administrator
Harvard - Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics
mph...@cfa.harvard.edu
http://cfa-www.harvard.edu
Jerry Petrey
Mark Brown wrote:
>
> I would appreciate any user comments or anyone's thoughts for that matter on
>
> Thanks
> Mark Brown
> in Calgary
I have had one (with the Sky Sensor 2000) for a few months and have
been very happy with it. It appears to be well made and the views have
been great. The GP mount is not the most stable but it is not bad.
I replaced the dinky 6x30 finder with a 8x50.
Jerry
=====================================================================
= Jerry Petrey - Consultant Software Engineer - Member Team Ada =
= GP Software Consultants Member Team Forth =
= homepage: http://members.tripod.com/~gpetrey/index.html =
= email: remove <nospam> from reply address =
=====================================================================
russell.martin
Matt Phelps wrote:
>
> >
> > This is what I found out.
> > Posted with the author's permission.
> > Can be read with Microsoft WordPad.
> >
> > mike
> >
> > Name: Visac#1.doc
> > Visac#1.doc Type: unspecified type (application/octet-stream)
> > Encoding: x-uuencode
>
> Please, please post an ASCII version of this. Not all of us
> have succumbed to the Microsoft Empire.
RESISTANCE IS FUTILE. YOU WILL BE ASSIMILATED.
"Borg" Gates
>
> --
> Matt Phelps
Russell Martin
Mark Brown
mike goodnight wrote:
> snip:
>
> This is what I found out.
> Posted with the author's permission.
> Can be read with Microsoft WordPad.
>
> mike
>
> snip:
Mike,Thank you for the Barclay review, I read a "review of his review" but
could not find the original.
> Thanks Again
Mark Brown
>
JTGill
>Personally, I would love to see him or Jay Freeman or anybody, review the 4"
>Semi-APO kit in described in the Internet Telescope exchange. This thing has
>really got my attention.
>R.D. Elliott wrote:
>> In article <6h0vri$u...@ds2.acs.ucalgary.ca>, Mark Brown
>> <brown...@usa.net> wrote:
>>
>> - I would appreciate any user comments or anyone's thoughts for that matter
I'm corresponding with someone who bought one of those objectives from
Markus Ludes (he advertised them on Astromart a while back, 300 bucks shipped,
I think) and he's putting it in a tube at the moment, but he's having
trouble finding a decent focuser. I'll let you knwo when I hear something.
JT
JTGill
>Mark Brown wrote:
>>
>> I would appreciate any user comments or anyone's thoughts for that matter
>>
>> Thanks
>> Mark Brown
>> in Calgary
When I asked for info, someone emailed me from australia, I think,
and they said they were quite happy with the scope.
JT
Jim Van Nuland
>From: "mike goodnight" <good...@ix.netcom.com>
>Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1998 05:08:11 -0700
>Organization: Netcom
>X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.71.1712.3
>This is what I found out.
>Posted with the author's permission.
>Can be read with Microsoft WordPad.
>mike
>begin 666 Visac#1.doc
>MT,\1X*&Q&N$`````````````````````/@`#`/[_"0`&```````````````!
>M`````0``````````$ ```@````$```#^____``````````#_____________
I've no way to decipher this. Why not simply paste the text directly
into the message, and then everyone could read it?
* SLMR 2.1a * Little girls, like butterflies, need no excuse. -Heinlein
__
| Internet: Jim.Van...@sjpc.org
| Fidonet: Jim Van Nuland 1:143/11
|
| A service of the San Jose IBM PC Club, running OS/2 Warp
Bevan & Leigh Harris
R.D. Elliott wrote in article ...
> In article Mark Brown wrote:
>
> - I would appreciate any user comments or anyone's thoughts for that
matter on
> - this telescope
>
>
> So would a lot of people; so would I for that matter. There have been
a
> lot of requests for info on this scope, but I don't think I've ever seen
an
> answer...
There was a short review by Jim Barclay posted a little while back. I'll
see if I can dig it up and repost it. <dig dig scratch scratch rummage dig>
Ah yeah, here it is. Looks like it was actually a review in one of our
local mags, probably the now defunct Southern Sky, though I there is a
heavily edited version in the August 1996 issue of Sky & Space.
<Jim says>
Vixen's VISAC VC200L telescope
by Jim Barclay*
Back in the early 60's an American company- Celestron International, built
a stubby, orange-coloured telescope they called a C8: The popular
Schmidt-Cassegrain was born. As the C8 design grew, another optical
company soon joined in: Meade Instruments. Whilst the battle of sales
between these two is on-going, another has joined in releasing the
cat-amongst-the-pigeons telescope: The VISAC VC200L Aspherical Cassegrain
from the Vixen Optical Company in Japan.
The VISAC (Vixen Sixth order Aspherical Cassegrain) has an 20cm F9 concave
primary and a convex secondary. This telescope is modelled on a
Richey-Chretien Cassegrain (RCC) design: Coma free, with a totally flat
field. Whilst a fully-fledged RCC of same aperture can literally cost an
arm and leg, the VC200L optical tube assembly complete with 6 x 30
finderscope and a 100mm long screw-in extension tube with 1.25-inch
adaptor, comes in around the $2000 mark. This I thought, was too good to
be true, so I bought one!
Field corrector lens
To flatten out a given field of view in a wide angle eyepiece or on film,
Vixen designed a special 3-element field corrector lens that delivers 15
micron star images across a full 35mm (24 x 36mm) frame. This lens
incidentally, lies about 60mm inside from the eyepiece end of the 60mm OD
rack & pinion focuser. Back focus travel is about 125mm. An optional 50mm
screw-in adaptor ring is available to take those big mirror star diagonals
and off-axis guiders, etc.
Collimation
The primary mirror cell and the focuser each have six push-pull
collimating grub screws. If you really need to adjust the collimation, it
is the primary mirror you need to adjust, not the secondary nor the
focuser.
To test for collimation, I attached the scope to my Great Polaris Deluxe
(GP-DX) Equatorial mount and polar-aligned. I then attached the 50mm
adaptor ring and a Parkes mirror star-diagonal and a Nagler 4.8mm eyepiece
that gave 375x. The star I chose was Achernar: Alpha Eridanii.
After adjusting the image to the customary diffraction rings purported in
many ATM books, the collimation was absolutely perfect! Not bad for a
scope that has travelled many thousands of kilometres by air and road
transport.
Cleaning the optics
Because the VC200L has an open top end (no corrector plate) dust and muck
will eventually find its way onto the primary mirror. Vixen does not say
how to clean their optics. To clean this multi-coated primary, just invert
the tube so the mirror is facing the ground and with a can of compressed
air (Dust-Off) as used in the photographic industry, attach a small,
plastic extension tube and without touching, give the mirror a quick blast.
If on the other hand the mirror needs a wash there are four retaining
screws
that attach the rear cell to the main tube.
Before you start however, I recommend that you align-mark of one of the
screws - this makes it easier to re-install the mirror cell later. Once
the cell is removed, don't under any circumstances, use straight
Iso-Propyl. Alcohol, as this may damage the delicate coatings. Rather swab
the mirror gently with tissue paper dipped in luke-warm distilled water.
Blot dry with tissues. With all coated mirrors it is better to use
mineral-free water as house water contains iron and other chemicals that
could damage or attack the coatings. Once the mirror cell is re-installed,
nip-up the screws. You may have to re-collimate using a bright star.
VISUAL TESTS
They say that: all comes to them who wait; well, it did on a night of
excellent seeing and the same Nagler eyepiece used for the collimation
test. Focusing was very smooth and precise; no sign of image shift as we
find in the Schmidt-Cass scopes. The VC200L focuser allowed fine lunar
detail to be seen in large craters. The coloured markings on Saturn's disk
with its edge-on Ring was a magnificent sight. Stars were absolutely
razor-sharp and dead flat right across the Nagler's field of view. For
distortion test I just nudged the scope in RA so the planet's disk was
just on the edge of the eyepiece field: I could not detect any distortion
of the image. Next target was Orion's M42.
120x showed the delicate nebulous structure of M42. It was quite
impressive. Stars right out to the edge of the field were tack-sharp. At
180x the 5th and 6th star in the Trapezium was clearly visible. Pushing
the scope up to 375x the image was still quite acceptable. My next target
was the globular cluster: 47 Tuc. At 200x the image was ablaze of millions
of tiny pinpoint stars. After eyeballing many other DS objects that night,
including NGC 2070, I was totally convinced the VC200L is a superlative
visual instrument, for whatever object you fancy.
Photo-Imaging
Because most Cassegrains have a fairly long back focal travel, fitting a
50mm guider with its adjustable in-out axis mirror was a cinch. With a
small roll of hypered Tech Pan 2415 in the camera, I did four 10-min.
exposures of 47Tuc. After developing and drying the neg, each frame was
carefully inspected (especially the edges) with a 10x lupe over an
illuminated viewer box. Not a single star was out of focus! The VC200L
was living up to its claim.
Focusing a CCD
As with any CCD camera, focusing can be quite a chore particularly when you
cannot see the image in real time. To focus a CCD camera you have to take a
series of 1-2 second exposures of a 4 - 5th mag star and adjust the focuser
until the sharpest image is displayed on the computer's screen. When you
are pleased with that image, take out the CCD camera and pop in an old
eyepiece - this could be a Kellner or a medium power Orthoscopic. Adjusted
that occular until it too, shows a sharp image.
By scratching a mark, or use a small, heavy-duty rubber band on the
outside of its chrome barrel, that mark or stop becomes its focus marker.
You can now pre-focus a telescope knowing that the CCD image will be in
sharp focus.
CCD imaging
Even though the ST-6 camera head weighs about .5kg, balancing the scope
(like it was for the Nikon F camera body and the guider) was not hard to
do. After pre-focusing the scope (as described above) the ST-6 was set to
a 30-second intergration (exposure) of M42. When the digitised image
appeared on the computer's screen, I was stunned: Stars were not only
tack-sharp, the swirling mass of nebulosity surrounding the Trapizium was
unbelievable! "Let's go to 47 Tuc," said an excited voice behind me.
After a 15-second exposure the enhanced image was just mind-blowing. The
same voice with eyes wide open said: "Is THAT the cluster, or am I seeing
a
trick...,". "No my friend, that IS 47 Tuc!. With images like this, it's
no wonder CCD's are taking over film," said I.. Software used to operate
the ST-6 AND process the image, is called SkyPro, from Software Bisque -
the makers of `The Sky'
Conclusion
The VC200L will no doubt appeal to those who want a superlative
photo/visual telescope that combines portability; professional
optical/mechanical performance, and value for money. The VC200L is also
available with a GP, or GP-DX mount. Contact the Astronomy and Electronic
Centre on (086) 282-435 for more details. Mention this magazine!
*Jim Barclay is well known for his astrophotography and love of astronomy.
He owns and operates two observatories: One at Manly near Brisbane; and a
professional setup at in the Stuart Ranges, near the Bunya Mts. - south
of Kingaroy in Qld.
</Jim says>
I think Paul Laughton has also had a chance to check out the VC200L.
While they're seemingly scarce on the ground in the US, there are a few
drifting around here in Oz. There's a member in my local astronomical
society who has one, but I have not yet had the opportunity to see it. My
local camera store (Midland Cameras) is also obtaining one as display
stock.
> Now only if we could convince Todd Gross to buy one and review it..:).
How about it Todd?
Clear skies,
Bevan
--
Bevan Harris (Lat 31º52'23.20"S Long 116º02'21.36"E Alt 30m)
NOTE: To obtain true e-mail address, substitute "spam" with "BMH" and
"blackhole" with "bigpond".
David Nakamoto
Bevan, I'm replying to both you and the group.
Thanks so very much for the copy of the report. Somehow I missed
it the first time.
One thing I'd like to comment on, however. In the report, Jim
Barclay stated that "After a 15-second exposure the enhanced
image was just mind-blowing". I took this to mean no other
exposure times were tried. If this is the case then the jury
is still out on this telescope for use in long CCD exposures.
The few other reports I've gotten on this scope seem to indicate
that the mount is too unstable for long duration exposures, with
excessive vibration and track error. This is thought to be due
mostly to the small size of the polar shaft, 3/4 of an inch if
memory serves. On any scope, over-engineering (read, "oversizing")
the primary RA shaft is a necessity if the scope is going to be
used for CCD or astrophotography work. It appears that this
was not done on the VC200L.
I hope this is either not the case, or that it will be corrected
in the future if this is the case, because optically this
appears to be an excellent scope. I hope Jim Barclay will try
longer CCD exposure times and reports on this soon.
Clear and Steady Nights.
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
If it was so, it would be, and if it were so, it might be,
but as it isn't, it ain't! That's logic.
Lewis Carroll, from Through the Looking Glass
AndersonRM
>I admire your discipline Jeff. Mr. Anderson would not even need one night's
>look himself. He would draw a conclusion and present it as fact based one
>person telling him it was so because they looked through one once at an
>observing session somewhere.
Sorry, did I venture any opinon on this scope, which i've never
even seen? If so, produce the post you are (?) referring to.
-Rich
kev...@cais.com
I was referring to a post in a long running thread about the performance of
the 7" Meade Mak, not this specific scope. It was something to the effect
that in a side-by-side comparison, the Meade outperformed a 6" or 7" Astro
Physics refractor. In a subsequent post you revealed that you were not
actually there, but someone had told you about it.
It was intended as a good-natured tweak, not to be hostile. Everyone has
their own opinions and perspectives that I may or may not agree with, but
that doesn't mean that they don't have a right to express them.
Kevin Brown
In article <199804170420...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,
Bevan & Leigh Harris
David Nakamoto wrote in article ...
<snip>
> One thing I'd like to comment on, however. In the report, Jim
> Barclay stated that "After a 15-second exposure the enhanced
> image was just mind-blowing". I took this to mean no other
> exposure times were tried. <snip>
David,
You must have skimmed some sections of the review as Jim also stated that
he did a 30 second CCD exposure of M42 and 4 x 10 minute exposures of 47
Tucanae (on Tech Pan 2415).
> The few other reports I've gotten on this scope seem to indicate
> that the mount is too unstable for long duration exposures, with
> excessive vibration and track error. <snip>
I wonder how it would go on the Atlux mount (is that available in the US?)?
I too have been considering the VC200L, but would rather have a sturdier
mount. One option could be to buy just the OTA and mount it dobsonian
style until I can get a better mount. (If truth be known, I've been
considering new scopes for nigh on a year now, but plans are being
constantly postponed because of ongoing fiscal considerations. There is an
advantage to this however, as I'm able to evaluate more scopes and
hopefully eliminate the poorer options.)
>
> Clear and Steady Nights.
>
With Easter passed, my skies have taken on this dull, leaden look and sound
curiously like a bad case of indigestion. :-(
JTGill
>>
>> Clear and Steady Nights.
>>
>With Easter passed, my skies have taken on this dull, leaden look and sound
>curiously like a bad case of indigestion. :-(
>Clear skies,
>Bevan
>--
Um, do you have GOOD cases of indigestion?
JT
David Nakamoto
Bevan, I'll comment on your reply in private and to the group.
Due to the length of your reply, I'll comment on it here, but
I included it at the tail end for a reference.
The exposure times of 30 and 15 seconds are too short, in my
opinion, to show tracking errors. This is from my experience
with other scopes and particularly with my C5. But I have to
admit that, due to the large area of the TI-241 chip in the
ST-6 (9 by 7 millimeters, rounding up), the 35mm shot might
mean that the mount is servicable for large scale CCDs. However,
I hold to the opinion that, based on reports from a few other
users, that the jury is still not returning a favorable
review of this scope as far as CCD cameras with small pixel sizes
are concerned. The ST-6's TI-241 has some of the largest
pixels on the market, 23um * 27um, and that helps to hide
tracking errors.
I'd feel much better about this telescope/mount combination
in conjunction with CCD cameras if I could get reports from
someone who tried it using a camera using either the TI-255
(10um * 10um pixels) or the KAF-0400 (9um * 9um) pixels).
Clear and Steady Nights.
------------------------
From: Bevan & Leigh Harris <B...@bigpond.com>
Subject: Re: Orion/Vixen VC200L GP 200mm Cassegrain
Date: Sat, 18 Apr 1998 11:30:35 +0800
To: David Nakamoto <David.I....@jpl.nasa.gov>
Hi David,
(Snip!)
Okay, for the record's sake, let's see if I can find it for you.
<quote>
Photo-Imaging
Because most Cassegrains have a fairly long back focal
travel, fitting a 50mm guider with its adjustable in-out
axis mirror was a cinch. With a small roll of hypered Tech
Pan 2415 in the camera, I did four 10-min. exposures of
47Tuc. After developing and drying the neg, each frame was
carefully inspected (especially the edges) with a 10x lupe
over an illuminated viewer box. Not a single star was out
of focus! The VC200L was living up to its claim.
<snip>
CCD imaging
Even though the ST-6 camera head weighs about .5kg, balancing
the scope (like it was for the Nikon F camera body and the
guider) was not hard to do. After pre-focusing the scope (as
described above) the ST-6 was set to a 30-second integration
(exposure) of M42. When the digitised image appeared on the
computer's screen, I was stunned: Stars were not only tack-sharp,
the swirling mass of nebulosity surrounding the Trapezium was
unbelievable! "Let's go to 47 Tuc," said an excited voice behind me.
After a 15-second exposure the enhanced image was just mind-blowing.
The same voice with eyes wide open said: "Is THAT the cluster, or
am I seeing a trick...,". "No my friend, that IS 47 Tuc!. With
images like this, it's no wonder CCD's are taking over film," said I.. Software used to operate the ST-6 AND process the image, is called
SkyPro, from Software Bisque - the makers of `The Sky'
---------------End of Original Message-----------------
AndersonRM
>I was referring to a post in a long running thread about the performance of
>the 7" Meade Mak, not this specific scope.
The problem with analogies is that most people don't know how to
employ them. They simply use them when they lack the ability
to properly explain themselves.
-Rich
Sean Chan
>> The few other reports I've gotten on this scope seem to indicate
>> that the mount is too unstable for long duration exposures, with
>> excessive vibration and track error. <snip>
>
>I wonder how it would go on the Atlux mount (is that available in the US?)?
> I too have been considering the VC200L, but would rather have a sturdier
>mount.
I've got the VC200L with a GP-DX and it's quite a good mount. With a Canon
F-1
and 100-300mm zoom lense piggybacked, balancing can be quite a had one to
master but still tends to handle it quite well. My only complaint would be
the tripod
which I have an aluminium one. Think if I went for a wooden one, vibrations
would
probably be absorbed a little better.
Sean
P.S. Remove NO.SPAM when replying
--
Sean H.Y. Chan (se...@tsm.com.au)
IT Consultant
DSM Group Pty. Ltd. +61 414 467-077 (M)
PO Box 1493, West Perth, 6872, WESTERN AUSTRALIA
Bevan & Leigh Harris
David Nakamoto wrote in article...
<snip>
> users, that the jury is still not returning a favorable
> review of this scope as far as CCD cameras with small pixel sizes
> are concerned. The ST-6's TI-241 has some of the largest
> pixels on the market, 23um * 27um, and that helps to hide
> tracking errors.
>
> I'd feel much better about this telescope/mount combination
> in conjunction with CCD cameras if I could get reports from
> someone who tried it using a camera using either the TI-255
> (10um * 10um pixels) or the KAF-0400 (9um * 9um) pixels).
>
*any* form of astrophotography and none with CCDs. While I am aware that
there is a relationship between optimum pixel size and focal length (or is
that focal ratio?), I do not know off-hand the relative merits of specific
chips/cameras . Wasn't there an article about this in S&T a few issues
back?
In the 'Meade 8" equ. Newton vs. 8"LX200' thread, Geoff Hansford mentioned
that locally (Australia), the VC200L is available on a Russian mount as
well. I don't know which one, but I assume that it is a heavier mount than
the GP. I know I've mentioned this before, but if the VC200L is available
as an OTA only from Orion, there are a bunch of other mounts it could be
put on. Repeating myself again on another point, has anyone any experience
with Vixen's Atlux mount?
Clear Skies,