Great video ED! To anyone new to this, double check that RA and DEC are locked up tight before you try placing the tube up there!

Using a dob for imaging often means the opposite problem , I.E. , not enough inward travel on the stock focuser , which is a more difficult problem and may even lead to the engineering the scope , moving the secondary closer to the primary , etc . Yes , aperture fever causes poverty and hernias lol . I am typing this while surrounded by a pair of Z12s , an XT-8 , and ETX60 , and a Jason 60mm refractor 1979 vintage . No I don't live in one of Ed' s closets .

I have shifted from 65mm f6.5 APO to 150mm F4 Newtonian. Yeah, stars are not as sharp (but not bad either!) but it is satisfying how fast you can collect photons for an image. In the climate where I live, every photon counts, since weather is the most rare resource. Never ever going back to slow systems again!

I enjoyed this video and like your approach and delivery. Direct, straightforward, and helpful.

The first telescope I ever bought back in August 2023 was a 10" Dobsonian I bought at the suggestion of this channel. It was too heavy to drag into the back garden and gave it away. Six thousand dollars of learning later, I ended up with a Celestron C6, a HyperStar 6v4 and a ZWO asi294 cooled camera on a Celestron CG-4 with an Astro-Gadget motorized go to conversion kit keyed to SynScan. At f/2, ideal for EAA photography in my Bortle 6 sky with trees surrounding my house.

@BirdFinder

5 ай бұрын

Woo hoo, go team C6-Hyperstar!

@nickademuss42

5 ай бұрын

but did you learn how to read scales? :)

@chrimony

5 ай бұрын

"at the suggestion of this channel"... I've watched a lot of Ed's recommendation videos, and he gives a range of options, and warns you about the problem of going big, and that the best telescope is the one you're going to actually use. So if you bought a 10" but found it too awkward to use, that was your suggestion.

Always wonderful videos, Ed!

My solution for focuser balance on my 10" f/4.5 showed up in a discard pile at a roofing supply business. There are these little metal disks you use to secure the felt underlayment to the roof. I got a free box of 1000 of these. They have 1/4" center holes. Take a big stack of them and put them on a threaded rod and screw this assembly into a 3rd tube ring - presto, perfect balance! You can customize the number of disks to get exactly the right weight. I do think such balance is critical when you get to a scope this big. My focuser is a big, heavy hunk of solid aluminum.

@TheStevecas9860

20 күн бұрын

I love your solution thanks!

I have the 6" version of this telescope (also f/4) on an HEQ5 and really like it. I agree with Ed's conclusions here; especially for imaging, a coma corrector is required at f/4, but the combined cost of a coma corrector and one of these newtonians still comes out to less than a triplet refractor of equivalent light-gathering and gives equally colour-free images. Getting a good quality coma corrector is important, and getting the spacing and tilt just right is critical to maximizing your usable field of view. I like the 4-element GPU corrector, also sold by TS-Optics and as the Skywatcher Quattro although watch out because they have a cheaper version (I think 2-element) included with some of their Quattros that is much worse. I image with APS-C sensors so it's a bit less demanding than trying to get a full-frame sensor fully illuminated and sharp across the whole field; I think this is a reasonable tradeoff for most astrophotographers as full-frame astro cameras are also a huge step up in price. The 6" is a good compromise for somebody who lives in a condo in the city and needs to drive anywhere to do imaging, but if I had my own property away from town and space for a dedicated observatory I'd definitely pick up one of these 10" newtonians and a beefier mount instead. The 6" is a bit too small for enjoyable visual use for me (I used to have an 8" dob that I sold for being too bulky in my small condo) but the 10" would probably be excellent. The only issue on an equatorial mount is that the eyepiece can end up at some awkward angles for visual use; I really wish rotating rings were more readily available and cost-effective, as they can entirely eliminate this issue if you can find some for your tube size that don't cost an arm and a leg. For radial balancing, you can buy "counterweight bars" off aliexpress that mount on your existing counterweight bar and stick out at 90 degrees; they have various diameters available to work with your existing bar. You can then install weights of various sizes on this extra perpendicular rod to compensate for the focuser's weight to get proper balances in all axes, which helps a lot with the difference in forces as the mount swings through its range of movement. The only downside with Ed's alternative suggestion at the end of buying the dob version and potentially converting it later is that the visual-focused dob will be a challenge to reach focus with most astrophotography optical trains; it's always easier to deal with a focus point that's too far _out_ (simply add an extension tube) than one that's too far _in_ (hacky stuff involving modifying the tube or using extra long mirror screws and hoping you can make up the distance).

I learn something new every time I watch your presentations. Thank you so very much.

Love your videos Ed. I've got this scope in my closet. Tried it on a CGEM. Worked, but was a bit like a sail on that mount. Those fast newts are great beginner scopes, I have all 3 of the Orions. Paired up very good with my Canon T3i. Clear Skies!

Went the opposite way. Have an 8" orion newtonian (non astrograph) on an Atlas mount. I did eventually make a dobsonian mount for it and it goes back and forth. Only use it visually on the EQ mount and it's been well worth what I paid for it almost 20 years ago.

Thanks again, Ed. I always enjoy your presentations. I often ponder over which mount to get when the electronics on my 14" Meade die.

Another great one Ed.

Dobs again and again! Great video (again)

My endeavor into big Newtonian scopes was a home ground f/6.3 scope mounted on a William Optics GT1-HD mount. The mount was discontinued 2-3 years after they went into production. The tube was 65 inches long and made from steel drainage pipe. I used Parralax custom rotating rings. The experiment only worked so well. Too much sail area. Shook with the slightest breeze. Eventually sold the mirror , focuser and secondary. Bought a G11 and a C9.25. Still in use 23 years later!

I own the older Orion 8" variant. It came with a really weird Vixen style plate which I'm guessing is made for Vixen specific mounts. The same style plate came on my Vixen ED81S as well, it was pretty terrible. I had the experience no wants to have with my Orion last October, the scope fell right out of my mount. Luckily the damage was only cosmetic. I haven't used it since though. I've just been using the ED81S since it''s so much lighter. But I did replace the plates on both of them with a much better quality VIxen plate. Thankfully the ED81S didn't suffer the same fate. Oh yeah, I also really liked the Orion astrograph a lot. I used the Baader Mk.3 coma corrector, it's relatively affordable and does it's job at cleaning up the edges. Though I'm using a fairly small sensor, an ASI174MC-Cool, which happens to be a good match for that telescope. Great review as always and no, you don't have enough stuff. If you think you do though, I'll take that R200SS off your hands, cause you got too much stuff🙂

Great video , would like to see you make video in the field showing tips for viewing and videos on actually out there doing astrophotography!

Great stuff, Ed. You have me leaning to the Dob.

@BirdFinder

5 ай бұрын

@tallperson9422. Be aware that the different design of the optical tube of the Dob will make it difficult to do the second step Ed suggested and use it for full on astrophotography. The focal point is deep inside the focuser (designed perfectly for eyepieces), so you cannot get a typical camera to reach focus. A mini cam can be used for planetary since they slip in like an eyepiece. But a larger sensor camera (astro cam or DSLR) cannot get there in a typical Dob. You would have to shorten the tube, or move up the mirror, probably change to a low profile focuser. Not impossible, but not perfectly simple. You'll notice that when he had the imaging newt set up for visual, it had a number of extension tubes in order for the eyepiece to reach focus--because the focal plane was outside of the focuser due to the overall shorter tube. But for primarily visual, the Dob wins.

Another informative video. I recently purchased a SkyWatcher HEQ5 Pro mount and mated it with a StellaLyra 8” f/5 OTA. I’m a happy camper. 👍🔭

@NG-VQ37VHR

5 ай бұрын

Hey, if you like tinkering, theres a Rowan Belt modification kit you can buy for around $100. I have the orion sirius eqg, which is just a black, orion branded heq5, that ive run with the belt mod for many years. It swap out gears for some belts and pulleys, giving you something similar to the eq6r-pro. The mount operates much smoother and will improve your guiding accuracy. Its really easy to do, and given the costs involved with astrophotography, its worth the price.

I’ve considered some newts but I’m currently saving my pennies for the Stellarvue SVX102T I don’t think you have too much stuff at all Ed, in fact, I am quite envious of your collection.

The scale of the equipment today is pretty mind blowing, Ed looks so tiny next to that behemoth.

Great video. I've always wanted to try astrophotography, after 40+ years of terrestrial photography. Several years ago, I decided I was going to stick my toe into it, in what I thought was a very practical way -- rather than buying a telescope, the first thing I bought was a used AVX mount. Then I bought a vixen dovetail for my camera, and a 300mm f4 ED lens. I thought that this would be a fairly inexpensive way to allow me to learn to set up the mount, connect it to a laptop, learn to use the tracking software and do some very basic imaging. I settled on the AVX because guided by the manufacturer's capacity rating (which after watching your videos, I've learned is somewhat optimistic) because I thought it would be up to holding a fairly decent sized scope and its attendant accessories. with eh DSLR and 300mm lens, it does just fine, but this brings up a good question -- what about a short series where you pick a popular commercial mount at a given cost, and suggest two OTAs for each one -- one optimized for visual observing, and the other specialized for AP?

@jonathanleblanc6203

4 ай бұрын

That’s a good idea.

That’s a beast!

Thanks Ed.

you have a lot of stuff, looks like fun

I have had 8” DOB for about 6 years. It was first real telescope and I loved it and astronomy. My backyard was perfect for it at the time. I ended up moving to a bigger city with more lights and less room so I left it behind with family. I looked at other scopes like ST80, but really missed the 2” focuser and didn’t like the chromatic abberstions. I also didn’t like the angle to look through the scope compared to my dob. It’s almost impossible to look high in the sky with a refractor without a tall mount. So I found Orion’s astrographs. I like that they are similar to my dob, a bit smaller, and I could eventually get into astrophotography. So I got it a 6” astrograph along with an alt/az VersaGo mount that is rated just higher than the weight of the scope and a camera. I really don’t do much photography since I can’t track long exposure. I just do visual for now. I enjoy the scope very much. I had later purchased an Explore Scientific ED80 triplet on sale thinking it would be a smaller option for me. But after pulling that small, heavy scope out, I was not impressed. It felt heavier than my 6” astrograph. And the image wasn’t as nice visually. The ED80 have more much glow in it, and the stars didn’t stand out as much. The 6” astrograph had a very dark background and the stars much brighter. Of course it helps to have more aperture. I ended up returning the ED80 and committed to my astrograph. I haven’t had the chance to put it up right next to my old 8” DOB, but I figure they will have similar images, with the 8” dob having a bit brighter stars. Overall, I’m pretty pleased with the versatility of the Astrograph. With that said, like Ed says, I think I would still steer people to a dob first because of the simplicity of the setup. I’m pretty sold on reflectors, so a Astrograph is a good option for those who like reflectors, but want to go Astrophotography. There is a reason why most big scientific telescopes are reflectors.

Thank you.

Orion makes good scopes. I had an Orion cassigrane that I dropped and cracked some years ago. I took some very good images with that little scope.

I always leave the rings on the OTA and then tip it in the mount but no more after seeing you do it correctly. Live and learn :p

@edting

4 ай бұрын

I should have rotated the saddle plate 90 degrees to make it easier to mount the optical tube.

Your CGE is up and working again? That's good!

@edting

5 ай бұрын

Update - CGE mount just died again…

@MastodonRockss

5 ай бұрын

@@edting tragic!

Ed, I knew the weight was going to be a problem, so, when mine arrived, I stripped it down to the tube. Used the steel tube as a form to make a fiberglass replacement. Now the total weight is just over 20 pounds. I have used it with my CGX mount 1600mm and a small guide camera. I think it takes very nice images. I wish there was a carbon fiber tube for the thing! Oh, I did not use the rings, just made my own D mount from a 3/8" thick aluminum plate and bonded it to the outside of the new tube.

@matopodhora6918

4 ай бұрын

Why didnt you go straight with carbon instead of fiberglass? I have 10" f4.7 and now you gave me an idea cuz I work with carbon from time to time.

@glenb1356

4 ай бұрын

@@matopodhora6918 I just now received some carbon cloth. One of the biggest problems is:how many layers?

@matopodhora6918

4 ай бұрын

​@@glenb1356 I saw some "original" tubes which claims they have 1mm wall. 200g/m² carbon under the vacuum results in ± 0,2mm, 450g/m² claims about 0,5mm. So i think 2 layers of 400 or 3-4 layers of 200 should be enough even when vacum is not available but idk what weight savings would be.

to unscrew the optics of a TeleVue barlow in order to use it as an extension tube is wild. Wild sign of money abundance, that is.

Perfect timing! I'm about to pull the trigger on a Skywatcher 250 or 300. The Orion and Skywatcher are made by the same company I believe. I need to compare both the Orion and Skywatcher to make sure of the details. Thanks for the review Ed. Your expertise is legendary.

@anata5127

5 ай бұрын

Get Tak Epsilon 180. Better in every respect.

@BirdFinder

5 ай бұрын

@@anata5127 Sure if you can get one, oh and 5+ times the price.

@grandmasteryoda9893

5 ай бұрын

@@anata5127 the tak stupid expensive and are pain to collimate

@raizalmohammad8188

5 ай бұрын

Orions fast newtonians are made by the taiwanese company GSO..The built quality is slightly better then the skywatcher newtonians.

@matthewbrown8679

3 ай бұрын

I toyed with the sky watcher 12 inch myself. The idea was to use it as a holdover while saving for my dream scope. Seems like potentially a great deal. But it's a beast weight wise. It's about 60 lbs. You'll spend a fair bit for the mount. Then figure a coma corrector, if you don't have one, and eventually replacing the focuser if you want a heavier imaging train. Not knocking the scope. But as a cheap newt owner myself, I'm suggesting you count all the costs. You might want to consider the TS optics 12 inch UNC, or even the 12 inch ONTC. Both weigh around 43 lbs, and are carbon fiber. The first is about 1700 euro. Exchange rate is 1.06 dollars per euro. Register as an American and you can see prices without the VAT tax. The ONTC version is about $3000, but that comes with a quality focuser you will want someday anyway. Not bad when you consider you can get by with a smaller mount. What mount do you have, or are you getting?

Great video! I've been using a 6" Newtonian for visual for about a year, it's good, but I want more detail than I can get with it in my light conditions. I just got a used 10" truss tube dobsonian from explore scientific.

I would love to use the optics from one of these as the basis for a suitcase Dob.

You ought to see my room!!!!

Hey Ed, for photos, is the extra 2" of aperture worth dealing with double the weight of the 8"? Time saved and image quality? How much is really gained?

Instead of using a step ladder, you can just rotate the OTA and bring the focuser down to a manageable height. Doing that on an EQ mount will have your readjusting the EP height all night. It was easier with a 6" Newt.

I enjoy your reviews and the other videos you produce. I have a question you might be able to answer. I have an 8” Newtonian (Orion) and I suffer, to a lesser degree, of having the eyepiece rather high in the air when looking at overhead objects. Why isn’t there a “short” EQ mount that doesn’t end up with the eyepiece too high to use without a stepstool?

0:24 I hope you found where that bolt you knocked over came from.😉

Ed I like the Ranger you added to the backround,I know you said you sold your original one and only had the case,did you finally get a replacement one? If so I know you've done a Pronto video but it would be cool to do a Ranger review,I just bought an early 480mm F/6.4 Pronto serial number 1206, It's a dream come true,I've wanted one since I was a kid in Oct. 1997 when astronomy magazine did a review on it and the Ranger. Thanks for the video!!

@goldni4429

5 ай бұрын

Sorry I meant to say 450mm F/6.4 1st gen Pronto!

@edting

5 ай бұрын

Ranger retro review, coming up soon!

Nicely done! Can you do a review on the Seestar S50? please

@edting

4 ай бұрын

Playing with one now. My impression is mixed. The images it takes are not that great, the app feels like patchwork, the device feels unrefined in general. The Seestar's main draw is its price.

You mentioned that no one looks through their scopes anymore. I am purely visual and find it upsetting that almost all and I mean almost all scopes especially refractors are made for photography first and visual as a leftover. Even the TAK FC 100DC and DF are made to correct for photography at the expense of visual. All short tubes as well. It would be nice to have a refractor of the quality of a TAK with a long focal length for planets. Sorry for the rant lol!

It’s funny you mention how AP is taking over, which I’m a huge fan of myself. I have no desire to do it, I just love the effect it’s having on the used market. I was able to procure a Panoptic 22, 27, and 35 for a total of $560, all from people who said they don’t use them anymore. I wasn’t quick enough to snag it, but a guy sold a 4.5, 8, and 12 Delos for $400 for all three today on CN.

@edting

5 ай бұрын

Wow you got a GREAT deal on those eyepieces.

@Astro_Ape

5 ай бұрын

Not only did the lucky buyer get the 3 Delos eyepieces for $400, but the seller also included a 2" TV Everbright diagonal in the purchase as well!! I always check CN & AM every morning, but today I just happened to be lazy and checked it a little before lunchtime and was like 2 minutes too late on that deal... I've currently got a secondhand 12mm Delos and have been looking to get the 8, 6, & 4.5 plus a TV dielectric diagonal . Bummer I missed out on that deal but hopefully another poor boy such as myself lucked up and got it. Hopefully it brings them some joy.

@bcrocks3935

5 ай бұрын

@@Astro_Ape I’ll keep my fingers crossed for you! I’m a 7mm Delite away from being done… for a minute anyway🤣

I have a very heavy mak newtonian astograpgh the trick for balancing the scope is to rotate the tube that focuser faces the ground. That way you do not need to add extra to the other side. Bam you are balaced. Only thing is to connect your camera to a computer. You need to be connected anyway if you want your composition to be good and drizle/dither the picture. I thing newts are underrated OTAs for AP. Most of the pictures I like comes from good astrophotographers with "afforable" newtonians or good photograpghers with very very expensive OTAs and cameras. That is for me showing how sharp imagies they provide. If I can I would love to get 16 inch newtonian in a observatory when I can. In observatory most of the negatives can be solvable.

@matthewbrown8679

3 ай бұрын

Cheap Newts are a great bang for the buck, until you start forking out for the mount. I started with the older version of the Orion 8 inch f3.9. Got a cem120 for whenever I can get a 16 inch newt. But I'll want a remote observatory for that.

Thanks for the video. Thank you for showing that trick for mounting. I'm about to order a 12 inch beast from TS (47 inches long) and was wondering how i would mount it on my cem120. For visual i might just mount it on my ioptron GEM45. Much shorter mount, and it should handle the weight for visual. I could also make a dobs style mount for it with a dovetail saddle. No one should think about using a heavier imaging train on a cheap scope like this without replacing the focuser. Fine with the simple camera. RCC I coma corrector works well on my orion 8 inch f3.9, but it has to dit very deep in the focuser. I have the same style coma corrector as in the video too. Never used it for imaging.

@edting

3 ай бұрын

I wouldn't put more than 20 lbs on that GEM45!

a large newt my favorite scope! f3 is hard s:

I have an 8" - Bresser N20839 - and just bought a Sharpstar 0.95 Coma Corrector / reducer. It would be good to compare different coma correctors in this size Newtonian :)

My Orion 10" Skyline is much easier and faster to set up without all the hassles of the mount. Plus there is something inspiring to view celestial objects real time through an eyepiece that creates a sense of wonder.

Great review. Too much stuff? You can never have enough astronomy stuff! Haha

If you rotate the mount head so that the rings are horizontal, it's easier to lift the tube into place.

@edting

5 ай бұрын

Correct. Should have done that.

In my mind, as a purely visual guy, this scope folds easily to a Dob of similar size. I have not used it, but the parts look identical to my AD10. The only advantage I see is tracking (I don't need Go-To or push-to). I would love to hear your thoughts on a wedge. I keep thinking this is my solution to tracking so I can sketch, change EPs and add/subtract filters without having to find the object again.

The fast f-ratio of these telescopes paired with a visual O-III filter sound appealing for more light-polluted observing. What do others think?

Nice review as usual Ed. If I look to the NGC 891 picture 13:49 I can see three, we can say identical, lines captured in the left lower corner. The first one is diagonally right up from the most bright star in the left the second one is under this star little bit to right and the third one is little bit under star and more to the right. Since all three are same lenght direction and thickness I suppose they have same velocity and brightness could this swarm be the Starlink?

@edting

5 ай бұрын

I looked at my raw images. I think those are processing artifacts.

@lfab1369

4 ай бұрын

​@@edting Thank you a lot for your reaction Ed. Ok the solution is even more prosaic :).

Thank you for your review, great video! Could you do a review of CDK 14" from PlaneWave. It is not cheap and it would be great to have your opinion of such telescope or class of such telescopes. Thank you!

@edting

3 ай бұрын

Wow, I'd love to get my hands on any PlaneWave scope!

@grigoryvidishev1810

3 ай бұрын

I take your response as it is a good scope overall :) Thank you

@leonardvorhis838

Ай бұрын

​@@edtingEd make a trip out here to SoCal. The Planewave guys might give you a tour through a scope. Let me know if I can help. L

Hi Ed. I also own an old Celestron CGE mount that is no longer working. In fact, it is working too much, the dec axis is rotating indefinitively. I wish a video on your faulty CGE, the problem and the solution found by the scope wizard.

@edting

5 ай бұрын

The problem is almost always in the cables. It's a lousy design. It uses the metal cable housing as a ground, for one. Gary Bennett used to sell a mod, but it's expensive (~$500). You're going to have to go in and hard wire the cables.

Im buying a TS Photon f4 8“ Carbon Tube and need a coma corrector. Your GSO Coma Corrector seems to be the most affordable option. Some advised against it, because it lacks optical performance. What’s you stand on it? I would like to use it with a IMX585 or IMX571 (at a later point). As alternative a was advised to use a „TS-Optics NEWTON Coma Corrector 1.0x TSGPU Superflat - 4-element - 2" connection“. What do you think? Which is better? Any significant difference worth the price?

@edting

5 ай бұрын

I haven't done a comprehensive study on coma correctors. The one I showed here is "OK" but not much more. One club member gets very good results with his Sky-Watcher Quattro coma corrector and I may get one of those.

I have that exact same telescope. Want to install it in a CGX but want to upgrade the rings for rotating rings and a D plate. Any suggestions?

@edting

5 ай бұрын

The D plate is easy to find, but the rings may be tougher. Check Orion, they sometimes have a big selection, but sometimes they don't...

Ed, standing on a ladder in the dark, perhaps not the best idea. What about taking the mount and putting it on a pedestal stand like the Meads you have? I have a 8" f8 Newtonian, tripods don't work. Thanks for all your videos.

@edting

4 ай бұрын

I agree, there should be more pedestal mounts on the market. Note that when people pour their own piers, they are always pedestals. Someone should bring these back.

I have the 8 inch version of this scope. I like it, but if I were to do it all over, I'd go with something else. While the 8 inch version COULD be used on something like a Celestron AVX, you really want a better mount, like a SkyWatcher EQ6-R. When you add on the weight of the imaging equipment (e.g. camera and autoguider package), you're bumping up the weight somewhat. I think my total payload weight came in around 25 lbs., give or take. Most experienced astrophotographers suggest keeping your total imaging payload weight at or below 50% of the mount's rated max, which the 8" version exceeds with the scope alone, forget mounting hardware or imaging gear. I run my mount (iOptron iEQ45) a little over 50%, but not hugely so, so I get away with it. An AVX running this much payload will probably be limited to 60 second exposures, give or take. You mentioned the coma corrector. For imaging, it is not really optional. You'll see significant coma with a camera with an image sensor in the APS-C range. I use the Baader MPCC MkIII and it does fairly well. While you CAN use the scope visually, it really isn't a visual scope. And putting any Newtonian on a GEM makes for a lot of VERY awkward viewing positions due to the orientation of the focuser/eyepiece (unless you add some kind of rotating-ring option, which is not always feasible). One of the most important considerations, however, is what you're trying to image. With a DSLR using an APS-C sensor, you get a mid-size field of view that's too small for a lot of wider-field targets (e.g. NGC7000 or M31), but too wide for a lot of others (e.g. most galaxies, pretty much all planetary nebulae). And here you also have to consider pixel scale. Unless you have good seeing, you're likely to be oversampling, which means you'll need a mount with better performance. For AP, aperture fever doesn't make as much sense. What matters more for AP is focal ratio, which controls the concentration of light on the image sensor. If you have an 80 mm refractor with a focal ratio of f/5 and a 20 inch Newtonian at f/5, the amount of imaging time you need to get the same level of exposure will be the same (given the same camera and target). The difference, then, will only be in field of view. Using the same camera in each, if the focal ratio is the same, the larger aperture will mean the smaller field of view (this is not the same as magnification, but for the sake of simplicity we'll treat it as such). This means the larger scope will give you a view of smaller details, but this isn't always helpful. If you're trying to image a target like M31 (the Andromeda Galaxy), a small field of view will confine you to just a small portion of the target, unless you capture a mosaic -- which means a lot more time and work. On the other hand, if you're trying to image a small target like the Eskimo Nebula, a wide field of view like you'd get with a short refractor will give you a small target on a large background. But as long as the focal ratios are the same, the exposure level - e.g. how bright the target appears in the image) will be the same regardless of aperture. I STRONLGY recommend for beginners getting into AP that they start with a short-tube refractor for wider-field imaging. There's a lot of good targets here and it's much more forgiving when it comes to your mount's capabilities. It also tends to be a lot cheaper. If you want to use a scope like the one reviewed here, you really should have some experience under your belt and be ready to spend quite a bit of money on your gear. I should also point out that the time it takes to set up a scope like this for imaging can be considerable. With my 8", I typically needed at least an hour to pull it all out, set it up, balance, align, and dial-in the focus and guiding. Then it's another 30-45 mins (or more) to pack it all in at the end of the night. Not something easy to do if you have to work in the morning (which is why this kind of rig is much better if you have a backyard observatory). For all that, it's not a bad scope for the price. It's just not something I'd recommend for most users.

I have read that in Europe, Lacerta Newtonian scopes are popular. What company makes Lacerta? Have you used them, Mr. Ting?

@edting

20 күн бұрын

It looks like they sell some of the same stuff we have here in the US.

Would a Coma Corrector be necessary for an f/6 dobsonian, or should that money go to better eyepieces?

@edting

4 ай бұрын

For a typical f/6 reflector, usually not. Go for the eyepieces.

Ed, before putting tube in rings, why not rotate the mount so you are sitting the scope into a level position, then you don't have to worry about it sliding out of the rings before you get them tight?

@edting

5 ай бұрын

Yes, I should have done it that way.

My friend, can you please take a picture of an active satellite? I really appreciate it.

@edting

4 ай бұрын

That is extremely difficult! You can check with people like Damian Peach who have the skill to do such things.

Such a tall tripod for your 10” astrograph… seems too awkward that high. Good to see the rig

@edting

5 ай бұрын

Yes, and the CGE just died again...ugh.

@guyjordan8201

5 ай бұрын

@@edting - rats 🐀 , sorry to hear that 🙁

Any chance you could review the 8" GSO version?

@edting

4 ай бұрын

All those Chinese-sourced f/4 imaging Newts are very similar, they're just different sizes. I have a review of the Orion-branded 8" f/4 on Scopereviews.

@electrode6872

4 ай бұрын

@@edting but the website says it's manufactured in China but from Taiwan. Is it better or ?

Those are large speaker magnets.

Ed Ting does a review of a newtonian astrograph and ends the video by recommending a dobsonian. Nobody saw that coming. ;)

You can never have too”too much stuff” !!

@edting

5 ай бұрын

I dunno, it's getting pretty crowded around here...

@jwg9338

5 ай бұрын

@@edting future giveaways in the future is what I hear!

Yes, you have too much stuff, but I’ll take some of it off your hands.

Orion europe has shut down. Are they having problems? Will orion US be next?

@edting

4 ай бұрын

Ouch, I did not know that.

A carbon fiber tube for a 10" Newtonian will weight half

@thewheelieguy

5 ай бұрын

Telescope Service lists the weight of their 10" UNC model with carbon fiber tube as 12 kg (27 lbs), depending on the focuser, etc. So it saves 25% of the mass.

Thats a giant paper towel😂

Q, for the smarts out there. Why doesn't the astrophotography made Newtonians, use a dedicated sensor or camera as the secondary instead of the mirror being secondary, and use the spacing between the top of the tube and normal viewing hole the focuser, by using a form of equalised motion draw. To me seems the secondary mirror is a lose of image or photons if you will.

@borzak101

5 ай бұрын

Most people that do astrophotography use their camera on a variety of telescopes. It would limit the usability if the camera was made into the telescope. Cameras and astrophotography equipmnet rapidly changes tech wise. That telescope will last for years or decades. A camera will likely get replaced many times in that period. It also can be used for astrophotography or visual viewing and having the camera made in would limit that.

@BirdFinder

5 ай бұрын

They do make scopes that work like you suggest, google Schmidt camera or Schmidt telescope. In those original incarnations, it was a photographic plate placed inside the scope. The modern implementation is the RASA or Hyperstar, although they are not exactly the same since the optics are changed to put the camera sensor outside the tube, rather than inside.

@cryptojihadi265

5 ай бұрын

For one, it eliminates the ability to use it visually, and as the other guy mentioned you are paying all that money for a camera sensor that can only be used on that scope. Also you use different cameras for planets and deep sky. Also you will want to use mono and color cameras. Mono for best quality, color for ease and less costly.

@marcusbrown3880

5 ай бұрын

Ty for the info, always wondered why putting on the outside instead of the inside as the secondary wasnt more viable.@@BirdFinder

@marcusbrown3880

5 ай бұрын

If youre astro eccentric you would only need the sensor for the secondary and it wouldnt be a waste coz it is part of the telescope, and tbh most phones are better for social photos.@@cryptojihadi265

Dumb question: the 8 inch and 10 inch have the same focal ratio, so the length of the 10 inch should be 1.25 ti e the 8 inch, why would the 10 inch so much longer than that?

@edting

4 ай бұрын

The 10" has an integrated dew shield which make the tube longer. This is much appreciated by the way.

@philongpham3886

4 ай бұрын

@@edting thank you sir!

How in the world could they have made it with a Vixen dovetail?

@edting

5 ай бұрын

To save money...

Third

Can you ever have too much stuff? 😂 Astronomy seems to be like cycling - n+1 is the ideal number of telescopes/mounts/eyepieces where n is the number you already own.

Too much stuff? It depends on whether or not there's a lock on the door that your wife doesn't have a key for... And if she does, it's much easier to smuggle in more "Oh? This one is owned by my friend..." kind of stuff. My advice? Get the Dob! But don't listen to people like me... 😜👍

God forbid a 12” Newtonian or larger

Those silly things are CGI machines, get a nikon and you can view what the stars and wandering stars actually look like.