Author Topic: Maksutov? Schmidt?  (Read 1221 times)

contpeeresto

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 114
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Maksutov? Schmidt?
« Reply #30 on: February 02, 2018, 05:21:15 PM »
If you want an EQ5-type mount, and never have to look back...

http://www.losmandy.com/gm8.html

Equipped with just the dual-motor drive with hand-controller and tripod, it's a great buy.

Carlos Watson

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Maksutov? Schmidt?
« Reply #31 on: February 02, 2018, 10:59:12 PM »
Quote
Get ready for an endless amount of collimation and tweaking if you opt for the SCT.

I star test my SCT every session and almost never have to collimate it. Even packed it up and moved it across town - no change. YMMV, but I'm perfectly happy with mine. Of course, having a permanent setup is a fantastic idea for any scope.

Damon Brigham

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Maksutov? Schmidt?
« Reply #32 on: February 08, 2018, 08:40:41 PM »
Oh, I left one out, the EQ-1000...

http://www.library.v...rd/einstein.jpg

Jim Snyder

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 121
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Maksutov? Schmidt?
« Reply #33 on: February 08, 2018, 09:50:39 PM »
The EQ-1000, just a simple grab-n-go, circa 1900.

rms59--I assume that by the Mak, which you recommended over a SCT for reasons of less need to collimate, you were referring to a MCT rather than a Mak-Newt. Is this correct? And where does the simple Newtonian fit into the collimation scheme of things:  less or more than a catadioptric? My personal usages will require moving the telescope/mount for nearly all viewing sessions. Too much light pollution where I live, not to mention occlusive obstacles (trees).

rentireacen

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 109
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Maksutov? Schmidt?
« Reply #34 on: February 09, 2018, 02:16:35 AM »
Quote
The EQ-1000, just a simple grab-n-go, circa 1900.

rms59--I assume that by the Mak, which you recommended over a SCT for reasons of less need to collimate, you were referring to a MCT rather than a Mak-Newt. Is this correct? And where does the simple Newtonian fit into the collimation scheme of things:  less or more than a catadioptric? My personal usages will require moving the telescope/mount for nearly all viewing sessions. Too much light pollution where I live, not to mention occlusive obstacles (trees).

Yes, I was attempting to say that the MAK (MCT) would require MUCH less collimation than the SCT. I'm sure the SCT people will jump on me for this, and that's OK ! I have driven hundreds of miles with each, and have even flown across the country with Maksutovs..........collimation remained dead on ! Conversely, I have gently carried C8's tomy back yard, only to set them up and have the collimation way off ! You will have the same issues with a Newt, in my opinion. I prefer razor sharp, high contrast images ! For that reason, I prefer and would HIGHLY recommend refractors or Maks ( MCT's). Also, my observation time is limited and precious to me. I want to spend time observing......NOT making equipment adjustments !

subhymerlo

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Maksutov? Schmidt?
« Reply #35 on: February 09, 2018, 07:42:04 AM »
Even the CG-4, an EQ-3, is not a grab-and-go, at least not in the sense as most others perceive. It can be made moreso by replacing the steel legs with those of wood or fibreglass, and the CG-4 could easily handle any of the aforementioned 6" telescopes. Motorise only the RA axis, pop in one these orthoscopics...
...and enjoy the views.

Some do trundle their smaller equatorials out into the wild, but for many an equatorial is for the front or back yard, or if larger, a small observatory, with a tarp, a roll-off roof, or even a dome. The easier the kit is to transport, the more often the experience, of communing with the starry void under darker skies.

Of course, alt-azimuth mounts make for the ideal within a grab-and-go kit.In passing, with a Schmidt-Cassegrain, these collimation knobs... http://www.optcorp.c.../6/1644-l_1.jpg ...make quick, safe work of the process. Using the original adjustment screws entails the risk of scratching up the front corrector lens with a screwdriver or other tool. With the knobs, the screwdriver is eliminated...

http://www.bobsknobs.com/index.htmlThat said, with a Maksutov-Cassegrain, the secondary is fixed and cannot be collimated, with the exception of the Intes Micros and perhaps a few others...

https://www.youtube....h?v=OlFf1GC70OAA Maksutov-Newtonian, the aforementioned "Comet Hunter" in this case, utilises allen-key screws to adjust the secondary. One or more of said knobs, however, might be incorporated...

http://agenaastro.co...uide_ver1.1.pdfInsofar as a classic Newtonian, collimation instructions abound throughout the internet, including a few of my own experience with my 6" f/5... http://www.cloudynig...-ota/?p=6998508