Fun Day!!!
 

Well, two great packages in two days. My Celestron GPS 11 arrived yesterday. I
can't wait to bring it to PA for a real test. And moments ago...my second pair
of Revel M20 speakers came!!!!

RB

do they render the sound of wind and waves accurately?
g
gf.

"Bobsprit" wrote in message
...
Well, two great packages in two days. My Celestron GPS 11 arrived
yesterday. I
can't wait to bring it to PA for a real test. And moments ago...my second
pair
of Revel M20 speakers came!!!!

RB

do they render the sound of wind and waves accurately?
g

They do best on Jazz and classical.

RB

"Bobsprit" wrote in message
...
Well, two great packages in two days. My Celestron GPS 11 arrived
yesterday.

Are you going to use it for Photography?



Regards


Donal
--

Well, two great packages in two days. My Celestron GPS 11 arrived
yesterday.

Are you going to use it for Photography?

Actually, probably not. I have the most fun spending a few hours just doing
visual and maybe some sketches. I used to have a cold camera, but it rarely got
any use. Too much trouble.

RB

"Bobsprit" wrote in message
...
Well, two great packages in two days. My Celestron GPS 11 arrived
yesterday.

Are you going to use it for Photography?

Actually, probably not. I have the most fun spending a few hours just
doing
visual and maybe some sketches. I used to have a cold camera, but it
rarely got
any use. Too much trouble.

What do you expect to be able to see with it?

I'm investigating the purchase of an 8" SCT at the moment, so I have a
genuine interest.

I started off by thinking that I'd get a LX200, however I'm now thinking
that I might get a TAL200K, HEQ5 and Skyscan 2000.

The LX doesn't seem to be designed for photragraphy.

What do you think?


Regards


Donal
--

If you are not doing photos then get a big Dobsonian.

Cheers


Bobsprit wrote:

Well, two great packages in two days. My Celestron GPS 11 arrived

yesterday.

Are you going to use it for Photography?

Actually, probably not. I have the most fun spending a few hours just doing
visual and maybe some sketches. I used to have a cold camera, but it rarely got
any use. Too much trouble.

RB

I'm investigating the purchase of an 8" SCT at the moment, so I have a
genuine interest.

I started off by thinking that I'd get a LX200, however I'm now thinking
that I might get a TAL200K, HEQ5 and Skyscan 2000.

To start, I'm of the opinion that Meade builds a mediocre product. In star
tests using their 8" systems I've always found Celestron Optics slighty better.
Meade has also released many drive systems onto the market which were basically
untested. They've ****ed off a lot of people.
My main problem with the Tal is the open tube design. One of the big pluses on
SCTs is the closed tube design. While there is a small penalty in thermal
equalization, I think a sealed system is less trouble in the long run. Dew and
dust on the primary and secondary on a regular basis will give you fits.
I usually find that Celestron manages to have a smaller central obstruction,
making for better contrast. Have you compared?
Finally, have you looked at the Celestron 9.25? It's generally considered to be
one of the best compound optical sets on the market (for the money) and I think
it makes sense over the 8.

http://www.adorama.com/CNOT9AX.html

RB

I started off by thinking that I'd get a LX200, however I'm now thinking
that I might get a TAL200K, HEQ5 and Skyscan 2000.


Donal, did a bit of homework for you. I think the Tal's secondary obstruction
is a deal breaker. Also, without a correcter plate, it requires spidervanes to
support which will further reduce contrast. I don't like the focuser either,
but this is based only on what I've read. Interesting scope and good optics,
but I'd go with a Celestron 1st. Read the reviews of the 9.25 and Tal.

http://www.cloudynights.com/compound.htm

Everything with a grain of salt. No two scopes perform the same.

RB

"Bobsprit" wrote in message
...
I started off by thinking that I'd get a LX200, however I'm now thinking
that I might get a TAL200K, HEQ5 and Skyscan 2000.


Donal, did a bit of homework for you. I think the Tal's secondary
obstruction
is a deal breaker. Also, without a correcter plate, it requires
spidervanes to
support which will further reduce contrast. I don't like the focuser
either,
but this is based only on what I've read. Interesting scope and good
optics,
but I'd go with a Celestron 1st. Read the reviews of the 9.25 and Tal.

http://www.cloudynights.com/compound.htm

Everything with a grain of salt. No two scopes perform the same.

I've noticed that the obstruction is bigger in the Tal than the Meade.
However, I've also read that the contrast is inherently better in the Tal
design.

I haven't looked very closely at the Celestron range, but the 9.25 keeps
popping its head up. If it weighs less than the Tal, then I will seriously
consider it. I don't want to buy something that is too heavy to carry from
the garage to the garden.


Regards


Donal
--

I've noticed that the obstruction is bigger in the Tal than the Meade.
However, I've also read that the contrast is inherently better in the Tal
design.

In one review of the Tal, the large obstruction is blamed for poor contrast.
The Meade's CO is already bigger than the Celestron's and effective light grasp
on the Celestron is also higher.
I doubt you could go terribly wrong with any of these scopes.
If you haven't read this, check it out.
http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews2/tal200k2.htm
Meanwhile you can also find a review that says the Tal outperforms the 9.25. A
grain of salt as always and few people will say they picked the wrong scope.

RB

"Nav" wrote in message
...
If you are not doing photos then get a big Dobsonian.


I want to do photography.

I'd love to be able to get shots like this ..... one day!!
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/M31_wip.html


BTW, that site is well worth exploring. He is an awesome photographer.


Regards


Donal
--

If you are not doing photos then get a big Dobsonian.


I want to do photography.

Film or digital?

RB

"Donal" wrote in message ...
"Nav" wrote in message
...
If you are not doing photos then get a big Dobsonian.


I want to do photography.

I'd love to be able to get shots like this ..... one day!!
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/M31_wip.html


Typical Irish expectations.

My neighbor took this photo.
http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/IMAGES/SMALL...000-000891.jpg

He has use of a very nice camera and lens.
Bet Nutsy would **** sea urchins if he could take such fine photos.

Joe


BTW, that site is well worth exploring. He is an awesome photographer.



Regards


Donal
--

"Joe" wrote in message
om...
"Donal" wrote in message
...
"Nav" wrote in message
...
If you are not doing photos then get a big Dobsonian.


I want to do photography.

I'd love to be able to get shots like this ..... one day!!
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/M31_wip.html


Typical Irish expectations.

My neighbor took this photo.
http://grin.hq.nasa.gov/IMAGES/SMALL...000-000891.jpg

He has use of a very nice camera and lens.
Bet Nutsy would **** sea urchins if he could take such fine photos.

That is indeed a very nice photo.
However, some of the stars have a "round" shape. That would suggest that
the optics were not much better than I(or Bob) could afford.

Regards



Donal
--

"Donal" wrote in message ...
I'd love to be able to get shots like this ..... one day!!
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/M31_wip.html


Slower to download than Pony Express to the finish line..

I gave up on it.

CN

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message
...

"Donal" wrote in message
...
I'd love to be able to get shots like this ..... one day!!
http://www.digitalsky.org.uk/M31_wip.html


Slower to download than Pony Express to the finish line..

I gave up on it.

It's only 160k. Your broadband connection should deal with it easily. I
suspect that there was a "blockage" when you tried to look at it. Maybe it
would be quicker if you tried again.


Regards

Donal
--