I use an Ioptron GEM45 mounted on a permanent pier in a small observatory in my backyard. The current scopes I use are a William Optics GT81 refractor for wide field and an old (1981) Celestron Orange tube 8 for long focal length. Both scopes do very well on this mount setup. They're both very stable and I get good guiding numbers using a guidescope even with a little breeze. However, my good friend gave me an old Orange tube C11, same year as my C8. Wow! This scope is huge compared to my C8. C8 weighs 14 pounds close to 20 with all my accessories including imaging train. The C11 weighs 28 pounds close to 35 with all the necessary accessories. The C11 is at 1280mm focal length with the reducer and the C11 at 1760 with the same reducer. I'm imagining the light gathering ability of this large scope, how much brighter things will be and the objects it will bring in closer with the increased focal length. Of course I needed and purchased a top bar for the C11 to hold my guidescope and Pegasus powerbox, a dew shield and an adapter from the large 3.28" opening to an SCT 2" to accommodate my imaging train. And, possibly another counterweight if I don't have enough. I've not viewed any deep sky objects but the C11 mounted on a temporary mount on my patio yielded a spectacular view of Jupiter. The increased light gathering and focal length over the C8 was obvious. I was able to do a little testing and collimation on a star and the results show excellent optics for those early Celestron years. So, my question: Is the dramatically increased weight and possibly less stable mount and scope worth it? I've spoken with and researched others on this site who use the same mount, a GEM45 and some who use the popular SkyWatcher EQ6R, both on a tripod mounting a C11 and accessories. Both mounts are rated at 45 pounds maximum weight capacity. Well, the SkyWatcher is 44 pounts. Both camps say they had no trouble mounting the C11. A little wind was a problem though being out in the elements. My observatory and permanent pier do provide a shield from the wind and the 1200 pounds of concrete make the mount extremely stable. Looking at this large scope mounted on a temporary mount in my office is giving me second thoughts on using this scope. I've seen some beautiful images taken with the same or similar setups here on AB. Is it worth it? Your thoughts please. Buying a larger mount is not possible as I've spent a small fortune getting where I am. Oh but the possibilities of this giant light bucket  |
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Go for it! I have a 1991 C-11 with the same reducer and it's great for imaging galaxies.
That mount of yours should handle it well.
Ron Abbott
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I think your mount will handle it just fine, certainly worth trying. If your seeing is good enough it will be great on the moon and planets. Deep sky objects won't be brighter than what you see in the C8 but the objects will be larger and with finer detail if your seeing is up to it. I think you're gonna have fun with it!
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I have a C11, a ED80 refractor and a guidescope on my EQ6-R on a concrete pier and my guiding is fine.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Almost double mirror area not taking central obstruction into account?
my maths probably terrible though.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Keep in mind the scope was FREE!
Even though many of you use OAG with great success, my experience was not so great. Installation etc. no problem. Just had trouble finding stars while imaging galaxies. And a continuous loss of guide stars by PHD2.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I had very good results from my C11 with HyperStar with the 2600 camera and the 183 for smaller galaxies however, I will say that switching to an 8" newtonian has given me equal and in some cases better result than the C11 HyperStar and a much lighter rig than the C11. I had no trouble with the C11 on my EQ6 unless there was wind but this was without benefit of an observatory. I tried imaging with a .63 reducer but finding and holding a guide star with an oag was a pain and I gave up on that. Maybe with a 2600 Duo, it would work but I'm not going back to find out.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Wow Randy, that Trifid is gorgeous! And a SkyWatcher reflector and all the accessories would be great. I'd need the coma corrector, new focuser and sturdier secondary mirror holder just to start with. Except for the accessories, the C11 was free  Mike
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I own an EdgeHD800 and a regular C8 telescope, which I use with a reducer. Often, seeing limits the detail I can capture, and at least for me, a larger telescope and focal length wouldn't be beneficial. But then there are those nights when the seeing would allow imaging at a greater focal length. In such cases, the telescope's resolving power is the limiting factor, and a smaller pixel size of the camera doesn't help.
I would say that if the seeing at your location is usually good, then the C11 might be a good investment. But I'm not sure is GEM45 enough for it. I use both SC-telescopes with CEM70 and I'm pretty sure that C8/CEM70 is better combo than C11/GEM45 combo, because mount is the weakest link. First, sufficient accuracy in tracking must be achieved, and only then will increasing the focal length be truly beneficial. I often have a total RMS of 0.3", and I notice a difference with my C8 telescope if the value drops to around 0.5-0.7". I'm not sure of accuracy with GEM45, but if it's not 0.3-0.4", I would buy a stronger mount before C11. Of course if that’s not a problem then you can ignore what I said about accuracy.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Thanks Tommi, a CEM70 is not going to happen right now as I stated in my original post. In the future, maybe. I'm going to try it as several have posted it worked for them. Thanks guys. What do I have to lose? C11 was free  Mike
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Depending on the night and the location of the object, I do 30-60sec unguided subs with my C11 on a AZ-EQ6  |
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
In 2009 I had a C11 on an EQ6 Pro (rowan belt modded and hyper-tuned with bearings, very carefully meshed worms etc..) and depending on what you want to do with it - it worked reasonably well.
I only once used it at its native 2800mm focal length, and found that to be quite unweildy (mostly because my camera at the time had a TINY sensor, so I wasn't seeing much sky at all!)
At f/6.3, I found it to be quite good, it was certainly seeing dependent, but with an OAG, and a really solid polar alignment, it was quite good.
For planetary imaging, I ran the C11 at f/25~f/30 to image jupiter and lunar features etc - it was fantastic for that!
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Good luck MikeH! balance DEC & RA carefully.
I use EdgeHD11 on iOptron HAE43(55LBS payload with weight) without problem, it is better than Celestron CGX (55LBS spec payload).
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Thank you so much for all the examples of how it has been done successfully. Unfortunately, we're in the middle of the southwest Florida rainy season so it'll be a while before I can test it out. But when I do, I'll be sure to report back  Looking forward to it. Mike
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Just my personal thoughts on this Mike, is if the scope was free then I’d say give it a go. The only thing I’d suggest if you’re going mainly for DSO??? Is run a FR. I think in the end it will do several things for you. 1 reducing the fl which in turn will help your image scale and ultimately help out your guiding constraints on your mount. 2 and of course it will help out with shooting at f6.3 verses and f10. Personally if the scope was free then you could even pick up a Starzona SCT FR for the scope that many have had excellent results from, and finally even if you did want to do Lunar and Planetary work you could always remove the fr for the more FL your scope can provide you with.
So in the end I think its worth a go and even if it don’t work you don’t have much into the setup.
Good luck at whatever you decide!
Dale
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Thanks Dale. The focal reducer is already a definite. The imaging train is already attached. I'm just waiting for the rainy season to be over. DSOs only! No success with the Starizona piece. Ended up selling it. Using the Celestron unit with much greater success. Honestly, I've had round stars all the way to edge after making sure of good collimation, no tilt and proper back spacing. I tried the Starizona piece on my 1981 Orange tube C8. Not enough focus travel. Nina autofocus would not work because I was out of room. It maybe the old C8 focusers have less travel? Starizona had no answers. I'm guessing they wanted nothing to do with a 1981 Orange tube. And, the C11, even though it's an Orange tube as well, may have more travel? I don't know. Too late as I sold the Starizona reducer. Didn't know this C11 was coming.
Mike
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
I shoot on a Edge11 and 9.25. Overall go for it! The weight does add up, be careful in the setup and breakdown. (hernia bad) I got JMI wheely bars to help - otherwise I wouldn't be outside as much. I also got a Farpoint Astro handle that mounts on dovetail bars and it makes it much easier to mount the scope https://farpointastro.com/products/carrying-handle-and-farpoint-dovetail-accessory-adapter?_pos=30&_sid=c7fd4a37f&_ss=r
I used it in this video - it makes it so much easier to manage https://youtu.be/uLk_lnpJAV4?si=9qepRB--bdW58vEL&t=203 |
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Thanks Brent. I’m very fortunate to house my setup in a small observatory in my backyard with a permanent pier. So, only have to lift one time. That is, until it’s time to mount the wide refractor for nebula season 😁
Mike
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
also consider a hyperstar - it takes tuning but oh my to shoot at f/1.9 with a mirror that big.
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
Brent my friend, the C11 is a 1981 Orange tube. No Hyperstar here  Mike
|
You cannot like this item. Reason: "ANONYMOUS".
You cannot remove your like from this item.
Editing a post is only allowed within 24 hours after creating it.
You cannot Like this post because the topic is closed.
Copy the URL below to share a direct link to this post.
This post cannot be edited using the classic forums editor.
To edit this post, please enable the "New forums experience" in your settings.
