TheSkySearchers

Bigzmey wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:38 pm

notFritzArgelander wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 9:42 pm

Bigzmey wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 9:10 pm

Funny how things work. From the limited sampling I had I prefer standard SCTs over standard Maks.

Bad sample?
I MUCH prefer aplanatic SCTs and Rutten Maks and Klevzov Maks for DSOs and planets. Even Gregory Maks like this Bresser model outperform standard SCTs on lunar/planetary.

Bad sampling can go both ways. I have not, but would love to try better executed Maks. As for mass produced Gregory Maks, they are not bad. I still prefer SCTs though.

Noted. My experience is that even Gregory Maks have better contrast than SCTs.

Apart from sampling issues there are individual physiological differences and differences in experience of the observers.

I'm very much put off by field curvature aberrations and loss of contrast. Having had a lot of experience with 8" SCTs I had high hopes for the 9.25 SCT "the SCT for folks who hate SCTs" as Ed Ting says if I recall right. It was a disappointment and lived down to my experience of the 8" SCTs. Now the aplanatic Edge 9.25 was wonderful!

I'm looking at a 9.25 or 11 Edge or a VMC260L as my last non feline CAT.

I have used a few different SCTs from Meade, Celestron and a couple older Japanese made ones, just not my favorite views though the Meade LX-200 7" Mak was an outstanding telescope.
The Japanese ones were much better than the C & M versions though.
If I can remember the manufacturer I will post it tomorrow.

notFritzArgelander wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:41 pm

Bigzmey wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:38 pm

notFritzArgelander wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 9:42 pm

Bad sample?
I MUCH prefer aplanatic SCTs and Rutten Maks and Klevzov Maks for DSOs and planets. Even Gregory Maks like this Bresser model outperform standard SCTs on lunar/planetary.

Bad sampling can go both ways. I have not, but would love to try better executed Maks. As for mass produced Gregory Maks, they are not bad. I still prefer SCTs though.

Noted. My experience is that even Gregory Maks have better contrast than SCTs.

Apart from sampling issues there are individual physiological differences and differences in experience of the observers.

I'm very much put off by field curvature aberrations and loss of contrast. Having had a lot of experience with 8" SCTs I had high hopes for the 9.25 SCT "the SCT for folks who hate SCTs" as Ed Ting says if I recall right. It was a disappointment and lived down to my experience of the 8" SCTs. Now the aplanatic Edge 9.25 was wonderful!

I'm looking at a 9.25 or 11 Edge or a VMC260L as my last non feline CAT.

I like the idea of 11" Edge.

Bigzmey wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:59 pm

notFritzArgelander wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:41 pm

Bigzmey wrote: ↑Thu Jan 09, 2020 10:38 pm

Bad sampling can go both ways. I have not, but would love to try better executed Maks. As for mass produced Gregory Maks, they are not bad. I still prefer SCTs though.

Noted. My experience is that even Gregory Maks have better contrast than SCTs.

Apart from sampling issues there are individual physiological differences and differences in experience of the observers.

I'm very much put off by field curvature aberrations and loss of contrast. Having had a lot of experience with 8" SCTs I had high hopes for the 9.25 SCT "the SCT for folks who hate SCTs" as Ed Ting says if I recall right. It was a disappointment and lived down to my experience of the 8" SCTs. Now the aplanatic Edge 9.25 was wonderful!

I'm looking at a 9.25 or 11 Edge or a VMC260L as my last non feline CAT.

I like the idea of 11" Edge.

No doubt. Yet the VMC260L is 6 pounds lighter and is relatively immune to dew problems for the same price. The 9.25 Edge is the budget choice.

Nice looking scope. I thought the same thing as JT did about the finder being less than optimal.

For myself the finder would be replaced anyways with some type of RDF or a RACI
I have only come across one 6x30mm that was actually worth using as it is.

There seems to be some at least one new VMC260L for sale, at least as I type this. See:
https://www.adorama.com/vxvmc260l.html (says "in-stock, ready to ship," for $3,499).
(On the other hand, B&H lists it as "discontinued" and "no longer available.")

Gabby,

Stop procrastinating and juuuuuust get it as you oooooobviously want it

Have fun!
Abb

I do really like my VMC200L. Optics are very sharp. (Less contrast than my little APO, and I prefer Saturn and Jupiter through the AT, even though at much lower power.) I have not yet tried collimating it; I think it may be time to give it a shot after all the bouncing and jouncing it endured on its long drive in my van from Michigan to Mexico. I have printed out Vixen's good instructions on collimation...

The light weight is a big reason I chose the VMC200L. Easy to one-hand it atop the mount. Chunky spider vanes are a minor downside. But it's so great not to have the dew problem of a front corrector plate. Scope has kept on performing late into a Michigan night of dew-horror where everything else I have is drenched.

R&P focuser is okay. I would like to have a fine focus option, but it works as is. Of course, the VMC260L has internal focus, moving the primary, so quite different there.

The price difference between the 200 and the 260 is huge, and the 260 is out of my league price-wise, but I think it would be a great scope.

Voyageur wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2020 3:17 pm I do really like my VMC200L.
[...]
But it's so great not to have the dew problem of a front corrector plate. Scope has kept on performing late into a Michigan night of dew-horror where everything else I have is drenched.

Beyond my current hobby budget, but an intriguing scope. So I take it that the tube acts as a very good dew shield? Nothing collecting on the primary or on the vanes?

pakarinen wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2020 5:56 pm

Voyageur wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2020 3:17 pm I do really like my VMC200L.
[...]
But it's so great not to have the dew problem of a front corrector plate. Scope has kept on performing late into a Michigan night of dew-horror where everything else I have is drenched.

Beyond my current hobby budget, but an intriguing scope. So I take it that the tube acts as a very good dew shield? Nothing collecting on the primary or on the vanes?

Exactly so. Open ended tubes don't have serious dew problems. The tube itself acts as a dew shield. Newtonians in a tube similarly resist dewing. SCTs with their thin corrector plates are most susceptible to dew. Full aperture corrector plate Maksutov scopes with their thicker more massive correctors are less susceptible. Sub aperture Maks like the VMC line and Newts are pretty resistant.

So how difficult is VMC collimation? I remember reading some horror stories on CN...

Bigzmey wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:16 pm So how difficult is VMC collimation? I remember reading some horror stories on CN...

Heh... there are always 'horror stories' on cloudy night even on the simplest of tasks. No shortage of strong opinion over there!

UlteriorModem wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:18 pm

Bigzmey wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:16 pm So how difficult is VMC collimation? I remember reading some horror stories on CN...

Heh... there are always 'horror stories' on cloudy night even on the simplest of tasks. No shortage of strong opinion over there!

Do Tell

If it is not strong opinions it is drama.
I have not been on there since August last year.

"Ethos or nothing!" - that's an opinion. "I struggled for several months trying to collimate the scope" - sounds like a frustrated user. Post #4 is the thread below.

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/5758 ... observing/

I was trying to be diplomatic

Now back on topic! I have no idea how hard it is to collimate a VMC. Cant be much harder than an RC.

UlteriorModem wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:51 pm I was trying to be diplomatic

Now back on topic! I have no idea how hard it is to collimate a VMC. Cant be much harder than an RC.

CN also has articles decrying the optical quality and telling horror stories of the Smaller VMC110L. The only horror there is that the collimation screws are glued in place at the factory. Once the glue is removed (use as little alcohol as possible) collimation is a snap. I do mine using an artificial star. Easy, peasy.

Lady Fraktor wrote: ↑Tue Jan 14, 2020 9:46 pm If it is not strong opinions it is drama.
I have not been on there since August last year.

If I've told it before, forgive me.
There was a redneck bar near here when I was a kid.
Everyone would put a few bucks in the pot One of the guys with long hair (has to be a least shoulder length) heads in and tries to touch the back wall and get out
without getting hit. If he pulled it off you he the pot.

That's how it feels to post there.

Its a shame really. There are some very knowledgeable people at CN and some top observers that I highly respect as well. But, as has been noted, it can be a bit like tossing a chicken into the pond at a gator park in Florida at times. From what I can tell the ones that I have the most respect for stay out of the cat fights as they have more decorum about them than to get into that malarkey. But some simply can't resist the opportunity to put their egos on display and beat the crap outta someone!