Greetings everyone, need advice on a scope!

[skrap1r0n]

Hi everyone, been probably a year or better since I posted here. Life kinda kicked me in the butt, and more important things were going on. At any rate, I am in the midst of making a serious telescope purchase.

This will be my first REAL scope. So far I am looking at the Orion XT-10 intelliscope (http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=157232&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=4&iSubCat=8&iProductID=157232). I realize this may be WAY more scope than I need at this point, but I really want to see some deep space objects. From what I have seem this is the most bang for the buck i can get.

Now, aside from obvious size, is there any serious reason to not get this scope and go for something different?

What additonal accessories should I get with it? I am living in the deep. texas hill country these days with very little light pollution

Also, I know that dobs are not good for photographing deep space objects. however, I have seen a few CCD's that sound like they adjust for a stationary mount. Has anyone sucessfully photographed deep space objects on a dob mount?

Edit: I forgot to mention, I will be getting a 2x barlow and a Telrad mounted on this scope. Is there any necessary item I am missing for a great night od deep sky viewing?

[aurora]

A narrow band nebula filter is the item I would recommend. That will really improve the views of emission nebula (like the Lagoon, Orion, Veil, etc.)

Also, a chart or software that will let you star hop to the deep sky objects.

[skrap1r0n]

Ok good advice on the filter. I am currently using Cartes Du Ciel as the software and the scope comes with some versionm or another of starry night. Personally, I like Cartes Du Ciel best.

[redshifter]

That's a great scope (I own the non-intelliscope version, I like finding stuff myself) for DSO's and general observing. Dob's are not very good for astrophotos unless you invest big $ in an equatorial platform, but my advice to anyone just getting into astronomy with a first scope should probably shelve the astrophoto idea for a while and get to know the sky and your gear first. Astrophotography is a pretty big step. If after a couple years or so you decide you do want to get into astrophotos, you can then figure out what you need, maybe get a dedicated astrophoto scope and use your XT10 for visual.

Here's my list of equipment:

Vixen 42mm eyepiece, 72 degree FOV - good eyepeice, but exit pupil is really too large so contrast suffers. However, it is pretty cool to get M20 and M8 in the same FOV

Orion Stratus 30mm eyepiece http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=73598&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=6&iSubCat=36&iProductID=73598
This is a great low power eyepiece, and with a little over 6mm exit pupil, works pretty well. Not as wide of a field of view (FOV) as my 42mm, but better contrast, I'd recommend this one if you like low power scanning.

Orion ED2 eyepieces, 25 and 9.5 mm http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=212&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=6&iSubCat=36&iProductID=212
These are good all around eyepeices, the 9.5 yeilds about 125 power which is nice, since that's about all the magnification I can use most nights due to the crappy atmosphere here in the Pacific NW. I'd recommend the 9.5, but the 25mm plossl that comes with the XT scopes is pretty good, there isn't much benefit out of upgrading to the 25mm ED2 IMO. I personally don't like plossls for anything under about 20mm, the eye relief is too short and the hole you look through is too small IMO.

Vixen superwide 17mm. This along with the 30mm Stratus I use 80% of the time. The 17mm is about 70X, so it's perfect for higher power on some DSO's. Really works well on all kinds of DSO's that support a little higher magnification. Plus I get about 1 degree FOV, which at 70 power is pretty good. If I could only keep 2 eyepeices, it'd be this one and my 30mm, though I'd have to say my 17mm is probably my favorite.

I also have a 7.5 mm Vixen lanthanum for a planetary eyepeice as well as the ultrascopic 2X barlow. This is a great combo for planetary viewing on the rare times the atmosphere is cooperating.

The Telrad is a great idea, I didn't even mount the 9X50 finderscope, I'm a Telrad junkie. No reason for any other finder IMO.

Here are some mods that I made to my XT10:
1) Flocking paper inside the tube
2) Washers cut out of a plastic milk jug between the ground board and the mount, makes azimuth smoother.
3) Cooling fan from Orion
4) Remounted the mirror using little sticky squares, the mirror rests on 15 of them as opposed to the 3 little cork pads. Note: I did not remove the backing from the sticky squares that the mirror sits on, I just stuck them to the mirror cell so the mirror can be easily removed for cleaning (though you shouldn't clean your mirror very often, once per year is the maximum IMO)
5) Verified the mirror screws that hold the mirror down are barely torqued.
6) Telrad instead of the finder

Next mod: Rebuild my focuser. There is a pretty good XT users group on Yahoo that has info on how to do this.

[skrap1r0n]

Most of the stuff I have teaches starhopping using a telrad. That will be the primary way I fond things. I want the computer for several reasons, first it will make it easier to give quick tours for friends.

What does the flocking paper in the tube do?

[Peter Wilson]

A narrow band nebula filter is the item I would recommend. That will really improve the views of emission nebula (like the Lagoon, Orion, Veil, etc.)Agreed.

You're still going to want to look at moon & planets occasionally, so at least one neutral density or polarizing filter is essential as well.

[redshifter]

What does the flocking paper in the tube do?

http://scientificsonline.com/product.asp_Q_pn_E_3060068 It can provide a little more contrast, as the interior of some tubes isn't black, but more gray. Some folks get a benifit simply by putting a 1 foot by 1 foot section opposite the focuser inside the tube.

[Dave Mitsky]

If you want a paper star atlas, The Sky Atlas 2000.0 would be a good match for your telescope. I also highly recommend the current bible of DSO observing, The Night Sky Observer's Guide. If not The NSOG, then a simpler observing guide like Phil Harrington's Star Watch or, better still, The Deep Sky: An Introduction would do nicely.

http://www.astroleague.org/al/bookserv/obsgd/rev99051.html

http://www.willbell.com/handbook/nitesky.htm

http://www.philharrington.net/

Eventually, you may want to purchase an OIII filter as well.

Dave Mitsky

[aurora]

Eventually, you may want to purchase an OIII filter as well.



I was lumping the OIII in with the narrowband nebula filters.

I have both, and I have noticed some differences on certain objects, but I haven't come to the conclusions of which works best on which type of objects.

I think it is important to have one if you want to look for nebulaes, but if you could only afford one I'm not sure which I would pick.

[skrap1r0n]

If you want a paper star atlas, The Sky Atlas 2000.0 would be a good match for your telescope. I also highly recommend the current bible of DSO observing, The Night Sky Observer's Guide. If not The NSOG, then a simpler observing guide like Phil Harrington's Star Watch or, better still, The Deep Sky: An Introduction would do nicely.

http://www.astroleague.org/al/bookserv/obsgd/rev99051.html

http://www.willbell.com/handbook/nitesky.htm

http://www.philharrington.net/

Eventually, you may want to purchase an OIII filter as well.

Dave Mitsky



Cool, thanks, I will look into that. Currently All I have is Cartes Du Ciel on my laptop and the bbook 'messier marathon"

[Dave Mitsky]

I was lumping the OIII in with the narrowband nebula filters.

I have both, and I have noticed some differences on certain objects, but I haven't come to the conclusions of which works best on which type of objects.

I think it is important to have one if you want to look for nebulaes, but if you could only afford one I'm not sure which I would pick.

The OIII and H-beta filters are classified as line filters due to their much narrower bandpass characteristics.

http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org/filters.htm

According to David Knisely, and many other DSO observers including me tend to agree with him, narrowband filters like the Lumicon UHC or the Orion UltraBlock (and there are many more on the market today) are the most generally useful filters.

http://pages.sbcglobal.net/raycash/filters.htm

Dave Mitsky

[kookbreaker]

The Telrad is a great idea, I didn't even mount the 9X50 finderscope, I'm a Telrad junkie. No reason for any other finder IMO.


And if you don't get the Telrad, get a right angle finder. Trust me, with a Dob it makes a big difference.

[Dave Mitsky]

A right angle finder with an erecting prism is even better.

Here's an example (http://www.astronomics.com/main/product.asp/catalog_name/Astronomics/category_name/5QKXWMM37DFH9HWGT0JW88RNN2/product_id/750EBK).

Dave Mitsky

[skrap1r0n]

And if you don't get the Telrad, get a right angle finder. Trust me, with a Dob it makes a big difference.


I went and looked at them again on friday. The guy at the scope shot said that Orion is redesigning that scope with the right angle finder and a better focuser. He mentioned that there were some issues with some of the stuff on the older scopes and that they were actually going to supply retrofit kits for the ones that had been sold over the last year so that people that had purchased one could trade get their scopes fixed. Kind of like a recall.

[Peter Wilson]

Another good accessory is a premium focuser.

I just added a low-profile, super-smooth focuser to my 8" Newt, and it about doubled the resolution.

[kookbreaker]

I went and looked at them again on friday. The guy at the scope shot said that Orion is redesigning that scope with the right angle finder and a better focuser. He mentioned that there were some issues with some of the stuff on the older scopes and that they were actually going to supply retrofit kits for the ones that had been sold over the last year so that people that had purchased one could trade get their scopes fixed. Kind of like a recall.

I suppose the RA finder makes sense.

What was wrong with the older models? Problems with the Intelliscope part or what?

[blueshift]

I suppose the RA finder makes sense.

What was wrong with the older models? Problems with the Intelliscope part or what?No, you just about wind up breaking your neck if your neck is as arthritic as mine is. I can also feel that I am falling all over the tube to get a good look through my red dot finder. It is too uncomfortable and when guests are around at public star parties it can be a royal pain to try and find something after someone has bumped the scope.