开云体育

Hi all,

I have a 1989 non-ED 178mm AP Starfire.
I'd like to have a large aperture compact telescope and the C14 seems
to fit what I need. However, some tell me the quality has suffered in
recent years. Can someone tell me of their experiences in comparing
these two very different telescopes?
Would I lose much planetery detail and the ability to split close
doubles? Are stars fuzzy or pinpointed when using the C14 visualy? I
would presume ccd deep sky imaging would improve with the C14 but,
would the stars be bloated?
My skies are 4-5 magnitude and the Milky Way is easily seen almost to
the horizon.

Thanks for any feedback from your experience.

Bob

I have a 1989 non-ED 178mm AP Starfire.

SNIP

However, some tell me the quality has suffered in
recent years.

Can't comment on that, but Celestron and Meade produce telescopes
that on average are good but this means that there are excellent ones
and less good ones as well. I guess since they make less C-14's than
C-8's quality control could be better for these instruments.

Can someone tell me of their experiences in comparing
these two very different telescopes?

Wish I could...

Would I lose much planetery detail and the ability to split close
doubles?

Under perfect seeiing the C-14 would show more (more light, more
detail due to larger aperture)and should be able to split closer
doubles. Problem is that larger telescopes and telescopes with
obstruction suffer more from seeiing than refractors. Due to the
obstruction, you will also loose some contrast in the image!

Are stars fuzzy or pinpointed when using the C14 visually?

Pinpoint in my C-14, but make sure collimation is as good as you can
get it... same comments about seeiing: brighter stars at higher
magnification will look "fuzier" than in the Starfire due to
obstruction and larger aperture being more sensitive to seeiing
effects.

I would presume ccd deep sky imaging would improve with the C14

but,

would the stars be bloated?

Due to the long focal length (= higher primary magnification) and due
to the optical system used, brighter stars appear somewhat larger
than they would with a refractor.

My five cents...

Geert Vandenbulcke

--- In C14@y..., boshar@t... wrote:

Hi all,

I have a 1989 non-ED 178mm AP Starfire.
I'd like to have a large aperture compact telescope and the C14

seems

to fit what I need. However, some tell me the quality has suffered

in

recent years. Can someone tell me of their experiences in comparing
these two very different telescopes?

I have a cm1400 and am quite happy with it.

Would I lose much planetery detail and the ability to split close

No. You will get fine detail of the planets as long as the seeing
conditions are good.

doubles? Are stars fuzzy or pinpointed when using the C14 visualy?

Stars look great. Collimate the scope though!

I

would presume ccd deep sky imaging would improve with the C14 but,
would the stars be bloated?
My skies are 4-5 magnitude and the Milky Way is easily seen almost

to

the horizon.

The main thing to consider is the C14 is a very long focal length
(3910mm) scope and therefore your CCD images will be narrowfield not
widefield like with the AP. The next thing to consider is that for
any given target, the extra light gathering power of the C14 is nice.

I shot lots of images with my 14 and then recently started to do
widefield with a 4" refractor (TV101 and FSQ106). The biggest gripe I
have is the exposures take A LOT LONGER than what I'd have to do with
the C14. For example, a 5 to 10 minute exposure seems to take 40 to
60 minutes with the smaller refractors. It is a light gathering issue.

The f/3.3 focal reducers are really hard to make work with out
introducing a ton of COMA into the image, so about all I think you
can easily do from a focal reduction perspective is to use the f/6.3
reducers (gives an F7 with the 14").

You will notice that you see a very narrow field of view through the
14 and that the exposures are a lot faster.

I'd love to have a 14" scope with a 600-800mm focal length...


Here are links to somee images I took with mine:







The Star Queen is at both f/11 and at f/7 to show the difference in
focal length. The M57 is at f/11 and the M27 and bubble are at f/7
I use the Celestron focal reducer.
rdc

Thanks for any feedback from your experience.

Bob