Posts Made By: Rod Mollise

Tapio Lahtinen said:

What do you think ?
http://www.celestron.com/news/

Hi:

I think "RIP" is a little hasty until we see what Synta does. Heck, it ain't like this ain't happened before. Been a long time since the days of Celestron Pacific, when it was a family company owned by Tom Johnson. First there was the absentee Swiss owner, then there was Tasco. I think Synta will be a better deal than either of these was. It would have been nice to see Celestron continue as an independent company in the hands of Lupica/Hedrick/Hale...but insufficient captitalization did 'em in, I guess. That was, in fact, Celestron's major problem, IMHO, in the days before the Tasco buyout. Much as people disliked Tasco, an improvement in Celestron's product lines, advertising, etc., were immediately after the infusion of Tasco cash.

Peace,
Rod

Richard Beasley said:

Anyone ever see one of the famed 22"er? I am wondering if one has been for sale on Astromart, and a price?

Clear skies,
Richard

Hi:

Have I seen one? Yep. Has one been on Astromart? Nope. ;-)

More seriously, there were very few of these scopes made. For a wealth of information on the scope see Bob Piekiel's excellent e-book _Celestron, The Early Years_.

Peace,
Rod Mollise

Hi:

I've used both. The CG5 rather extensively. Bottom line?

Goto is substantially more accurate on the CG5 than on the CGE. Even when CGE users do the "cone" alignment using a 3rd star (the CG 5 basically forces you to do a cone alignment every time). In my experience, the goto accuracy of the CG5 is typically at <10', and often, with careful setup, <3'. Goto accuracy is something a lot of CGE users seem to struggle with.

Payload-wise, however, the CGE is certainly in another class altogether...in spades. You won't be hanging a C14 off your CG5...though the folks who bought the C11 configuration of the ASGT seem happy with it. It's just about perfect for a C8, however. The tripod of the CG5 is very nice indeed, and makes it so much more stable than what we've seen with earlier GP clones.

Tracking? The PE on the CGE is lower, but the CG5 is not bad in this regard. Unfortunately, the CG 5 does not feature PEC. Since most users tend to guide with webcams/Guidedog, it really doesn't matter that much.

I assume the higher goto accuracy of the CG 5 is a software thing. The CGE is a very nice mount--a beautiful mount, IMHO--just what it should have been, a fix for the problems of the CI 700. Unfortunately, they don't seem to have got the software _quite_ right. If I had a need for a GEM for a C11, I wouldn't hesitate to buy the CGE, even knowing that it's not quite as good in the goto department as it probably should be.

Peace,
Rod Mollise

Oh, let me add that if I were looking for a mount in this payload range (actually with a higher payload capacity than the CGE or G11), but for less money, I'd look at the EQ6 Skyscan. I haven't used one yet, but apparently Synta has worked out the problems with the PE that affected the original EQ6, and has added a reliable goto system. Since Synta now owns Celestron, I wouldn't be overly surprised to see Celestron offer some OTAs on the Skyscan. ;-)

Peace,
Rod

Amen. Yes, there are some cheaper alternatives out there now. But nothing with the quality of the Denks, and nothing that offers the "real" binoviewing experience like they do.

Peace,
Rod

[QUOTE]Joe Lalumia said:

OK.........I broke down and ordered an LX90 with LNT and upgraded coatings.......does anyone have experience with LNT? Does it work as advertised leveling the scope and aligning to True North?? Does it work better if the scope is level and pointed north already?

Howdy:

It works just as avertised, I'm rather impressed by the LNT system.

As for "Does it work if it's level and pointed north already?" Well, you really don't want the scope pointing north when you start. A little off true north is best for starting out in my experience, but I'm not sure that really matters. There's no home positon required for the LX90 (unlike the LNT ETX). You lock the locks, turn on the power, and the scope will do a little dance, figuring out where north is and where level is.

Do note that, naturally, the first time you use the scope you will have to enter your location, time, time zone, etc. Thereafter, the LNT will keep the date and time current via its onboard batter-backed clock.

Uncle Rod

David Pitre said:

I need to ship my 9.25" Nexstar back to Celestron for repairs (under warranty) and am nervous.

Any advice as to which shipper, insurance....
I have the original packaging.

The best thing to do as far as the physical shipping is, yes, use the original packing materials. Do that and there should not be a problem. And, yes, insure it for the full value (with UPS or FedEx).

Unk Rod

They are the same. What's different is the paintjob.

Unk Rod

Well, it was clear here...B-U-T...our longitude here on the Gulf Coast meant the Moon didn't rise until totality, and by the time she got above horizon obstructions it was well over. Sure, I guess I could have gone down to the beach for clear horizons, but a day of drinkin' Dixie beer at the annual chili cookoff left me a little deficient movivation-wise. ;-)

Nevertheless, I got out there with a pair of 15x70 binoculars and the ETX. Even snapped a few snapshot after Luna cleared the worst of the houses and trees. ;-)

http://skywatch.brainiac.com/planets/eclipse.htm

Unk Rod

paul putkowski said:

I know there have been tremendous swings in quality through the years.

I have a late '80s Super C8 with Starbrite and I'm wondering how this "Japan" scope compares to the current "far-east-country-that-will-remain-nameless" versions.


P

IN what was was the Super C8 a "Japan scope"? It was made in good old California, USA.

That said, the current Celestron SCTs, whether made in China (the SEs) or California (the rest) are quite noticeably better than the late 80s scopes.

Unk Rod