If price is no problem, what Newt do you recommend at that focal length? preferably the fastest optics as I don't have too much free time.
What is the best imaging Newtonian you can recommend at a focal length of 800-1000 mm?
If you could find an ASA Newtonian I would go for that. Dreamscopes produce amazing images but I think the 16 inch is their smallest. I personally use a TS optics 8 inch ONTC f4 that I love. Many other folks produce fantastic images with them here on AB. You can get it down to f3 with the starizona .75 coma corrector. Lacerta and OOUK would also be great options in my opinion. Those are just what I have researched but I know there are some other great Newtonian telescopes out there. Or build your own!
Cheers,
Cody
Cheers,
Cody
Helpful
Easier to get: TS ONTC
Harder to get: Lacerta
Dream scope: ASA H400 f2.4
To avoid: OOUK
Harder to get: Lacerta
Dream scope: ASA H400 f2.4
To avoid: OOUK
andrea tasselli:
Easier to get: TS ONTC
Harder to get: Lacerta
Dream scope: ASA H400 f2.4
To avoid: OOUK
This. I wanted a Lacerta but couldn't secure one. Got an ONTC instead, absolutely love it. Super sad ASA discontinued the smaller newts but I'm 100% satisfied with the ONTC.
I personally use and can recommend the TS Optics ONTC 8 inch. A friend of mine uses the 10" and his experience with it was why I chose to go with TS Optics. I use it with a Paracorr which slows it down to f/4.6 (920mm f/l). Others I know use other coma correctors which don't slow down the scope. Choice of focuser is important too. I went with a Feathertouch 2" which has been rock solid.
Well Written Concise
Mostly Any Newt that you can handle will be nice, i have a discontinued one from Meade 8" F/5, while i modified it it is getting closed to a better quality ones, so it is like if i couldn't buy an expensive one then i buy a standard one then convert it slowly to a fine one, i also bought GSO 6" f/4 at lower price initially before all things went up in prices, it also needs kind of modifications to make it super, the better Newt are just made with higher quality materials or say higher quality parts to make it as quality, but someone just said something for me "A wedge is a wedge no matter which brand it is", i will say the same, "The Newtonian is a Newtonian, no matter which brand you get", what made ONTC better than for example UNC and OOUK and Lacerta is even better, ask yourself that.
Tareq Abdulla:
"The Newtonian is a Newtonian, no matter which brand you get",
My 2 cents - this is incorrect. While the Newtonian is indeed a simple design, the sturdiness of the tube, spider, and mirror holder is important. So you can get any old Newt and then, if mechanically inclined, tune it so it is good for imaging. Or you can pay a bit more and get something a bit more mechanically sound. People like the TS Newts because they fall in the latter category. I decided that it was worth some of my money to have a design than others have had success with. Life is short. I'd rather spend time imaging than troubleshooting.
Helpful Insightful Respectful
Tareq Abdulla:
Mostly Any Newt that you can handle will be nice, i have a discontinued one from Meade 8" F/5, while i modified it it is getting closed to a better quality ones, so it is like if i couldn't buy an expensive one then i buy a standard one then convert it slowly to a fine one, i also bought GSO 6" f/4 at lower price initially before all things went up in prices, it also needs kind of modifications to make it super, the better Newt are just made with higher quality materials or say higher quality parts to make it as quality, but someone just said something for me "A wedge is a wedge no matter which brand it is", i will say the same, "The Newtonian is a Newtonian, no matter which brand you get", what made ONTC better than for example UNC and OOUK and Lacerta is even better, ask yourself that.
What makes them better is quality. Cheap newts have thin tubes that can flex, mirror cells that don't hold collimation, and focuser that cannot handle much weight before flexing. I've personally owned 2 GSO newts and even after modification they don't hold a candle to a premium newt. Quality definitely matters.
Arun H:Tareq Abdulla:
"The Newtonian is a Newtonian, no matter which brand you get",
My 2 cents - this is incorrect. While the Newtonian is indeed a simple design, the sturdiness of the tube, spider, and mirror holder is important. So you can get any old Newt and then, if mechanically inclined, tune it so it is good for imaging. Or you can pay a bit more and get something a bit more mechanically sound. People like the TS Newts because they fall in the latter category. I decided that it was worth some of my money to have a design than others have had success with. Life is short. I'd rather spend time imaging than troubleshooting.
And my statement is correct, because you talked about the design, not the type, the Newt is a Newt, but i never mention about the design itself, it is easy for me to say the car is a car, nothing wrong about it even if you and all the world say wrong, but it is about the type, same when i say you and me are human being and a human is a human, so i was correct, about design quality that is completely another story and topic, very simple.
Reg Pratt:Tareq Abdulla:
Mostly Any Newt that you can handle will be nice, i have a discontinued one from Meade 8" F/5, while i modified it it is getting closed to a better quality ones, so it is like if i couldn't buy an expensive one then i buy a standard one then convert it slowly to a fine one, i also bought GSO 6" f/4 at lower price initially before all things went up in prices, it also needs kind of modifications to make it super, the better Newt are just made with higher quality materials or say higher quality parts to make it as quality, but someone just said something for me "A wedge is a wedge no matter which brand it is", i will say the same, "The Newtonian is a Newtonian, no matter which brand you get", what made ONTC better than for example UNC and OOUK and Lacerta is even better, ask yourself that.
What makes them better is quality. Cheap newts have thin tubes that can flex, mirror cells that don't hold collimation, and focuser that cannot handle much weight before flexing. I've personally owned 2 GSO newts and even after modification they don't hold a candle to a premium newt. Quality definitely matters.
Read above, the type is still the same, it is just the design, so no matter even if aliens came to make it, it is still a Newtonian, challenge me if i am wrong, so the quality of design and making it is another discussion which is right, same when that person said a wedge is a wedge, he never mentioned about quality of optics or body design, right?!!!
And i know all the issues of the cheap Newt, i never said it will match or became high end premium, but after all the mirrors are almost the same unless many high end Newt using a completely high end premium mirrors, and they definitely use high end or better focusers, in fact even Tak refr many said their focusers are meh and they change, many manufacturers just install a joke focusers, so we just replace it, high end makers just use better things like better material maybe or better measurements or better optics and better focusers, but when i look at the images results i see nothing different there, and those results never told us what is behind of scene about quality of design, so we assume that high end scopes where easy to deal with and use without issues to make those while cheap ones continues into headaches fixes and modifications.
I replaced my focuser on my 8" Newt only, even with old focuser the stock one which is a single speed it was ok and the scope hold the collimation for long time, but i never stopped there and i replaced to make it even better, and once i did the collimation is holding like forever and i need a big accident to incorrect it, in addition, the focuser holding my imaging setup secure, and i had a light leak which is normal with cheap Newt, if they used a better tube and parts i won't see that, but i liked that i fix things one by one, made me to learn about my Newt parts even more, and now no more issues i saw first place, and know what, ALL THAT AT REALLY SO LOW COST, i could buy another one and do exact the same modifications and i still spent less than a price of one Newt high end even smaller aperture than both, but i know people never like to deal with issues and fixes and willing to buy like doubles and triples only to have that a scope which is just…. WORK FLAWLESSLY, it is their choice and decision after all nothing wrong about it.
Tareq Abdulla:Reg Pratt:Tareq Abdulla:
Mostly Any Newt that you can handle will be nice, i have a discontinued one from Meade 8" F/5, while i modified it it is getting closed to a better quality ones, so it is like if i couldn't buy an expensive one then i buy a standard one then convert it slowly to a fine one, i also bought GSO 6" f/4 at lower price initially before all things went up in prices, it also needs kind of modifications to make it super, the better Newt are just made with higher quality materials or say higher quality parts to make it as quality, but someone just said something for me "A wedge is a wedge no matter which brand it is", i will say the same, "The Newtonian is a Newtonian, no matter which brand you get", what made ONTC better than for example UNC and OOUK and Lacerta is even better, ask yourself that.
What makes them better is quality. Cheap newts have thin tubes that can flex, mirror cells that don't hold collimation, and focuser that cannot handle much weight before flexing. I've personally owned 2 GSO newts and even after modification they don't hold a candle to a premium newt. Quality definitely matters.
Read above, the type is still the same, it is just the design, so no matter even if aliens came to make it, it is still a Newtonian, challenge me if i am wrong, so the quality of design and making it is another discussion which is right, same when that person said a wedge is a wedge, he never mentioned about quality of optics or body design, right?!!!
A wedge may be a wedge but a telescope isn't a wedge. Even so you think all wedges are created equality? Would you trust your rig on a wedge made from cheap materials and poor craftsmanship? You speak as if all that matters is the optical configuration when what really matters is QUALITY. Is a Takahashi 106 equal to a $200 plastic telescope just because theyre both refractors? No. Is a Ferrari no different than an entry level coupe because they're both cars? No. Quality and performance set them apart. So saying a newt is a newt no matter what brand you get is flat out incorrect.
Reg Pratt:Tareq Abdulla:Reg Pratt:Tareq Abdulla:
Mostly Any Newt that you can handle will be nice, i have a discontinued one from Meade 8" F/5, while i modified it it is getting closed to a better quality ones, so it is like if i couldn't buy an expensive one then i buy a standard one then convert it slowly to a fine one, i also bought GSO 6" f/4 at lower price initially before all things went up in prices, it also needs kind of modifications to make it super, the better Newt are just made with higher quality materials or say higher quality parts to make it as quality, but someone just said something for me "A wedge is a wedge no matter which brand it is", i will say the same, "The Newtonian is a Newtonian, no matter which brand you get", what made ONTC better than for example UNC and OOUK and Lacerta is even better, ask yourself that.
What makes them better is quality. Cheap newts have thin tubes that can flex, mirror cells that don't hold collimation, and focuser that cannot handle much weight before flexing. I've personally owned 2 GSO newts and even after modification they don't hold a candle to a premium newt. Quality definitely matters.
Read above, the type is still the same, it is just the design, so no matter even if aliens came to make it, it is still a Newtonian, challenge me if i am wrong, so the quality of design and making it is another discussion which is right, same when that person said a wedge is a wedge, he never mentioned about quality of optics or body design, right?!!!
A wedge may be a wedge but a telescope isn't a wedge. Even so you think all wedges are created equality? Would you trust your rig on a wedge made from cheap materials and poor craftsmanship? You speak as if all that matters is the optical configuration when what really matters is QUALITY. Is a Takahashi 106 equal to a $200 plastic telescope just because theyre both refractors? No. Is a Ferrari no different than an entry level coupe because they're both cars? No. Quality and performance set them apart. So saying a newt is a newt just incorrect.
Isn't a Takahashi 106 a refractor or a telescope? Isn't a Ferrari a car and another entry level car is a car? i never heard someone called a Rolls Royce a plane or ship, it is still a car, but no one doubt about luxury, a human who is a Doctor isn't same as a human of a non job living in a street, but they are both human, read carefully what i am talking about, and i wasn't talking about a wedge of the mount, but a wedge that is Herschel Wedge used for Solar imaging, and if i told him about QUALITY difference he will give me pages about "So WHAT?", so a Newt is a Newt, but i won't say a Tak or ASA Newt is an Orion or Celestron Newt at all, i know the difference in quality absolutely, but i still call them both as .... NEWTONIAN or REFLECTOR.
The OP posted about if price is no problem, then i will definitely go with high end Newt, even Lacerta and Takahashi Newt could be a joke there, and many answers already confirmed about if price is no problem and answered, i just posted about another thing, related to a Newt, if i can afford that high end Newt then no one will buy cheap Newt or even they will never exist.
Tareq Abdulla:
Isn't a Takahashi 106 a refractor or a telescope?
Yes, I literally said that.
Tareq Abdulla:
Isn't a Ferrari a car and another entry level car is a car? i never heard someone called a Rolls Royce a plane or ship, it is still a car,
Just as with telescopes saying a car is a car and ignoring everything that makes them significantly different is flawed logic. You made the statement that a newt is a newt no matter which brand you get and that is factually incorrect. Believe what you want though I’m wasting anymore of my time arguing about it.
Reg Pratt:Tareq Abdulla:
Isn't a Takahashi 106 a refractor or a telescope?
Yes, I literally said that.Tareq Abdulla:
Isn't a Ferrari a car and another entry level car is a car? i never heard someone called a Rolls Royce a plane or ship, it is still a car,
Just as with telescopes saying a car is a car and ignoring everything that makes them significantly different is flawed logic. You made the statement that a newt is a newt no matter which brand you get and that is factually incorrect. Believe what you want though I’m wasting anymore of my time arguing about it.
That is what others also replying, so i am using same argument, and they even didn't go into details of differences, and they are well respected know about astro, so it is like they are correct when it comes to their own points, but when others say it they are changing points or answers, i am not interested in that really.
Thank you.
What's this argument?
It's very simple logic:
A Newt will always be a Newt when it comes to the optical design, no matter which brand you get from. If they send you a pebble and call it a Newt, that doesn't count as a Newt.
Mechanical quality, optical quality, and aesthetics may differ, but a Newt is a Newt; not all Newts are the same, but all Newts have 5 things in common:
1. A primary mirror
2. A secondary mirror
3. A focuser
4. A structure holding these pieces together to form the OTA itself
5. An aperture
Does this settle the argument, or was I not clear?
EDIT: it looks like the argument already ended,
but I wont delete my post
It's very simple logic:
A Newt will always be a Newt when it comes to the optical design, no matter which brand you get from. If they send you a pebble and call it a Newt, that doesn't count as a Newt.
Mechanical quality, optical quality, and aesthetics may differ, but a Newt is a Newt; not all Newts are the same, but all Newts have 5 things in common:
1. A primary mirror
2. A secondary mirror
3. A focuser
4. A structure holding these pieces together to form the OTA itself
5. An aperture
Does this settle the argument, or was I not clear?
EDIT: it looks like the argument already ended,
but I wont delete my postWe should call the "Rolex" a Newt also because it is "Quality" in every atom of it, same we can call "Hasselblad" camera and "Zeiss" optic as Newt because they both are Quality beyond imaging, so now Quality = Newt, Quality = Car, Quality = Watch, means a car is a Newt is also a watch because they are all quality matter.
Not trying to go off topic or boiling it, but i was just saying it simple, a type is a type, the quality isn't included in it, when we talk about quality then it is different story, because we can talk about the quality of Newt and quality of Ferrari and quality of Planewave, but we won't call Planewave a "Swiss" watch just because we talk about quality design and performance.
Not trying to go off topic or boiling it, but i was just saying it simple, a type is a type, the quality isn't included in it, when we talk about quality then it is different story, because we can talk about the quality of Newt and quality of Ferrari and quality of Planewave, but we won't call Planewave a "Swiss" watch just because we talk about quality design and performance.
What's this argument?
It's very simple logic:
A Newt will always be a Newt when it comes to the optical design, no matter which brand you get from. If they send you a pebble and call it a Newt, that doesn't count as a Newt.
Mechanical quality, optical quality, and aesthetics may differ, but a Newt is a Newt; not all Newts are the same, but all Newts have 5 things in common:
1. A primary mirror
2. A secondary mirror
3. A focuser
4. A structure holding these pieces together to form the OTA itself
5. An aperture
Does this settle the argument, or was I not clear?
EDIT: it looks like the argument already ended,but I wont delete my post
I really hope it is ended really and never go further, and your post is important and nice, hope the topic is just keep going and not getting back to this argument.
Yeah, a type is a type, and quality is irrelevant to the type.
Tareq Abdulla:What's this argument?
It's very simple logic:
A Newt will always be a Newt when it comes to the optical design, no matter which brand you get from. If they send you a pebble and call it a Newt, that doesn't count as a Newt.
Mechanical quality, optical quality, and aesthetics may differ, but a Newt is a Newt; not all Newts are the same, but all Newts have 5 things in common:
1. A primary mirror
2. A secondary mirror
3. A focuser
4. A structure holding these pieces together to form the OTA itself
5. An aperture
Does this settle the argument, or was I not clear?
EDIT: it looks like the argument already ended,
I really hope it is ended really and never go further, and your post is important and nice, hope the topic is just keep going and not getting back to this argument.
Thanks
Back to the topic, so they recommended few brands, the OP also said "preferably the fastest optics as I don't have too much free time".
For that i think something like f2.8-f3 is what you need, Tak Epsilon has it, Sharpstar also has it, or buy a good quality brand Newt and use Nexus 0.75x, with it, if it is f/4 that will bring the scope to F3, i believe TS has PhotoNewt called Boren-Simon with two versions one of them is f/2.8.
For that i think something like f2.8-f3 is what you need, Tak Epsilon has it, Sharpstar also has it, or buy a good quality brand Newt and use Nexus 0.75x, with it, if it is f/4 that will bring the scope to F3, i believe TS has PhotoNewt called Boren-Simon with two versions one of them is f/2.8.
A Newt will always be a Newt when it comes to the optical design, no matter which brand you get from. If they send you a pebble and call it a Newt, that doesn't count as a Newt.
What if they sell you a bridge? Does that count as a Newt
? What would be really confusing though, is if they sold me one of these:
The bridge? It's not a Newtonian optical design, even if the bridge was nicknamed "newt".
The amphibian? The seller would be honest in saying that it's a Newt, but he'd be lying in saying that it's a telescope; It's optical design is not that of a Newt's, so it doesn't count.
The amphibian? The seller would be honest in saying that it's a Newt, but he'd be lying in saying that it's a telescope; It's optical design is not that of a Newt's, so it doesn't count.
A Newt is a Newt and that's a hoot
And no one can call it a Newt, well shoot
Unless that Newt is the famous brute
Known as a Newtonian
He's mean and he's bad and that is sad
But the boys with fracs are always glad
That is because they've never had
To collimate a Newtonian
For stars with bars don't look too far
Buy a Newt and there you are
If you want a real pink star
Try a Newtonian
And no one can call it a Newt, well shoot
Unless that Newt is the famous brute
Known as a Newtonian
He's mean and he's bad and that is sad
But the boys with fracs are always glad
That is because they've never had
To collimate a Newtonian
For stars with bars don't look too far
Buy a Newt and there you are
If you want a real pink star
Try a Newtonian
What is the best 8" F5-ish Newtonian you can buy?
I've had a lot of fun with my inexpensive Skywatcher 200 PDS. I just wondered what the best Newtonian is out there at roughly the same focal length?
Directly addresses best Newtonian at similar focal length to author's scope.
RC8/RASA8 or EdgeHD8 + Hyperstar?
Alright fellas, Here is the situation; as of now I have an RC8 and RASA8 as my two major telescopes. Lately I have been thinking of trading them out for just an EdgeHD 8 system. I won't consider any larger aperture so there's no point trying ...
Fast optics telescope recommendations align with author's F/2 imaging requirements.