Re: Extra load on an LX200 (how much?)

> There is no simple answer to this. The more weight you add, the more
problems
> you introduce. I can give a reference point, though. I'm using a 12" LX00
> classic, and have the following equipment: filter wheel, ST8i, 50mm dia
> guidescope with ST237 guider using Losmandy mountings. There is also a
RoboFocus
> motor on the primary. This is all counterbalanced by a Losmandy 3D weight
system
> on the bottom of the scope, and I also have a couple of pounds on the east
fork.
> With this system, I don't have any problems with flexure, tracking error,
or
> resonance.
>

I suppose comparisons like this were what I was after really, many thanks
for that info.

> Film, with its lower sensitivity and lower resolution, is more tolerant of
> tracking problems than CCDs. I don't think you will have any problems with
> either a 12" or 10" LX200.

It's a choice, I think, between a 10" and a 14" scope, with the immobility
of the latter being a big consideration.  Yet to read much about using the
latter photographically, either.

> You can save weight with a smaller guidescope- what
> you are proposing using is larger than it needs to be.

That's creeping aperture fever kicking in again. :-)  OK, if I go the
guidescope route I'll limit myself to 60mm, there's a very nice Tak 60mm
that I can still also use visually.

Regards, Michael