I have used both the 400 f2.8 and the 800 f 5.6 Canon lenses with F1
attached on the 12". Since the fork mount is the same and the OTA
lighter, you should have no trouble with the heavy load. If there is
any binding at all, it will be in the declination axis. With
excellent polar alignment, the dec should not move anyway.

I am at about 43 degrees latitude so the stress on the RA bearings
would be greater is you were in the south of Aruba or such.

Doc G

>
> Hi all,
>
> Does anyone have a good idea of the amount of weight my LX-200 8" Ÿ6.3 can
> take? I know I'll probably need counterweights a 3-D system preferably to
> use my large Canon EF 500mmŸ4L IS lens and the EOS-3 body. Total weight
> around 12-15 lbs. depending on the batteries and extenders attached.
>
> I know it is not the ideal camera for long exposure pictures, I have and use
> an Olympus OM-1 normally, but the Canon lens is so nice and sharp and long
> especially with the 1.4x and 2x Tele extenders attached, and I can't justify
> buying another smaller long lens for the Olympus, the Canon cost about the
> price of two LX-200 12" scopes $8500.00 US! ( I do use this lens in my work,
> just to justify having such a beast).
>
> I would turn off the IS (Image Stabalization) feature while shooting
> piggybacking photos. I'd love to try it out, but am concerned about wearing
> or putting undue stress on the electric motor in my scope. The other thing
> is that with the lens hood attached it is longer than the scope itself, but
> the weight is mostly around the middle of the lens.

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: RE: [M]: OT: Auto headlights., LaGuardia, Kristofer S.
Next message: RE: [M]: OT: Auto headlights., Anthony J. Kroes
Previous message in thread: [M]: LX-200 and piggybacking weight?, Email address hidden