Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

Have someone here tried connecting small telecope to the photo tripod . I'm looking after new sturdy photo tripod so would like to buy one stable enough to use it also with the small scope (40 cm long Newton tube in my case). I'm not a big fan of astro tripods and EQ-mounts. As long as I do not leave home I do not need them in fact (say to take a quick look on the Venus or Moon from the balcony anything stable will work, big EQ-mount is overkill for me).


I was wondering if say 10 kg loading capacity (5 times oversize), with quite big ball head (plus dovetail plate and clamp) will be OK or should I look for something even more sturdy?


This might be little bit off-topic, but I feel this is the best place to ask. Your ideas, thoughts and examples are welcome!

For visual it should do just fine. I would prefer a gimbal over a ball-head.

Thank you!

I use a Manfrotto 144 found in the local ads for 25$. Most photo heads have the problem of not working well with a heavy unbalanced object to support. I bought an alt-az aluminum mount head for 150$. I use it with a 5-inch Mak with 1500 mm fl. Lots of fun to use up to 100X, bit of a strain between 100 and 200X, not really usable above that.

Not having a scope to stick on something I'm not sure how much help my advise is but I stick my stuff on a tripod I built out of some 2x4s, 2x4 sized square u-bolts, 1/2 inch bolts and 3/4 inch plywood, and 3" deck screws. For mounting a head on it I have the 3/8 inch bolt (at the hardware store it is the 3/8" coarse thread which I think is the 3/8"x16 thread pattern) running up through things. It cost just under $50 to build and easily has a safe load capacity of 500 lbs. but that is a function of the materials used and not something I intentionally designed for. For a head I use an old manfrotto 3047 head which has the hex plate as the quick release plate that I picked up for $25. It will keep my k-3 and SMC A* 400mm f/2.8 monster of a lens with astrotracer stable even in windy fairly windy conditions. That load is getting into the ballpark of what you are looking at although your stuff might be longer.

The tripod is heavy (about 60 lbs) and wider than it is tall but it does fold up and collapse down.

Can we see a photo of that setup? I'd love to see it for my own research purposes.

Weren't you going to post a photo of that? I'd love to see it.

I use a Vanguard Alta Pro 2+ 263AP, rated at 11 lbs. With a Skyguider Pro, camera, and tripod, I feel like it approaches the good limit for photography. Ideally, I think 1/2 the weight limit of tripod and mount is supposed to be good for astrophotography. I've found I can take decent photos above that 1/2 limit, but it is a good rule of thumb, and my gremlin-to-save ratio approaches 1:1 as the weight goes up over that line.

A 1.5" or 2" leg telescope tripod was recommended to me for more heavy photography. For instance, this tripod is supposed to support 27 lbs or thereabouts, with a cost of $188. To get 27 lbs support with a camera tripod, I suspect you'd have to spend easily upwards of $200. Or, similarly, this tripod, supporting a similar weight for $148.

Thank you very much for all the answers. My scope is really short - just 41 cm, and weights circa 2 kg, so hopefuly usable on photo tripod. Will most probably buy dovetail plate and clamp and try it with my current Manfrotto to get some experience before buying next tripod. The ballhead seems sturdy enough, but it might be better to check it anyway.

Thanks for reminding me. I will go and find the pictures I took.

Here on a 055 which is very similar to the 144 I usually mount it on.

Telescope weighs 8 lbs. Finder and eyepiece add another pound or two.

What is the "T" on top of the tripod?

It's the alt-az mount head. Bought it in 2008 from Desert Sky Astro. It looks a lot like they call it DSV-1 nowadays.
DSV-1

They have a smaller DSV-M model that may interest you.