Telrad v Rigel ... Advice please?

[JulianFR]

Apologies in advance if this topic already exists (I did a quick search) but do you have any thoughts/advice on the choice of a Telrad finder or a Rigel?

I have A Telrad currently but may need to get a replacement finder soon. So I thought I would investigate the competition. The Rigel seems smaller and more compact than the Telrad, but how does it perform in comparison?

Thanks, Julian

[Orange Haze]

Hi Julian. I've never used a telrad so it's hard for me to be objective, but I can 100% support the Rigel. It is compact, upright and very easy to attach to the OTA. I have mine in place of the finderscope.

Love the fact that you can dim the red circles so as not to obscure stars in view. Battery lasts for ages, unless you leave it on accidentally like I have on about 8 occasions. I have begun to find objects that would have been far more difficult in the finderscope. For me the Rigel has been a revelation and it makes viewing sessions so much more enjoyable.

[bambuko]

+1

another happy Rigel user.

I use mine together with RACI finder.

Remember also that Telrad can be (easily) halved in size with a bit of diy (it's mostly air inside).

ps did you mean TITLE in the title or is it another auto-correct nonsense?

[ronin]

Auto corrct to get from Rigel to Title is not worth having, especially as Rigel has come out in the main body.

[Astro Imp]

From reading various posts on this topic in the past it would seem that both the Telrad and Rigel do what you want and the choice of which is best is just down to personal preference.

FWIW I use a Telrad alongside a SW RACI but cannot offer a comparison as I have never use the Rigel.

[RikM]

I don't think there's anything in it really, they are both outstanding products. I have never used a Telrad, but love my Rigel QuikFinder. Best £30 I spent on astronomy

If you meant to type Rigel instead of Title in the ...errr Title, let me know and I will fix it for you.

[JulianFR]

Aarghhh ... Yes it's the flaming spell check. It changes everything when there's no need! If someone with editing rights could change it I would be grateful ;-)

Anyway, TELRAD re RIGEL ... Many thanks for the answers. Sounds like they are both good. I might be tempted to try the smaller Rigel this time!

[RikM]

Done

[JulianFR]

Thanks Rik !

How are you doing over there - staying dry I hope!

[wolfpaw]

I got the Rigel simply because I wanted to install it between the focuser and finderscope. I couldn't do that with a Telrad. It works nicely, although it takes some practice to see the red bullseye when sighting along the tube. I've never used a Telrad but they are apparently very good as well, and more sturdy.

[John]

Hi there,

I've owned a couple of Telrads and a couple of Rigel's and like them both. Currently I use a Rigel on my 12" dob because I want to keep the nose weight of the scope to a minimum. The only difference that I see between them is that the Telrad projects 3 circles (.5, 2 and 4 degrees angular size) but with the Rigel you just get the 2 and .5 degree circles. 

Here is a little review of the two which seems to match my experiences with them:

http://www.astrobargains.com/Articles/telrad_vs_quikfinder.htm

[ChrisLX200]

I have both but only used the Telrad on the scope, the Rigel I use on my binocs. I found the Rigel offers the most clear view, for some reason I didn't get on well with Telrad - I could not see fainter stars through the viewing aperture. Also, the Telrad would often dew up early in the session and I had to make a shield for it that looped over the top. That helped a bit but it really needed a heater.

ChrisH

[JulianFR]

Thanks... I'm interested because I've just taken advantage of the FLO 10% off offer and invested in an SW 300p Flextube (hope it will arrive tomorrow). But the secondary mirror part at the top looks quite narrow, or shallow, and I wonder if the bulky Telrad will be too long and/or heavy. The Rigel looks like it might be an easier fit on that scope.

[jabberwocky]

I've used both on my old 8 inch dob and found the RACI much easier to use, plus it takes up far less space, the telrad needed to be on a riser and even with that I never liked using it, only design flaw with the RACI is not having the adjustment knobs recessed so I was forever accidentally using them to try to turn it on or off and miss aligning it. The telrad is also a dew magnet.

[jetstream]

The Rigel works well for me,light,high,easy to detach.I just replaced the original mount tape with a better,more permanent tape (Norton)-very rigid now.

[Langy]

Sorry only just noticed this topic. I did raise the exact same question a few days ago here http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/207382-rdf-replacement/

In the end I decided on the Rigel for weight and overall size. 

It is very easy to install and align, you will see my last comment in the topic above on how I installed and got on with it.

I'm sure the Telrad would be just as easy, it was the length and weight that put me off.

[JulianFR]

Thanks Gerry and Psul. You you have helped me lean towards the Rigel. Confirmed by the fact I've just held my existing Telrad up to the top section (secondary mirror housing) of the Flextube and it is far too long to fit. So it's the Rigel for me!

[JulianFR]

I mean Paul. Sorry :-( I use an old HP (Palm) Touchpad and the spellcheck and 'keyboard' are awful.

[Moonshane]

basically the same. if you want smaller footprint and a bit lighter get the rigel. I use dobs and prefer the telrad but there's not really anything in it other than the sizes.

[bambuko]

When I originally posted in this thread I only had Rigel, so couldn't comment on comparison with Telrad.

However I have just got one. I have modified it (shortened) and include below few photos comparing the modified Telrad with Rigel.

Hopefully it might help someone when trying to choose

Dinky Telrad:

and showing new location for the batteries:

I have considered few different options including changing to AAA batteries or using Lithium CR2032 (same as used in Rigel), but in the end decided to keep it simple and re-used AA battery box, just fitted on the outside.

And now Telrad next to Rigel:

You can see from this angle that they are roughly the same height, but Telrad has bigger window and footprint.

Here you can see the mirror adjustment knobs on both:

One thing to bear in mind when looking at these pictures is that original Telrad is about 60mm longer than my shortened one (but shortening is such an easy job )

Also - Telard is shown on it's mount and Rigel without one (because it is already fixed to the scope).

[Langy]

A nice comparison. Think I'm still pleased I got the Rigel, but mainly due to the weight difference, which comes more in play on a shorter scope.

[Charic]

bambuko.........Nice job matey. You didn't need the box after all?  It looks the dogs! That would now probably sit forward of the focuser and  9 x 50  on my Skyliner. that could have solved my reach problem.   

NOTE* Please note that on the Telrad, the reticule is set to view at infinity. This is ideal and is how its supposed to work, but I wear and need  prescription glasses to see a clear sharp image. That said, bambuko has also advised me that the Rigel works similar. So those who wear prescriptions, may see each ring as a double or even triple when viewed without glasses!

With glasses on, its pin sharp, but I don't like wearing glasses using the telescope, so the Telrad had to go.

[bambuko]

Yes, I totally concur with Charic's observations re use of glasses.

I only get away with it because my right eye (-1.0) is not as bad as left (-3.0), so I can use both Rigel and Telrad without glasses providing I use right eye.

When I try using left eye without glasses I get blurry rings, double rings etc.

Of course the solution is easy - wear glasses, but I hate it because I do not use them at the scope (focuser takes care of my short-sightedness).

[JulianFR]

bambuko... Nice conversion! How did you actually slice a section out? I've invested in a Rigel now (haven't been able to use it yet) but if there were a shorter Telrad available (I'm useless at DIY) I would have bought one.

[bambuko]

Housing is made from ABS plastic, so it easy to cut using razor saw (for nice clean cut).

You could also use hacksaw. It's easy to sand or trim using scalpel or Stanley knife.

It can be glued using MEK, or (perhaps easier to get) solvent cement adhesive as used in plumbing.

Main difficulty is protecting Telrad, lens, glass, LED from the mess/dust of conversion.

The whole job took only couple of hours.

Only you can judge whether you are up to it