Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_annual.thumb.jpg.3fc34f695a81b16210333189a3162ac7.jpg

DhamR

Members
  • Posts

    68
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

74 Excellent

Profile Information

  • Location
    Black Country

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This Angle/FoV business ontop of the magnification factor is making my head hurt. I'm using https://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/?fov[]=10054|67|||1||&fov[]=10054|68|||1||&fov[]=10054|806|||2||&fov[]=10054|105|||1||&fov[]=10054|806|||1||&fov[]=10054|122|||1||&solar_system=moon to get a feel for the range I'm looking at. 16mm Nirvana Even if the edges are a bit iffy, it'll help finding things, and I feel like the immersion factor is pretty cool. FOV-wise it seems to replace the 25mm that came with the scope, which is my most used EP. Next decision is based on things I'm seeing available second hand really, thinking being I'm not sure how I'll get on with them, so if I buy second hand I shouldn't lose too much cash if I dislike them. Barlow the 16mm Nirvana This (in my head at least) will reduce edge iffiness, and concentrate on the central portion of the EP where it's good, at the cost of light collection, maybe a bit of vignetting. Will it mess up my idea of parfocality? Will I need to rack the focus back in to use the barlow? 8mm Starguider Alternative option - well loved EPs from what I can see, would be a slightly higher power replacement of the 10mm, but mag (ignoring angle of view) sits bang on the barlowed mag of the 16mm Nirvana. You'll also see a 40mm Plossl on there, but only because I've seen one going and wonder what that size exit pupil and light-catching ability would be like.
  2. Definitely seek out the Orion Nebula (M42) if you want to see something other than a dot of light.
  3. Missed this earlier, is it only the edges that suffer at f/5 or across the range?
  4. Thank you, very much appreciated. I like this field view, so whilst I was possibly going to go more mag first this will (with a barlow) be an upgrade on both my existing EPs. Unless anyone can see anything obvious wrong with that approach.
  5. I don't tend to wear glasses when viewing, can't get close enough with my current EPs, so this won't change things from my perspective. Are the edges notably poor? I'm guessing I'd still see a huge improvement from the stock 25mm Super.
  6. Thoughts on the Nirvana 18mm? I've seen a used one and thinking of snapping it up. According to the various field of view visualisers it'll give a very similar field to my 25mm, but I assume it'll be a large step up in quality and ease of viewing
  7. That's mad because I'm in a bortle 6 area and can see the sword with naked eye on most clear evenings. Certainly well enough that my red dot finder is all I need to get onto the brightest bit of orion's nebula first time.
  8. I'd say spending upwards of £100 on one eyepiece would need a lot more thought about it than £50 even if in real terms it just means budgeting to upgrade over a longer period. Is there a particular EP which it's worth spending more money on? I assume from conversations it's the wider end, but worth asking?
  9. Wow, a lot to read through and digest here: - I think a zoom might be an annoyance with the helical focuser if I'm honest, the focuser really is the worst part of this scope, and I haven't had much success with ptfe tape, even a single layer makes things too stiff, and causes shredding so I cleaned it all out. (I don't want tape falling down my tube). - All that info from @bomberbaz is really interesting, I hadn't figured that you could get more mag AND wider FOV from the same lens. Will definitely bear that EP in particular in mind, as I'm happy to spend a bit more for better quality up to a point, but especially if it reduces the need to buy an additional EP. - I guess this is what I meant by having nothing to compare things too. I am straining to get close enough to both EPs, so more eye relief and wide FOV would probably make things a lot more comfortable, particularly when showing things to others. Thanks everyone. Sounds like the BSTs are highly regarded in the other FLs, but if anyone has alternatives worth looking at that would be great.
  10. Agree with those suggesting the 10-22 or 15-85. Both excellent lenses, oft compared to the L lenses but for crop sensor cameras. The 50mm is great for capturing a lot of light but at f/1.8 it's soft, and but the time it sharpens up around f/3 or 4 you might as well be using the zooms.
  11. I'm starting to think about eyepieces for my SW 150P Heritage, probably won't bite the bullet for a little while, but want to start a bit of research. I'm surprisingly happy with both the 25mm and the 10mm that came with the scope. More so the former. But from comments prior to purchase I was under the impression I'd hate the 10mm and it doesn't seem to be that bad (although I've nothing to compare it to). I've had issue with my eyelashes applying grease marks to the upper lens of it (I'm not a lady, just a man with pretty eyes ) so the eye relief is one complaint. Another is that it's not par-focal with the 25mm, and because I'm a novice, I like switching from one to the other as I move around the sky to help find objects. Whilst I've got go-to in the Virtuoso mount, I'm trying to encourage myself to find things manually where possible (Orion's Neb is/are easy enough with the RDS, but I've enjoyed star hopping to the Andromeda galaxy). Also the beauty of the scope is that it's grab-and-go and I don't always want to spend time aligning it, especially on partially cloudy days. So what I'm currently doing is focusing the 25mm flush to the bottom of the focuser, and then suspending the 10mm part-way in the focuser, however when holding it in with the two thumb-screws, there's a little play, and I'm always wary I'm fixing it at a slight angle, which I'm guessing makes more and more difference the shorter the f/l. I've started looking at threads on here, including Warthogs excellent "Bare Minimum" thread. I noted that because the scope is an f/5 dob, I should consider using a barlow and a 6-8mm EP to hit higher powers, so I was looking at the below for rough numbers: - good 2 x Barlow - 6-8mm for High Power with above, and Med-High without. - 10mm Med-High (I have a 10mm so can leave this for now) - 15-20 Med-Low - 25mm low (which again, I already have - although at 35 years old, is it worth maybe eeking a bit more exit pupil out of my eyes before they get old?) I'm a glasses wearer, but I'm only mildly shortsighted, and have a mild astigmatism. I prefer viewing without my glasses as my eyes/brain seem to work around the astimatism after a minute or two, and focus is handled by the scope. But as the focuser on the Heritage is, frankly, a bit annoying and sloppy, I'd love my EPs to be par-focal - is this even possible? Does a barlow mess this up? Happy to be punted to other good threads on the topic if that's easier!
  12. I'd go into Settings > Apps and Permissions and pre-emptively give the app location access in there then try again. Alternatively I'm sure I've seen on here you can manually enter location info into the app, it just has to be in a specific format.
  13. I'm going to assume for my own immature amusement that that means flamethrowers and comedy falling anvils.
  14. I was looking at M42 last night and thought it was pretty good from here, I couldn't see the wings at all, but the central patch of bright nebulosity was clear and green even at 10x. I saw a bit more light weirdly if I slowly panned the scope left and right over the view, seemed to trick my eye into seeing more detail than I could in the stationary image.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.