9 minutes ago, Frank the Troll said:

Quick question, I have the 2.25 barlow, how well will they work with a Hyperion 24 and 17mm lens

Cheers

I'm considering getting either a 10 or 5mm, or would that be too much mag

With which of your scopes ?

The barlow will work with those eyepieces but whether the magnification produced is useful will depend on the scope, the observation target and the seeing conditions.

I use the 2.25x Baader Barlow with a 21.5 - 7.2mm zoom eyepiece to give a 9.55mm - 3.2mm zoom. That is a very useful range with my refactors. Not so much with my 12 in dobsonian.

Back in 2016 I purchased two telescopes which I hoped would deliver pretty much as good performance as you can get from their respective apertures. I'm pretty confident that they both live up to that expectation.

While I can't control the seeing conditions I think that I can recognise what they are reasonably well now and adjust my observing accordingly.

I'm less certain that my eye is able to take full advantage of what these scopes can do when the seeing conditions are good enough to allow them to perform to their full capability thought. I'm the weak link in the optical system I expect now

There is a slight irony that it takes until the latter part of ones life to be able to afford excellent optics which you might be better able to exploit more with younger eyes and younger energy levels.

But I soldier on anyway

Sorry - nothing scientific in this post

I've been an astronomer for 40 years but I've said "no". I do lots of astronomy at home so it's not a priority when on holiday.

10 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

.....You can't cheat physics. Telescope aperture is about resolving not about detecting. Well, that too - you need large aperture to detect faint stuff - you won't be able to see mag15 star with 3" scope for sure, but in this context we are talking about resolving.

No amount of magnification, nor sharpness/quality of optics can make telescope resolve beyond what physics says it is capable / allows to be done.

You can do quite a bit to ensure that you get as close to the best performance that is possible from a given aperture though and as often as the seeing conditions will allow. That's part of the fun of observing IMHO - pushing things as far as you can

My guess is that the capabilities of a lot of scopes are not really fully explored. Hopefully this thread and others like it will provide some tips on how observers might get a bit more from their instruments before succumbing to the urge to upgrade

Just now, mikeDnight said:

The Pentax 3.5mm XW is a pretty awesome eyepiece worthy of consideration.

Agreed. I really like mine

Not long ago a certain brand of dobsonian was being advertised as having a "1/12th wave" mirrors without specifying whether that was a RMS or PV value.

When I queried it the vendor said it was RMS and the PV was "probably" around 1/4 wave. 

51 minutes ago, Pixies said:

Yep. the barlow parts are indicated below. There is a nosepiece or similar stuck in the barlow ('x')

That's what I mentioned a few posts back !

It would be worth seeing if the piece marked "X" above will screw into the diagonal.

99% of my observing is from my back garden which is fortunately just a few paces from where my scopes are stored.

My skies are Bortle 5 as well and there are plenty of obstructions and some light pollution issues here but the sheer convenience means that I can observe as often as the skies are clear and at really short notice.

I'm going to make it full screen, put my lap top on a hill about 50 km away and observe it at 500x with my Tak

@mikeDnight would still see more detail in it than I would

Then what ?

(the 17 popped out a little easier for me when I removed my reading glasses)

1 minute ago, Starboy6969 said:

Ohhh okok so that means that I can’t use the star diagonal?

If you can get the silver barrel out of the top of the barlow lens, it may well screw into the diagonal  then you can use it.

It means nothing really.

Plan on 150x - 220x as the maximum useful magnification.

Telescopes for astronomy are more about light grasp than magnification. Most observing is done at 50x - 100x in reality.

Stepping up from the stock eyepieces is a good plan and not using the barlow lens is another one.

The BST Explorer eyepieces are a very good move away from the stock eyepieces:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bst-starguider-eyepieces.html

Is your scope the dobsonian or the equatorialy mounted 150mm newtonian ?

That is part of the finder scope. Lots missing there including the objective lens !

I think the silver barrel for the diagonal might be stuffed into the barlow lens that you have.

Opticron Tiaga 8x25 - Very bright for their limited apeture. Sharp too.

Zeiss Jenoptik 8x30 - I seem to have two pairs of these now.

Russian Komz / Baigish 8x30 - Zeiss copy from the USSR (as was). Sharp, rugged and low cost.

Swarovski Habicht Tirol 8x30 - Probably 50 years old. Battered but very sharp. Very light as well.

Boots Fleet 7x35 wide angle - decent Japan optics. 11 degree field.

Helios Nature Sport Plus 8x40 - nice day to day birding binoculars.

Helios nature Sport Plus 10x50 - as above. Pleasant to hold and use.

Opticron Vega II 8x56 - Japanese made but not out of the ordinary. Competent performers and good for travel because of decent light grasp with light weight.

Opticron Oregon 11x70 LER ZWCF - Japanese made and much better than the current Chinese 11x70's in my opinion. The largest binoculars I own and quite easy to hand hold.

The diagonal should look like this:

Hello and welcome to the forum.

This link should be the instruction manual that covers your scope:

Celestron1510UsersManual393336.199887065.pdf

Feel free to ask questions if things are still unclear.

9 minutes ago, turboscrew said:

I'd still be interested on how the barlowed laser method works - optically.

 

There is a section in this piece by Howie Glatter titled "BARLOWED LASER PRIMARY ADJUSTMENT" which goes into the optical principles:

http://www.collimator.com/collimation

Hello and welcome to the forum

For balcony observing a short tubed scope would be desirable I would think.

Something like a maksutov-cassegrain perhaps ?

These show no false colour and "refractor like" views in a compact package. For example:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-127-synscan-az-goto.html

7 minutes ago, Stu said:

John, you should look into a Herschel wedge for your scope, it will give you better views of granulation and generally more contrast and detail. The views I was getting today were wonderful, not often that the seeing is that good.

I agree. Even though I don't do a lot of solar observing, even I found a noticeable step up when I moved from a Baader film filter (Kendrick) to the Lunt Herschel Wedge.

12 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

I’ve got on order a Vixen 4 mm SLV, however the delivery time has gone out to 30-40 days the same as a HR planetary 3.4 mm. One reason to go with the SLV was 20 mm eye relief and deliver of 7 days.

Other options are 4 mm versions of:

Tele Vue Delite 62º Eyepieces

Takahashi TOE Eyepieces

Is the planetary HR that much better then the others, worth the wait? This I imagine is the last opportunity to aquire them new?

 

From what I've read, the Vixen HR's are very close to the best planetary eyepieces that you can get and in the same league as the Zeiss ZAO's, TMB Supermonocentric's, Pentax XO's.

The Takahashi TOE's and Tele Vue Delite's are excellent but just a step down in terms of outright planetary performance. The Vixen SLV's (which I have used and reported on) a small step down again. Still very competent though.

The very best mentioned above are out of production and practically impossible to acquire now at any price. The Vixen HR could well be in a similar situation soon so picking one or two up while they can be got and at a reasonable cost makes sense if you are looking for that type of eyepiece.

These eyepieces have been branded many different ways since I first saw the as Astro Tech Paradigm's 11 years ago:

https://www.cloudynights.com/articles/cat/cn-reports/eyepiece-reports/first-look-astro-tech-paradigm-eyepieces-r1845

Barsta, who make them, had their own brand name, originally the BST Explorer's and then changed to Starguider's when, I believe, they were told that another manufacturer had claimed the Explorer name was theirs.

It maybe that Astro Essentials is a branding that FLO have specified ?

If you order enough you can have the branding you like printed on them.

At least Barsta didn't use the branding "Barsta RD's" 

Nice reports folks

Very large storm clouds building over here currently - I'm not going to risk putting a scope out

34 minutes ago, nikkoppernigk said:

Sorry to bother, but what do you think about this model? https://www.olx.ua/obyavlenie/teleskop-sky-watcher-bk-mak102azgt-synscan-IDIRwze.html
Is this goto mount ok? I think I could buy a AZ3 mount to observe without the goto mount (I've heard they can't be moved without a power supply)

A few things bother me about the photos of that scope. The diagonal is missing it's eyepiece tube which seems to be attached to an eyepiece in another photo. The finder scope bracket is on backwards.

I wonder if the seller knows much about the scope he / she is selling ?

If the GOTO is not working properly, they might not be aware of it ?

1 minute ago, popeye85 said:

....Half the point of stargazing is escaping modern technology!!

3 hours ago, Andy38416 said:

... This hobby can be such a money pit if you let it....

 

It's been more like an open cast mine with me