John

Hi and welcome to the forum.

Generally I think its best to keep the counterweight close to the body of the mount. On the end of a long counterweight shaft there is more likely hood of vibrations.

1 minute ago, FLO said:

@AliP80 Please don't think you have to mod' a Sky-Watcher Skyliner 200p.  Many owners enjoy modding a scope to enhance performance, but most don't. 

FWIW my favourite mod for a traditional non-motorised Sky-Watcher Dobsonian was to fit several large washers - cut from a plastic milk carton - around the central bolt to achieve silky smooth stiction. I also recommend at some point you upgrade the 10mm eyepiece, because the one included is pants! 

I agree with others here who say the Dobsonian is a better buy than the 130M/EQ2. 

HTH, 

Steve 

I agree. I bought a Skywatcher 200P dobsonian (from First Light Optics as it happens) a few years back and it worked well straight out of the box. Once of the best scopes that I've owned in fact

Sometimes items that are out of stock are still listed but at lowered prices. I think its a ploy used to make competitors look uncompetative.

The 34mm 72 degree Svbony eyepiece looks much like the William Optics SWAN 33mm 72 degree doesn't it. I wonder if they are the same item optically ?

I used to use an Astrozap shroud with my Meade Lightbridge 12 inch. It worked well with that scope and was more or less essential with the amount of ambient lighting that I had around my observing site.  Not sure if Astrozap do one that would fit your dob though Piero ?

For many there is no substitute for seeing something with your own eye.

Anyone can look at a fine image taken with a powerful scope but those moments where its you, the scope and the target object, even if it's a little indistinct, are very intimate and precious IMHO and can leave a lasting mark on the mind

18 minutes ago, Littleguy80 said:

Thank John. Are you able to see any cloud detail on Venus without a filter? Perhaps a similar experience to Mike. Once you’ve seen it with a filter it becomes easier to see without?

Nothing solid Neil. I've only ever seen vague contrast variations when observing Venus. They might have indeed been cloud features but they were so vague that I've not felt confident that they represent anything worth noting. Maybe I've been seeing something all along and not realised it ?

Personally I have a level at which I need to be sure that I'm actually seeing something to feel that I've actually seen it, if that makes any sense. None of the vague shadings and brightness variations that I've seen on Venus has convinced me of that, as yet. I've had times when I've felt close though !

Hi and welcome to the forum from the northern end of the county !

I've tried lots of different filters for planetary observing over the years including various colours, UHC, H-Beta, O-III, polarised and the rather expensive Tele Vue Planetary filter (not in production now). For me, I didn't see any improvements in the visibility of planetary features during those trials. The Tele Vue filter (which gave a rather "bubble gum pink" tone to everything) did initilly appear to enhance the contrast of the more obvious features of Jupiter but this was at the expense of the visibility more subtle features and it was the latter that I was after of course !

So these days I don't use planetary filters. I do try and observe the planets when there is still some daylight left in the sky though. I've found that really does make a difference to surface detail and some of my best views of Jupiter, Saturn, Mars and Venus have come under such conditions.

Observing the target planet when its high in the sky also makes quite a bit of difference but that has been difficult lately without moving ones observing site quite a bit further south.

Fortunately colour filters are relatively low cost things so its possible to try for yourself without risking too much capital

SCS Astro were a retailer based in Wellington, Somerset, UK. They closed their operation down a couple of years back. For a while they marketed 80mm and 90mm equatorially mounted refractors under their own branding very much like the Skywatcher Evostar 80mm and 90mm scopes and mounted on an EQ-2 style mounting.

So @knobby's link is as close as you can get today.

Here is a link to an instruction manual for the Skywatcher scope much of which should be relevant to the SCS Astro Voyager 90:

https://www.apm-telescopes.de/media/manuals/skywatcher/en/6.pdf

And here is a link to a video showing how to setup a scope on this type of mount, which should also help:

Feel free to post any further questions you have on using the scope and I'm sure we can help

On 08/03/2020 at 11:57, Piero said:

As a side note, this is NOT aperture fever in my opinion though, but simply the fact that you want a more capable telescope which is still within portability, storage, weight, etc. Aperture fever is when someone has NOT yet explore the potential of his/her own telescope (generally 150-300mm) and decides to upgrade thinking that the larger instrument will show what the current smaller telescope is not. This can lead to disappointment though.

A fair and valid point Piero but I would venture to say that the majority of observers here would be guilty of moving up in aperture before they have fully explored the capability of their existing scope. Same goes for eyepieces I reckon

I know that you graduated carefully and thoughtfully from small apertures though and pushed your early scopes much further than most do

59 minutes ago, Philip R said:

Hi @Skyline_UK and welcome to SGL.

A site worth checking out is: https://www.heavens-above.com/

 

Thats a great site. Create a login (free) and specify your location and it will tell you all about what is passing over, the timing and the track across the sky. Has info on comets and other stuff too !

Good to see a manufacturer giving hands on practical advice though

Ah, the old "wooden stick" ploy

Personally I feel that the diminishing returns on larger apertures are in terms of portability / ease of set up rather than performance, especially where deep sky objects are the target. Aperture really is "the king" there but scope weights and size seems to take a big jump once 10 inches of aperture are exceeded.

@merlin100: thanks for the translation.

@Marc jacobs: welcome to the forum but please could you make all posts in English as per the rules of the forum ?

Thanks.

1 hour ago, merlin100 said:

At what point would I need to start upgrading to 2 inch EP's? Would that usually be from 150mm upwards, depending on the make and model?

2 inch eyepieces give you a wider field of view, nothing more in optical quality terms.

I use them in small scopes when I want a large field of view. For medium and high magnifications I use 1.25 inch eyepieces even with my 12 inch aperture scope.

The 31mm Nagler is a 2 inch giant - here in my 102mm refractor where it shows 3.8 degrees of sky:

A 150mm F/5 newtonian can show the planets well. Magnifications of 130x - 230x will prove the most effective for this purpose. 

Many (hundreds) deep sky objects are within the grasp of such a scope as well. Generally lower to medium magnifications are used to observe deep sky objects, eg: 25x - 80x

Decent quality eyepieces can be bought for between £30 and £50 new, less on the used market. A good example of such an eyepiece are the BST Starguider range as sold here by First Light Optics:

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

It is useful to have at least 3 eyepieces to give low, medium and high power magnifications. Many folks end up with quite a few more though !

You might find that an illuminated reticule / red dot type finder is a good addition to the scope. These are zero magnification but appear to project a target against the sky showing just where the scope is pointed. This is a good one and it can sit alongside the optical finder you currently have:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/finders/rigel-quikfinder-compact-reflex-sight.html

Whatever finder you are using, it is vital that it is adjusted so that whatever the finder is centered on is also exactly what the main scope is centered on. This can be done in daylight using a distant target (ie: tree, chimney etc) and a low power eyepiece in the scope.

A good star chart is also essential to help you work out where your target objects are in the sky. There is also the free software Stellarium which shows you what is where and when:

https://stellarium.org/

Some of my best ever views of Saturn came with an older C8 that I used to have. On one memorable Summer evening Saturn was high in the sky (unlike now ) and the views of Saturn using a Tele Vue plossl 8mm (250x) were truly breathtaking and steady as a rock.

It is worth having something that can take you a bit higher than that though, for periods of really good seeing on a suitable target. Something around 7mm (285x) or even 6.5mm (308x) would be good. The Baader Morpheus 6.5mm would be a very nice tool for such use I reckon. The Pentax XW 7mm is also rather nice

My Pentax XW story is a little different. FLO loaned me the 10mm XW and then the 30mm XW a few years back to compare them with the Naglers that I was using back then. Rather to my surprise I found that I slightly preferred the 10mm XW performance to the 9mm Nagler T6 that I had despite the reduction in AFoV. 

What I wanted though, being still a "wide field junkie", was the neutral tone, sharpness and lack of light scatter of the XW's combined with a very large field of view. Unfortunately for my bank balance the Ethos range came along ......

It depends on the tube length as well. This 150mm F/12 refractor weighed 14.5 kg but the long tube meant that the EQ6 was not all that stable even for visual observing. And that was with 3 inch steel tubed tripod legs !

7 minutes ago, Sunshine said:

Thanks, I see you take every opportunity to show off your “king” the 31mm Nagler, its ok my friend I would do the same haha!

Its useful to show scale - I don't actually use the Nagler 31 that much

Powermates are superb - as @JTEC says, practically invisible in the optical path apart from the magnification increase. They can create quite a stack when used with a long eyepiece though !

I agree with Peter (above) - most likely an F/5 with a 750mm focal length.

I think that scope is one of the older Orion Optics ones that uses a single vane secondary support like this ?:

Orion used to have a series called the Europa which yours could well be one of.

It is worth blowing the dust off the mirrors using a manual blower but don't touch the mirror surfaces.

The collimation may need attention if it's not been adjusted for some time.

M31, the Andromeda Galaxy should certainly be visible through the scope but you will need a low power eyepiece and even that wont show the whole thing - it's a big object !

I go for the wider field every time when using my 12 inch dob, personally. I don't find that I need to roll my head to see the 100 degree field but thats not the same for all I realise.

I've had galaxy spotting sessions where the 21mm Ethos is the only eyepiece I've needed. I had the ES 20mm 100 before it but could not resist acquiring the Ethos 21 despite the ES being pretty good itself.

I have some light pollution to contend with which is why the 21 Ethos gets more use than the 31 Nagler. Darker background sky.