soojooko

Maybe try having RA in home position and do a guiding test on a random bit of sky? Looking at your image, that's a lot of unbalanced weight on the left side of the tripod. Comparing the error in this position to RA home position might give you some insights as to whether balancing is affecting your RMS.

Cheers. I really cant get used to seeing such a lump of a scope on a tiny mount like that! Regards your RA error - what was the RA angle when you tested? Closer to home position, or a side heavy 90 degrees like in your image?

Hey Elp. Thanks for sharing your findings with the HEM15. Im also a bit surprised by the RA error. I would love to see a picture of your rig - if at all possible? No worries if not.

Apologies for resurrecting this thread again! @Skyline The claimed 2.5kg OTA weight seems really high. I can't help but think this is not correct. Have you weighed the telescope at all, and if so what did you find?

I'm going to be in the market for a 60-62mm refractor in a few weeks - to mount on my Star Adventurer. These three have caught my eye: RVO Horizon 60ED Altair 60 EDF Skywatcher Evolux 62ED Both the RVO and Altair seem literally identical specs wise. Both are hand picked with claims of 0.95 Strehl or higher. Both have a dedicated flattener for around £100 extra. Right now - I cant see the reason to spend an extra £100 on the Altair. All I seem to get for the extra money is the handle bar + the Altair name which may be a better investment if I sell down the line. As far as the Evolux goes - I can't find much info about the glass it uses. And the claimed tube weight of 2.5kg is too much for the Star Adventurer. Although I doubt the OTA weighs this much - I cant see any evidence to back this up. Basically, theres too many unknowns so I'm drawn towards the RVO or ALtair. So, anybody with experience with any of these telescopes? Any differences between the RVO and Altiar I'm unaware of? And if anybody owns the Evolux 62ED, can you confirm the OTA weight? Thanks for reading.

That's some great info there. Thank you so much. I never really considered what you are saying: cropping my image from 5000px wide to 1000px gives me the same FOV as using a 5x barlow - except without slowing down the scope. I think I can live with sacrificing resolution to get brighter subs.

To be honest, ive no real interest in planets. Im a DSO type person. However, im finding myself wanting to ( attempt to ) image some of the smaller DSO, such as the whirlpool or sunflower galaxies. I don't really have the money to invest in a new rig. I'm currently using a Star Adventurer, so I can only use a small refractor. But I understand that making my scope really slow wont help me as I'll need to take absurdly long subs. Maybe its just not possible without moving to a bigger mount and telescope?

This has been suggested a few times but I didnt understand. Its only just clicked what you guys are saying! Yes - it is quite simple. And yes - I had a massive Doh! moment. I appreciate that 5x might be a bit extreme. I wanted to get an idea of the extreme ends of magnification. Would you say that it is similarly impractical to use a high-ish powered eyepiece ( 8mm ) and do eyepiece projection?

I already have one of those adapters. Again, I was talking about having an M42 thread at the eyecup end of the barlow, not the barrel end. For example, see here: You can see the M24 thread at the eyecup end. I was just wondering why there are no 5x barlows with this thread. I don't have the gear yet. Just figuring things out. I already have an imaging setup, with a DSLR and some lens. Im considering a small refractor: 50-60mm aperture with a focal length of around 250-350. I was checking out the different FOV when using barlows and was curious if a 5x could work. But without the M42 thread, its not possible as far as I can see.

Thanks for the reply. I was talking about having an M42 thread at the eyecup end of the barlow. Basically, so it can sit between a refractor and a DSLR.

Hi. I have a couple of 2x barlows that come with a M42 thread for direct connection to my DSLR via T-ring. They both work well enough when connected like this. I've noticed there are several cheap 5x barlows what also have the M42 thread - but none of the higher quality 5x barlows come threaded. Is there a reason for this as far as anybody knows? If not - are there any good 5x barlows that come with a M42 thread? Thanks

Hi. I got hold of a Star Adventurer. I plan to use it with a DSLR and Lens/small refractor. I don't see myself going about 2kg payload. I was on the verge of grabbing the Skywatcher Star Adventurer tripod - which somebody is selling for £40. But I'm not sure whether I should spend a little more money and get a used Manfrotto 055XPROB for around £70. Anybody have any thoughts to share about this? Thanks

Hi all. I've been in 'beginner' status for a good 9 months now, using a basic 130mm F/5 DOB. I've well and truly caught the bug and am ready to upgrade. I've had a lot of joy with the DOB and used it both for visual as well as taking pictures using my smartphone. I know at some point in the future I'll likely invest in a DSLR, but for the foreseeable future I think I'll be happy upgrading to a 150mm Newt on an EQ mount with sidereal tracking. I plan to continue using the scope for visual as well as some smartphone fun. But whatever I choose, I would like it to be reasonably competent at imaging via a smartphone - and hopefully with a DSLR later on. Not looking to go pro. Just scratch my cosmic photo itch. I was about to bite the bullet on a Skywatcher explorer 150p-ds. But then spotted the TS-Photon 6" F/5 : https://www.altairastro.com/ts-photon-6-f5-newtonian-telescope-6358-p.asp The TS sounds like it has a higher quality primary mirror and a good focuser - as well as being geared towards imaging. However, I noticed the secondary mirror is 63mm! This seems absurdly large for a 150mm scope. My concern is that this telescope is very much geared towards imaging and will be very poor when used visually, particularly on planetary viewing. Is this a valid concern? Even though I lean towards getting an imaging scope, I don't want to totally sacrifice the visual side of things. I would be happy with a telescope that's stronger when used to image, but is not terrible for visual observing. Would I be better off with the SW 150P-DS which has a more reasonably sized 52mm secondary? ( still quite large, but this is understandable as the P-DS is an imaging scope ) Thanks for reading.

Thanks. Even though your images are taken using an f/6 - I'm still rather impressed with the sharpness of the GSO to the edge of the view. I can get one new for £35 ( Taiwan sourced ). I'm going to give this some thought.

@Louis D whoa - that's really useful. Thank you. The big surprise for me is the GSO super plossl. That wasn't even on my radar, but looking at your images, its sharpness across the field is really impressive. So much so that I find it hard to believe! Can such a cheap 32mm EP really be that good on fast scopes?