Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_comet_46p_winners.thumb.jpg.b3d48fd93cbd17bff31f578b27cc6f0d.jpg

kirkster501

Members
  • Content Count

    4,813
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

kirkster501 last won the day on April 30 2018

kirkster501 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,229 Excellent

About kirkster501

  • Rank
    Red Dwarf

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://stevesastro.blogspot.co.uk

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    INTERESTS AND EXPERTISE
    My Children, Cycling, Listening, Thinking, Counselling, Cancer patient care, Conversation, Science, Astronomy, Computers, Karate, Piano (grade 3), Self Defense Expert, DIY, Bonsai trees, Travel and Holidays
  • Location
    Radcliffe On Trent, Nottingham
  1. Sorry for slight thread hijack but does the title thread reflect this special sketch? So funny...
  2. It is what it is and for mono we have to pay more. Nothing we can do about it. But it is a rip-off never the less IMO. Stick an "astronomy" label on pretty much anything and you can double the price because enthusiasts will pay that price.
  3. Not sure I agree Gina. I don’t think the production cost differential is anything like as much as they’d like us to believe. They are happy to perpetrate this myth of higher production costs. We were ripped off like this when CDs and DVDs were introduced. The quality of them required higher production costs we were told. It was proven to be a marketing rip off and there was no such difference. Of course, FLO and other dealers only pass their higher buy price from the manufacturers on to us so it’s not their fault.
  4. Unless you can get clear skies to make the most of the aperture you'll be largely disappointed in what a bigger scope can do on Deep sky objects vs the practicality of wheeling it out. I have had magnificent views through the 8" Dob we had in Bortle 1/2 skies. It was breathtaking. I cannot even see the same objects in a 14" scope in Bortle 5 where I live. It's like saying a bigger engine is always better. To a point that's true. But don't forget affordably and practicality as well. Scope size increases HUGELY the bigger they get. A 12" Dob is quite a beast whereas a 8" can be lost in a corner behind the rocking chair. "But it's only 4" bigger you say. Sure. But physically it is MUCH bigger than that 4" increase in aperture might suggest. Just sayin'.....
  5. Marketing my friend - because astronomy users with deep pockets *are prepared to pay* for them. Production costs have little to do with retail costs. The difference in manufacturing costs will be almost nothing.
  6. Yep. I'd highly recommend the 7 port one though. Seriously, the ports get consumed rapidly with guiders, focusers and the like.
  7. Highly recommend the Startech ones. They are not cheap but they are superb. Don't cheap out on this item is my advice, it will save you untold frustration.
  8. Agreed. As per my lunar thread seeing was fabulous in Nottingham and could bare very high magnification.
  9. Thanks, and yes it is. Only bought it off an SGL ad a month ago. It is magnificent. I bought it principally for lunar/planetary visual and photography. But also some deep sky. I am still learning to use it. The FoV is small though with Nagler 12mm and focusing can cause slight wobble for two or three seconds. Damian Peach talks about this with long FL SCT scopes. So I need a motorised focuser ideally so that I do not have to touch the scope physically when focusing.
  10. Well said and, at the end of the day, that is all that matters. That *you* are happy. As I said in another thread, don't forget visual on The Moon. Our nearest celestial body and we curse at it! She is a wonderful thing to view and photograph. I spent 90 mins visual on the Moon last night, it was fabulous. No dark skies needed and streetlights do not effect.
  11. I can highly recommend the Baader wedge. Works a treat with my TEC140.
  12. I have the AstroPhysics CCDT67 for my 14" ACF. I have yet to try this reducer since I bought it off of ABS two weeks ago due to other projects and cloud out. Others have used this same reducer on the ACF 10" scope successfully. I can't think why the 14" should be any different so I have taken a punt on it. https://astrojolo.com/gears/acf-10-and-ccdt67-telecompressor/
  13. Looking at the Apollo 11 landing area and I could clearly see the Armstrong, Aldrin and Collins craters, with the Nagler 12mm = x300. Also spent some time observing Taurus-Littrow region of Apollo 17. A project idea I have is to image all Apollo landing sites in fine detail. Not often can use x300 magnification in my experience.
  14. Hello all, Used my recently acquired Meade 14” SCT ACF with my 12mm and 17mm Naglers tonight. Got the scope well collimated and at ambient. I have never seen such spectacular lunar views. Crystal clear, almost as if I were in orbit. The Apenines were sharp and leaped out. Craters like Copernicus full of fine detail and colour. wonderful. Still mesmerised by it. Had to come in since up for work at 5am but looking forward to the next session!
  15. Cool, many thanks. I will investigate.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.