Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_annual.thumb.jpg.3fc34f695a81b16210333189a3162ac7.jpg

jimmyjamjoejoe

Members
  • Posts

    1,499
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jimmyjamjoejoe

  1. I have mine the other way, blowing air out the bottom. There really isnt much difference, but having it baffled makes a big difference.
  2. I think i might be onto something... Lots of perfectly timed clear nights while i'm working, and thick cloud on my nights off... Seems to have cured my aperture fever! This whole spate of bad weather started last january when i bought my scope and has turned from just bad luck to downright taunting me. We had several clear nights in the leadup to my 5days off (a day off is a very rare occurance for me). Suddenly, solid cloud until tuesday when i return to work. Maybe i should sell my scope and let you all get back to your hobby.
  3. I carry it out of the house in one piece, but to go in the car i need the base in the boot and the tube in the back.
  4. You just need a t-ring to fit on your camera (these are specific to your make so find one for canons), and a t-adapter for your focuser, then the two just screw together and you're away.
  5. Blurred image, irregular field illumination, there are lots of signs, but i'd definitely check it if the images are blurry.
  6. For that price range you'd do well with a hawke naturetrek 8x42 or 10x50. Those things are crazy sharp. Personally, i prefer an 8x42, even though i'm young and strong, 10x50 is still a bit shakey handheld. I also have the helios naturesport 10x50 wide angle, which as i say are a little more shakey, almost as sharp, but much more emersive. These are better for scanning around freely than actual observing.
  7. That looks like a hacked account. Anyway, the lens is certainly respectable. You'l probably find it performs best in its middle range. I.e. Stopped down to around f8, with decent results at f5.6, CA might creep in above 200mm or so but should be manageable. Worth asking yourself if you REALLY need stabilisation though, since you can get a nicer non stabilised lens for the same money.
  8. I've done it, doesnt change much but makes things more comfortable. Its not so much that the image is TOO bright, obviously your eyes can deal with it, just that the contrast can be improved ever so slightly with a very weak filter.
  9. Fantastic images! I really like the first one, nice moody sky and a hint of green in the tail.
  10. I find star test require a VERY keen eye, and pretty steady conditions (though tbh, you shouldnt be observing without either lol). I use a cheshire before carrying the scope out, then star test once cooled to verify.
  11. Think you can pick up some quantum 4 15x70 for that. If you fancy something more manageable theres always the strathspey marine 10x50...
  12. That the one from ebay with david hinds mirrors? Nice scope, and as others have said, dob mounts are easy.
  13. Most people concentrate on wrapping their feet with 50 layers and yet leave their legs with a single layer of denim and wonder why their feet still get cold. Your extremities are the first to go, no matter how well they're wrapped. Best thing i ever did was to buy some winter fleece lined walking trousers, my feet have never been cold since.
  14. Mine is much the same as the others, camping matt taped together with notches around the spider screws. After a while it deformed feom being stuffed in my car etc, so i reinforced it with a pair of embroidery rings, now it's solid as a rock.
  15. I believe the lightbridges are actually heavier than the skywatchers.
  16. Cant go wrong with a cheshire. Lasers have their uses, collimating in the dark after setting up etc, but they're subject to miscollimation themselves, they also cant help with your secondary.
  17. You dont need a tabletop, when on the floor the eyepiece height works out about right to sit down and view comfortably. The tube is about chest height on me when stood up. The 250 isnt THAT much bigger, infact i think the base might be the same size, so the footprint will be the same, just a wider tube. You will need to collimate ocasionally, but it's really not as tough as it appears when most people try to explain it. My first time took an hour or so, now it takes less than 5mins every time.
  18. Think you might be confused there, dobs can look anywhere. Eq mounts can make it tricky to look certain directions, either by sheer mechanical inability or by leaving the focuser in an awkward place to look through, but to be honest that is so rarely a problem that its a non-issue.
  19. Mind = blown. Also, you left your wibble open.
  20. In general terms dobs and newts are one and the same. However skywatcher for some reason have different focal lengths for their dobs than the eq mounted counterparts. The dob is 1200mm (f6), the eq is 1000mm (f5).
  21. They're the same thing. Dobsonian refers to the mount, not the telescope. The skyliner is a newtonian on a dob mount, as opposed to an eq mount. I can wholeheartedly recommend the dob. Good build quality, decent optics, and will grab a lot more light than your 130. It is rather large though... Assembled, the base is 530mm across and the tube stands (guessing) 1400mm or so tall. Also, dobs arent really any good for photography, so if you wanna try that, a dob is not the way to go.
×
×
  • 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.