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.


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by johninderby

  1. 7 minutes ago, andrew s said:

    Thanks,  that is the process I had in mind.  Regards Andrew 

    PS just seen a YouTube clip where they used a jubilee clip to cut against to keep it square. Might try that if I can get one big enough.

    Forgot to mention that I had to tap the new holes for the flange mounting screws.

  2. 2 minutes ago, Ibbo! said:

    Looking to get another scope for my wedge.

    My WO132 works fine as it is designed to be used with bino viewers, but at the present it has the CCD on it and I don't really fancy fiddling about swaping over.

    Anybody got a clue on a scope of around 120  -130 mm that would do the job without going under the knife?

    Think this would work well and has a great focuser.


  3. 26 minutes ago, andrew s said:

    How much did you remove? Any advice on the best way to do it?

    Just got mine and want to use a Herschel wedge with it.

    Regards Andrew 

    Took 20mm off. Used masking tape to mark off the amount of the cut then used a junior hacksaw to cut slowly around the tube. Then wrapped a piece of paper around the tube held together with tape to to make a collar which could then be used to show how square the tube had been cut. Then a bit of fiddly sanding to square up the cut. Then I enlarged the holes in the flange by a mm to allow a bit of adjustent to collimate using a laser. Printed out a target to fit the objective.

    Of course you might not have to enlarge the holes in the flange if collimation is OK as is.


    • Like 1

  4. Don’t really like those light duty EQ mounts like the Starquest.

    Either of the others would be very good. Just depends on if you want GOTO or manual mount. The manual alt-az takes no time to set up and you can use it right away. On the other hand GOTO is useful but takes afew minutes to set up and requires power, either batteries or an AC poweradapter.

  5. On the moon and planets the mak will give very nice sharp views. The 150 will show a bit more detail as it has a bigger aperture.. The mak is really best on the moon and planets wheras the 150 is more of an all round scope that does well on the moon and planets but also good on DSOs.

    The mak should never need colimating whereas the 150 being a newtonian will need collimating which will need doing occasionaly.Also the mak is so much smaller.

    • Like 1

  6. Welcome to the forum. 

    One thing you will soon learn is no one scope does it all. You WILL end up with more than one eventually. 🙂

    The mak is extremly compact and lightweight and can be used on an AZ-GTi  goto mount or a manual alt-az mount like the AZ5.



    My little Bresser 100 mak on an AZ-GTi


    • Like 1

  7. Cloud and haze this aft so no white light solar for me. ☁️

    The Baader film is very good and it’s not until you use a wedge that you realise it’s limitations. Well worth the extra cost for the wedge.👍🏻

    Stu.    Have you had a chance to try the ScopeTech with a wedge yet?

  8. Found this on a French website.

    This is a 1.5mm thick spacer to fit the Baader SteelTrack NT for Newton on small diameter tubes.This spacer allows you to adapt the Newton plate supplied with the BDS-NT to your optical tube if its small diameter does not allow it.It measures 110 x 12 x 1.5 mm (length x width x height). It is only suitable for the BDS-NT Diamond Steeltrack focuser for Newton telescope.

    It is normally included (four pieces) in the scope of delivery of the BDS-NT.


    Thickness (mm): 1.5

    Sold individually!

    Adaptable for Baader Diamond SteelTrack BDS-NT


    • Thanks 1

  9. Was about to mention the lack of photos of the optics myself. When someone selling a scope seems to know so little about it worries me as how would they know if it was working OK. Cheap enough though that you could throw the mount away as long as the OTA is a good one.

    Definately wouldn’t buy until you have a chance to examine the OTA.


    • Like 1

  10. For visual the coma corrector isn’t needed, or at least I’ve nerer needed one. Some people seem to find one useful but many don’t.

    And what sort of budget?

    I find for higher power observing a 5mm, 7mm work well on the moon and planets and the most used overall is my 16mm eyepiece. For lower power something in the 30mm range works well. For nights of good seeing my Nagler 3-6 zoom is handy. Of course all depends on what you will be observing.

  11. Yes second hand 8” Classical Cassegrains are very rare.The 6” version is fairy easy to find second hand  but no one seems to want to let go of their 8”. 🙂

    The CC also has a fixed primary mirror and a refractor type crayford focuser. I find it will take higher magification than the 180 with more contrast and resolution.  The lack of dew problems and quicker cooldown are a very nice advantage. Great build quality as well.🙂


    • Like 1

  12. They are the same scope.  There are actually three different threads on the 180mak The original gold one needed an adapter, then the early black one had an oddball size that no one makes an adaptor for.now and the newer black one with the SCT thread. There have been some recent changes in the lettering applied and also now the Schott logo is being removed although they still use schott glass.

    So if you are thinking of buying a used black 180 find out what thread it has on the back. The SCT thread is about 50mm  in dia.

    Used to have a 180mak and really liked it although have now upgraded to a Classical Cassegrain 8”



  13. Woke up about 4:00 this morning looked outside and could see the moon. So set the scope up and opened one of the bedroom windows. The  outside temp wasn't much different to the inside temp. Some light clouds around and seeing wasn’t that stable but no real problems. 

    Spent about half an hour observing and trying different eyepieces and found the 16mm Nirvana gave the best views. Nice and sharp contrasty images. The 7mm Nirvana did show more detail but image was softer but should be ideal with better seeing. The Nagler 3-6 zoom was definately too much in this f/14 scope. Not a surprise.😁

    I was using the Baader neodymium filter which is my favourite filter but had picked up one of the cheapie Solomark Moon & Skyglow filters to see if an £8.95 filter could be any good. Well the Solomark filter was actually not too bad. Image was brighter than the Baader and not as much contrast but gave a nice neutral grey image. Would definately recommend the filter if you are looking for a cheap alternative to the Baader. 👍🏻

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1
  • Create New...

Important Information

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