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.

Welcome to Stargazers Lounge

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customise your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements




Advanced Members
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2,213 Excellent


About Scooot

  • Rank
    Brown Dwarf
  • Birthday 18/05/59

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Billericay, Essex

Recent Profile Visitors

4,866 profile views
  1. Update. Now checked and they did return an OIII filter, the filter itself is clearly marked and the front of the box is labelled Lumicon LF3045 Oxygen III Filter. So it's just the reverse of the box that seems to have HB filter transmission details on it for some reason.
  2. Nope, it was meant to be an OIII, so I guess I've been tricked, or diddled, maybe a genuine mistake. Today is the first time I've looked at the box, and I don't use it very much. Unless of course it's just the box that's wrong? Ps i'm not at home to look at the moment but I think from memory the filter itself is marked as oxygen III, so I reckon it's just been sent back in the wrong box. I only have two filters and the other is an astronomic Uhc. another edit. Thanks for pointing it out Gerry, I had no idea it was HB filter box until you mentioned it, not even when it was staring me in the face this morning I hope I at least have the right filter.
  3. I bought my 2" o111 in 2014 but they exchanged it in March 2016 because of a fault with its fitting, ( there's a thread about it on here somewhere.) This is the one I received back. I presume it's still the older version?
  4. That's very sad news.
  5. Yes, that's the one, the pattern on the grip of mine is slightly different but everything else is the same. It's quite old. It was 1/400 at f5.6. I was on The Oriana so I hand held it, and it's slightly cropped. For visual I was using my binoculars with Kendrick filters, except during totality. I highly recommend filtered binoculars, the views were amazing leading up to totality and afterwards.
  6. I took this in the Faroe Islands with my canon 450 and 55-200mm zoom at 190mm.
  7. Yes it's a great help thanks . strangely enough I read it yesterday after another attempt to find some information from google. Don't know why I couldn't find it on google before I started the thread but I do know how to read the Clock now.
  8. Wonderful images.
  9. I thought if it was 129 the marker would have been much near the 13. I agree the TV doesn't compare. Thanks again for your help.
  10. Ah got it so 119 deg 47 mins 35 secs got there in the end. Thanks for everyone's input. Mr Flamsteed was a clever old soul. It's a fascinating timepiece considering it was made in 1691.
  11. Now I have a better grasp I wonder whether it's reading 119 degrees 10 minutes 42 seconds On the big dial a complete resolution is 10 degrees, each little interval being 1/6 degree or 10 minutes. The hand is clearly 1 notch past the 9, so 10 minutes past the 9. The marker in the window showing 11,12,13 is almost on the 12, travelling between the 11 & 12 making it 110 degrees plus. The little hand showing arc seconds, the dial marked in ten 6 second intervals, the hand being on the 7 giving 42 seconds. How does this sound?
  12. Yes 14:15 BST. I didn't change my location to Greenwich and used Sky Safari to go back in time to look up the local sidereal time so my 6:15 is only approximate.
  13. Thank you, I'm sure your not going mad I doubt they reset it regularly. Still not quite sure how to read it correctly. The 12 shows 120 degrees, the big hand pointing just past the 9 showing the extra 9 degrees? Is that correct? So how do I read 47 minutes 35 seconds from the smaller dial. It Looks to me is if the little hand is pointing just under 3/4 round. Sorry for being a bit slow
  14. Ah, so the clock is reading 120 degrees something? From memory the smaller hand was turning quickly, presumably then impacting on the larger dial. I wasn't there long enough to take note of the bigger hand moving much.
  15. Thanks Elliot, so what's the distant object, the Sun? I took the pics yesterday at 14:15. At this time the correct local sidereal time was 06:15. The Clock, unless I'm misreading it, only shows a maximum of 10 hours. I'm guessing it's not correct, although it was working.