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_celestial_motion.thumb.jpg.a9e9349c45f96ed7928eb32f1baf76ed.jpg

Alfian

Members
  • Content Count

    1,857
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,907 Excellent

About Alfian

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Astronomy, Walking, MotoGP, WWII aircraft history.
  • Location
    West Yorkshire
  1. It really is worth reading the small print as to what courier insurance covers and indeed whether they will deal with optical equipment in the first place. When I came to sell and ship a scope a while back I came to realise that for most of the couriers I got a quote from the insurance was worthless and the one that seemed ok would have been prohibitively expensive. As to the couriers mentioned after unfortunate experiences I would never use them.
  2. Just thinking about the last line of the OP in terms of what makes us happy. Its made me think back to many years ago to when I was really big into hifi getting ever better equipment but there came a point when I spent more time listening out for the imperfections in the reproduction than actually enjoying the music. Effectively the tail was wagging the dog. I stepped "back" to something simpler and started to get back into the music. I've had a couple of pefectly good very usable scopes but somehow did not do it for me, whereas I have what might be deemed as a technically lesser scope that I find somehow more satisfying to use (when I can) - it hits the spot. I'm not suggesting for one moment that upgrading, or whatever, to something better or more capable is wrong just that just maybe its not necessary for an agreeable level of satisfaction. What is an agreeable level to one however is of course different to another and certainly it doesn't stop me looking and wondering but the question of where our hearts lie is a good question to ask.
  3. To pick up on and reinforce Peters point, when I find myself looking at bigger and/or better astro'equipment, when either I'm ashamedly not or can't use what I have, I try to remind myself of what Galileo used so influentially. To misquote somebody, serious is as serious does.
  4. WITHDRAWN FROM SALE. Mods please remove. Thanks.
  5. These are still for sale if anyone is interested.
  6. That's a very nice image given its just a smartphone. Hope for us all!
  7. I've had the Opticron iMagic 7x50s for a while and also have the iMagic 10x42s. I've never had the steadiest of hands but with age I've found hand holding binoculars more frustrating and with the 10x42s I've needed to have arms well braced to get a satisfying image. With the imagic 7x50s at such a bargain price it was too much to resist and I was hoping they would work better for me. I was aware that with my eyes the 7x50s would function closer to 7x40s. The 10x42s and 7x50s are virtually identical in build apart from the scale and size of the optics. The build quality is excellent, eg no rocking movement in the bridge. Optics are very nice with good coatings, and ergonomically they feel nice in the hands although of course the 7x50s are larger. They come with a good strong carrying case and the usual adequate lens caps and rain guard eyepiece covers. The 7x50s have a stiffer focuser action than the 10x42s but this is not an issue, indeed once focused it stays put! A feature of both binos is that for their given optics (like Pentax PCFs) they have a narrower field of view than many other binoculars such as Nikon Action Ex series. This means that the eyepiece afov is narrower but I for one would prefer a better quality narrow field eyepiece than a poorer wide field item at this price point. In practice this works out that much (but not quite all) of the field of view in these two binoculars is very nice in terms of being usably sharp. I found the 7x50s very slightly better in this respect , only the very edge is the image falling off. Focusing also has more of that snap-to quality about it too. In both binoculars there is some and I mean just a suggestion of stray light when viewing objects near to a bright moon but apart from that there is nothing to grumble about and certainly not at this price. I've found the 7x50s, for me, are easier to use but do lament the loss of the higher power but as I can't justify to myself the cost of buying a Canon IS binocular its a compromise I'll have to live with. I should point out that I have some 15x70s which I tripod mount so I'm in no way badly off! Its worth adding that 7x50s make for an excellent terrestrial bino too and they come with a 30 years warranty.
  8. I've just realised that its my "old" 35mm EP that we are taling about! Glad its seeing good service. Tripod wise, I've used various mounts with both aluminium and steel tripods and without question the steel legs make a big difference when using anything other than a lightweight scope. However given that the AZ3 is part of the deal, there is no harm in using it and see how it works out.
  9. The ST120 is noticeably bulkier than the 102 but will be fine on the AZ4. Dont know about the AZ5. The Aero 35mm is a nice EP but it will give a 7mm exit pupil at F5. May be OK with nice dark skies and younger eyes than I have, just something to be aware of.
  10. My son drives big (300 + miles) distances fairly regularly but its not something I would consider these days. This is down to traffic density, delays and significantly, having to have eyes in the back of my head , to cope with the bad mannered crazy driving that is frequently encountered. A couple of hundred miles is about my limit and that is with a break for lunch! Driving 200 miles to look at a potential buy but with the possibility of maybe not being convinced it being 100% is not something I'd consider lightly.
  11. Great images Paul, love the first one really crisp and contrasty.
  12. Snap! that's the edition I have.
  13. Regarding a 5mm EP if funds will not stretch to an SLV, a very nice EP, then the BST Starguider is a good cheaper alternative.
  14. My first influence into stargazing was via my father who pointed out the more obvious constellation and stars. Although aware of the Sky at Night program and of course of Sir Patrick as the public face of astronomy the program was on after my bed time. After that a school friend who was very definitely a young and enthusiatic astronomer with a proper telescope (and did a convincing Sir Patrick impression!) hooked me into astronomy as a proper interest. Pocket money was saved and the Observers book of astronomy was purchased and I still have it. I grew up with the space race and particularly the Apollo program and with that came an appreciation of Sir Patricks great passion for astronomy and particularly the moon. With later teenage years came other interests and distractions but after a long long gap the astronomy bug bit me again and with that Sky at Night became compulsory and a full appreciation of just what a key roll he has played in the astro community.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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