bingevader

That sounds like the Autostar, rather than the ‘scope then. Are you able to update the handset?

Hello, have you had the ‘scope long? If there any whirring of motors? If you then press the cursor keys, I’m assuming nothing happens. If you loosen the locking mechanisms, can you slew the ‘scope around? If it finished up against one of the stops, it might be what’s causing the problem. I have an ETX90 and stripped it down when I had a problem without much trouble. Weasner’s Might ETX Site is still live, though inactive. It is a mine of useful info. 😊

29 minutes ago, John said:

I don't think the perpetrator is typical of the majority of Somerset folk, thankfully 🙄

We are generally quite normal and well behaved down here in the SW 🙂

But not much good a mowing the grass, judging by that scythe.

As a 'finder' I've had no problem using mine to star hop to the Vale before popping in the other EP with the filter.

Still got my 32mm Panaview.

Yep, soft round the edges, always was, always will be.

If your budget will stretch to the UFF, then go for it.

I've never been disappointed with the Panaview, no nostalgia here.

But then I've never bought an EP as expensive as the UFF!

Sorry, picture's a bit huge!

On my 8" dob (and the 10" that this picture is from), I have a cover that fits the top of the tube.

The offset is a hole covered by a cap (top left) that reduces the diameter of the 'scope and is offset from the centre to avoid the 2° mirror.

You'll basically be replicating this, but with a cover that fits over the diameter of the tube and with a smaller, offset, hole covered with the solar film.

As I said above, I'd make it bigger than the one in the picture, to fill the space between the spider vanes.

The one I've made for my 8" dob, to cover the hole in the cover is too small really.

The full size ones I've made for my 90mm and a 150mm in school are much better.

Made a few of these now, you shouldn't need a technical drawing, no technical skills here!

The above instructions are good.

If you make the offset diameter just smaller than the space between the spider vanes, as Louis D says, you should only need an A4 sheet of film, which would be quite a saving.

And I thought it meant used but not owned!

You lot are single-handedly keeping the second hand market alive and kicking.

As I haven't sold any, I'll answer my own question.

We use 5 in school, only two are mine. 😎

I only have two to start with and being a rather irritating individual, I'd first have to know why I have to get rid of one?

They're both rather old and no longer worth much, so it wouldn't be for financial reasons.

However, just to play the game, although the etx90 is the travel 'scope and the easiest to set up for solar, it's the 8" dob that I've seen the most through and draws the biggest queue at the school observing sessions.

On 20/02/2024 at 14:54, Tiny Clanger said:

I doubt many astronomy societies would accept any under 16's attendance without an accompanying parent, the safeguarding regulations, and requirement for DBS checks of volunteers working with children, or vulnerable adults, are rightly quite tough.

Rightly so, but sadly so nowadays.

Way, way back, many centuries ago, my brother, two friends and I used to attend Cardiff Astronomical Society in our teens. Parents dropped us off and picked us up. No nonsense. Very fond memories. Excellent Society.

On 20/02/2024 at 15:25, Wanderers said:

It blends nicely with my ear hair!

Seriously! Plaited? Or do you use a clip or bobble?

Well done!

Couple of cups of tea and you will be able to add the rings to your image.  

23 hours ago, Sunshine said:

Amateur astronomer rings nice, though some have referred to me as an amateur astrologer which annoys me to no end. 😁

When the children in school say, "But what's the difference?!"

I just say, "One is science, the other is made up."  

4 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

The activity of astronomy is a broad church so no single form of looking can embrace it all - which is good.

My point about the small PN at long focal length is simply that you won't find it by 'gazing,' you will find it only through some studious looking.

Olly

Yes, but once you've found it......!!! 

14 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

Without going to the OED, I would suggest that gaze has clear connotations which include:

Looking while lost in reverie.  He gazed into her eyes. We can safely say that this is not an optician going about his trade. Or he gazed at the blackboard.  This will not endear him to the teacher.

Looking with wistful adoration.  I used to look at my colleague Sue like that. (I'm using the name Sue because... that was her name.)

But, if you are an 'astronomer' and have ceased to do the bottom two, I'd suggest you find a different job. 🤔

To use your analogy, if an optician has lost sight of the person whose eyes they are looking into then, personally, I'd find a different optician.

And as for Sue, if you don't see a low magnitude PN located outside the plane of the Milky Way in a Dob of 3M focal length, in even vaguely the same way, then that's a bit sad, sorry. 😢

I suppose it's another wonder of this splendid forum!

We've professionals and non professionals alike.

I'm very much a stargazer, looking up in awe and hoping the sky will be clear for the next shooting star shower!

I get embarrassed if I'm referred to as even an amateur astronomer.

I know what hard work goes into being a proper astronomer.

Hi Don,

Have I got my terminology the wrong way round then?

I was thinking short FL = Wide FOV?

Apologies for the confusion if I have.

Maybe have a play first, and see if you think you are missing anything?

Ah, she/you are worried about the expensive EPs.

None of my EPs were terribly expensive, and they all work well in my 8" dob.

Is it the 1200mm?

If so, I find the 6mm is super on the best nights, but if the sky isn't quite there, then I need to drop back a couple of mm.

You might get away with it at Bortle 3, if your skies are still, as well as clear.

Is she's not using the Nagler either!?  Then something in the middle would be good for the the DSOs.

I like the 2° EPs for framing DSOs at shorter FLs and for the drift time at the longer FLs.

On 06/12/2023 at 10:49, phantomgod_06 said:

yeah i got the moon quite sharp in my eyepiece

Excellent! And so, if the moon is also slap bang in the middle of the finderscope, you should be able to find Jupiter.

We were out in school the week before last and found Jupiter and it's 4 moons in 'scope ranging from 90mm to 200m.

Should be more than possible in a 127mm.

Have you tried looking at the moon?

Might be worth trying to set up your 'scope on something that's relatively easy to find and focus on.

If you can point the finderscope at the moon and it's slap bag in the middle of the field of view of the eyepiece then you are half way there.

If not, move the 'scope around until the moon is in the middle, then centre the finderscope as people have described above.

If you can up the magnification and do the same again (on a crater or the terminator, where the edge disappears into blackness), then you will should have adjusted the finder enough to find small objects like Jupiter.

10 hours ago, lunator said:

All parents probably have material in their Lagrange  points

That's getting a bit personal, isn't it?

As a parent, I try to keep all my points clean and tidy, thank you very much! 

Just watch your back!

Mine only has to come out of the shed, but I still tend to do it in two parts.

I find, at most, I only need to move my eye to see the whole field of view in an 82° ep.

However, if you needed any further justification for buying low mag, wide fov eye pieces, that would appear to be not too dissimilar in magnification or field of view!

I've found that (if you don't own a filter wheel) swapping between a non filtered and filtered ep of similar mag and fov when locating nebulae makes a world of difference.

Star hop with the one and then swap to the other.

On 12/10/2023 at 12:33, Whistlin Bob said:

Interesting thread. I have the 4mm Nirvana. In my f6 200mm dob, with good seeing, it's ok but a touch soft on planets but spectacular on the moon, sharp right across the fov. Always find this slightly odd, but this has been repeated on several different nights. It's a keeper because of how it performs on the moon. 

I've never had a clear enough night to get up to (or down to? 🤔 up to the mag and down to the fl, I suppose?) 4mm on the planets in my 8" dob. 6mm on a very good night.

However, I would also agree that in the 8" dob, the moon is lovely through the 4mm Nirvana.

No need to apologise, John, the information you posted is still useful for anyone else reading the thread who might be wondering about 2" EPs.

2" EPs certainly aren't always better.

My plossls are probably the clearest and sharpest EPs I have, you just can't fit much in them!

I had the 7mm and still have the 5mm X-Cel LX EPs and they were very decent EPs in my 'scopes.