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.

bomberbaz

Members
  • Content Count

    2,963
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1,222 Excellent

About bomberbaz

  • Rank
    Brown Dwarf

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Burnley, Lancashire.
  1. Here is a thread from cloudy nights I often refer to for planning trips out. I have always found it very useful and backs up my statement above re: mainly using OIII filter on most dso's. Especially for larger aperture scopes which yours definitely is. I still believe UHC have a place alongside anyone's collection of glass though. Filter Performance
  2. This is out of date but quite helpful http://www.astrosurf.com/buil/filters/curves.htm
  3. As a buy once add on I would agree with John, buy the best and you will never need to change it. I have lumicon OIII and HB although I do use a far cheaper UHC but that's because I tend to use mainly OIII.
  4. Going to find me a real dark site, like real dark (Have a few already that need sounding out) and make fewer but longer sessions to really get the best out of this. Also just purchased a PST so hoping the sun will start to kick out a few spots.
  5. Thanks Gerry. As I posted earlier, I am looking for a super dark site which will be my only dark sky viewing place, I am not going to mess about with half rated skies anymore, it's down heartening and wasteful of good viewing time. The back garden is now relegated to planets and lunar only. ( also for when betelguese goes )
  6. Another option for me a little nearer is the ribblehead viaduct, loads of parking with a beautiful clear southern horizon and the sqm is given as 21.71, that is now top of my list to try out as its less than an hour away too.
  7. When you say nothing is visible, what do you exactly mean. Have you tried aiming it at a tree or other object in the distance (during the daytime) and focused until you get a clear image. This is usually a good way of checking its focusing capabilities. Also, and I know this is obvious but did you take the end cap off the scope?
  8. Just realised the web page I am using has the SQM readings as well, sorry mate but thanks as well. Now I better understand what I am looking at a little more.
  9. you are right in the snaps thing there my friend, but simple snaps with my iPhone using a time lapse app. It takes half decent pics of some brighter dso, milky way etc. Might be able to take some pictures from different sites for comparison purposes.
  10. Just viewing Viaiv, I have been to Galloway once and it sticks in my memory how beautiful inky black the skies were, if they are anything like that I know they will be perfect.
  11. Thanks gentlemen. I think that a recce with perhaps some simple snaps of some brighter dso's (M45, 42, 33, 15 for example) and a use of pair of bins and making notes of the sites all on the same night might be the best option to see whether it's significant enough to warrant going for the slightly darker skies.
  12. First of all, hello guys and long time no see. I have been around just not been commenting as much, hope to get a little more active again going forwards as my circumstances have changed somewhat. I have grown tired of observing from light polluted skies. A bortle 4 site I visit quite a lot has a millicandela measurement of 0.360 mcd/m2 but has had all the lights converted to lcd at the nearby town. There is now a horrible sky glow ruining the horizon. So my intention going forward is to spend less time at these now poor sites, fewer trips but travelling further to much darker sites. Anyway, to the topic title. I realise bortle reading is important, but also that it can vary quite a lot but still remain a same numbered site, in this case 4. I have a few prospective sites for possible observing to examine near to me, one is a confirmed area, three others look positive but need a proper recce. The confirmed site is also bortle 4 as above but the millicandela reading is 0.240 mcd/m2, the unconfirmed sites are all bortle 3 go down to as little as 0.210 mcd/m2. So my question is, how big a difference is the millicandela readings. I really don't get it in technical terms even though I have spent time reading up on it. Obviously a difference of 0.360 (as above) to 0.240 mcd/m2 as at the confirmed site is going to be quite significant. But is 0.240 to 0.210 going to make a huge difference. I know the stock answer is darkest site possible, but the confirmed site is the best option. Come on you techy types, let me know your finding please. regards Steve.
  13. Not been coming on here much, real life and all that. Saw this dating back to beginning of year and thought I would throw in my own views on the Nikon Nav's. Had both the 17 and 12.5mm Nikon's for about 3 or 4 years now, memory and age thing, sorry can't remembere exactly. Anyway, I would not swap them for anything currently on the market or indeed, at all. I use a F4.7 dob and a cheapish revelation coma corrector is attached when using the 17mm both with and without EiC fitted, the views are perfect. I also use a dioptrix on the 17mm only due to astigmatism, this fits good and tidies up my astigmatism. On the 12.5mm the exit pupil is well under 3mm and so astigmatism does not really cause a problem nor does it need a CC. With the EiC's and a 2x TV powermate plus the aforementioned extras I effectively have 8 ultrawide gorgeous pieces of glass giving superb views that covers most viewing needs. I do also have a a 26mm Nagler for lower power viewing needing a little more FOV but to be honest, the 17mm Nikon has become my workhorse and is generally the first eyepiece I reach for.
  14. I bought these for my mum and dad as a present but they are on holiday when he is on so I am selling them. I have already seen this show and it's fab. Anyway, they are in block 102, lower tier. Thats the one nearest the stage. row P. So good quality seats. These 2 cost £105 but as I like you guys and would rather sell to people I know at a cut down price I will let them go for £75. #bargain They are on sale elsewhere for a lot more. pm me for details. Tickets will be posted to you recorded delivery. Steve SOLD
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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