bomberbaz

Did you read the blurb on the FLO website James? Apparently you can train the mount to increase accuracy. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/sky-watcher-eq8-rh-astronomy-mount-with-renishaw-ra-encoder.html

There are a lot of reports that some types galaxies depending on brightness/orientation/light emission/other do benefit from certain lightpass filters but given nearly all of the said reports indicate such results are very subtle, limited too mainly brighter galaxies (The Leo triplet hamburger probably won't benefit that much) then I don't think shelling out the best part of £200 for a 2" version is worth it. So I think that the generally accepted way of increasing contrast by using more magnification is a better, more consistent and lower costing option going forward. Steve

I own this mount and cannot help but think that the mount is at it's limit with that scope (130ps). I use it with a 90mm/F10 celestron frac and it is at the limit there. It is my white light scope but I always remove the dew shield. Less for the wind to grab hold of and reduces wobble. That said, the mount is a brilliant bit of kit for use with lightweight scopes. I currently have three which I use with it and they all give me a lot of satisfaction in three different categories: Solar white light, Solar HA, EEVA and use of my MAK. Sorry that's four. Anyway the mak is used for planetary and viewing stars (cluster, doubles etc). Actually it's got a fifth use. I have taken a few images of various night sky wide views using my sony camera. It's an all in one type camera but has a lot off ubiquitous settings. Another thing worth mentioning is the GTI can make use of the SW wedge which means it can be changed to an EQ mount, even more versatility. (Requires an upgrade to mount, done online, free of charge) The AZ Gti mount is a great bit of kit for a lot of basic stuff. If you want something more advanced, expect your wallet to take a bigger hit. Steve

I have actually just carried out repairs on my existing copy of S&T, it's 9 by 7 inch, not sure if that's classed as the pocket version. I will wait for the glue to dry to see if it still serviceable. I have never bothered taking a laptop, occasionally use the phone one for stellarium but not often. One option I am playing with is that I am ok at finding roughly where the objects are in the sky in terms of AZ, finding the right elevation I find more difficult. There are gadgets that help with the latter which are quite accurate, a kind of push to lite. However I do want to do far more hopping and not rely on technology as much. As it stands it's probably 30/70 star hop/pushto, I would like to reverse this ratio. Steve

I had looked at the desk edition (although I know I want field) at FLO. It does sound quite comprehensive but there are quite mixed reviews of it on other sites. The publishers own website is very detailed though and i have played around with the sample pages. I found a few minor star discrepancies but nothing major. Also quite costly so I need to think this one over and see if there are any other options or ideas forth coming. Steve.

My existing sky and telescope atlas is starting to fall to bits, had it 8 years and last time out I accidently left it overnight in the garden when the dew was horrendous. It has gone very cardboardy now so think it's time I got a new one. The sky and telescope atlas was highly recommended when I obtained it way back so just wondering is that still the preferred choice amongst members or has anything new come along that is better (subjectively of course) Steve.

basket cases, boils my blood this kinda thing. Hope it isn't too badly damaged

The qualities of the Panoptic are well known and I have read many times on these forums reports of the eyepiece and how well rated it is. The ES 24/68 is also supposed to be of very good quality and I am sure I remember reading that they are a kind of clone of the panoptic. The best kind of flattery. Just wondered if anyone has ever done a side by side though, both good eyepieces so how do they compare.

Do you still have them John, I liked mine when I had them but at the time I was still trying to view with glasses and despite the good ER, I did prefer the Delos I owned too.

£1000 budget though! 🤣 Seriously though, I have to say though it will be a cracking setup and cover all your goals as far as you have described. One thing though, if you live at the top of a mountain with little light pollution, I reckon you should be looking at a pier at some point with maybe even a roll off roof type shed further down the line. Your location sounds like an astronomers dream. Steve

I used to have a full set of radians, amazing eyepieces they are, well worth the relatively low 2nd hand price they demand. Steve

Fair comments there. I thought a dslr was a lot heavier tbh, there you go. I also guess it depends on what the end game is going to be for the OP. Your solution above is a great one, no doubt there. My own idea was also worthwhile based on my own experiences using something which is maybe a little outside the conventional box of thinking, more EEVA tbh. If the OP goes onto more serious astrophotography though, I would agree the HEQ/200p option wins out hands down. Balls in your court @Scorpion Rob Steve

Surely though once you start hanging a camera off a scope, the extra stuff you are still going into the realms of a HEQ type mount are you not?

I am far from an expert but my take is depends what eesults you want. A dslr leads onto a heavier mount and then higher cost. Budget £1,000 remember

I think they are erfle in design hence the fov and I really wouldn't expect it to perform as well as a radian at 30 quid but if the OP wants a step up from his existing ep without busting the bank then I reckon it's a decent option for a slower ota.

So will the c70 not take the 70 degrees, I have no idea. I only put the link up as I have the 2 eyepieces from them as mentioned and they work great in my mak as well as an F10 frac. These are only 30 quid. Still 66 degrees but should work fine in an F10 and if the fov is useable or the OP upgrades to another ota, they would still carry over. http://www.opticstar.com/Run/Astronomy/Astro-Accessories-Telescopes-Opticstar.asp?p=0_10_5_1_8_315

These eyepiece from optic star. http://www.opticstar.com/Run/Astronomy/Astro-Accessories-Telescopes-Opticstar.asp?p=0_10_5_1_8_320 i have the 10&15 mm which i use in an f15 mak. Gives me excellent views for the price and the 70 degree fov is undistorted in use.

Ok so here’s what i do that covers all you asked for. Not brilliant in two of the three but keeps me happy. skywatcher gti wifi mount & tripod with a 127 mak. Great for clusters and planetary. Stick a 0.5 reducer on this and it will do satisfactory for dso. same mount as above with a starguider wedge ( you need flash the mount to operate in eq mode) then i am using a small F4.2 frac with a zwo asi224mc camera. I can do short exposure pictures of brighter dso and planetary. i also have a solar wedge and do solar on the mount. It is very ubiquitous. i upgraded the tripod to a steel one, it is much steadier. I think the whole setup cost circa £1,050 Like i said it is not a perfect solution but it covers your objectives as well as could be. steve

checking the specs of this and It is around F11. It comes with a 10-30mm zoom and when using it at 30mm/x25 magnification you will get 1.3 degrees of view. However my eyepiece calculator doesn't agree with it and gives 1.7 degrees field of view. Whichever is correct it should be ok for finding things making it easier to use. As Jonathan says, a decent camera tripod would work well with it. It should be ok for planetary viewing, some clusters but it's the moon where this is going to perform best imho. Globular clusters will look just like a smudge, open clusters will lack the depth of stars seen in a bigger scope and nebula will lack any structure. However you will get the buzz of hunting and finding your target object. I would get it out to darker areas to maximise it's potential. In anything other than low light polution and viewing anything other than the moon or jupiter is going to be somewhat disappointing. M44 and M39 are lovely clusters and if you can get a better 10mm eyepiece with a wider field of view (70 ish or better) , you would be better equipped. A 10mm/70 degree fov eyepiece will give you about 1 degree at x75 magnification. You would get a lot more out of it than your supplied eyepiece.

This report on cloudy nights forum has a lot of detail regarding this filter and compares lumican's deep sky with the GCE, the results are as expected really. report Strangely enough the report is from 2007, I thought this GCE filter was a fairly new thing, obviously not. Steve

I would be very interested to hear of any results Ricochet. I am not rushing out to buy either but if something really does work to enhance the visual experience, I am prepared to consider. thanks Steve

Well this caught my attention whilst browsing yet another online shop, this time Okularum. Never heard of one of these before Filter I know DGM have a good name for thier nebula (UHC) filter, so doubt they would market something that isn't effective. Looking at the filter light curve graph next to the price tag it strikes me that it cuts out just visible light pollution as do all other filters and then lets everything else through. I did think it was similar to a neodymium filter at first but on closer inspection there are some significant differences, notably around the 550/5500 mark and to a lesser extent around the 475/4750 mark. The GCE also drops off the 500/5000 mark later than the baader. Anyway, back to the DGM GCE, interesting idea that by blocking out light pollution wavelengths you increase the contrast which does make sense, but some of the dimmer galaxies would surely end up disappearing altogether. Of course I know the best thing for getting the best out of your galaxy hunting is a dark sky, goes without saying but this has pricked my interest. Just wondered what anyone else's thoughts are on this filter! EDIT: Found a few reports on CN forums. Seems they offer moderate results generally on brighter objects in darker places from the outset. Steve

Always worthwhile using stellarium assuming you are familiar with this program to build your current and future list of objects to view. There are quite a few nebula on the messier list and a good nebula filter would be a sound investment to help you view these objects. The kind of filter I am referring to is a UHC (ultra high contrast) which removes most of the light you don't want from light polution and makes the nebula easier to see with more detail. This filter by ES is very well priced and has very good reviews from some very reputable sources on this forum. filter (other filter manufacturers are available) There are other filters types but the UHC is something of a catch all and covers circa 90% of all nebula with varying levels of results. Steve

I concur

read a few reviews recently on sgl regarding various eyepieces and types, one by astrobaby on narrow fov ep's. On it she reviewed several eyepieces including vixen npl, celestron x-cels and bst's plus one other whose name escapes me. To cut to the chase the vixen npl's were the one's she liked the best for the contrasty views and the sharpness accross the fov.