neil phillips

Update ive been informed by TS germany that this mount is not called a EQ 3 but is called EQ4 Or skyview

Comparisons pictures underneath. Do my pics (on the bed) look like this comparison picture of a EQ4 ? skyview.  Apparently they do have a RA motor to fit it. But there is somekind of 1mm discrepancy (12 mm to 13 mm )

Which i didnt fully understand.  I will post the relevant part of the TS message. Hoping someone can concur with what i am being told by them. And or understand this 1mm difference in size, having to use a socket of somekind ? to bridge this gap. Anyway there email response is 

The motor will be coupled on the bolt which is on the side of the mount. The Motor has a 13mm hole - my engineer remembers that the bold was a little smaller (about 12mm) so you will have to us a socket to put them together....

Cheers for any feedback guys

3 minutes ago, StuartT said:

they were brand new. So I may just send them back. That video is for a different model. Mine don't seem to have collimation screws visible

Get the Oregons no question

Collimate Celestron Skymaster Binoculars - YouTube

Hopefully you got them for a good price, which might be worth trying to collimate. New i would send back.

Ive seen youtube vids you could try that

You might want to check collimation closely. They do have a reputation of going out of collimation. Not sure the clips holding the prisms are very consistent.  replaced mine from new with Opticron Oregons. Lots of happy users of the Celestrons out there. But there reputation is not the best if you want honesty

Hi Adam. Telescopes can be like guitars. Hit and miss. Although that is a little exaggerated. As there is often a certain amount of consistency between models. Variation is a unpopular view for buyers, as it creates paranoia and uncertainty. Where there should be joy and consistency. Its also a unpopular view for sellers who rely on consistency for faith in there products to the consumer. Your question is a difficult one for the reasons you outlined. You may also be setting yourself up for hundreds of uncertain emails from uncertain buyers. 

On 05/04/2021 at 17:13, Craig a said:

It’s A I’m looking at, that’s your secondary it’s not circular so that means it’s rotated, B is the reflection of the Cheshire’s silver diagonal 

 We may be on different pages craig ? i thought you was referring to the offset shape of A. Was worried the poster would interpret this comment to mean the shadow A Should be circular. Which in a F5 scope its offset from circular.  

On 05/04/2021 at 17:13, Craig a said:

It’s A I’m looking at, that’s your secondary it’s not circular so that means it’s rotated, B is the reflection of the Cheshire’s silver diagonal 

That looks like secondary offset to me Craig because its F5 Example on here

Collimation - Newtonian Telescope - Reflector - Astro Baby's Guide to (astro-baby.com)

Example CN. (not mine)

The offset is exaggerated. Or even off. But the shadow is showing its effect which is the point

Probably a secondhand EQ3 I would have thought. For more money EQ5 Deluxe

1 hour ago, Trevor N said:

Good image Neil. I always think achros have been underrated regards imaging. Lots of detail there.

Cheers Trevor stuck at prime focus. Hope to do a lot better when i get my driven EQ5. For some closer work

Very nice. I missed the boat this time around

Stunning clarity sharpness and detail Avani. inspiring.

34 minutes ago, Mr Spock said:

I have a Meade 140. It's pretty good but I always prefer the view without.

Makes sense why that would be. Always had a interest in barlows doing hi res imaging though

Interesting Louis.

I can see why shorty's took over, diagonals is one , newtonian overhang when imaging is another. But feel i may have a point, that shorty's may not be the best optical performers. Compared to longer designs.

Refractors too. Optically a ED 4" F11. Will be better than a ED 4" F7 especially spherical aberration. But of course that suits the lunar planetary guys only.

The deepsky guys will want faster of course. I am just talking optical aberrations. Not suitability. Those Orion barlows look very very nice. Bet they perform wonderfully

I Just ordered a GSO 3X ED Barlow  (A bargain if you ask me)

And it got me thinking about focal length. Comparing to refractors, longer focal length reduces spherical aberration. And chromatic aberration with a flatter feild.

a wider sweet spot. I have owned A Celestron Ultima 2x A Celestron 3x xcel  A 3x Televue (and others) two shortys and a longun (dont start) of great quality

Out of those 3 i loved the Ultima the most. But surely the Televue design is better, ED doublet longer focal length, as mentioned above in theory, less spherical and chromatic aberration with a flatter feild and wider sweet spot. I know more elements can correct for this. But that also has its disadvantages. My thoughts at the moment are the Televue and GSO ED doublets win on design. Notice how the GSO seems to be somewhat of a clone of the TV. If the figure of the GSO lenses are up to scratch. with its long focal length and ED Doublet (less absorption and reflection than multi element) I wonder how close it can get to the TV 3X 

I will at some point be testing this GSO barlow on lunar with my revamped Orion 10" Newt so we shall see. Wonder what others think about the points raised here. Any owners of the GSO 3X thoughts on its performance

On 01/04/2021 at 17:46, wookie1965 said:

You can make one out of a exercise mat. 

I did this in the past. Though if you think about it this type of material must store heat. Unless stored outside. I put mine in the freezer for twenty mins

Nest time i am going plastic for hi res work

10 hours ago, Luke said:

Wow, undriven. Very nice. Good work by the Frankenhammer.

Lol cheers Luke. Hopefully me and frank will be parting company in the not too distant future. Hope i dont need to drive a nail before then. You know how sticky that tape is ?

Like the good doctor himself i am going to pay for this creation.

Many thanks Luc.

Hey thanks old fruit. It seems promising doesnt it. So low down. Nearly full moon, undriven. Cant wait to see what it does on a driven Eq5 mount. When craters are more on show..

5 hours ago, WestCoastCannuck said:

Awesome Neil!!  I love my 120ED.  Thought I would never replace it.  I expect you will get great enjoyment from it.  Lunar binoviewing fabulous on it.  

 

LOVE the hammer!  🤣

 

Clear skies!

 

Mike

Cheers Mike.  Though this is the achromatic 120. Would love a ED

I will know quite quickly how it performs. I have a good feeling about how the old beast will pan out. Stay tuned.

14 hours ago, Lead_weight said:

Shot this with my Celestron C5 Spotting Scope.

Best 15% of 3500 frames using a ZWO ASI462MC camera.

Autostakkert, with drizzle 1.5x and wavelets processing in Registax 6. Wavelets processing is some serious magic.

Very nice

Personally i reckon This Sky-Watcher Explorer 150PL OTA | First Light Optics  would give the big Maks a run for there money. My 4.5 F8 Newtonian produces very very, pin sharp lunar images. I had two F15 Full apeture (8.25 oversized primary) 180 meade Maks Apart from focal length which isnt a problem, as barlows can close the gap

The above scope might even be sharper than Maks. Dont underestimate F8 Newtonians

1 minute ago, Stu1smartcookie said:

Lovely pic , Neil ... i kind of feel part of it lol 

you are Stu for sure