jonathan

20 hours ago, amateur telescope said:

all i saw was white when i looked through it i tried to focus it using the focusing knobs but it didn't get better what stuff should i be doing?   which lenses should i use? and what stuff should i get? and how to view the moon and other things

If you're still struggling then perhaps a photo of the setup will help us determine if something is amiss.

Seeing white usually means the telescope is pointing at a white wall (if indoors, which is not the most ideal place to observe from).

10 hours ago, Powdergnome86 said:

Which often during my sessions I'll scan with the bins, find something I want to look at, then line up the scope. But I'm finding it a little trickier on dimmer targets to go from bins to finder scope

Ah, that old chestnut, I think we've all been there.  A decent red dot finder can help, I think, as you'll be able to get to the general area much easier than with a magnified finder, and if everything is properly aligned (finders) then it should already be in the magnified finder somewhere.  There are some finders that use sticky pads to attach to the scope, usually the adjustments are then made from the finder's own mounting platform for precise alignment.  While I think a Telrad might be somewhat large for a 4" Mak, there may be other options or a DIY solution to add a red dot finder.

1 hour ago, DPF said:

Firstly, thank you all for your kind and helpful advice - this is a great forum. I’d feel guilty telling the wife that it’s not a great scope and as she’s just tested positive for coronavirus today, I’m now hoping that the sky’s are clearer for the next 10 days 😀.

In terms of upgrades, does anyone have any suggestions for the following:

- Tripod

- 2 x Barlow 

- Star diagonal (would I need a 90 degree)

Once again thank you all. 

Keeping in mind that this is a small budget refractor, we don't want to get carried away buying exotic carbon bodied accessories so I'd probably start by looking at the following:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/astro-essentials-90-erecting-prism-diagonal.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/tripods/horizon-8115-2-way-heavy-duty-tripod.html

I'm aware that these two items together cost about the same as the scope itself, but any telescope lives or dies by how steady the mount is so this part at least shouldn't be overlooked.  Other photo tripods would undoubtedly be an upgrade over the supplied one but that Horizon tripod is superb for all sorts of applications, I use mine for binoculars, the travel scope, camera, basically anything that has a standard photography thread hole in the bottom (the travel scope should have one already).

Double check that your travel scope didn't come with a 90 degree star diagonal in the kit, there seems to be two versions - I have the one that came with both 45 and 90 degree diagonals, if yours only came with 45 degree then you should ideally buy a 90 degree one to make observing easier at night but it isn't a deal-breaker if funds don't allow.

I've never been that impressed with budget barlows so can't recommend anything there.

27 minutes ago, Marc1964 said:

So where does this leave me? I am thinking that something with a 90 mm aperture would be perfect, but mainly I see 80 or 100...

I think a 100 aperture refractor is only going to be slightly shorter than your current 90, and if you're spending a few hundred then you'll want to keep it in a sturdy case for transport.  Once you factor in a case, the tripod / mount, and accessories etc you might find that you need to have four or so sturdy cases.  When I take my 102 refractor out to a hillside I take my eyepiece case, my mount accessories case (hand controller, additional counterweight, etc), my battery case, the telescope case, and finally the mount & tripod on the back seat (they just fit and don't need to be separated).

There's probably a very good reason why high quality telescopes come in these sizes (80mm, 102mm), if you search desperately for something in between then you might end up with a lesser quality product.

I have this exact same scope and I have to disagree a little with some of the comments here, for what it is it's a very capable small refractor, on a good clear night you'll get sharp crisp views of plenty of objects in the night sky.  Think of it as a large mounted monocular, or one half of a large binocular pair (it's probably slightly better than my 15x70 binoculars).

A few things could improve the views and usefulness of the scope - first is the tripod.  Mine was supplied with what is probably the flimsiest tripod I've ever used, so invest in or use a heavier duty camera tripod, preferably one with a panning head so that you can pan and tilt smoothly. 

Second thing to consider is the eyepiece.  The scope was probably supplied with two very basic and cheap eyepieces, while they work they probably won't get the best out of the telescope so consider investing in something around the 15mm such as this BST StarGuider.  I don't own this particular eyepiece but I hear good things about the BST range.

If you're using the 45 degree erecting prism and you have the 90 degree diagonal, use the latter for night viewing - that's what it's designed for.  It will help to brighten the image, you'll just have to get used to the image being back-to-front and possibly upside-down as the correcting prism has effectively been removed from the light path (thus reducing the loss of ancient photons from distant stars).

As for what to look at, there's plenty!  Being a small telescope you could look at binocular guides to the night sky, it'll be at the small end of any 'small telescope' guide but you could still get plenty of viewing out of such a guide.  Check out this excellent guide which has been kept up to date by some dedicated astronomers, there's a downloadable PDF which I'd recommend printing out and taking outside with you (leave your iPad / phone in the house, it'll ruin your dark-adapted eyes).

When looking at the moon only remove the small cap, keep the large cap on.  This will reduce the amount of light entering the scope and make the view less dazzling.  This trick can also be used on Jupiter, Mars, and Venus if the brightness is too much.  When the brightness is right it should be possible to make out phases on Mars and Venus.  It should also be possible to just about discern the rings on Saturn, though it's been a while since I viewed Saturn through my 70 Travel Scope so can't quite remember what it looked like.  Best time to view Jupiter and Saturn at the moment is shortly after the sun disappears below the horizon.

You should find out the weight of your telescope with your usual attachments and an eyepiece fitted (you can weight them separately and add the weights up for safety if you like), then look for a mount with a carrying capacity that is something like 1.5x the weight of your telescope setup.  This should provide good stability and minimise vibration.

EQ mounts can be motorised in a few different ways - the most basic is RA tracking, with a manual slow motion control knob for the DEC axis.  This will allow the mount to track the movement of the stars as they race across the sky with only minimal input from you, depending on how well you align the mount to the pole star (which can be as simple as pointing the N leg of the tripod to magnetic North or the pole star).

You can also have dual motors for RA and DEC, with this setup it's the same as before except you'll make small adjustments to the DEC axis using the motor controller instead of a slow motion knob.  Personally I find this setup tedious as it's much faster to make small adjustments with a manual slow motion knob than it is with the motor controller (which is mainly designed for use as you look through the finder or eyepiece, so the movement is very slow).  With either of these motor setups you'll have a basic hand controller with just a few settings such as speed and direction buttons.

The next step is full Goto, with a hand controller containing a database and small backlit LCD display.  This type usually requires more precise polar alignment and has a bit of a learning curve when it comes to doing the star alignment routine, Goto accuracy will depend on how well the initial alignment is done... poor polar alignment, tripod levelling, or star alignment will result in objects not appearing near the centre of the eyepiece, or not in the eyepiece at all.

For simplicity and reduced expense I much prefer the single axis RA tracking setup, this can be purchased as an optional extra to the Skywatcher EQ3-2 or Celestron CG4 mounts, EQ5 often comes with motors built in.  Which mount you look at will depend on the weight (and to some extent, size) of your telescope.

4 minutes ago, Waddensky said:

For planets, I'd consider a short focal length zoom like the TeleVue Nagler 3-6 mm.

I'd be very surprised if they were usable in an 8SE.

9 minutes ago, Joe beaumont said:

Hi all sorry my scope is a celestron nexstar 4se but am looking to upgrade to maybe an 8se and mainly looking for planets or maybe galaxies and nebula if possible but mainly planets 

thank you 

I have only ever used the Baader Planetarium Hyperion 8-24 Zoom (in terms of zoom eyepieces), my experience of it with the 8SE has been superb, a very good match it would seem, even at the 8mm end (I often can't get any useful views from regular eyepieces less than 14mm with my 8SE).  It would probably work well in the 4SE too however I've never tried that (as I don't have a 4SE).  This eyepiece also works very well in my Lunt LS60 solar scope.  Baader make very good products on the whole, can't think that I've ever heard of a bad product with their name on it.

If using the 4SE/8SE on the original Celestron mount then you may need to rebalance for the extra weight as the zoom eyepiece is quite substantial.  I use my 8SE on an NEQ6 mount so have no problems with weight distribution or hitting the mount.

My old Celestron Plossl 25mm is the first eyepiece I use in each session, so your choice of 24mm should serve you well; whether it needs to be Explore Scientific (ES?) is probably just down to personal choice.  I have the 82 degrees 14mm Explore Scientific which works very well as a mid-range eyepiece.

Baader are a reputable brand, however the T2 looks geared towards attaching a camera - is this your intended purpose?  I use the William Optics 2" diagonal but you may not need the 2" aperture with a 4" Mak (I use the same diagonal with a couple of my scopes).  I would have thought a more simple 1.25" like this Willam Optics Dielectric DuraBright one should suffice just for visual use.

I'd question the RACI finder, is a 4" Mak really going to be at such odd angles that makes looking through the finder awkward?  Also 8x50 might be quite a large finder scope for a 4" Mak, could be too much for star hopping.  I might have gone for a straight-through 6x30 or red dot finder (or both, if there's room to fit them).

A simple ND filter should be enough for the moon.

+1 for what Stu said. 

I recently read something that may well apply here - do something badly, and you might just be pleasantly surprised at the results.  So in this sense it could mean get something more manageable, get a basic setup going and get to grips with how it all works.  You may be pleasantly surprised at what you can achieve with even just a standard camera zoom lens on a tracking mount.

There's plenty to learn even before you start getting into guide scopes and all of that, just setting up a standard tracking mount for polar alignment is a learning experience (one that I've long since given up trying to master... or even achieve properly just once), you can learn on a 2nd hand setup so long as it has what you need - a polar scope, goto (very popular with serious astrophotographers), just add a small refractor that's capable of having a camera attached.  You might also want to think about a CCD instead of SLR to save on weight and bulk.

Ultimately consider a small refractor specifically built with photography in mind, they can be expensive and won't show you as much visually but will be much easier to handle than a large reflector, and won't get hit by wind nearly as much.

On the refractor side, it depends on how much you want to spend.  You could get a shorter OTA such as one of the Skywatcher StarTravel range, however I think on the brighter planets and moon you'll get some colour fringing, you have to go towards the doublet or triplet to get away from that sort of artifacting.  Another option are the offerings from AltairAstro, certainly this 70ED looks very handy for travel purposes; I have the 102 triplet refractor and I can say it's a very nice piece of equipment, a noticeable step up in quality and performance over equivalent packages from Celestron or Skywatcher.  The 70ED shouldn't need much by way of mount, EQ3 or AZ3 should be fine, for something very solid go for AZ5 or similar (carry capacity is double the weight of the scope you intend to fit).

So yes, at 70mm you're losing some aperture compared to your current 90 refractor, but as a travel scope I think you'd struggle to find better quality at this price.

I certainly agree with the Dob concept as getting the most 'bang for your buck' from a reflector.

Skywatcher tend to be the main brand who make a lot of the popular Dobsonian setups, there are two designs in general - Skywatcher's FlexTube, which is basically a collapsible tube that can save on space when not in use (not sure if there's much of a weight saving as the frame and fittings probably weight as much as what the tube would have) and what Skywatcher now call 'Classic' which is the straight tube.  There are other brands that do decent Dobsonian mounted telescopes but Skywatcher is probably the most common.  Buy from a reputable astronomy retailer, or used from an astronomy hobbyist (they will likely know a lot about the scope, and have kept it in good order).

Which eyepieces to go for would depend largely on the scope but also on what's going to be comfortable for you to use.  A fast reflector (f5 or lower) can make use of higher quality glass and potentially higher magnifications, assuming sky conditions are ideal (some nights the higher mag eyepieces just don't work well - you'll have difficulty focusing or it'll just be like looking through muddy water). 

As for your exit pupil, I think this might be the sort of thing your optician can tell you.

I discovered that a cheap mount can certainly cause annoyance for what otherwise would be a great experience, as for tightening I also found that if you over-tighten (because there just isn't enough friction due to cheap / poor design) then they tend to break.

Given the current shortage of telescope equipment at the moment and the general cheapness of the mount, I would say you have an opportunity to improve it for yourself.

If you're a cyclist then you may have heard of such a thing as 'carbon paste', it's a gritty paste that's designed to prevent carbon saddle stems from sticking in a carbon frame, while still allowing it to grip and not slip; this property is very useful for all manner of applications where you want something to be moveable but won't move as easily by itself.  Check your local bike shop or look online for it, you should only need a very small tub or tube of the stuff.  To apply, it needs to be between the two surfaces that would normally provide the friction, you may need to partially dismantle the mount in order to discover and expose these surfaces, apply a small amount of the past evenly, then reassemble.  It's worth a try, but be aware that if you do anything like this then it's likely to void the warranty.

I think that would be my approach for this scope - try to improve the friction on the mount any way you can without breaking it.  Spending money on a good quality mount would likely cost more than the whole telescope, and while a budget EQ or AZ mount may certainly improve the situation, they would still be on the cheap side and susceptible to the same problems (difficulty in setup / weak components that are easily broken).

Once you get a mount sorted, consider a beginner's book such as Turn Left at Orion, with no Goto you'll need to learn how to star hop and know what there is to see, a few simple facts about the objects increase the enjoyment too.  A Planisphere and red light torch are also good things to have.

2 minutes ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

The choice of new mounts under £200 that are worth buying is somewhat limited.  If you can find one, a steel-tripod AZ-4 would make a simple and sturdy grab'n go mount.  Or consider an EQ-5,  available new or used as manual or GoTo and with upgrade kits readily available. This is a mount that is good for use with all sorts of smaller telescopes up to a 203mm f5 newtonian.

I use my 150P reflector on a CG4 EQ mount (with 1.75" steel tube tripod legs), works fine.  A 130 OTA shouldn't tax an EQ3-2 mount at all IMO.  EQ5 I feel is overkill, unless it comes down to the width of the fitted dovetail bar (probably could be replaced with one to fit an EQ3-2).  Heck, even my 8" SCT fits the CG4 mount, it's seriously overloaded so I don't use it on there but the dovetail does fit.  Makes me wonder what a 'CG5' dovetail actually is.

CG5 would refer to a Celestron CG5 mount, however it's best if you measure the width of the mount 'bar' to give us a starting point.  I have a CG4 mount and also an EQ5 so I can check what widths they will accommodate, I'm fairly certain the EQ5 / AZ5 should be fine, not 100% sure on the EQ3-2/CG4 without knowing more.  The mount bar will be something like this (probably shorter).

I would recommend looking at an EQ3-2 / CG4 (almost the same thing) or an Alt-Az such as the Sky-Watcher AZ5 Deluxe Alt-Azimuth, paying attention to the load capacity of the mount and tripod, both of these mounts are 5kg.  Remove the tube from your mount, fit the heaviest eyepiece that you own and anything else you would typically have on the scope, then weigh it as you might a piece of luggage, or if you have a set of bathroom scales weigh yourself without the scope then with to get the weight of the scope in kg / lbs, just be very careful not to drop it if using a luggage sling or whatever!  The closer the scope weight is to the carrying capacity of the mount, the more vibration you'll get and strain will be put on the gears (and motors if it has them).

Looking at the original mount load capacity on the Celestron website, it states 3.6kg (assuming that the mount is near to capacity with the scope fitted, the scope might weigh just over 3kg).  The AZ5 states 5kg capacity so that sounds like it should be a good upgrade (the 130 is not a heavy scope in general terms), there are plenty of other mounts around so take your pick, just keep that weight and load capacity in mind, and don't forget to factor in the weight of tube rings if you decide to go that route (they may not be necessary).

Motor drive can be added easily to the EQ3-2/CG4 mount, either dual axis or single axis (only require single axis for simple tracking), if you wanted a solid goto then there's the EQ3 Pro Goto version for £419, Alt-Az has a few different options for Goto including BYO wifi device (keeps the cost of the mount down, but might be obsoleted if the app is discontinued) such as Sky-Watcher AZ GTi WiFi Alt-Az

You could look out for a used scope bundle that has the mount you want, then either keep and use the scope too or sell it.  Stick to popular brands such as Skywatcher, Celestron, and others that are sold by companies like First Light Optics and (fingers crossed) you shouldn't go far wrong.

1 hour ago, Ladynat999 said:

I've seen this one in stock online.....£229.

Is this worth it?

Dorr Danubia Delta 30 114mm Catadioptric Reflector Telescope

Seems to me a dob would be better for that kind of money, if you can stretch the budget a bit more.  I have no experience with Bresser but I trust First Light Optics not to stock a turkey (even at Christmas).

Hi,

I'm collimating my Skywatcher 150p reflector and have got so far with aligning the secondary according to AstroBaby's guide, however I seem to be at a conflict with the positioning in the focuser tube.  It looks to be aligned up/down the main tube, but not left/right (looking into the main tube from the open end) or up/down when looking down the focuser tube with a collimating cap on.

i was told to align the secondary to the middle using the spider vane adjustments, but I can't see any other way to move the mirror than to adjust the spider vanes, which would result in the secondary no longer being precisely central in the main tube.  Am I missing something?  I hope these photos explain it better.  To my eyes there seems to be clearly a larger gap at the bottom than at the top.

Just throwing this one in here... if looking at the 4SE then consider the 6SE, it comes on the same mount as the 8SE (or at least it did when I bought my 8SE) so for the 6SE it's a reasonably steady mount, with the 8SE it's at the weight limit so not such a good mount for that.  I have the 8SE and ended up selling the Goto mount it came with as I just couldn't get on with it, but I hear good things from 4SE and 6SE owners.  8SE realistically could sit on an EQ5, I have mine on an NEQ6 Pro but that is a heavy mount and not something you'd want to carry more than 20 feet or so at a time.

The 4SE and 6SE should be manageable complete, I was able to lift my 8SE out into the garden mounted on the Goto mount.  The SCT design of the Celestron NexStar SE range is good for viewing planets and bright nebula, however small or dim DSOs are more of a challenge.  Last time I looked, the 4SE had a different back to the 6SE / 8SE which permitted the connection of a camera, I think it has a flip mirror built in so you can observe or photograph without having to remove anything, though it's been a while since I saw one up close so best get a second opinion on that.

All goto setups come with a caveat in that if you don't understand and follow the setup steps precisely then it can mess up the operation of the goto system, and if something doesn't work then it can be a real pain trying to find where the problem lies, not to mention frustrating as you spend your evening fiddling with handset menus instead of observing.

For straight forward viewing, providing you can find the targets, a non-goto setup with simple motorised tracking (typical for EQ mounts) or just push-to (in the case of a typical Dob) avoids the pitfalls of Goto and saves you quite a big chunk of money too.  Motorised tracking is not especially required for visual observing but helps when using high magnification (which you will want for seeing detail on planets), and also helps with longer exposure photography (usually not necessary for planetary stuff though).  Manual slow motion controls require you to touch the mount which can introduce vibrations and slop if the gears are not that great.

I agree with Cosmic Geoff, right now and probably for the next few months a pair of binoculars will be an excellent choice to get you started, and you'll still use them if you buy a telescope later on.  You could spend a long time trying to buy a scope, not find the ideal one for you, and by the time things come in stock it could be summer and light skies.

Have a look at these Helios bins, I don't have experience of this particular pair but they tick the right boxes for astronomy.  For a better pair with an apparently shorter restock time check these too.

I don't have either, but have you looked at the circuit board inside?  It might have small + and - next to the solder points for the battery.

In lieu of a telescope once stock becomes available, how about a nice pair of astro-friendly binoculars, a planisphere, red light torch, and a guide book or two.

There's a lot you can see with a simple and robust pair of binoculars such as these Helios 7x50 (which I hear is an excellent brand), mount them on a suitable camera tripod or monopod (perhaps with a ball head), sit back in a comfy recliner and enjoy the night sky!  Some people mainly do binocular astronomy, it's a popular branch as it requires very little kit and almost no setup time.

In case the views in any Lunt solar scope don't come near to showing surface detail or the bright patterns around a sunspot (I forget what it's called, spiculae?), the small blue glass filter (the one that can suffer from surface corrosion) is easily replaced.  They are available to buy quite cheaply from Lunt's website and Lunt will send one free of charge if it's one of their own scopes that has this problem.  It's a known problem with older blue glass filters, they are not a critical blocking filter.  Corrosion will be easy to see on the blue glass if the diagonal is closely examined, what the surface corrosion effectively does is diffract the light coming through a bit like when there's some thin cloud coming across, usually resulting in a red background around the sun as well (this can also happen if there's some haze or thin cloud around that the sunlight is lighting up, if the blue glass filter is not corroded then it should still be possible to see good surface detail through bright haze).

I've been impressed with the views through a PST for such a small scope, more aperture definitely improves the magnification and detail potential though.  Whatever you get, make sure you mount it on something solid, I've seen a PST mounted on a flimsy camera tripod which seriously diminishes the experienice in my experience, fighting against an overloaded tripod sag and trying to nudge the stiff joints trying to keep the sun in view.  A heavy duty camera tripod with smooth pan and tilt controls or an EQ1 is probably enough for a PST, I use a CG4 (EQ3-2) for my Lunt (I found it too heavy for my camera tripod).

The B600 part is in the diagonal and so should in theory be easy to upgrade to B1200 at a later date, whether it is worth while is another question.  I've never actually seen another Lunt in person so can't compare B600 to B1200.

I had similar frustration with goto (made worse by power socket problems on the 8SE mount) and in the end threw the towel in, now Ra tracking is as sophisticated as it gets for me.  I could probably use a goto if I wanted to, they're great if all setup and working, e.g. on a pier in a dome, it's getting to that point that I just found more difficult and time consuming than star hopping, especially as I have to carry the scope out to the garden each time and there's nowhere to put markings for the tripod feet.  With the British weather being what it is, sometimes any delay can mean the difference between observing through a gap in the clouds and getting rained on.

I have the AstroZap tapes myself, but I found the controller not that great (one of the POTs actually failed, took quite a bit of effort to find a replacement part).  I now use an HitechAstro four channel controller which has performed brilliantly.  I have no experience of any other heater tapes but I bought a Lynx-Astro handset cable which was very good so would have no problem in buying that brand again from FLO.