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.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_terminator_challenge.thumb.jpg.b7f10f594317507d0f40662231b0d9a8.jpg

johnturley

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    64
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

30 Excellent

About johnturley

  • Rank
    Nebula

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Dronfield, Derbyshire
  1. johnturley

    A tale of two implants

    I've now got a date for my cataract operation of 15 March. Partly because of my interest in astromomy, I opted for the standard monofocal lens optimised for distant vision, as besides the fact that the NHS will not fund having a multifocal lens (I would have to pay for this privately), I thought that the latter, which is similar to bifocal or varifocal glasses, might not result in me seeing star images as sharp as with the former. John
  2. The Explore Scientific CC, although more expensive, does however solve the problem if you have insufficient back focus for the Baader MPCC Mk III, which according to the spec requires 55mm of back focus. In addition the ES CC comes with an adjustable a 2" integrated helical focuser which allows the adjustment of spacing between the corrector's rear element and eyepieces or an imager's sensor plane - eliminating (in many cases) the need for the need to invest in additional spacer rings to acheive optimal results. I understand that you need to buy this separately with the Badder CC. John
  3. johnturley

    Scope Fungus Prevention

    A dehumidifier in an observatory shed or garage will also help
  4. The TeleVue Paracorr costs even more John
  5. The Explore Scientific Coma Corrector does the opposite of the Skywatcher, it shifts the focus out by about 35 mm, and produces slight amplification, I think by about 1.05 x John
  6. johnturley

    Which is the closest planet to Earth?

    I think what most people usually mean is actually which planet comes closest to the earth. John
  7. johnturley

    A tale of two implants

    Thanks Pete I must admit that I'm a bit nervous about it, I expect mine will be done under local aneasthetic too, but if my vision improves as much as yours did, it will be well worth it. John
  8. johnturley

    A tale of two implants

    I was diagnosed with a cataract in my right eye last May, I had suspected something was wrong for some months previously, as my vision through an eyepiece was starting to get cloudy, and I was getting increasingly short sighted in this eye. I was however informed by the optician at the time that it was not suffiently bad for a cataract operation to be funded by the NHS. In December I was aware that it was getting worse and arranged another eye test, I explained to the optician that it was causing me problems when viewing through my telescope, and was then informed that this would probably be sufficient reason to justify the NHS funding the operation, and I am currently awaiting an appointment at the treatment centre. Having read other reports of the positive outcomes, I am therefore hoping that my astronomical vision will be much improved following the operation. John
  9. johnturley

    Anyone using an OGEM mount??

    I thought it was necessary to keep worm wheels regularly greased John
  10. johnturley

    Skywatcher Esprit 150 or APM 140

    I did have an AP 6in f8 mounted piggyback on my 14in Newtonian with no problems, I think the Esprit 150 is a similar weight, but a shorter tube with it being f7. John
  11. johnturley

    Skywatcher Esprit 150 or APM 140

    Many thanks to all those who have posted comments. What I have read so far reinforces my initial preference for the Esprit 150, it would be mounted piggyback on my fork mounted 14in Newtonian, so I wouldn't be purchasing a mount specifically for this scope. The one advantage of the APM 140 would have been that I could have mounted either it, or my existing ES 127 on an HEQ5 mount. The replies also reinforce my feelings that:- It would not be worthwhile spending a lot of money just to upgrade to a high end scope in the 130-140 mm range such as the TAK 130 or the TEC 140 There would be relatively little to gain over the Esprit 150 by spending over three times as much on a high end 150-160 mm scope such as the TAK 150 or the TEC 160 John
  12. I don't know whether there is much to chose between them optically, probably not, although you could ask the team at FLO. Although the Baader filters are more expensive, I think that you will find them easier to screw in and out with cold fingers in the dark, if you look at the images of the filters on FLO's website you will see what I mean. John
  13. I don't about the latter make, but I have a couple of Explore Scientific and Baader filters, and the threads are a lot better on the Baader filters, plus they have knurled casings making them easier to screw in and out .
  14. I am planning to upgrade my main refractor in 2020 (partly because of the favourable opposition of Mars in October of that year), which I will mount piggyback on my 14in Newtonian, on which my ES 127 is currently mounted. My two most favoured options are the Skywatcher Esprit 150, and the APM 140, but I am not planning to sell my ES 127, instead I intend to purchase a portable GOTO mount (probably the Skywatcher HEQ5, and possibly with the Rowan Belt modification), which would give me a more portable instrument than my Celestron 9.25 CPC. I also prefer the shorter tube length and wider field of an f7 rather than an f8 instrument, so was not considering the APM 152 or other makes of 6in f8 refractors. The APM 140 would have the advantage that I could also mount it on the HEQ5 mount, whereas the Esprit 150 would probably be too heavy for this mount, requiring a heavier duty mount such as the EQ6 and not be very portable. The main snag however with the APM140, is that with only having an extra 13mm of aperture, would I notice much improvement over my ES 127 FDC 100 scope, and being a doublet it may not be as well colour corrected. The Esprit 150 with an extra 23 mm of aperture should show more of an improvement, and would be at least as well, if not better colour corrected. Although doublets do have the advantage of cooling down faster, with being housed in an observatory shed, the longer cool down time of a triplet would probably not be an issue. If I really wanted to, I could stretch to a more high end refractor such as the TAK150, or the TEC 140 or 160, but would it be worth spending more than three times the price (Esprit 150 £4k, TAK150 and TEC 160 £13k) for something that would only be marginally better. A comparison between the Esprit 150 and TEC 160 was done on Cloudy Nights a few years ago, and the TEC 160 came out as being only marginally better, in addition Es Reid (a well-respected optician whom I know personally), regularly checks Esprit 150’s and considers them optically to be almost as good as the TAK’s. Another possibility would be a TAK 130 at around £5k, but would I notice much improvement over my ES 127, although I have no doubt that some TAK owners will claim that there would be no comparison between them, and that a TAK 130 would equal or even outperform the Esprit 150. John
  15. johnturley

    Mars Neptune conjuction and a sneaky Uranus

    Here is a photo I took at 18.00 last night (7 Decemeber), I overexposed Mars to show Neptune (lower to the right) better, and I think that you can even make out what I ssume is Triton very close to the lower right of Neptune, it was clearer before I reduced the number of pixels in order to be able to insert the photo on SGL. John
×

Important Information

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