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.

stargazine_ep34_banner.thumb.jpg.28dd32d9305c7de9b6591e6bf6600b27.jpg

DanOrion

New Members
  • Content Count

    11
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About DanOrion

  • Rank
    Nebula

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Astronomy, science, art, guitar playing.
  • Location
    Sussex, UK
  1. Haha! Yep that did throw me for a loop! right got you, I have that clear in my head - something important learnt today
  2. Mattscar & Moonshane, good points from you both in additions to Stu's, thanks! I am happy now, after feeling deflated before. Thanks so much for your informative replies, its much appreciated. I shall be sure to ask questions re this if anything else stumps me Best Dan
  3. Hi Stu, Thank you! I am glad I had this wrong. So with the SLT127 i would need about an 8mm Plossl or similar to take it to around 187X? And if i went with an SLT 102, at 660mm FL would need a 4mm eyepiece for 165X. Is that about right? Cheers!
  4. Hi there, Im looking to buy a budget scope, like the Celestron 127slt, thats the kind of size and budget i have at the moment. Re viewing planets through the eyepiece - I have read that Saturn is pin [removed word] on most scopes under 8'' so i take it that it cannot be magnified enough to see a decent view of it, even with more powerful eyepieces? So my confusion is also seeing beginners guides stating that you can see Saturn and its rings on a good with budget gear - how, if its too small to see? I looked up two astronomy calculators which show the image possible against what telescope you enter, all the scopes up to 8'' showed Saturn as a pin head. Also, i see pictures taken via small scopes of Saturn, so i guess they are still pretty tiny but cropped in the editing stage? As you can see i am somewhat confused....What is possible re smaller scopes and far planets, and how? Many thanks for any help as i am stymied at present. Dan.
  5. Beautiful shot Ben! Really sharp and contrasty.
  6. Guys, many many thanks for you kind replies, I am taking this all in. I shall indeed buy the book! 1) So, when it comes to focal length, if I had an F5, I can then use a lense to increase the focal length and be able to do planets and DSOs. 2) But, if I plumb for a longer F length like the Evostar 90 or 102 , can a lense be used to reduce focal length to see DSOs - and if so, is it a desirable way to go? I will then need to think of the mount - something halfway ok for a beginners that can have motors added, EQ 3-2 would seem minimum, then later I can upgrade.
  7. Thanks Rowan, the bigger refractor scope you linked to is F5, which I read is not too good for planetary as it is more rich field, so much wider an image? I guess for my first scope planetary is the prority but if you know that an F5 can do that well to that is great. I wish to study the moon as close as possible over a length of time. Grant, thanks, so if a scope is goto and motor driven only, it will not track an object well enough for AP but ok for visual observing?
  8. Hi there, I have some question and hope you can help me. I am just starting out, and firstly want to get something modest to use and then if I really love it to upgrade. I only have around £200-300 for a first scope. My main urge at present is to view planets and hopefully one or two brighter DSOs. I would also like to be able to progress to modest AP, planets etc. So, from what I have read so far, I am drawn to refractors or hybrids, mainly due to less maintenance and the sharpness of refractors. Would starting with a simple refractor like an Evostar 90 on an alt-az mount be a decent start? I would like to be able to view and image the moon from the off with a smartphone if possible. Later on, if I want to pursue the hobby and be able to do AP I could upgrade the mount, then scope to something better. what would you suggest? you may think a slightly better set-up from the off which can be ugraded? Also, I was thinking that if I wish to view the moon and planets and not wish to manually keep it in frame every few seconds, would I be better starting with a mount that can take motors? Such as: http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-sky-watcher-evostar-90-eq3-2-refractor-telescope/p10585#details I assume this will then track the object? (i must admit to some confusion on this as I see there are 'autoguiders' which I thought was accomplished via an EQ mount on motors? Many thanks for help. Best Dan
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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