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

paulastro

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    3,482
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

paulastro last won the day on September 5 2017

paulastro had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

3,702 Excellent

7 Followers

About paulastro

  • Rank
    White Dwarf

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Oakworth, West Yorkshire
  1. David, I've had both of these and still have the AZ4. Whatever the spec says, the AZ4 is FAR more steady and will take a heavier load. The azimuth slow motion on the AZ5 comes out at such a strange angle from the mount that you will never be able to reach it if you have anything but a short scope - or you have very long arms! True, the AZ4 doesn't have slow motions, but it is smoother to push around, or at least mine is. The AZ5 is prettier, but then looks aren't everything .
  2. Jon, I'm sure your 102, if you go ahead and buy one, will do you proud - especially if you're taking it out to dark skies. At home my skies are not too bad, but I've taken the AT102 to Kelling for the last couple of years in the Autumn, and wow! Just like any scope that's taken to Kelling it will perform like a bigger scope in excellent transparent skies. In such skies the AT102 is a superb deep sky scope offering some stunning views - just a shame I have to come home at the end of my stay. Still, only seven months until my next trip . Best of luck.
  3. Mark, good to hear your comments. I did wonder if you might see this thread and recognise the scope as once being yours. I agree with your sentiment, I love it and it's performance is fabulous. I think this particular telescope proves the point that it's not just the type of glass that makes a good doublet, it's far more to do with the quality of the objective in its' manufacture and that it has a well made cell and nicely darkened/baffled tube to accommodate it. It was in really good condition when I obtained the scope from Shane and I assure you I'll continue to do my best to maintain it in the same way. Thank you for looking after it so well when you were its custodian . It's in safe hands.
  4. Apart from the physical length of course the focal length is much longer, the optimum focal ratio for a four inch refractor is f7 for me. This is because I like to do widefield sweeping as well as planetary, and the combination with my 17.5mm Morpheus is made in heaven for me - literally .
  5. Mike, this isn't quite accurate. The FT focuser came with the scope when it was sold new - nearly eleven years ago. I have the original invoice. It was fitted from new, and says on both sides of the focuser that it was made for both Astro-Tech and for this particular telescope. The focuser has a 9:1 reduction fine focus. The original price when bought new on 21st April 2008 was £825 including VAT. It was sold in this country by SCS Astro Ltd. The scope also came with a nice hard case which I still have.
  6. paulastro

    Alternative to Baader Zoom?

    Emad. Yes, a 100ED is a good scope and personally I think if you're in it for the long run, a used Baader Zoom is the way to go. If you buy an inferior zoom that compromises your telescope then you may regret it. Even if your scope is f6 or longer, an inferior zoom will give a worse performance in other important aspects such as field at different focal lengths and contrast etc. As in many other instances, you generally get what you pay for. If you have the opportunity, it would be worthwhile taking your 100ED somewhere you can compare different zooms and see for yourself how they compare on the night sky. A star party, a local astronomy society's observing session or a well equipped observatory such as The Astronomy Centre nr Todmorden would be ideal.
  7. Lovely pictures Stu, I love the first one over the trees particularly .
  8. Thank you Mark. Sorry about you being beset with fog. It didn't creep up the hill to engulf me until 7.10am, and it happened very quickly, so I was very lucky.
  9. You're very kind John, I'm sorry you didn't have clear skies. Looking at the pics again I was lucky, there was fog and mist below us in the valleys which didn't creep up on us until after 7am. I suppose it's one advantage of living at an altitude of over 800 feet.
  10. Thank you Mike. I was going to say that some of us need our beauty sleep more than others. I won't though, as that wouldn't be very nice would it .
  11. Thanks Andrew, you're very kind. Certainly crisp, at -6 degrees C I think it's the crispiest night of the year so far
  12. Nice one Paul, it looks as if it might have been even more cold than it was here in Oakworth, -6 degrees C.
  13. Many thanks Stu, as you say, very fortunate. It looks like the weather was clear and frosty in most places so hopefully it was widely seen.
  14. Out at 5.36, very cold, -6 degrees C. The conjunction looked really beautiful, delighted to see it as when I went to bed around midnight it was cloudy and murky. Used the SW 72ed for some nice low power views and took the pics below, hand held with an Olympus E-M5mk11. At 7.10 freezing fog came in very quickly and engulfed the two planets leaving only the Moon, just as well as my fingers were frozen by this time.
  15. That's a nice picture Stu. I did exactly the same thing for the same reason, but in my case when I looked out of the bedroom window when the alarm went off it was cloudy and there was more snow on the ground. Still, it won't stop me setting the alarm again for tomorrow morning .
×

Important Information

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