paulastro

I had an 8inch f6 for over a year up to July when I had the opportunity to part-ex it for a 10inch f5 version of the same make Dob. I used the 8 at every opportunity and became very familiar with its performance while I owned it. A wonderful scope. Roll on about six weeks, and I have to say I am surprised how much the 10 surpasses the performance of the 8 . Both on deep sky and planetary, it clearly gives a better performance unless the seeing is particularly bad I was surprised as I've owned 10 inch and up to 14 inch scopes at various times over the years but couldn't recall the difference being so much.. Though, I hadn't owned a scope greater than 6 inches for some time before buying the 8 inch. (I had used other people's larger than this though in the odd occassions). So for me, on performance it is a no brainer. However, Peter makes a good point on size. I should have had a hip replacement in July, posponed as during the pre-op I was diagnosed with a heart condition so the op is off for some time. I also have a back problem. I only have to carry the 10 (in two pieces) a few yards to use it, but it can be very painful - despite doses of codeine. I don't regret the swap of scopes at all, but I do have three smaller scopes I can use instead if I'm having a particularly bad day. The weight between the 8 and 10 isn't great, but it depends on how your condition affects your lifting ability, which will be different to mine of course. But it is important you take it into account when deciding what to do. PS I should have said, moving the 8 around hadn't given me any real problems.

It's rare I don't see a satellite zap through if I'm observing any object for more than five minutes. It must be a nightmare for imaging colleagues.

I had the same experience bosun21 did. Though I had some apprehensions ordering it, it went very smoothly and it arrived a little earlier than I was expecting.

Excellent, well said. To me visual observing is actually experiencing the night sky, while imaging is time spent obtaining a picture of it, which however impressive is only a poor representative of the real thing. It's a bit like reading holiday brochures but never going on holiday. It doesn't really matter as they are completely different activities so one being better than the other doesn't come into it for me. It's also not true there is somehow a 'natural' progression from observing to imaging, indicating the former is superior in some way. This myth is encouraged to some degree by magazines and astronomical retailers advertising very expensive imaging equipment. It's a good business to be in - selling equipment most of which will soon be out if date or incompatable. Indeed, apart from the telescope or lens used, if its kept long enough it becomes worthless. A friend of mine, to counteract jibes saying how superior imaging is responds that 'imagers are failed visual observers'. I couldn't possibly comment. 🙂

Jim, I've asked my wife, and she says under no circumstances should I take up cage fighting. So sorry, but I can't participate 😔.

I often talk to the Moon sometimes when I'm observing it, but please don't tell anyone else!

I initially wondered if this was meant to be a serious comment on the issue. I didn't realise that visual observers were becoming 'unpopular' - I know some visual observers who have quite a few friends. I suppose visual observers should also be grateful that 'there is a certain charm to visual observing' - I m glad it has something going for it. On a more serious note though, I am rather concerned that I am ' going to evolve to become more astrophotography than visual'. What does this mean, square eyes to better use monitors, thinner fingers to tap the keyboard keys more effectively? And 'imaging takes research before going out, planning the night' - and there was me thinking visual observers just rush out at the sign of any clear sky and point the tesescope randomly at any object in the night sky. Incredible!

To suggest that there may be a time when visual observing will become a rare activity and astro imaging will somehow take over is nonsense in my view. There have always been more visual observers than imagers and there always will be. It just seems there are more imagers than there are because they like to share their images with others and get have them onto websites, forums, magazines and other publications. Read AN and S@N mag and you will find many images of celestial subjects, but you won't won't see many pics of anyone actually observing the night sky. You will also read many articles about how to take better images, or just pics to admire, but comparatively little about visual observing - and even then usually at a very basic level. Read the classified ads on astro forums and the vast majority are items primarily for imaging. This is because imagers need to spend so much money on all sorts of gear unrelated to visual observing. Most observers don't leave their trails and signs everywhere as imagers do so don't tend to get noticed. There are many solitary visual observers who pursue their interest quietly and without fuss and never go near any societies or forums. There may seem to be a lot of imagers and few visual observers - but that's just how it seems. Imagers are the noisy neighbours of the astronomical community - they are not the majority and never will be.

You should get out more Luke 🙂.

No apology necessary, I'm pleased someone else is able to help you out. I've never used GPCs, only barlows 😊.

No problem. It depends on the binoviewrs light path, but with a x2 barlow, just divide the eyepiece fl by 4. So a pair of 24mm ep will effectively be 6mm.

bosun21 I have no problem using the binoviewer with any telescope. I have the original Baader Maxbright and it's always worked with any barlow lens, or just a barlow element screwed straight into the binoviewer eyepiece. With any scope I've used it always comes to focus, and this includes my 10 inch Starsense Dob. The barlow I use mostly is just the element component of a x2 SW Deluxe barlow screwed into the Maxbright nosepiece. I also use 24 mm Orthoscopics usually, x200 on the 10 inch Dob. On the Moon and planets the image stays in focus right across the width of the field to the edges. The images are better than with any single eyepiece I have ever tried including Monos and Delos. Just try any barlow, or just the element, you may find it's all you need. The only downside is if you wanted to use a pair of eyepieces and use them at their native focal lengths at lower powers. On most Newtonians, without using a barlow ( which has the affect of increasing the eyepieces magnification by x4) you will not be able to get the binoviewer to focus. There won't be enough in-focus. You will need the GPC for low powers with appropriate eyepieces. No problem for me as I mostly use my binoviewer for the Moon and planets.

This might make the image look sharper Mike, especially if the seeing is not great, however the available resolution will be reduced to the diameter of the stop. If the objective is to reduce any glare, ND, polarising, or other filters would be my choice. With my 10inch Dob (Starsense Explorer) I have seen very good detail on Jupiter and Saturn on some sessions in the last couple of weeks using the binoviewer, 24mm Orthos and a x2 barlow element - giving me x200. As you know yourself Mike, for many of us binoviewing itself makes a significant improvement for many observers when observing the Moon and planets. The sharpness has been very good too - helped to some degree by hazy skies at times. Just to state the obvious, in using filters, the effect will be different for every observer depending on their eyesight and experience, so it pays to experiment in different conditions. Also the visibility of the GRS and other features on Jupiter (for instance) will depend on the observers green or red sensitivity - the appropriate choice of filters will help to balance this out to some degree.

Nice one Mike. I'm looking forward to coming to play some time soon 😊.

I had one of these for a while some years ago. It was good, but I mostly remember how heavy it was, I swear, it's for ever etched into my memory. The tube tube walls were so thick I'm sure if you'd driven a car over it the tube wouldn't have squished. And no, I never actually got round to putting this to the test 🙂.

Many thanks bosun21. From what yourself and Stevie Dvd said, it does sound as if a re-set may do the trick. I think I probably made a mistake in downloading all the apps from my existing phone - I only want it to use Starsense so hopefully there's a way of doing this without the whole lot downloading again. I think I'll wait until I'm feeling really brave! 🙂.

Many thanks Stevie. I'll bear that in mind. I'll do a re- set if all else fails, thanks for your time. At least I can still use my other phone so I wont miss out on any clear sky 🙂. I've had the dob over a year, and am aware of its plate-solving - but didn't stop to think that it won't be working in the daytime 😏. Thanks again.

I recently bought a used phone as a spare to use with my Starsense Explorer 10 inch Dob. It's an Oppo A53, and is a supported camera and is on Celestrons approved list. (Under its model number as many of them are, not as an A54). It sets up OK and it does work - with one caveat. When you push it toward an object, the position on the sky on the phone's display doesn't keep up with the actual position that the scope is pointing to, and this is however slowly you push the scope. If the display is on the target it will indicate this is the case as it should - but if you try and push it, it's so slow to respond on the display you will be past the target before the phone display has changed virtually. I am pretty certain it must be the phone's camera settings, since if you pretend to set it up indoors and move the phone around, the display changes as fast as it should do when the phone is moved. I remember ages ago reading that if a certain camera setting is not switched off (or on!) it may present a similiar problem, though I may have got this wrong and I can't remember what it was anyway! If anyone more savvy with phone's than me (which is just about anyone!) can suggest what the setting might be I'd be very grateful to hear from you. Of course, I can use my usual phone, but its rather irritating to me that I can't figure what the problem is. Probably something amazingly simple 🙂. It looks like clear sky until 3am tonight so can try it out if anyone has any suggestions. Many thanks for reading this, if there's anyone still awake! Many thanks, Paul

irander, I'm not sure, apart from by editing it and just deleting it that way. I objected to it because I think it had little to do with Starsense apart from it involved the use of a phone, and it should have been posted elsewhere - it was just hijacking the post which was about Starsense. Regards, Paul.

Totally agree with you. The BBC App is toast as far as I'm concerned. As you indicate, I find the Met Interactive Cloud/Rain map to be excellent since it was re-vamped some months ago. Its useful for spotting approachhing clear patches, and often correctly indicates clear conditions even when the map is different to the weather indicated by their own hourly weather symbols. If I just had one source of predicting clear skies, it would be this weather map.

Well done having some clear skies, excellent descripttions of double stars, and good use of Starsense.

The two 'advertisements' for FinderCam should have been posted somewhere else in my view rather than added onto my post re Sarsense. If any moderator agrees can they be removed please?

Thanks Robert; I have tried it out briefly and it works well. Poor weather has curtailed its use but the optics look fine. Its a good compromise with portability and aperture as you're aware. I don't think the secondary size will make much difference for visual observations. I considered other 130mm Newts. The PDS won partly because of the focuser, but also the shorter length than other f5s, I wanted an f5 anyway, solid tube, it has a proper dovetail and tube rings, a fully collimatable mirror and tried and tested optics. The system also works well with an 80ED and C5 I have with a CF photo tripod plus AZ5 and a Scopetech Mount Zero. I mix and match mounts/ tripods depending what I'm observing and how portable it needs to be. My Celestron 10inch StarSense Explorer is used at home. I usually have a small finder with me, but most of the time it's not used at all with any of the scopes. I have Android, so will have to wait to use it with SkySafari.

I bought the 130PDS as a portable/travel scope to use with my Starsense Explorer. The first pic shows the three components. A small 30mm finder for the initial alignment, a multi-finder adapter (Vixen) and the Starsense phone holder and base with an adapter (the orange bit kindly provided by an SGL member) screwed into the bottom of the base. There are other multi-finder adapters available, but found this one to be the best as it enables the finder and phone holder to be close together and both used while you can still see through the eyepiece from the same position. Of course, once you have done the initial alignment the first time you use the Starsense, you don't really need to use the finder and could remove it if you wished. The beauty of this system is that you can use Starsense on any telescope that has a Vixen finder foot (or fit one if necessary) without having to drill holes into your telescope, or indeed change it in any way. The cost of this is buying a Starsense Explorer telescope to obtain the phone holder and base, plus the multi-finder device and obtaing/making the Vixen finder foot adapter to attach to the base of the Starsense holder. A bargain in my view.

Guest stuff Louis. Yes, I submit. It's just amazing that both of us have embraced Starsense Explorer 😅.