Peter Drew

Apologies, not easy to put into words. I'm not familiar with the setup on the mount but usually the worm is in an adjustable bracket. This allows the worm to be tightened in mesh with the wormwheel which you have done. What I was trying to describe was that there was a possibility that the bracket wasn't firmly fixed after the adjustment and whilst you were turning it to check the backlash the bracket backed off thereby providing backlash again when the looser position is reached. A spring loaded worm bracket would overcome this issue. I believe there is a mod available for this mount. 🙂

Only the best of the best on Solarchat! 🙂

I have an excellent 5" F15 triplet APO and three 8" SCT's and I can confirm exactly what John has said. Saved me a lot of typing! 🙂

It could be that the mechanism that holds the worm assembly in place is somehow moving. When you adjust the worm mesh it could be pushing the worm holder back although the mesh will feel tighter. When the wormwheel reaches its opposite looser position this will have been made looser. The overall problem is eccentricity of the wormwheel. 🙂

A rare opportunity for a bit of solar viewing today. Good definition despite the thin cloud which reduces the contrast slightly and the stiff breeze that shakes the telescope despite being in an observatory. The departing active area is still putting on a good show with a smaller version oncoming. A number of decent prominences and filaments to add to the mix. 🙂

Hello Neno. Whereabouts are you in Tenerife?, I have an "Astro" apartment in Playa de la Arena with some telescopes. 🙂

We are near completion of the refurbishment and erection of a 3.6metre radio telescope, formally sited in Cumbria and known as the Three Peaks radio telescope. 🙂

It sounds to me that the telescope has been subject to vibration somewhere during its transit which has loosened the focuser attachment and its motion adjustment. There is a fine line between proper action and slippage on a Crayford type focuser regardless of the make or cost and correct adjustment is essential. There will be a facility for adjustment somewhere on the body, if in doubt contact Starlight for the information. You shouldn't use the drawtube locking screw to stop the unit slipping, this could cause premature wear. 🙂

Nothing new here! W Herschel used to make spherical eyepieces for high powers by dropping molten glass into water. Over 60 years ago I made some singlet short focus eyepieces from the small lenses on the front of torch bulbs that were available at the time. 🙂

Congratulations on the completion. I hope the "Windy Knoll" description has been taken note of in the hold down design! 🙂

I have several zooms ranging from inexpensive (Seben, Celestron and Vixen) to medium cost (Baader) and expensive (Leica). All give good results with the equipment I use them on, the difference between them is marginal, the more expensive ones can work well at shorter focal ratios and tend to have slightly wider fields of view. If the intention is mainly convenience rather than an alternative to single eyepieces then the mid range ones are ideal. You still need a good wide field low power eyepiece to complement them. 🙂

Hello Maggie. Welcome to SGL. Beginners, understandably always want to view planets, nebulae, the Moon and also to take photos of them. At a modest initial budget this is going to invite the "c" word--compromise! You will get various recommendations from the experienced members, they will all be valid to a certain degree and may well add to the choice confusion. It's best to try and narrow down the type of astronomy which you would like to do most as this can focus on the best advice. For a start, planets need enough aperture and magnification to do them justice whereas faint objects like nebulae and galaxies require aperture, lower magnifications and wide field of view, It is difficult for starters to have both of these attributes. The 130P mentioned by Robin probably comes nearest to this solution at this price bracket. Bear in mind that there is only one Moon and only three or four planets that are interesting in a small telescope and the main three are poorly placed for some time. By contrast, there are countless star clusters and double stars available to a small telescope. 🙂

I currently have a Tal1 and a 100R, they seem to come up at such irresistable prices! 🙂

I've had a Tal2 in the past, it gave excellent views, I doubt whether the mirror was spherical although the Tal1 might well have been, even so, the Tal1 also gave great views. The "M" should denote a motor drive. If all is in reasonable order £80 is a steal. 🙂

@RodAstroI have a 8.5" F12 achro refractor and a 5" F15 triplet APO, both self built with existing optics on large self built mounts. I also have an Ealing-Beck asymmetric equatorial mount similar in size to your mount which easily carries a 16" SCT and a piggybacked SW 150ED refractor. In the main I use zoom eyepieces on these telescopes, Baader and TV Nagler types plus a selection of TV plossls. Lowest power eyepiece is a Vixen 42LV. 🙂

I have reservations about binoculars for a 5 year old, they rarely have the coordination or manual dexterity at that age to keep something in view let alone find it. Mounting a binocular will help but it would still need an adult to position it and the views are likely to be underwhelming to someone probably used to seeng photos in books. 🙂

I seem to remember a similar ready made telescope from around that era, it had the same spherical backplate and odd eyepiece assembly. It was billed as the "Super Moon Scope". 🙂

Naked eye views are deceptive, can you see the craters on the Moon without a telescope?, almost any telescope will. You cannot see planets with the naked eye, only the light from them, they need to be magnified by a telescope to see the actual planet disc. Using a telescope is hard enough for an absolute beginner let alone a 5 year old, however keen, much other than the Moon will take adult intervention. Well worth the effort to nurture the interest though. 🙂

I've also been comparing different telescopes observing Mars and have come to similar conclusions. The main comparison has been between a 16" SCT and its SW 150ED "finder". In general, the refractor gives a neater, consistently more stable image than the SCT and the colours are more pronounced but at high magnification around 400x the image in the refractor becomes dim whereas the SCT, presenting a larger exit pupil remains more than bright enough. I tried a whole range of colour filters but all were disappointing. I've yet to try a couple of the more recommended specialist filters. Overall, the best image of the night has been with the SCT which is probably to be expected, if only there was that perfect night! I also have a vintage orange C8 that puts up excellent images, almost as good as the 150ED but noticeably different in presentation. My experience over the years leads me to believe that there is small incremental difference in planetary detail as apertures increase, visibility of faint DSO's is a different matter. 🙂

Join the queue. 🙂

Dense fog all day here so far. ☹️

Grave situation! 🙂

I'm surprised it went through the letter box. 😀

I made an adapter for the eyepiece so that the focus position for the eyepiece and the camera were identical. 🙂

+1 🙂