Louis D

7 hours ago, GasGiant said:

When I switch to the 9 ( its all I have a the moment ) the planet whizzes past at a great rate of knots haha. I have a job with the dob keeping up.

Look into getting an ultra to hyper wide angle 9mm eyepiece to give you more dwell time between nudges.

14 hours ago, Steven Harris said:

Hi everyone, does anyone know of a padded bag which will fit a Starsense 12" Dob, including the phone mount? Thank you

Why not just get a really large duffle bag and wrap the tube in yoga or camping mats?  Even closed cell foam sheets would work well.  Worst case, 12" Dobs are pretty tough, and minor dents won't affect their optical abilities.

I thought the Baader ClickLock system used a torque mechanism preventing over tightening.  I thought that was the point of the clicking.  Once you reach that point, it won't tighten any further.  I've never actually used one, so I'm totally guessing here based on my experience with torque wrenches.

The Delites have neither the SAEP nor the coffee tone of the Radians.  They are basically a scaled down version of the Delos which are basically a scaled down version of the Ethos themselves.  Paul Dellechiaie did all three designs.  I've read that rare earth glasses were avoided due to their prohibitive cost.  They also are the most likely cause of the coffee tone found in many older Tele Vue designs.

If you like the Delos, but find they are too bulky, the Delites are probably for you.

Would pairing a UHC filter that doesn't cut IR with a UV/IR cut filter help reduce star bloat with EAA?  Would you get weird reflections between the two filters causing issues of their own?

@Manoah, are you saying that you can't see Jupiter's bands visually?  It's just a bright white blob?  It could be that a variable polarizing filter could be used to dial down the overwhelming brightness to a level allowing your eye to perceive the low contrast details.  If that doesn't help, try using a green #56 filter to cut out the poorly focused red and blue ends of the spectrum due to either your scope being an achromat (I'm not sure what type you have) or due to atmospheric dispersion.

Given that cordless electric drill chucks have a really reliable, centering action that releases every time, why can't that same mechanical action be scaled up for eyepiece holders?

On 26/12/2023 at 13:42, Don Pensack said:

If you want to center the inserted accessory, then you need a Twist-Lock or Click-Lock system.

According to @Tiago Ferreira, the Baader Click-Lock does not center the eyepiece/camera/etc.  See video below queued up to about 3:00 where he demonstrates it pushes in from only one side.  Basically, it sounds like an eccentric cam was used to achieve the clamping effect rather than using a true collet action.

Those old eyepieces are pretty easy to disassemble with a lens wrench/spanner.  Once apart, you could try soaking the fungal coated elements in bleach or mildew remover to see if you can kill the fungus and then start cleaning the elements.  If it's between lens element in the cement, it would require a lot more work to loosen the lens cement to separate the lens elements to get at the fungus.

Of course, any lens coatings are probably etched beyond hope by the fungus.

I'm just tossing out ideas to make lemonade out of lemons.

Santa brought several filter wallets for my ever growing filter collection, and 1.25" and 2" 650nm shortpass (light cyan) filters to experiment with to cut unfocused red light in my achromats.  Sorry, no photos yet.

1 hour ago, Nigella Bryant said:

a heated seat for my observatory chair. 

Just a heads up, I had to swap in a higher amperage (same voltage) power supply for a similar seat heater several years ago.  The one it came with was just too anemic to do much heating.

10 hours ago, F15Rules said:

Good advice from Mr Spock above 👍.

This adapter will enable these eyepieces to work in a 1.25" focuser😉

https://uk.vicedeal.com/products/0-965-to-1-25-eyepiece-adapter-telescope-astronomy-24-5mm-to-31-7mm-metal-mount-adapter-for-binoculars-monocular?variant=UHJvZHVjdFZhcmlhbnQ6MTcyNTgyMjMw&gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAiAyp-sBhBSEiwAWWzTnjmInk_hbmno5fz_ba-4iFFO-j_3byRGTstcz9YeANOGUWB47NfEwhoCBWgQAvD_BwE

Hope that helps,

Dave

Wrong way round for that adapter.  That one is for using 1.25" eyepieces in an 0.965" focuser.  This is the adapter needed for these eyepieces.

On 22/12/2023 at 16:02, bingevader said:

Have I got my terminology the wrong way round then?

I was thinking short FL = Wide FOV?

Wide True FOV or TFOV is generally associated with longer FL eyepieces.

On 22/12/2023 at 16:52, bosun21 said:

The FOV is dependent on the design of the eyepiece itself.

Apparent FOV or AFOV is eyepiece design dependent.

12 hours ago, Vinnyvent84 said:

Mind if I ask what Bortle Zone you are? Mine is 8 and I’m terrified that once I get my scope setup I will have spent close to 2k between scope and equipment to look at smudges and blurs lol

I would forget about galaxies except for M31 and its satellite galaxies.  Under those skies, you're just seeing the cores of the very brightest ones, and then only dimly.

Star clusters should still look good IF you can find them in the murk and pump up the power to decrease the background sky brightness.

Planets, lunar, and solar observing are not really affected by sky brightness, so they're really good targets for urban astronomers.

Nebula can be seen with a narrowband OIII filter.  The slightly wider passbands of UHC filters might show some details.  The Orion Nebula, being the brightest nebula in the sky, is good even from urban skies if you pump up the power.

Planetary nebula, at least the brightest and most compact ones, are visible from urban skies if you pump up the power.

The largest and brightest globular clusters don't quite resolve in a 6" scope.  It's close, and the outer fringes start to resolve.  They're still worth trying to observe from an urban site IF you can find them in the murk and pump up the power.

I highly recommend getting familiar with planetarium software like Stellarium to learn where things are in the night sky at different times of the year at different times of the night.  Also, some planetarium apps like SkEye will allow you to turn your scope into push-to to get you into the general vicinity of objects when no guide stars are visible.  You just need to work out a way to mount it to your scope, but not so close to the metal tube as to throw off the compass.

Having lived near NYC for 6 years, your greatest nemesis can be smog that can obscure even the sun on a clear day.  If a front or storm clears out the sky of pollutants, your Bortle number can suddenly drop a notch or two for one or two nights because nothing but clean air is scattering light pollution leading to less sky glow.  You'll learn to plan for those conditions.

12 hours ago, Vinnyvent84 said:

And I just realized by looking at your name I made a purchase on your site just the other day for the Televue Eyecup Extender for my 32mm Plossl - so cool!

Then you just squeaked in with that purchase.  Don's retiring for a second time at the end of the month/year and will close his store.  From what I've read, he plans to continue astro observing and participating on the various astro forums.

On 12/12/2023 at 17:17, Bugdozer said:

I can't help but notice how often the phrase "no telescope is ideal for everything" gets said on these forums, yet whenever anyone ever asks what telescope they should get, you always get several people saying "6 or 8 inch Dobsonian" regardless of whether the interest is planetary, deep sky, lunar, whatever. 

Certainly not the best if you need to transport them any significant distance, especially if walking or biking.  In that case, a suitcase/travel Dob would be more appropriate, but you have to build them yourself as Reiner Vogel has done many times over.  I don't understand why no manufacturer has stepped up to make these commercially.  They would make recommending Dobs even easier.

I wasn't a fan of the Radians' SAEP on bright objects (lunar and solar), so I went with Pentax XLs back in the late 90s.  The XLs also seemed to have more eye relief than their LVW counterparts, which was important to me as an astigmatic eyeglasses wearer.

10 hours ago, Neutrinosoup said:

Back garden is Bortle 3 (rural south Scotland). I could travel for darker skies but don’t usually bother.

That is nice and dark by suburban standards.  I'm in Bortle 7 or worse in most directions.  I would think either a 30mm or 40mm would work well under your skies.  I actually use both regularly, so it's not an either/or situation.  The 40mm (Lacerta ED, Pentax XW, ES-68) is best for really big objects or groups of objects and for centering smaller, but brighter ones before swapping to a higher power.  The 30mm UFF is nice for framing slightly smaller objects or groups of objects at a higher contrast level, higher power, and rendering them more sharply while using a smaller, lighter eyepiece that typically balances better when swapping with higher powered eyepieces.

If you want a widest field view without breaking the bank, or dealing with a lot of weight, the 40mm Lacerta ED is very good.  I've found it to be just a bit less sharp at the edges than my 40mm Pentax XW.  The Lacerta appears to still be available from this dealer where I bought mine.  Here's my review of it:

Keep in mind, if you live in light polluted skies, the sky background will be very washed out at that power/exit pupil.  However, the Pleiades and other large star clusters will look very nice in it.

5 hours ago, DaveL59 said:

Isn't another downside of the commercial the fact that rather than using hydrogen and oxygen as propellant they're using something far less eco friendly? So with lots of 'development' launches and failures, then a constant stream of viable ones they're likely adding more pollutant into the atmosphere than a multitude of long-haul airline flights?

Since many early rockets used RP-1 (a highly refined kerosene) just as SpaceX's Merlin and Kestrel engines, I don't see how it's all that much worse now than then.  Also, consider all of the burned kerosene in the form of jet fuel, also highly refined, in airliners every day.  SpaceX is migrating over to methane fueled engines for their future rockets.  I have no idea how it compares to RP-1 as a pollutant, though.

I've really been enjoying my GSO 5" f/5 Newtonian with Linear Bearing 2" focuser for quick outings.  It's low cost, relatively light, holds collimation very well, has no cool down issues, has sharp optics, puts the eyepiece up nice and high so I can keep the tripod low for stability, goes from wide field to high power views with merely an eyepiece change, and has a usable two speed focuser.  You might need a pier extension for your mount to use one without hitting a tripod leg at high elevations.  If you're picky about edge to edge sharpness at low to mid powers, you might want to pickup a GSO coma corrector for it.  If you concentrate mainly on high power viewing, you'd want to remove it anyway because it introduces spherical aberration at high powers.

Maybe by sheer luck, it's that weird thread size on Arcturus (and other entry level) binoviewers' nosepiece upper end.  It's somewhere around 26mm from what I've read and been able to figure out.

Seriously Steampunk looking.  I love it!

I'm picturing the astronomers of the day like this:

I recommend using a cell phone holder to attach mobile phones to eyepieces if you want to do afocal photography.  DSLRs don't work well in this application.

I couldn't figure out from the translated description if the black optics section is removable and 1.25" filter threaded.  If so, it might work well with binoviewers to reach focus.  Right now, I use the optics section of a Meade 140 APO Barlow for this purpose.