Stu1smartcookie

Hi ... i have just taken delivery although i havent opened it yet , of a TS Optics 8" CC .. would it be ok on an EQ5 ? or should i go for a skytee ... i would like the EQ mount as its very practical > Anything larger is unfortunately out of the question for me at this time. 

Actually if you want to dispose of them in my direction please do so !!!!!!!! .... In all seriousness please keep them and use them , Mike . I'm sure others will say the same .   

Thanks John  , Nice one .

Hi , I have a 3/8" steel tripod , but i want to fit a skytee mount . Ive been told that the thread isnt right , is there a way to accomplish this ?... ie a thread adapter or maybe just drilling out the hole . 

Any thoughts welcome 

Stu

Does anyone else have a feeling of guilt when on a clear evening one doesn’t go outside and set up ? I’ve got that tonight and actually trying to justify it by acknowledging  the wind being a bit strong ! Clear nights are at a premium … luckily I will definitely be out tomorrow night ! Promise 

22 hours ago, AstroNebulee said:

Looks very nice indeed Stu. Definitely be great for the az gti in alt az. Hopefully you'll get first light this week and the bigger aperture be great. Eager to hear how you get on with the scope on az gti 👍

So , last night i hastily set up the mount and used the 130pds . Now , i didnt properly level the tripod and only roughly pointed north and only did a one star alignment !! thats three bad marks for me ! 

Have to report that , as you would expect , the goto was a few degrees off but completely manageable . I viewd the favourites ie Orion , Plaides , Hyades... a few doubles , andromeda , Starfish Cluster and the Beehive cluster . The beehive was a lovely sight . I did notice that after centering Beetlguese the star had drifted towards the edge of view ( i left it for about 25minutes for this to happen ) I put this down to my laziness and its a lesson to everyone that preparation is key when using a Goto mount . 

I used just one EP , the 2" 28mm Ep that came with the scope . First i thought collimation was well out but in reality the scope just needed to cool down and stars were pin point . Another point is the extension pier from skywatcher that i used was probably not a good idea . The mount sitting directly on the tripod would certainly give a better centre of gravity and stop any potential unwanted instability although that in itself may bring into play the issue of the scope coming rather close to the tripod legs when pointing near the Zenith .  The 130pds really sits well on the AZ-Gti and i have no problems reccommending this scope . I am going to try it with a dslr at  the weekend , when i have more time . All in all , a very nice hour and a half . 

16 hours ago, jjohnson3803 said:

Apologies if this has been covered somewhere in the thread.  What is the practical load limit? I've seen 5 pounds but also 10 kg listed as maximum load.

I'd like to put a 102/700 refractor on an Az-Gti, total weight around 4.5 kg, but I'm thinking that's probably too close to the mount's limit (alt-az).

Thanks!

 

As above, i think the length will be the issue of the 102mm f7 scope rather than the weight . I am using an AZ-Gti with a WO ZS73 , and a 130pds f/5 which is 650mm long . It works very well.

What i do use is a counterweight on the side of the mount , which offsets the weight . ( when in ALt Az mode ) 

I have a WO ZS73 and i have just bought a 130PDS so in relation to your question its about the same difference in aperture . i like to think that both scopes compliment each other rather than directly compete . My zs73 will be used for observing and for photograhy , as will my 130. But the increased aperture will come in handy on the 130 . 

Stu

8 minutes ago, LaurenceT said:

I'd like to try that too but when adding a camera and in my case a Telrad I'd be at or over the load limit for the mount but heyho🤣

I think the counterweight " z bracket " (see photo 2) for the want of a better term helps , especially as the scope sits directly above the mount , when the scope points to the zenith , as long as the balance is correct it performs admirably . Also a strong tripod makes a lot of difference and , to be honest i probably could get away without the extension tube to make the whole mount even more solid . 

1 minute ago, AstroNebulee said:

Looks very nice indeed Stu. Definitely be great for the az gti in alt az. Hopefully you'll get first light this week and the bigger aperture be great. 

reckon it will work ok in EQ mode too , Lee ...when i get round to updating the firmware lol

13 minutes ago, Elp said:

Welcome to the 130pds club

I am a little spoilt for choice as i also have a WO ZS73 ... i really like the 130pds ... really light and set up for photography ... it will give me a bit more aperture for viewing over the zs73 

So i picked up a new scope yesterday which i was a bit concerned wouldn't happily sit on the AZ-GTi mount . As it happened i needn't have worried . Its well balanced and the scope is surprisingly light .. a bit too windy last night to try it out ... hopefully tonight i will at least use it for a bit of visual . I've kept my AZ-GTi in alt az mode for now. 

Hi Mark , where are you from , in Poland ? I've spent a lot of time there in the past ... lovely country . Welcome to SGL

Stu

Seems to be a few conflicting reports of Nirvanas , to be expected , but they do seem to get a good press .

10 minutes ago, ScouseSpaceCadet said:

I have the Nirvana 7mm -16mm and see no reason to change them. I did sell on the 4mm due to floaters. The Vixen 4mm SLV is nowhere near as bad for floaters and all round just better except for the narrower fov.

I think , i would go for those two if i went down the Nirvana route , did you use a barlow with these EPs ? If so how were the views ?

3 minutes ago, PeterC65 said:

I started out with the Baader Zoom as my only eyepiece but now have five Explore Scientific eyepieces which I prefer and use much more often.

I like the look of the ES range but the prices literally scare me lol ... thats why the nirvana Eps look tempting .. still not sure though . 

2 minutes ago, Pixies said:

I had heard so much love for them that I was really disappointed when  I first used it. I got advice here on using wide-field EPs but could never really get on with it.

I thought it might have just been me and 82° EPs, but then I tried the ES ones and they were fine. Sold the Nirvana on to a good home.

Everyone and their eyes are different. 

The ES eyepieces were also on my list 

24 minutes ago, Pixies said:

For balance: I never got on with the only Nirvana eyepiece I owned - the 16mm. I had trouble getting eye-placement correct and suffered from blackouts. I'm not sure how the other 2 compare. Given the choice between my Baader zoom and the 3 Nirvanas, I'd go with he zoom without hesitation. It's my most used eyepiece alongside the wider field 30mm Vixen NPL.

I have a couple of 82° Explore Scientifics EPs. Would I swap 3 of them for the zoom? Yes, but I would prefer to have both. Some nights the zoom is just so handy, it never leaves the draw tube.

Yes and that’s a very good point, convenience. I can get three Nirvanas for 250 or the zoom for 223 I reckon I am looking towards the zoom at present , a night of YouTube awaits though lol

4 minutes ago, johninderby said:

I found the Hyperflex zoom to be about 80% to 90% as good as the Baader zoom. The Svbony zooms are also very good.

The Nirvanas are a best buy. Not as good as a Nagler but not that far off either. Would rather have the set of Nirvanas than the Baader zoom.

 

I've read good things about the Nirvana EP's ... Have to say , whilst i like the thought of not chopping and changing EP's , the Nirvana EP's really do look like good value 

5 minutes ago, Saganite said:

Hi Stu,

I have used a Hyperflex 7.2mm - 21.5mm zoom in my two 4" refractors for some while.  I had previously tried the Baader 8-24 zoom , at least twice, Tele vue 8-24mm, and never really got on  with them, but I did stick with the Hyperflex for the longest time, it is very good.  I only really use the zoom for star splitting , and for that I find it very useful.

Steve , did you find the restricted field of view a problem compared to the more expensive EP's ?( maybe not if you were focusing on doubles ) . How about contrast and image brightness ?

Sorry for indulging in the 80's music scene , but , its relevent , to a point . 

I have very briefly owned a rather substandard zoom EP which had no branding and to be honest i reckon i could have made a better one myself . I would like to purchase a good quality Zoom EP for my WO ZS73 . Question 1 ... is the Baader 8-24 at least twice as good as , say an OVL Hyperflex 9-27 mm ... or indeed an SvBony zoom EP. From what i am reading the Baader does have a slightly wider field of view . 

Question 2 ... on the other hand i may be interested in the Nirvana 4mm, 7mm, and 16mm ... actually nearly matching the Baader zoom for price . What do you think ? i was rather hoping a Zoom EP would be my sweet spot when using the ZS73 for viewing . Anyone else used a Zoom EP with a small refractor ?

Any thoughts welcome 

Stu

On 06/01/2022 at 12:32, Merlin said:

Most of us use our ‘scopes for stargazing rather than research. It seems to a case of overkill to have a premium grade ‘scope for casual viewing.

I think when we try to confuse the hobby of stargazing with someone that uses astronomy for anything more than a pastime the lines are inevitably drawn that a casual viewer by definition probably has less , shall we say , premium equipment ... but , dont we ALL have less premium equipment next to the Hubble and the JW scope ? Optics  are better these days and astronomy equipment is much cheaper allowing casual stargazers to invest in scopes that people of past era's would have loved to use . The other problem is the dreaded Light polution which can render the most premium scope basically useless , whereas a cheap achromat in a dark site can show the wonders of the night sky . Its all a bit of a minefield . 

Hi , the ST102 is an Achromat single lens design that will display chromatic aberation when viewing bright objects . This would be the case for photography also , whereas the ZS73 is a doublet , which uses more expensive glass and offers a much cleaner image . Sure for viewing you will lose the aperture but for photography you will gain . 

To be honest i have viewed the planets with a zs73 and whilst they appear small , increased magnification gives sharp views . I have also owned an ST102 which is a fine widefield scope , its up to you how much chromatic aberation bothers you ( ie a false halo appearing around bright objects ) . 

Stu

So, new arrivals include the WO ZS73 and a 3/8” steel tripod .. all very secure and neat , shame it’s cloudy . 

Just reading this makes me impatient to set up my WO73 , Joe . 

Nice report mate 

Stu