A_N_other_beginner

Hopefully I'll be forgiven for going off topic, but these forums have never seen me wrong in the past when I've been looking for advice all things optics related.

I'm fortunate enough to live relatively close to a venue that has a fair few airshows, and it's not uncommon for the aircraft concerned to pass over or near my house. That said, they'll often then circle around a couple of miles away. I've got a pair of 8x42 Helios Mistral WP3 (which were bought for astro use, and are brilliant.) But they don't have quite the reach to be as useful as I'd like. So a spotting scope seems like the next sensible jump. A lot of the aircraft are pootling along at sensible speeds so tracking shouldn't be a major issue, my eldest was quite comfortable doing so handheld with the binoculars - but I'll be using the spotting scope with a tripod.

That said, I don't have a huge budget. So my options are restricted. Could anyone steer me towards something that will be a step-up on the 8x42's for around the £100 mark? Absolute top end budget would be £150. And I've no issue going second hand, albeit preferably from somewhere like the classified section on here.

That makes sense, cheers. Think I'm pretty well settled on the Flextube then. I'll consider a shroud nearer the time but for camping on fairly dark sky areas (Lakes/Peak District/Snowdonia) I'm not going to worry overly.

Thanks for all the replies. I think having been through everything I'm pretty much back to the very beginning - the Flextube. There seems to be little doubt that I'll see more with that than a similarly priced refractor from the comments above. Whilst the form factor is somewhat bulkier it's still relatively compact, and the idea of mounting it on a camera tripod with a vixen clamp as shown above is an appealing one. My tripod ballhead is rated up to 8kg; even being conservative with that figure, the Flextube shouldn't trouble it too much. But given the kids will also be using this, knowing it'll sit on the ground happily and I'll just need to bend slightly from a seated position whilst they stand is actually quite desirable.

My one question though is the leftfield option thrown up by Alfian - a 102 Mak such as the Skymax 102 would be fractionally over budget. How would that compare to the Flextube? I'm aiming to use this in relatively dark areas away from the worst of the light pollution and would like to have my options open, with DSO's, planetary etc doable with whatever I settle on.Sk

2 minutes ago, johninderby said:

I’ve had the AR80S dual speed and the AR90 and an ST80.

The optics of tje AR80S are noticeablely sharper than the ST80 and a bit less CA. A great value for money. The Opticstars are a real bargain. Reasonable build quality and a not bad Crayford focuser. Not up to the build quality of one of TS scopes but for the money quite acceptable. 

 

How much would I need to budget for a diagonal and what would I need to mount it on a camera tripod?

And any take on the AR80S vs the Flextube 130p?

At some point before the spring/summer months arrive I'm looking to pick up a cheap travel scope to take on family holidays camping away from much of the light pollution I'm used to at home. Taking my 6" newt and AZ4 isn't practical in a full car. I'm considering two routes - either a travel dob such as the SW 130p Flextube, or a compact refractor (in the latter case, something second hand through the classifieds of ABS.) In the latter scenario I believe I can use a photography tripod potentially - is that correct, and if so would it involve removing the tripod head (I currently use a ballhead and Swiss-Arca system with my DSLR and binoculars)?

I'm trying to work out the pro's and con's of either route. I also know very little about refractors, and if I do look at a refractor could someone suggest what I should be looking for - be it focal length, specific models etc?

My budget is around £150-170 total, if I can't reuse my Manfrotto tripod then something else would need to be budgeted for. Does anything jump to mind?

ETA:
One consideration that's just come to me - if I go for a tabletop dob, it'll likely be placed on a camping table - not likely to be the most stable. I'm not sure how much that will affect things.

I've got a Celestron C6N 150mm newt that I currently store stood up when not in use, with the AZ4 that goes with folded up nearby. To keep it out of harms way and save some space I've been thinking about wall mounting it - it's not hard to find a stud to affix a mount to. Has anyone done something similar and can recommend a clamp or similar that would do the job, or an alternative that's worked as well or better?

On 23/12/2019 at 14:47, mark81 said:

Not sure if there's much weight difference - if any with the 7 and 10x50s. A lot of people say a pair of 10x50s are more than enough to handhold... So for a young kid, maybe they'll be too heavy.  If you are keen on goin for a 50mm then certainly go for the 7's, the lower mag will reduce the shaking of the image.

8x42s might be your best bet. They are still very cabable of picking out some nice DSOs and with the wider FOV they might be easier for a youngster to use...

I've always found the Olympus Dpsi range to be great value for money...

Mark

I'd already ordered the Mistral 8x42mm before your post but they've arrived and seen a bit of action last night (and during the daytime.) Propped against a wall I was able to have a fair look at the Pleiades, but for childrens use they were right on the upper limit of what I think most kids can manage handheld. I have got a tripod mount adapter en route too so I don't think it'll be an issue either way, but the comments about weight really are worth considering if anyone else finds themselves in a similar situation.

I'm going to read up on how to check the collimation on them having never owned a pair of binoculars before, but on initial daytime (and brief nighttime) use I'm really impressed. And my eldest seems happy too with the FoV, commenting on how much more can be seen compared to the 6" newt. So I feel like we've done alright with them.

On 24/12/2019 at 13:47, Neil H said:

Hi I had item with that type of crack the same way . What I was  did was put a tiny cable the around the flat part so the crack was closed then hot glue on the cable tie to hold it in place it's worth a try 

Just the hot glue gun seems to have done the trick - it made a mess of the threads filling them in but a bit of time scraping the worst of the excess away seems to have done the job nicely. On a quick daytime glance it all looks to be optically where it was before, I'll just have to be a bit more careful with it.

Thanks for the advice.

2 minutes ago, John said:

I know the piece of plastic you mean. Not sure if replacements are available. Looking at my 9x50 RACI finder Its just an adapter / spacer to narrow the 2 inch finder body aperture down to a smaller aperture which the diagonal screws into. I guess it could be replaced with a wooden spacer - the conical shape does not matter but the depth of the spacer should be the same. The internal thread of the finder body is a touch over the 2 inch filter size (annoyingly).

You might find that bonding the parts together with a strong adhesive such as Araldite is the best short term approach. I think this is the part we are concerned about ?:

 

That's the part that's broken, thanks. And I've tried a bonding the split together, it's not worked unfortunately - the split is along the smaller of the two threads (it's not snapped entirely in half, but on the thread was about the worst point for it to happen.)

I'm still not entirely sure how, but I've managed to pull the mount for my Skywatcher 9x50 RACI off the OTA, causing it to hit the floor. One part is obviously damaged - there's a slightly conical piece of plastic connecting the main body (OTA?) of the finder and the diagonal, threaded at either end. The larger thread has split; I've tried glueing and taping it in place but I can't repair it. That said, when I connect it all up optically it still looks fit for purpose - it's just the plastic connector.

Does anyone know if that connecting piece of plastic is available seperately to avoid buying a new finder? I've seen some adapters for using it as a guide scope that would appear to be the right thread at one end, but I'm not sure what is needed at the 'diagonal' end - i.e. what thread.

It's a long shot, but does anyone know if I can save myself the cost of a new finderscope?

1 hour ago, Second Time Around said:

Check the interpupillary distance (IPD).  This may not go small enough for a child to close each barrel enough to merge the field of view.

I'm sure others will come along with ideas for specific models.

That's a good point, and one I hadn't considered. I've taken a quick measurement ('it's to do with your telescope, don't worry about why I'm holding a ruler across your nose,' being the only explanation proffered) and it seems that we should just about be okay.

I hit the time limit for getting them ordered with a chance of them arriving before Christmas so I went with the Mistral WP3 8x42mm; it was a judgement call, but lighter is better seemed to be the sensible decision. It may be at some point in the future we add a heavier duty pair on a tripod but as a cheap and cheerful set hopefully they'll do.

Thanks to a last minute drama in the next couple of hours (if they're to potentially arrive in time to go under the tree) I need to work out what binoculars to get for a youngster to use. Something that can be used unsupervised when the seeing is good but I'm not about to get the newt out.
Given age of the user, weight is a big consideration. And from a bit of mooching through this part of the forum, I gather going for 7x over 10x with the exit pupil advantages is likely to be a case of 'less is more,' - have I understood that correctly?

Budget is under £70.

This is my shortlist currently:
https://www.firstlightoptics.com/modern-binoculars/helios-mistral-wp3-42mm-binoculars.html
https://www.firstlightoptics.com/all-binoculars/helios-fieldmaster-8x40-binoculars.html
https://www.firstlightoptics.com/all-binoculars/opticron-imagic-tga-wp-7x50-binoculars.html

On the weight front it looks like the Helios Mistal WP3 8x42's or Fieldmaster 8x40 are a good amount lighter than the next alternatives - 625g vs. 805g for the Opticrons.
Anything else I should consider?

In the not too distant future I'll be looking to fill a couple of gaps and replace some EP's I currently own but don't get on with. I'm trying to make a decision as to what to go with. They are for use with a Celestron C6N (f/5 750mm.)
I've got a bit of a mix of EP's - I started with the stock 20mm plossl, added a 10mm BCO, then a Vixen NPL 30mm and most recently a Vixen SLV 5mm. As a glasses wearer I don't get on with either the stock 20mm or the BCO; I find the latter good optically but neither comfortable nor easy to use. Conversely, both my Vixen's are a joy to use. I spent the extra on the SLV 5mm on the basis that at top end usable mag I want the optics to be as good as I can afford.

I'm looking for a 15mm EP particularly for DSO's, and to replace my 20mm (I'm aware that BST don't do 10 & 20, but do 18mm.) I'll probably replace the BCO too at some point with whatever I go for, but to start with will barlow the 20mm.
The BST Starguiders are raved about on these forums, and seem to have a similar eye cup design to the Vixen's so they're a clear contender. But I really like the SLV's.

So my questions are:
Is the additional cost (about double) of the SLV's merited in terms of additional performance?
Is it worth going for the BST on the basis of 60° vs 50° FOV?
Is there anything else I should consider?

3 hours ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

An alt-az Goto would be sufficient for visual use and easier and quicker to set up (no polar alignment worries) Can you see Polaris from your restricted view site?

BTW, why do you hang a heavy weight under your AZ-4? I have one, and found it so rigid that adding stability aids is utterly unnecessary.

This brings us to equatorial GoTo mounts. An EQ3-2  Pro seems marginal in terms of capacity, even for visual.  An EQ5 Pro Synscan would do nicely - except that it requires polar alignment.  OTOH once you have polar aligned it the once you could mark where the tripod legs go.  This has the same (steel)  tripod as the AZ-4, BTW, so it won't be any heavier to carry (especially if you stop dangling that weight under it.)  These popular mounts cost, IIRC, around £550 new, so if you find one under £370 used you will be doing well.

Be aware that a Goto mount does require some setup time - significantly longer than with your present set-up.

I can see Polaris fortunately.

I put the weight underneath to see if it would make any difference to stability - and it didn't. I took it off a few days ago, but I at least know what sort of weight I can manage to cart about now.

I've no problem with longer setup time as I believe that on balance it'll mean I spend more time looking at the things I want to with a GoTo. I do plan to get a smaller scope (maybe a small dob like the Flextube 130) for instant gratification/travel use, but for looking beyond the easy subjects I think a GoTo is worthwhile.

An EQ5 GoTo is what I'm looking at now - and thanks to those who mentioned the classified ad, but I won't be able to treat myself to anything this side of Christmas.

1 hour ago, Alan64 said:

Hauling an EQ-5 round, not to mention aligning it, might, would perhaps, be like dragging a block to Stonehenge, and there to rest under a full Moon.

An EQ3-class mount would lighten the load a bit; for example...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-eq3-pro-synscan-goto.html

There may very well be used examples of that in the marketplace as well.

This would seem to be the ideal in your case...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/sky-watcher-star-discovery-150i.html

The OTA of that kit is comprised of a good deal of plastic, and is therefore lighter; not as much strain upon the mount.  But I feel that the OTA isn't designed and constructed as well as the one you have at present.

I'm not inclined to get a new OTA; I'm happy with the C6N, and would only consider it if it was a marginal increase in price over a mount alone. I think I can manage the weight okay (with a 5kg weight hanging underneath my OTA&AZ4 combo I'm carting out over 20kg in one hit) so I wouldn't let that sway me. But setup time obviously does, albeit only so far as it affects the overall amount of time viewing vs. finding.
Looking into it, my concern with the EQ3-Pro is capacity. I'm around 7.5kg visually and if I add a DSLR then that's going upwards; the EQ3-Pro has a visual 7kg payload and imaging of 5kg. So I think the EQ5 is still worth considering.

Thanks for the comments and advice, and helping me understand some of the compromises involved. It's a little overwhelming at first, but when boiled down there's really only a relatively small number of options that'll do what I need.

I can do two different directions, that shouldn't be an issue.

I've weighed the OTA with finder and EP - just over 7kg. So I think that rules out the SW AZ GTi mentioned above. What options does that leave me, and probably most importantly - how much do I need to budget for something second hand?

The short answer is I'm happiest with whatever leads me to being set up and able to view most quickly; the idea of tracking for future astro use be a bonus.
I'm okay with finding stars I've looked at before so picking out alignment stars shouldn't be too much of an issue, and I've got good views in certain directions - but not all.

Weight wise - I don't know, I'll dig the scales out the afternoon and post back with it.

Last year Santa - having been well advised by SGL forum members - brought my eldest a C6N with AZ4 mount bought through the classifieds. We've both got some use out of it and have really enjoyed it, but there are a number of factors holding us back right now in getting the most out of it. Chiefly time - the clear nights rarely coincide with those nights that I'm free and that a late night doesn't affect school too much. I wanted to learn my way round the stars and a RACI has helped but TLaO has sat largely unused as viewing usually consists of dashing outside for 45 minutes, then using SkySafari to work out what might be visible in the garden (which thanks to the surroundings has a limited view.)

To make the most of the opportunites that do present I was thinking of getting some sort of GoTo/tracking mount. I've seen some recommendations on here but have struggled to keep up with the different types, and budgets seem to become pretty well astronomical. I don't have the luxury of spending too much but nor do I really know what the difference is, either in terms of features between absolute entry level and budget-med range options.

I'm looking at a second hand option and scour the classifieds but don't really know what I'm looking for or how much I need to spend. Is there a consensus around a budget mount that'll do what I need it to, or any pointers?

I'm going to check the collimation tonight all being well, and have ordered a collimation cap to have standing by.
I did go out with it for awhile last night and left it to cool, I didn't notice quite the same issues with the 'bug on lens' effect but it was still there to an extent. I tried cleaning the eye piece (with a tool I use for DSLR lenses) which may have helped, or it may have been the cooling but I've got some optical cleaning fluid en route too.

I did try a comparison in clarity between the 10mm BCO with and w/o barlow; Jupiter was still similar to the other night in both cases. Conditions weren't bad, the wind meant any cloud cover was moved quickly.

One thing I have noticed is that there's some slight vibration/wobbling currently. I'm not sure if that's just the magnification showing up everything, effect of a breeze on the scope or something else. Is there any benefit to adding counterweights? The mount is a SW AZ4.

42 minutes ago, John said:

Yes thats right.

 

Thanks.
In light of that I'm drawn to a more comfortable EP, particularly for spending more time at the scope to adjust. I've almost made my mind up. With 150x the suggested upper limit that points towards the 5mm SLV (unless the ES82 is as comfortable in use? I believe I saw some comparisons somewhere.) Whilst there is a risk that the difference will be marginal between a 5mm SLV and a barlowed BCO, having been really impressed by the eye relief on the NPL range I'm inclined to take a chance on the SLV - particularly with my target audience.

Cheers to all that have given me a steer. I am going to address the basics first such as collimation, dirt on the EP's as frankly even if they aren't an issue it's worthwhile learning a bit of basic maintenance, and who knows - it could make a significant difference. It's all a steep learning curve but I appreciate everyone taking the time to share the benefit of their experiences with me.

44 minutes ago, John said:

In order to see more detail on planets such as Jupiter and Saturn, you need to spend some time observing them regardless of the quality of optics employed. What I mean by this is that 30-60 minutes of observing a target will gradually allow more detail to be seen. A quick look (eg: just a few minutes) will restrict the amout of detail that will be visible generally, in Jupiters case, to the two main cloud belts. Maybe a little more under good conditions. I realise that younger observers might have a more limited attention span but the general advice of "the more you look, the more you see" applies with them as well.

There are eyepieces that are easier and more comfortable to view with than orthoscopics and a relaxed eye does help in teasing out more detail plus making observing generally a more enjoyable process.

The Vixen SLV eyepiece range is more comfortable to view through for the reasons that Stu explains and maintains a similar level of optical quality to the orthoscopic.

When you are using higher powers with a scope (ie: 100x, 150x etc, etc) you need to use a short focal length eyepiece and that has the effect of producing a small exit pupil (the illuminated disk of light that comprises the field of view) and that smaller patch of light is what newcomers to observing can find hard to pick up as they move their eye to the eyepiece. The Vixen 30mm, being a relatively low power eyepiece produces a larger exit pupil which is easier to find with the eye. I've found repeatedly this is the case from the outreach events that I've done with my astro society.

With patience and practice folks learn how to keep their head still and how to position their eye at the eyepiece and get more success at picking up, and holding, the smaller exit pupils that higher powers inevitably produce. When using a 10mm eyepiece with your scope (which I think is an F/5 newtonian ?) the exit pupil is 2mm in diameter. If you reduce that to a 5mm eyepiece for higher power, the exit pupil reduces to 1mm.

 

I take it though that adding a barlow also affects the exit pupil size proportionately, so whether you 2x barlow a 10mm or just have a 5mm you're still talking the same levels of magnification and exit pupil size?

52 minutes ago, StarryEyed said:

It's easy to think that there are problems when in fact there are not.

You say you need to get to grips with your current scope. Then this is exactly what you need to do. This sounds like you have everything you need but one thing and that's experience in using your telescope and really good conditions.

I once owned a Sky watcher 127 Mak Cass a not so dissimilar scope. In the five years I owned it gave me bad views and good views depending on the conditions. Only on one night mid January when it was minus five and one o'clock in the morning did I get a view of the moon that was clearly outstanding. it's burnt into memory. Maybe there were a few other nights but it became clear to me that sometimes you can wait months even years for the everything to be right. There are lots of nights when this is true but you have to be out there using the scope.

A good target is the moon you will quickly see how the sky conditions effect things. You will quickly see if it worthwhile moving onto more difficult targets. Even if it's not such a good night the moon rarely disappoints. 

So get to grips with your scope, save your money and get your eldest involved.

Kevin.

That's easier said than done. There's only a small percentage of nights where the cloud cover makes it worthwhile taking the scope outside and when I am actually able to do that. Of those, the percentage of the time when I can reasonably bring a child out too is much smaller. This hobby fascinates me (and youngster) but I don't see any choice other than to look to maximise the time I have available. I accept there are no absolute shortcuts, but spending night after night looking at the moon (for the record, something I've managed a fair few times) just to get my eye in for when the conditions just isn't going to happen. And expecting a young childs interest to be held repeating the same isn't likely.

I'm not trying to blame my tools here. I'm just trying to make the most of the very limited time my eldest and I can spend together with the scope. And if I can stretch to an EP, barlow or ADC (and - whatever I consider, a collimation cap and some cleaning products for the EP's will be on the order) I do this knowing that at some point in the future that item will be used. It might not be for planets, it might be used for picking out lunar features or trying to split doubles, or something else. So I accept that the long way round is to take my time, learn the craft, learn to use what I've got - in a sense a refreshing change from the consumerism embedded into many hobbies. And I still hope to do that along the way. But I certainly don't have a problem with buying something - not in a vain hope of solving a problem, but because if I've got it I'm likely to use it. It's long been my intention to add a couple of EP's and a quality barlow, if one of those things could help with planetary viewing that is really a bonus.

One issue I have noticed is that the youngster seems to struggle with the BCO (as has my wife) to actually see anything very much. I've managed okay but struggle to articulate to a child how to move your eye around to actually get the subject visible - and that's before worrying about getting it into focus. I've noticed that my 32mm Vixen NPL is the most comfortable EP I have. Would something like the SLV be easier to use compared to the BCO with regards to the issue I've described?

2 hours ago, PH-R said:

I would go with this option.

Even though it'd mean a stack including a cheap and basic barlow?
I can see the value of an ADC, but in a combination including a good and a basic (and presumably optically inferior?) barlow I'm wondering how much the benefit of the ADC would be offset by that cheaper piece of glass in the middle. Am I barking up the wrong tree regarding the barlow?
If I already had the barlow I'm considering (Televue 2x) I'd not be thinking about the weak link quite so much, but I genuinely don't know what sort of difference there is between a £20 barlow and a £100 one.

A bit of a mix of replies, although I fully accept the one constant that planetary viewing conditions aren't currently ideal.
In relation to EP's etc, I'm completely happy with the quality of the BCO but my reservation comes from the barlow - it's a cheap thing. My background is photography and I've no idea how much this transfers over, but the rule was often that putting bad glass in front of good glass is not a recipe for the best capture - is that true here?

I will definitely look into collimation, and it's pleasant to see some suggestions that don't involve spending money. However I do have a bit of cash earmarked for something, so even if it's not something that's specifically going to help with Jupiter and Saturn currently I'm happy to spend it to just have more tools at my disposal. If the existing  cheap 2x barlow is better than I'm giving it credit for, then an EP that'll help with DSO viewing or something else is fine. Flexibility is never a bad thing.

33 minutes ago, Ricochet said:

Probably hairs/fibres on your eyepiece lenses. 

The 10mm BCO is very good and the Vixen barlow will also be good. I don't think there will really be anything to gain optically by changing the barlow or by buying any of the eyepieces in your price range. If you were to switch to the SLV you would gain eye relief which should be more comfortable and might help your observing. 

The atmosphere really is the limiting factor this year so you will probably be best off not duplicating a focal length that is covered by your existing eyepiece and barlow. Given that you effectively have a 10 and a 5mm, a 7mm (or 14mm) would split them nicely. 

I'm surprised to hear the Vixen Barlow referred to as good - it's a £20 jobby, I didn't actually buy it for use as a barlow.

https://www.vixenoptics.com/Vixen-2x-Barlow-Lens-T-31-7mm-p/3907.htm