Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_through_the-_eyepiece_winners.thumb.jpg.236833c5815bb321211a43f4d5214ba8.jpg

ballisticbrian

New Members
  • Content Count

    13
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About ballisticbrian

  • Rank
    Nebula
  1. Is that HM.25mm lens that I have , what you mean by low magnification? Unfortunately I couldn't see M81 or 82 but I was on the floor on uneven concrete and I only tried for 10mins. (don't have a diagonal lens) I could see a very bright Uranus though and a rather dim Mars near to eachother (if indeed it was Mars). It's a shame that the conditions looked excellent but my inexperience at looking for things or working the telescope meant I spent most of the time dashing in and out to look at a planetarium online. Seeing something as bright as Uranus was quite interesting though. I might try extending the legs as they are intended on the tripod next time.
  2. So I managed to get stars into focus tonight but it was clouding over (more like mist). I managed to confirm that my peculiar form of night blindness doesn't hinder telescope work. I could see the stars brightly through the telescope and other stars came into view that I couldn't see at all in the sky. I had read that the brightness of stars diminishes proportional to magnification, but it appears that more of my eye surface catches the star and I can see it. I worked out how to use an online planetarium and was going to look for Mars and Uranus which are on a line with Orions Belt but , no that mist came in. All I really want to achieve was getting good enough with this to point out some thing to my son when he's older, he us currently 6 months old. I was also hoping to see galaxies through this, but I really don't know if that's possible!
  3. I haven't even got my telescope working yet but my 2 cents... thinking for yourself is something to develop and aspire to, not automatic for most people. Taking a look through a telescope seems to hold some of the wonder of looking for yourself, whereas seeing a digital image seems to rely on trusting several fold of translations and data manipulations., which while may be technically accurate, you have still invested your trust in someone else to produce it for you.
  4. God, I'm such a dimlow. This post is sponsored by Merrydown Cider. After drinking one of those, I walked past the telescope and thought "what is that thumb screw?" (in pic above with model number) and pop, out come another 8 inches of chromed tube!!! Too cloudy to try it out though. I feel like the guy that phoned Tesco customer services to say there was no topping on his pizza when he had it upside down!
  5. OK, I see, thanks for your reply. Is there any way I could double check this without shelling out cash as it will probably cost more than the telescope? I guess an "experiment"? Failing that a download of the original user guide but I really can't imagine that would be available. I do really appreciate all your help so far. Also, are there various types of diagonal pieces and sizes / compatibility issues?
  6. Can anyone help me to double check everything? If you look at picture 5 above (the close up of the installed eye piece), can you tell me if it looks like that 25mm eye piece is installed correctly? There's not something missing that would change the focal length? Also, having just obtained the telescope, is there anything else that should be double checked that could be missing or broken? Any other newbie error that could be stopping me getting an image of trees a few gardens away?
  7. Yes, you are right! I then screwed the .25mm on the end of that but still can't get an image into focus. There's pretty much nothing in the field of view just light and dark. Can't even get the edge of light and dark into focus.
  8. This is all I have and the bad news is, I'm not getting an image through that .25mm lense (in day light looking for a chimney or tree) which was installed when I got it. The lense to the far right has nothing written on it and could be missing the end possibly. Disregard the incomplete Barlow below.
  9. OK, so my first foray into telescopes was short and a little uneventful. I found a star in the scope but couldn't find it in the telescope. I was in an illuminated house / room with various fish tank lights going. I don't know if that makes a difference? The light out there from the city doesn't help. The eyepiece in there is 25mm. I'm now not sure if the other one I have is complete or not, I think I should post pictures of the eye pieces I have for you guys to look at? Yes sorry, it's a Barlow not Bartholemew and it's just a plastic or metal tube with nothing in it. I don't even know at this stage if the scope is pointing exactly where the telescope is pointing. Is adjusting the screws and making the alignemrnt good something that has to be done when you set up a scope? Than you for the extra info on swift and eikow, I will have to look into that. Especially if I need eye pieces lol.
  10. No, that piece is definitely missing and there is a spare place in the box where one would possibly go. I must be missing the user guide as well. But to put a positive spin on this, let's say I got it for a good price and possibly saved it from oblivion. If these eye pieces and the diagonal come up, maybe I can restore it as a set. Contrary to the other member who found one of these in an attic some years ago, mine isn't covered in mould and missing bolts and fixings. Apart from a small dent in the telescope and scratches it looks ok. Yes the Bartholemew is just a "tube" LOL. A special kind of lens!
  11. It's very thick low cloud tonight and you can only see the moon from an awkward part of the garden so I will probably not be able to try it tonight. No - I don't think there is a mirror or prism going spare. I haven't as yet removed the installed eye piece from the sight or the telescope but it wont be in there will it? Also, I looked at the thread about a similar model that White Dwarf mentioned and that model does come with at least 2 more eye pieces so I could be missing some bits (plus I mentioned no glass in the 2x Bartholomew). Could be missing some bits then, but hopefully nothing that will stop a newbie getting going?
  12. Thank you for all the info, I love finding out about old equipment. Here are the pics. Wrapped up in paper is he "sun" filter (I understand don't risk old sun filters), there is no glass in the Bartholemew 2x eye piece, another complete eye piece to the one installed and can anyone tell me what the black round "off set" eye piece is please?
  13. Hello, first post. I just bought a Hilkin telescope t-705 at a boot sale this morning. It's my first telescope! I found this web site because I googles the model number but the old thread from 10 years ago didn't shed much light on it. It's a f1000mm / 77mm on a rather substantial and heavy tripod. There a couple of eye pieces and a huge box it all goes in. I have had a keen interest in Astronomy for many years but I have a slight night blindness problem which means smaller stars disappear when I look at them and I assume this is because I spent too much time laying in the school field staring at the sun as a child (yes - really). I'm hoping that because I can see bigger stars and planets I will be able to see them through the telescope but I won't know until later. Although may be too cloudy anyway. Does anyone around now-days know anything about Hilkin? Aparently what I found out was they imported Japanese optics in the 70's / 80's and are now a company concerned mainly with binoculars.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.