Stardaze

10 minutes ago, Ricochet said:

I've got the 16x70s. I think they're very well made and optically very, very good. Correction isn't perfect across the whole field of view but it is good enough for an instrument of this type and I'd have to specifically go out and test them to describe which aberrations are present at the edges of the field. Coatings are excellent as far as I can tell, transmission seems high and scatter is low. I think if you put the full moon just outside of the field of view you can get some reflection off the inside walls. I've just had a look down through the objectives and discovered that only the first 3-4 inches past the objectives are blackened, with the rest of the walls being grey, although there are ridges/micro baffles the whole way down. However, looking right next to the moon isn't something you usually do and during general use there are no issues with reflections.

Part of the reason I went for these over the cheaper options is the lighter weight, but as far as I am concerned they are still not something you would want to hand hold and so you would still need to mount them on your monopod. I have been sufficiently impressed by the quality of these binoculars that I've Manfrotto fluid foot monopod to mount them on and have an ebay saved search so that I can consider any 10x50s that might appear on the used market. I don't feel like I would ever need to upgrade from these to another ~15x70 binocular.

Thanks for the feedback. I assumed that I’d use my Nikon 10x50’s more than the Stellar 15x70’s due to weight but I’ve been using the latter with a manfrotto monopod and ball head 95% of the time. Do the HR’s still suffer with bloat on planets? I think the HR’s are probably the binos for life, I like the idea of buying keepers. The Stellars are only really sharp for around 30% from Centre and light scatter is definitely there, sometimes from a stray lamppost for example, but it’s not a regular problem, just something to be aware of. There’s an 85mm version of the HR too, which may be worth looking at.

14 minutes ago, Ricochet said:

I don't have a binobandit to knock the focus between sessions, but I don't remember having to focus my lightquests aside from the first time I used them. I've got some field optics eye shields on the eye cups at the correct angle for my focus settings and I just flick them up and down as needed. 

Field optics eyeshield

I might try a pair of those for what they cost. 
How do you find the lightquests? 15x70’s?

1 hour ago, PeterW said:

I’ve had bandit issues with my IF 10x50, I have plans to deal with this by replacing the bandit which is otherwise very handy to improve the view.

Peter

I'm not sure you can get away with it anyhow. The bandit grips quite tightly and so it's probably just a downside to them. I haven't used any other eye focussing type binoculars to conclude whether the stellar's are a little looser than normal. 

Lovely report Magnus. I found myself looking at those clusters in Auriga this morning too with my binos, but they certainly weren’t as prominent as you had for sure. I wasn’t aware that there was a name for the line of stars leading up into M38, so good to know that. I’ll look into the smiley face too as that’s new to me. 

I've been using this combo for a good year now and whilst I agree with the negative elements that Steve @BinocularSky  raises in his review, they're pretty solid performers and I've actually found myself using these mostly rather than the 10x50's. The one issue however that I have found is the fairly loose focusing on the eye pieces, which is exasperated when using the bandit. For the bandit to work best, it really needs to be pulled to the top of the eye relief. When folded back down for storage, inevitably some movement happens which means refocussing every time. That can be a faff with a monopod as you need both hands, one to hold the bandit whilst the other focusses, it is really more of an issue with the BB I find. So, it left me wondering how much stiffer is the focussing on the Lightquest HR model? I'd possibly consider the upgrade for this, if the focussing would hold better. The sharper image across the field is the obvious real gain with a little more light transmission. The HR seems to be worth spending that little bit more for, over the Apollo?

1 hour ago, johninderby said:

Few bits & pieces.

Cooling fan, self adhesive felt for relining tube rings and a Svbony helical focuser. 

I’ve still to buy a fan (did order one but it got lost and refunded) Which scope is that for John?

I’m going to add that overall, there’s probably more inspiration and ideas that have come from SGL which have been invaluable. The pocket sky atlas initially, but more sky safari since, have also been integral to finding my way around.

This last year, the biggest help for me was the purchase of a sack truck that I’ve adapted, to help me move my dob around following an injury that left me unable to lift. The binoculars have also been indispensable during this period.
Whilst kit is important to a degree, this great community is the most valuable resource without question.

Super first report, well done and welcome to this fascinating pastime. Look forward to reading more of your reports.

Great report. I've not managed to use my dob on Orion yet this year, but you've certainly whet my appetite here.

Just lovely that you get the opportunity to share those moments with her, very special indeed. 

I dragged my dob out of the garage Sunday evening to quickly show my 80 year old father in law Jupiter and Andromeda, it's really great to be able to do that.

I can't say that I've observed much more this last week as you list here, fleeting moments with the binos. I must get into the moon a little more, I did read up on Petavius and noted mare Crisium's perfect lighting last night. I bet your 6E made more of it though.

Just now, Ricochet said:

Exactly. As the optical axis and the mechanical axis of the telescope don't need to coincide, all you have to do is to be able to get the secondary mirror under the focuser and then collimate from there. However, the squarer that the focuser is, the easier it is to collimate the secondary, which is why I shimmed mine a bit.

Interesting. I did have a few minutes rolling the laser around in the click lock to see how that looked, wasn’t perfect. I’ve checked the laser and it was a tiny smidge out, so after half hour faffing, it’s probably slightly worse. I’ll sort that with a fresh head but led me to think, what if the click lock doesn’t centralise? 
 

1 hour ago, Ricochet said:

I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about here but I suspect that you may be trying to do something you've seen in the video that isn't possible with the Bresser focuser. If you can wind the focuser though the full range of travel with it always pointing at the same spot then as far as I know there aren't any grub screws you should be touching. I've shimmed mine with washers because there are no "squaring collimation" screws. The small grub screw (hole) that you can see in the side of the focuser base plate on the left of the photo just holds the focuser to the plate as far as I can tell and the grub screw further up the focuser to the right of the photo controls how the drawtube runs in the focuser.

No, I just drew a cross on the side with a pencil. I may have even drawn it on some masking tape that I later removed as squaring the focuser only ever needs to be done once. If there is only a slight error you don't ever have to do it as you can just shift the secondary a bit. So long as the secondary is under the focuser that's all that matters.

The skywatcher focuser had 3 screws for aligning but the bresser, as you say, doesn’t seem to have any adjustment that I can see? So the only thing you can do is to make sure the tube sits squarely on the plate and check from there it seems. If it has no proper way of aligning, surely most people don’t bother? 
I did wonder if just tilting the secondary to ensure the laser sits in the middle of the donut is all that is needed. It does sit under the focuser.

12 minutes ago, Pitch Black Skies said:

Yeah, it's definitely not something you would want to be rushing. Give yourself plenty of time, or maybe do an hour here and there over a few days. It can be a bit painstaking but I was also going to mention like you said, you have peace of mind. It's also very satisfying to know everything is squared up. It's a good opportunity to get to know your telescope better too, us Newton owners are tinkerers at heart.

If my memory serves me correctly I think the chap accidentally broken his secondary mirror in that video I shared. Be super careful 😬😊

Ricochet's advice above is really good, it should really help narrow it down.

Be sure to update when you've found the culprit!

Will do. I bought this dob really to get my head around everything. He did break the secondary in the video. I’ve had both mirrors out now so I’m not too bothered about dismantling, but definitely need some time for it all. I’ll have to get it something like for tomorrow night as it looks to be clear at last.
I still want to add a cooling fan at the bottom and he had a great mounting plate for that in the vid, which I think I’ll copy. 

1 hour ago, Ricochet said:

Loosen the clicklock slightly so that you can rotate the laser in the clicklock. Rotate the laser and watch the dot. If it stays on the same spot the laser is ok, if it draws a circle the laser needs collimating.

If the laser is OK move on to the clicklock. Loosen the 2" clamp a touch and rotate the clicklock. If the dot stays on the same point the clicklock is OK, if it draws a circle the clicklock clamping mechanism is tilting the laser. Also try unclamping the clicklock to check for repeatability. You should find that the laser always hits the same spot when clamped,

If the clicklock is OK, move on to your 2" clamp. You won't be able to check for rotation here but you can check repeatability. If you have a clamp with more than one thumbscrew try different screws and see what happens. If you've got the standard Bresser Hexafoc 2" clamp this is one of the places where your problem lies. The inner profile of the clamp is 2mm fixed - 8mm compression ring - 2mm fixed. That lower 2mm fixed section will always coincide with the location of an undercut, such as the one on the clicklock, so that the top fixed part of the clamp inner barrel becomes a pivot against which the compression ring tilts anything with an undercut. The solution here is either to change the 2" clamp or to change your 1.25"-2" adaptor to one that is smooth sided and never use any 2" eyepieces with undercuts.

My OTA is also slightly oval and to compensate I have added a couple of washers under two of the focuser faceplate fixing screws to get the focuser pointing closer to the correct point and then tweaked the secondary position by simultaneously shortening and lengthening the up/down spider vanes to get the secondary perfectly under the focuser. Having the secondary perfectly centred in the OTA is just a starting point, and not required for collimation.

Thanks. I’ll reread and digest that again later. The laser is fine as I’ve knocked up a little rig to collimate it.

The hexaloc fixings are clearly different to the Quattro focuser, only two grub screws with small allen keyed screws. A basic measure isn’t so straightforward measuring 4 points around, I found earlier.

Did you strip out and add a donut opposite the focuser to ensure the focuser is perpendicular?

1 hour ago, Pitch Black Skies said:

You're welcome. To go a step further than levelling the focuser, align it so that it is perpendicular to the opposite side of the tube. In fact this should be done before ever collimating the telescope IMO. This gent does a great job at explaining it. It starts at 27:15.

Have you verified that the doughnut is centred while you had the primary out? It isn't really connected to the problem you're having with the off center laser dot, but it's good to know for that extra level of accuracy. I've had to recenter the primary spot on every new telescope I've bought so far.

The template included with the Cats Eye by Jim Fly is a useful tool for this.

BTW if the spider vanes are over tightened they can pull the OTA into an oval shape. Not a deal breaker, as long as the focuser is aligned and the secondary is concentric to it.

Keep at it, you will figure it out.

I think having watched that I could do with a full morning to take the mirrors out and ensure the focuser is perpendicular and the doughnut is centralised, looks a bit of a faff but peace of mind. Removing the central donut, if needed, looks a bit scary though. 😱

24 minutes ago, Pitch Black Skies said:

You're welcome. To go a step further than levelling the focuser, align it so that it is perpendicular to the opposite side of the tube. In fact this should be done before ever collimating the telescope IMO. This gent does a great job at explaining it. It starts at 27:15.

Have you verified that the doughnut is centred while you had the primary out? It isn't really connected to the problem you're having with the off center laser dot, but it's good to know for that extra level of accuracy. I've had to recenter the primary spot on every new telescope I've bought so far.

The template included with the Cats Eye by Jim Fly is a useful tool for this.

BTW if the spider vanes are over tightened they can pull the OTA into an oval shape. Not a deal breaker, as long as the focuser is aligned and the secondary is concentric to it.

Keep at it, you will figure it out.

I didn’t check whether the doughnut is centred I’ll admit whilst I had the primary out. Quite a few variables that I skipped early on. Didn’t realise how out the vanes were either, I won’t assume again. 

7 hours ago, Pitch Black Skies said:

No. Tilting the primary doesn't move the dot out of the doughnut at all. The dot location on the primary is determined by how the secondary is reflecting the laser beam.

To get accurate collimation one must always ensure the dot is in the centre of the primary prior to using the Barlowed laser technique for the primary alignment.

Having said that, sometimes a laser can have one believe the secondary is collimated by showing the dot in the centre of the primary. Under closer inspection one might find that the secondary is slightly rotated and tilted more on one side to account for it.

I was a big fan of using a laser for collimation too but after more experience I am now wary of them for the reasons listed above.

IMO a very accurate way to collimate is by using a Cheshire sightube for the secondary alignment, then ensure it is rotated properly and that the three primary clips are even in the secondary. Then simply use a collimation cap to ensure the primary is collimated. As you peer through the collimation cap everything should look completely concentric.

When you know everything is completely concentric, then pop your laser in to see if it agrees. If it does, there might have been a slight tilt in your secondary. If it doesn't, the problem is with the laser, and from experience it is possibly with how it is seated in the holder.

Thanks for taking the time here. The laser seating is possibly the cause yes, though I have a click lock. I prefer the concentre to a basic cap. The Cheshire I find to be most accurate for the primary. I’ll have a look again this morning, realise it’s the focuser or secondary where the issue is. 

3 minutes ago, Spile said:

Did you check that the focuser is level f1=f2 f3=f4? see diagram at https://astro.catshill.com/collimation-guide/

I haven’t. Thanks, I’ll give that a look in the morning. 

I keep mine in a shed for some of the year. Just be aware of packing it away after a heavy evening dripping with dew. I found my primary dewed up twice and so will hair dryer it from here after a session with heavy dew. I have got a fan heater too for a quick blast but ventilation in a shed is important. I found mould in mine last year so have vented in readiness this year.

I know I posted on the ‘what did the postman bring’ thread but with these addition pictures, looks a cracker. I’ll add it to the mix.

I’m most on the fence about the mount for such a scope. An EQ5 looks a perfect match! Be interested to hear your thoughts after some use. Clear skies are due this week! 

46 minutes ago, johninderby said:

FLOs latest offering..

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/telescopes-in-stock/starfield-102mm-f7-ed-doublet-refractor.html

Hmmmm. Exactly what's on the shopping list for next year. They look the same as the Altair/Ts Optic/Starwave type options out there, same manufacturer? Is the FL53 glass worth the extra? Looks very nice regardless. 

I thought I was well and truly done with any collimation talk. I cleaned my dob primary mirror for the first time recently and whilst I started off with a Cheshire for all collimation, which I still think is best overall, I added a cheap laser that I collimated and have been using barlowed, for visual use. It's much quicker to get 99% of the way there and convenient with little available light. I hadn't gone looking before but did have a peek following the mirror clean as to whether the laser centred on the primary mirror, perfectly in the central ring. It doesn't, it sits just slightly outside the central circle. Here's the thing, I had never checked whether the spider vanes were as they should be (equal distance) out of the box before now and so found that they were a little out. Thinking that would be the answer, it didn't prove to be, following their adjustment. Is it simply that the slight tilt on the primary when aligned with the secondary (collimated well) does throw it off centre?

I use a concentre to set up the secondary, all is perfect there and the primary is simple to adjust from there. There does appear to be one axis that is not exactly the same as the other on the spider vanes, which could suggest the tube is slightly oval and not perfectly round. Maybe that has an effect. I'm thinking that it probably won't make a jot of difference for visual use, but I'd be interested to hear any reasoning around this. When I was using just a collimation cap and Cheshire, I would have been non the wiser, which almost confirms that in the real world, it doesn't matter?  But I'm interested anyway. 

3 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

Scope, finder and finder shoes 

I’ve not seen the Starfield frac before, looks super.

Thanks Joe for sharing. I must add Keid to my list, it’s a new one to me, sounds great.