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.



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

88 Excellent

About dd999

  • Rank
    Star Forming
  1. Yes it does take 2" eyepieces - my 28mm is a 2" My skies are probably not dark enough. But as John mentions the biggest challenge is knowing what you're looking for even if you have it in your FOV. I found the same with M101 and M51. I need to dust the cover off my copy of Turn Left at Orion. M31 is relatively easy as the 'smudge' is very apparent in the FOV - but others, not so much.
  2. Nice tip - will take the bins out with me next time!
  3. I didn't really look or notice. Wasn't particularly visible from memory, as I didn't really notice it.
  4. Thanks John I've struggled with M101 too. I tried with averted gaze in the eyepiece, but couldn't see. I'll have a look through some images and diagrams to familiarize myself with the 'four star' pattern to help locate first. I think I will try more with my dslr. Only managed a single shot before the clouds started rolling in. Will give it another go the next clear night (whenever that may be atm!)
  5. I had a relatively clear night last night, and was trying to find M33 using my goto mount. I'm using a 5" SW 130PDS, and a 28mm EP but (and it's the 2nd or 3rd time I've tried) I can't see it. For something that's just about naked eye visible in the clearest of dark skies, I would have thought with this scope and low eyepiece I should have seen it. I attached my dslr to the scope, and with a 20sec sub I could see it (it was in the corner of the image), so assuming the dslr FOV is not greater than the 28mm EP (?) I thought I should have seen something. I can see M31 quite clearly (although I know it's a lot brighter). Or in Bortle 4 (probably nearer Bortle 5 skies) am I expecting too much of my 130pds, or would a better EP be more suitable?
  6. I've just researched mine, and it is a cheaper sub £20 Barlow - so will take the plunge with the Star Guider.
  7. Wish I had read this before. Having had the same Barlow for about 10 years, after making a purchase to upgrade my eyepiece today to a BST Star Guider 8mm - I bought at the same time, what I considered to be, an upgraded 2x Barlow - the BST Starguider 2x Barlow ( https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bst-starguider-eyepieces/bst-starguider-2x-short-barlow-lens.html) Have I just wasted £50 that I could have spent on something else? My existing Barlow is a Seben Achromatic Super Barlow 2x that I picked up with a 2nd hand scope a few years back.
  8. Hi All, Having spent the past 4 hours looking through videos and researching as much as I can about using the AZ GTi in EQ mode (after some disastrous attempts the last cloudless night) I 'think' I have every piece of info I need, apart from the answers to the following. Can anyone help me fill in the missing pieces of the jigsaw? - In EQ mode should the Azimuth Clutch Knob be loose, or tight as it should be in AZ mode? - If it should be tight, I can't see what benefit the counterweight is giving to it (?) - In terms of polar aligning, is having Polaris in the FOV of the telescope and approximately the right 'position' from the NCP for that date and time of night sufficient? (as well as of course having the tripod level, counterweight pointing to towards the ground, telescope pointing North etc....) It wasn't necessarily the tracking I had an issue with (although it wasn't perfect as I could only get 40sec subs) but even after a 3 star alignment and using the Polar Alignment feature on the Synscan app - I couldn't get any DSOs in view on a goto, which made finding anything not visible a real challenge! In AZ mode it works really well, so it's something I'm doing wrong in EQ mode. Thanks
  9. Haven't tried M33 - but I doubt I'd see the Hercules Cluster naked eye, even with averted gaze. Moonless night on Thursday - I'll give it a test run.
  10. My town says Bortle 4 too on both Light Pollution Map and CO (maybe its just the same data). Although on a moonless night it can get reasonable dark but for all you other Bortle 4ers - what mag can you generally see down to with naked eye? I tested last night. With averted eyes I can just about make out Andromeda - and again with averted vision can just about see the two brightest stars within the Square of Pegusus (both Mag 4). Looking though on Wiki at it says I should be able to see mag 4 objects in Bortle 9 skies!! Only went to get my eyes tested last week, and they're pretty good lol Is down to mag 4 reasonable in true Bortle 4 skies or are my skies not as dark as it claims?
  11. Perfect!!!!! - it answers why I need to have it nearer to 35 ...... thank you!
  12. Last night I tried again. I pointed the scope due North, and set the wedge to 50 degrees as per my location. Unfortunately I wasnt even ballpark for Polaris. I had to set the wedge location to 35 degrees for Polaris to be in the FOV. I started the wedge at 35 degrees instead. Unfortunately accuracy wasn't great. Ballpark but target not in a 25mm wide view FOV. Poor enough accuracy that I had to find DSOs using my red dot finder rather than the goto! I've added some photos of my setup but I can't figure out what I'm doing wrong?! Original setting degree to match my location but Polaris no where near FOV (it was much higher in the sky) My setup (this was at 50 degrees to match location but Polaris was much higher in the sky) : Had to use nearer to 35-38 degrees for the telescope to point high enough in the sky to see Polaris in FOV:
  13. When I tried I did have the wedge for my location (rather than 45 degrees) - I used a compass for due North.... I didnt check the FOV, but assume Polaris would have been in the FOV. Yes this was my starting position before starting alignment. Thanks for the link - will have to try again
  14. The mount is the AZ GTi mount
  15. Thanks for the reply. As for 3 - if I did have Polaris in FOV is the 'close enough' as per 2?
  • Create New...

Important Information

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