Siegfried1969

Two observations from Friday morning with my TAL-1 11 cm Newton telescope. First test of my new Astronomik UHC filter and the effect of this filter is really impressive. Especially on M57. However, the conditions were not good with a lot of light pollution, both direct and indirect. For the sketches I used: Canson black grained paper 160g/m2 A white pencil Sakura white gelly roll pen A malleable gum Siegfried

That is a great sketch ! What telescope did you use for that ? I also thought to try to observe and sketch those but with my 110 mm Newtonian, there will be not much to see I am afraid

You can add a #80A blue to that. And if you really like to observe planets, consider the Baader neodymium (moon and skyglow) or the Baader Contrast booster. The first one is excellent for Jupiter and works very good on the sun. The second one is very good for Mars. The contrast booster gives a bit of a yellow cast and on the moon its like using a #8. These filters are not cheap but definitely worth their money.

Hello, I acquired my TAL-1 in 2005 and it is still my main telescope. Never used anything else in all these years. They are of excellent optical quality and the mechanics and build are far better than the telescopes they make today. I remember this TAL came in two versions. A manual and a motorized version. Mine is a manual and maybe you can find the user manual for the motorized version still somewhere online. So as I do not have experienced with the motor and its connection, I know the mechanical parts of this telescope very well. Last year, I have completely disassembled mine, cleaned it, regreased it and put it back together. That is what I all have done: full disassemble of the mirror cell, clean all the rust out with vinegar and sent both primary and secondary mirror to Orion Optics UK for recoating. Their service is very good and price was reasonable but as I am in Belgium transport + taxes were high. If you are in the UK you won't have this issue. It takes them around a week to recoat. I flocked the tube with black velour I bought from Teleskop Service I added on a rigel finder I replaced the straight TAL 6x30 finder with a right angle 7x50 finder. Honestly this finder is the weakest part of the telescope. Although of good optical quality, this finder is nearly impossible to use as you have to put your head in all kinds of positions to look through it. As I am wearing glasses, finding objects was impossible I tool the mount apart and degreased it with soda dissolved in hot water Put everything back together and regreased everything If you want a great guide on how to do everything, there is no better than the guide from Astrobaby: TAL-1 Telescope Restoration Project (astro-baby.com) I used this guide as well to disassemble everything. The mirror cell is a bit tricky but not impossible. You have to be very careful if you put the mirror back in and screw the ring back on. Due to the pressure, the mirror start to turn in its cell and will scratch on the side where the 3 holder points are. I got this and my newly coated mirror is scratched along the edge. So I am loosing like 1-2 mm of aperture. Now the telescope is back operational and with the new finder, its a joy to use and to find objects. The image is also brighter and detail like on the moon is unbelievable. I send you here a pic of my scope in the current state + the original delivery set list so you can check if you have all the accessories. If further questions pls ask ! Good luck ! siegfried

That is a great post Mike ! Thank you so much. That sketch is fabulous. Your post will definitely help me to make more accurate observations of venus, which I plan to do this year. I heard that 2023 will be a good year for observing venus due to its maximal distance to the sun.

Thanks a lot and thanks for the picture ! it is great to see a reference. Last night I spend another hour observing venus. Now with different filter combinations and drawing the features I see recurring and I am sure they are there. Venus is not an easy object to observe and I think that my telescope is a bit too small to work with a #47 violet filter. Especially with turbulent skies. An 8 or 10 inch would have got better results. With this small telescope I got very good results with a #15 yellow + #80A lightblue. With blue alone I could not see anything. here is the new drawing:

My impression of Venus with the violet Wratten #47 filter. I am however not sure what I have seen. The dark areas should not be where I have seen them. Its a bit like seeing canals on Mars I think. Will need some more observations but its a difficult object. Low in the sky. Unstable sky's and bad transparency. When I looked at Jupiter who was just above it, I could barely see the two major cloud bands.

I got an update on this story. I bought an Astronomik UHC from Teleskop Service and received it last week. Yesterday night I tried it on M42. I can say that this was a whole different experience and much more in line with what I expected from an UHC filter. I first looked at M42 without filter for a while with a 3,5 mm exit pupil. Then I added the filter and the sight was really impressive. The nebula was suddenly 2 to 3 times as big and immediately started to see the clear and darker regions in the nebula complex. With the Orion Ultrablock, the size was only half of the size in the view without filter. At the end I got decent results with the Orion Ultrablock but had to be real dark adapted which is not easy when observing from my home. So without making generalizations, All I can say that this particular sample of the Astronomik UHC is far superior than my sample of the Orion Ultrablock. I will keep both and test them on some more objects. Maybe there will be objects where the Ultrablock will have the edge.

My view of Caldwell 39 yesterday evening with my 4 inch TAL-1 reflector. Finally we had a clear sky night again

This is amazing. Very well done !! I am now sketching for about a year now (mainly planets). Haven't tried the Orion nebula yet but I won't be able to match what you have created here. But I can tell you how I usually work. To me a sketch is like a composite. I study the object for several nights with different magnifications, averted vision, indirect viewing etc. in order to observe much detail as possible. Every time when I see something new or some detail I haven't seen it before I add it to the drawing. Most details will come with averted vision and that is the hardest to render as these details are only visible a fraction of a second. Once finished and go inside, I still make slight modifications. It's important to rely only on what you have seen. Do not look at other pictures or drawings during the process otherwise it completely misses the goal. For me a sketch is the answer to: "This is what I have seen that night through this particular telescope with this filter etc...". And the rendering of my observation has to be as accurate as possible. I do not care about misplaced or missing stars or details I got wrong when compare my sketch with a picture or planetarium software.

That is a very interesting site ! Thanks a lot ! I assume these are actual test results and not the generic graphs. Baader UHC-S and Astronomik UHC-E are very similar.

Well to me as well. And this filter was not cheap. I bought it when I was living in Singapore and I paid 298 SGD for the 1,25". On teleskop-service, the 2" Orion ultrablock cost more than the Astronomik UHC 2". So it is by no means a budget filter. The main difference what I can see is that the transmission is around 10 % lower and everything in the red is blocked. Any opinions on the Baader UHC-S ?

What exactly did you buy if I may ask ?

Thanks a lot Mike ! I still have to read it more in detail but that looks a very interesting review. But what they are saying is that an OIII filter can also be used on smaller telescopes, what you are suggesting as well. I thought exactly the opposite... going broader instead like baader UHC-S or Astronomik UHC-E.

I used my lowest eyepiece which is a 25 mm Vixen SLV. That is a magnification of 32 x and an exit pupil of 3,4 mm. I did not try higher magnifications as 32 x is already so dreadful. I can say it simply like that: If you would let 100 people compare the view of M42 with and without the filter, nobody would choose the view with the filter.