Jump to content



  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

30 Excellent

About Astrid

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Interests
    Astrophysics, Astronomy, Astrophotography, Visual Observations;
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Hi! I have an EQ5 on a pretty weighty 200 mm f/5 newt (8 kilograms to be exact), and I must say that the steel legs feel very sturdy and well-built. The only downside is that those steel legs are quite heavy and weird to transport, but you get used to it eventually. I heard that for the EQ3, the steel tripods help (but to an extend). If I recall correctly, someone asked the same question in a thread called astrophotography with the 150P and EQ3 (I couldn't find it though, but it must be somewhere) By the way, here's a link that might help http://www.stubmandrel.co.uk/astronomy
  2. Yup, I agree! My 200P reaches focus without any problems with my Canon 2000D.
  3. perhaps you locked the focuser? that's what happened to me once: there is this little screw under the focuser that should be loose. Otherwise, you won't be able to move the focuser and obviously focus.
  4. As I said, i'm not looking for professional results. I'm looking for an improvement and perhaps a bit longer exposures...
  5. I wasn’t interested in GoTo since I want to learn the sky instead of relying on it. I guess the dual axis motors are worth it, if it would work without the polar scope too. For polar alignment I currently use an app called PS align and it works wonderfully for those-like me- that want a rough and quick polar align that is pretty accurate (clearly not professional AP level though)
  6. Hi! My EQ5 did not come with a polar scope, since it was the manual version. My scope is an 8 inch f/5 newt. (200/1000). Pretty heavy Thanks!
  7. Hello, fellow stargazers, and Happy New Year! These days the sky has been pretty clear here and I got the chance to shot the moon, but I'm starting to get bored by short exposures, thus I'm thinking about buying a dual axis motor drive for my mount (https://www.firstlightoptics.com/astronomy-mount-upgrade-kits/dual-axis-dc-motor-drive-for-eq5.html), EQ5 (keep in mind that the scope used is an 8'' Newtonian, 8 kg). My question is, is it worth it? Or should I get a polar scope and stick with a good polar alignment? I obviously don't have very high expectations, since I'm doing this as a hob
  8. I just bought my fancy-pants equipment in September and guess what... ever since then it was permanently cloudy. I barely had 3 days to observe Jupiter (thru the finder scope), the Moon (which was absolutely stunning) and Mars. Personally I'm seriously thinking about giving up on AP :') So I guess... this thread is a safe space to complain about the terrible weather all across Europe (but not only). Clear skies!
  9. Both are great choice, the only difference being in the portability: the 150P is a bit harder to transport than the 80D but since it is bigger (the diameter is almost double) it can collect more light, which is essential in AP, but at the same time with long exposures you can solve this problem. There are both Reflector/Newtonian (150P) astrophotographers on this forum and Apochromat (80D) astrophotographers, so you will find both opinions here. The important thing in AP is the mount, if you want to do long exposures you need a RA/DEC motor or a GO-TO mount and a sturdy mount. Check
  10. I have the 200P too, but I haven't collimated it yet so reading this gives me anxiety
  11. I have the same telescope, you shouldn't have problems if you use a DSLR. Lots of people I know do that just fine, and I'll try it too when the sky clears... Astrid
  12. I know, I'm lucky that I'll image somewhere where there is little to no wind.
  13. Hi! Is the barlow necessarily? I own a 2x one that has a T2 thread but I'm afraid that the field of view would be too small to fit big DSO like Andromeda or M42. (canon DSLR too).
  14. I believe WOHBAFGKMRNS is the full version, but usually W, R, N and S types aren't that common, so those aren't used that frequently.
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.