Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

keora

Members
  • Posts

    75
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

22 Excellent

1 Follower

Profile Information

  • Location
    West Yorkshire

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Thank you for all the suggestions. I’ve set up a 1 degree circle on the sky safari screen. I’ll flip the SkySafari screen so that it shows a mirror image of the actual sky when I go looking for stars. All I need now is a clear night.
  2. I'd like to thank all three of you for your advice. The telescope has a focal length of 1300mm and the two Plossl eyepieces I use have a focal length of 32mm and 9mm. The field of view for the 32mm eyepiece is 1 degree and the 9mm eyepiece has a field of view of 0.3 degrees. I don't use the 9mm eyepiece much when I'm looking for dim stars. It's hard to focus. The field of view is very restricted, to make the most of it I have to take off my glasses and get the eyepiece touching my eye. I originally had a basic version of Sky Safari and switched to Sky Safari Pro a year ago. If I go to the Observe menu it looks similar to the photo you added to your reply. I'll try to set up finder circles on Sky Safari for the 9X50 finder scope and the 32mm eyepiece. I've avoided trying this before as I wasn't sure what to do. I believe I can adjust the display on Sky Safari so the stars are shown as a mirror image of what the observer sees when looking at the stars. This would make the Safari screen match the stars seen through the 32mm objective. Is this worth trying out? I wonder if any other forum members have suggestions to make? I've always had useful suggestions when I've ask questions on this forum.
  3. I have a Skywatcher 102mm Maksutov with a 9x50 finderscope. It’s a good set up, yet I have problems finding faint objects in the sky. For example, a few weeks ago I spotted Uranus with binoculars. It was about 10 degrees east of Jupiter. I use Sky Safari on an iPad when looking at the sky and it confirmed it was Uranus. To get a closer look I switched to the telescope, pointed it at Jupiter and then made five full turns on the horizontal control, to swing it round to point it at Uranus. Although there were a few faint stars I couldn’t identify anything. Unless I’m looking for large bright stars/planets in the sky, most of the time the spotting technique is difficult to use. Could anyone suggest ways in which I can improve my techniques?
  4. Have a look at this advice from Sky at Night Magazine. https://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/reviews/binoculars/best-budget-binoculars/ Two years ago I bought a pair of Canon image stabilising binoculars, 10 magnification with a 32 mm objective. They are good but very expensive at about £800, so they are probably not what you are looking for.
  5. From reading the article, and others that Ron Brecher has written, I imagine he's a semi professional astronomer. So he's got more incentive to get out and look at the stars.
  6. Stu, I've found out that I've got the basic version of SkySafari. There isn't an extension to the name, such 5 or 6 Pro. Mine doesn't have an option on the screen that says Observe. The instructions are not very long,compared with the those shown in your reply yesterday. Apple store on my iPad offers four versions of SkySafari - the basic one (mine), then 6 Plus, 6 Pro and finally 7 Pro. I think I'll buy 6 Pro at £13 and hope it lets me find stars more easily.
  7. Stu, thank you for the advice. I've got Sky Safari on an iPad. It's hard to find out what version number it is. Since I paid just £4 for it I suppose it's the beginner's version. Whereabouts in the instructions does it mention the techniques you use? It sounds better than the crude system I'm using?
  8. Cajen, I considered buying a Rigel but I've decided to keep things simple. I just have a finderscope attached to the main telescope. As for a red dot finder I have used one and in my view it didn't help much. I live in a big city, the Bortle value is 7 or 8, and there's not many stars visible in the sky with the naked eye. With the finderscope I can find some of the dimmer stars. The field of view is nearly as wide as binoculars. I use Star Safari to work out the degrees of distance between the bright star I'm starting from and the star I'm looking for. As I move the scope towards the star, I count the degrees travelled by counting the number of turns on the controls - one full turn moves the scope two degrees . Routes which I find difficult include Regulus in Leo to M44 in Cancer - lots of dark sky, not many waymarks to guide you.
  9. I've looked at both the references and they are full of information. I've never seen such detail before, I'm impressed by all the time and effort it must have taken to prepare the lists of stars and clusters. I think they are aimed at people with lots of experience. I'm at the other end of the scale, I've been looking at the stars for about two years. I can find the location of most of the stars I want to see, provided I use binoculars. When I switch to a telescope, it's much harder because I haven't had enough experience star hopping. (102 Maksutov and a 9 X 50 finderscope).
  10. I initially had the idea that Maksutovs were susceptible to dew forming on the objective. I bought one of those collapsible cylinders that you stick on the end of the tube, and I’ve had no problems at all with Dee.
  11. The SkySafari app is very good for giving realistic views of the sky, I recommend it. It's better than a planisphere. You need to run it on an iPad and I use the basic version, about £4. I tried Turn Left at Orion and found it frustrating. Even though I avoided stars/galaxies which were listed as difficult to locate, most of the easier sites I still couldn't find. Recently I've found the Loughton list of stars - basic, but that's why I like it. https://las-astro.org.uk/docs/Loughton_List_v2_0.pdf
  12. After reading all the advice, I bought a 102mm Maksutov - here it is: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/telescopes-in-stock/sky-watcher-skymax-102s-az-pronto.html It's a well designed telescope. The tripod is stable. The mount is easy to use by turning two separate handles to rotate or raise the telescope- with my first telescope I had to nudge it to get it to move. The telescope has a focal length of 1300mm yet has an actual length of only 300mm. The complete outfit weighs only 6kg and it's very easy to carry around. I didn't bother setting up the red dot finder, instead I paid extra for a 9 X 50 finderscope, which fits into the slot where the red dot finder would go. Although the 25mm eyepiece is good, the 10mm eyepiece a very restricted field of view. This may be due to wearing glasses. Instead I use some good quality plossl eyepieces which I bought a year ago. Overall, it's a good telescope, it's easy to find stars and it looks good.
  13. Patrick, why not contact the Hull and East Riding Astronomical Society - https://www.heras.org.uk/
  14. I intended buying a Skywatcher refractor with an AZ3 mount. But some forum members suggested that the AZ3 wasn't very good. If you've only just bought the mount, it would be expensive to change mounts now. Perhaps it's a case of getting as much advice as possible on how to get round its limitations.
  15. I'm now wondering if the 102mm Mak might be better than my original choice of the Startravel 102. However what puts me off the Maksutov is the 1.25 degree field of view. My current basic Newtonian has roughly the same field of view. I've tried star hopping and found I couldn't identify any of the stars on my route to a distant target. I've no problem finding dim stars using Canon bins (10X32 Fov about 5 degrees ) while checking on the route with Sky Safari on an iPad. How easy is it to attach say a 6 X 30 finderscope to the Maksutov. Do you have to drill into the tube to fix the finderscope? or is there a more elegant method of attaching it?
×
×
  • 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.