LoveFromGallifrey

3 minutes ago, Chefgage said:

This does sound like a focusing issue. I had the static/fuzzy like image when using my asi120mm mini. But when I got it into focus everything came together. I would suggest trying to get it to focus during the daytime in some distant object and then fine tune it at night. 

Thanks! I'll give it another go in a second! I've just found a comment from someone with the same setup on a different forum that has given me a better idea of where to place the camera for focus with my particular guidescope, so I'm going to give that a try and see where I end up. Its so frustrating for someone so technologically challenged - I'm hoping it's all worth it in the end! 🤣

Hi all, after finally figuring out my EQM-35, and obtaining manual focus with my nikon d3400 on a WO ZS73ii with matching flattener, I'm now looking to get autoguiding sorted. So, I purchased a zwo asi 120mm mini camera and a WO uniguide 32mm guidescope. Visually, I can get both working in unison perfectly (I use the scope as a lightweight travel companion for observing currently).

But whenever I try adding the camera, I have no idea what I am doing. I've tried following PHD2 tutorials etc to no avail. No matter how I try to focus/play with camera settings, exposure times, gain etc - I always get either a pure white image in the daytime, or a static filled image at night. I know the guidescope isn't off target, because for observing I have the guider aligned with the main scope perfectly and in daytime I have it trained on a clear distant object, and during the night I have it on various bright stars - Vega, Arcturus etc. But nothing I do produces any sort of image with stars/the distant object visible. 

Anyone have any ideas? 

On 06/03/2021 at 09:19, jonathan said:

I consider a moon filter (ND) rather essential as even a 1/3 lit moon is too bright for my eyes, even if I keep the main cap on the OTA and only remove the small cap.  Look at the variable / circular polarising ones, they can offer a bit extra compared to a plain one.

Thank you for the advice! I’m looking at a variable polarising filter. The moon is bright for sure! It doesn’t hurt my eyes really, not until it’s full/nearly full, and even then the irritation is minor. But the filter should hopefully remove even the minor discomfort. 

On 05/03/2021 at 13:40, Zermelo said:

Hello,

This is a recent thread that discusses choosing filters.

Here is a thread that talks about building an eyepiece set.  Here is an alternative way of approaching it.  This is another useful article.

Thank you for taking the time to link threads for me! Probably should’ve done my own research a bit better, but my searches came up with so many threads and they were usually not relevant so I gave up pretty quickly. I appreciate your own effort on my behalf. 

11 hours ago, Louis D said:

Assuming you only have a 1.25" diagonal, I would recommend buying a 32mm Plossl.  The Astro Essentials and Revelation versions are both good and affordable.  It will provide the widest true field of view possible in a 1.25" eyepiece.  The 24mm end of your zoom is rather narrow, so the 32mm Plossl can help with locating objects and then centering them for the zoom.

A good OIII or UHC filter would be my choice for first filter purchase.  Astronomik and several others sell reputable versions.  Avoid the super cheap ones, they don't work very well in my experience.

If you want higher powers with your zoom, most folks here recommend the Baader Q-Barlow 2.25x Barlow as a decent performer for a reasonable price.

Thanks for the advice! I'll definitely be looking at getting that eyepiece. 

I forgot to mention that I have a cracking little finderscope as well, and a Baader Q barlow already. 

I'll also look at those filters. Definitely had a UHC recommended to me before, so I'll have a good shop around and see what's available. I'm under bortle 5-6 skies. 

Hi all! 

I've been stumbling my way around this hobby (observing, currently, with a view to branching into asteophotography) since November (real newbie, yay). I have yet to buy/try any filters or any eyepieces beyond my starting one. My aim when starting out was to try and wait until astronomy clubs reopened/meetings were allowed so I could politely beg the wisdom of others face to face, but that hasn't happened and is unlikely to happen while I am still on home turf. So, I'm turning to you lovely people once again! 

What filters do you consider essential? Especially those of you with short refractors, what do you find really works for you? For both observing and beginner imaging? I've seen people swear by certain filters (Optolong L-Pro, Baader Neodymium, Astronomik UHC etc), but I have no idea what is suitable for my scopes. 

Also, my current (only) eyepiece is an Altair 8-24mm zoom, which I love. But does anyone recommend any other (relatively cheap) eyepieces/brands that I could take a glance at? 

I currently have an Altair 102ED-R and a ZS73, the 102 being my first ever scope (love the thing) and the ZS73 being purchased as an imaging prospect + a very lightweight travel scope (I'm moving abroad soon, wanted something to take with me on my travels). 

This is a ridiculously late reply to your post, so I'm sorry for that (and sorry for dragging my own post back up from wherever it was buried). 

But I had to come back and say a massive thank you for your advice. Its so sound, and has been a ridiculous amount of help. I've invested in a copy of the Deep-Sky Imaging Primer as a belated Xmas gift to myself, and I shall study it religiously. 

I haven't yet purchased anything else for my setup, because I want to read the book first. No use rushing into things, as you say - my biggest fear is buying the wrong things and wasting money. I have a working plan to purchase the flattener/reducer made by Altair to suit my scope, and have copped a glance at a couple of guide scope/cam options, but that's about as far as I have gotten right now. 

I think the difficulty is with my scope, as you say, it's probably not a great choice for imaging in the first place and especially not with my mount. I tried to find something decent enough for portable observing (have successfully taken it across the country, on a plane, used it in the middle of nowhere etc) but also not too impossible to use for imaging. Its a difficult balance for anyone to get right, and especially a dumb beginner like myself! The mount is the best I could find in the current circumstances. Fully intending on upgrading once I have the option. 

And finally, thank you again! I love that quote, that already sums up my experiences - from polar aligning the darned mount (I cannot see Polaris from my house...at all) onwards. It only gets more confusing haha! I'm having fun though, and cultivating a rather impressive of bad language to use on demand :D 

18 hours ago, Marvin Jenkins said:

Don’t forget that if you get the EQM-35 and use it till you are ready to upgrade to something heavier, you still have the 35 for visual use when the heavier gear is running.

I dislike the lack of Astro when we have a great night and my scope and mount is doing imaging and I am twiddling my thumbs. A second cheap OTA would be lovely.

Marvin

This is very true! I've already been considering what to do if I get invested in imaging to the extent where my original OTA is tied up with the cam all the time. The pipe dream is having a good, big dob at home - but getting something like a little Redcat or Zenithstar for imaging is also a cracking possibility. And that coveted HEQ5/Az-EQ5. If I had another imaging OTA, I could use my original for viewing more often. This all being a very vague long term plan, ofc. 

19 hours ago, Erling G-P said:

Why not get the EQM-35 now if it checks out at an inspection.  That should solve your current wobble issues, and provide you with an opportunity to at least get your feet wet with regards to imaging.  Then once higher rated mounts becomes available again, if you feel the need and perhaps have accumulated some more funds, you could sell the EQM-35, probably for a modest loss, and then get a better one?

Thanks! This is what I am going to do - it just sounds like a better option when someone else is saying it! 

So, I'm looking to build up a little equipment base through which I can begin delving into imaging and processing. But I'm clueless. I want to image mainly DSOs and lunar with the potential to branch into solar, since I don't know if my scope lends itself to planets very well. 

What I have already: 

- Altair Asteo Starwave 102ED-r doublet with FPL53 

- Altair Raci 60mm 90° finderscope 

- EQM-35 

- Nikon d3400 

So, I know that I'll need a T ring adapter for the DSLR, and from seeing other people's setups I'm vaguely familiar with flatteners...but I've also had people tell me a flattener isn't necessary? I've also had people mention needing spacers but I have zero idea about that. People have warned me that my camera body is pretty poor, and that it will be very difficult to focus. Is this true? 

Another thing I was considering doing is investing in a small, cheaper dedicated astrocam with the potential to be used for guiding as well. I'm not looking to break the bank or rival Hubble, nor am I even really looking to equal any other amateur imaging astronomers. I'm looking to build my experience in operating a dedicated cam, while experimenting with imaging. 

So...what does everyone think? Any ideas, advice, recommendations? Basically feel like climbing on the roof and crying for help whenever I start looking at this stuff 🤣

30 minutes ago, Jm1973 said:

Two answers, both completely different.

I know a lot of people use these types of multi-functional jump-starters to power their mounts. It was more of a question as to whether this particular one is ok, not so much whether jump-starters can be used.

Interesting that you should say not to use them at all.

I don't use it to power a mount currently, but I have that and use it to power 3 dew heaters for via a controller for several hours without any issues. The power cable uses a cigarette plug. 

Brought it for three reasons - 1. because it was cheaper than a branded powerpack for astronomy and 2. Because other people recommended it as an alternative, and 3. after some issues with my car's battery I decided I needed this sucker handy. 

2 hours ago, KP82 said:

If you could do a visual inspection of the mount and ask the seller to show you that it can slew/track smoothly and there is no strange noise from the motor, that price wouldn't be bad. 

Typically a 102mm ED doublet weighs between 4 and 5kg, if you add a DSLR, a reducer/flattener, t-ring, extension tubes and a guidescope/cam setup. The total weight is going to be about 7kg which is just at the limit of the EQM35 for imaging. Ideally you would want the HEQ5 for imaging with a 4" frac.

In an ideal world, I know I would get at least a HEQ5 (friend has an Az-EQ5, which he rates highly). But since various stores are telling me different things about when they'll be available again, anything from maybe December to maybe February (and this has been going on since early September, when I got told maybe October/maybe November), I'm kind of stuck with this AZ4 on a vibrating aluminium tripod, with pretty poor viewing and no chance of actually beginning my imaging journey. Its not the retailers' fault, but it is frustrating me no end. I've seen a couple of adverts for second hand mounts, but they have either gone before I've seen them or had flaws like rust and as a total newbie to this its scary trying to weigh up how much of a problem things like that are.

Sorry for the little rant, its just, people keep telling me to go for the HEQ5, I know itw the better option for me, and I would go over my budget and buy it if I knew I was actually going to get it at some point 🤣  but I'm glad it's a decent price for the EQM-35 if everything is in full working order. 

My 102 weights dead on 4 kgs, DSLR 450g, 60mm finder without camera 910g. (weighed it all myself). I haven't got any of the other equipment yet because figuring out what I need is exhausting and I don't want to rush in and buy the wrong things. My DSLR is also a pretty rubbish one from what I've heard (Nikon d3400) so I'm considering upgrading.

And I'm teetering on the brink of saying yes, but I'm not quite sure of my decision. So, for the umpteenth time, I have chosen to come and harass you lovely people on SGL. 

This EQM-35 looks flawless in photos, no visible dings or scratches, and seller states its in full working order with no defects at all. I have seen a video of it slewing which seems fine. The asking price is £400, and it includes a Lynx cable to connect the SynScan handset to a laptop. 

However, I don't actually have a clue what I am looking at. I've never used an EQ mount before, yet alone a GoTo, and I'm panicky because of that. I'm so scared of spending money I can't really afford to lose. 

Given a choice I'd go for an Az-EQ5 or a HEQ5 pro, but a combination of lack of availability and lack of funds means I am unable to get what I really want at the moment. I'm being told different things by different retailers as to when stock will return and estimated dates keep changing. I'm also drawn in by the way you can apparently use the EQM-35 as a glorified Star Adventurer.

Just for extra info: I currently have my one decent scope, a 102 OTA (with 60mm finder) on an AZ4 with an aluminium tripod, which was a real bargain and suits me so well for grab and go observing, but by heck is it shaky. My current setup weighs around 5.5kg, including main tube, finder, diagonal and zoom eyepiece so well within the 10kg visual limit for the EQM-35, and I daresay if I was to trade out eyepieces and diagonals for a camera I'd still be just about within the limits for my first forays into the world of imaging. 

So...to cut my rambling short...what do you guys reckon? Decent deal? Something to steer clear of? 

4 minutes ago, StevieDvd said:

There are some other members with the same scope with the finderscope base fitted on the focuser, the web page for the scope also mentions the scope focuser has the connection point. They are usually filled with a screw rather than left open which causes the confusion. From the pictures I've seen the connections are at the 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock positions.

Suggestion if you edit the title to include the scope as 102ED-R an owner of one might see the thread and respond.

Cheers! Thanks to another person, I've got it now - I really was having a dumb moment and studiously ignoring that those 10 o'clock and 2 o'clock screws were actually what I needed to be looking at 🙄 kept looking at them thinking "but why are there already screws there, and if I touch them will I break anything?" 

7 minutes ago, Pixies said:

See these 2 small screws:

fit the bracket there using these slots:

 

et voila, something like:

 

 

Thank you SO much! See, I knew I was just being silly! I've got it now. I kept looking at those screws and flapping, because I couldn't figure out why there were already screws there and I'm a worrier so I was scared of breaking something if I tried playing around with them. Thanks again! 

Hi fozzybear, thanks for your help! I'm well and truly stuck, I think messaging them is probably the best idea...I feel like a right dumbo! I got the scope and finder as a package from them directly, so I did check if I needed any extras or whether everything would be in working order right off the bat, and the answer was yes...but, I'm clearly missing something obvious!

And I do believe it is definitely me af fault, being a complete newbie to anything other than the occasional glance through a friend's dob 🤣

Cheers fifeskies! Those all look great, but I don't think they are particularly what I am after 😅 at least, I don't *think* so - but I don't know anything, me, so I'm not exactly sure. 

This is my finderscope and the bracket on it is the bracket I have - https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/altair-10x60racii-finder-scope.html

Its meant to fit my scope, but I'm too busy having a dumb moment to figure out how. This is my scope -https://www.altairastro.com/starwave-102ed-r-fpl53-refractor-459-p.asp

Hey Shimrod! So I have that Altair mounting shoe, I'm just a complete idiot - I'm struggling with how, or where, to fix that actual mounting shoe to the actual scope...

Told you it was a stupid question 🤣

Genuinely one of the most stupid questions I have ever asked, but here goes. I have an Altair Starwave 102ED-r, and I was given an Altair 60mm finder/guidescope to go with it. Now, being completely new to telescopes, I'm being a bit thick and cannae figure out how to actually attach the thing to the main scope? 

Hi all! Bit of a strange question (sorry!). So, I'm now the proud owner of an Altair Starwave 102ED-r, and my granddad (bless him) is making a wooden storage box for it as something to do during this latest lockdown. Now, the main question is - does anyone have any suggestions on what foam to use/where to buy foam to line the box? I want this sucker to be extremely well cushioned, just in case. I have the foam that came with the scope but it doesn't fit the scope particularly well and I can see it banging around a bit. Anyone have any ideas? 

Also, does anyone have any recommendations on features the box may need? I'm planning to keek a few dessicant saches here and there to try and combat rogue moisture. Any other storage considerations? 

Hi all! 

So, I have been looking for a relatively cheap "get up and go" mount/tripod for a 102mm F7 scope (tube length approx. 70cm), weight approx. 4kgs, but with a diagonal and a solid zoom eyepiece on board (unsure of total weight, but planning ahead andnsaying 5kgs). Also hope to use a 60mm finder scope on it if possible, but its ok if not. 

I have been recommended a few different things by different shops. Mainly, the Skywatcher Az4, and even the cheap Celestron heavy duty alt az mount which a significant retailer has recommended (but I am not sure, although the price is lovely). But I'm wondering if anyone else has any recommendations, or advice for me? 

On 28/10/2020 at 12:35, Second Time Around said:

I agree with your idea of trying out a zoom.  That and a Barlow plus a low power, wide field eyepiece is all you'll need to begin with, and possibly for a very long time.

I've tried out 4 different zooms and kept 2.  These are the Baader 8-24mm that's very good but costly, and the very inexpensive Svbony 7-21mm.  This new Svbony is apparently identical to the Orion E-series but at an even lower price.  The stated eye relief is 16.3 to 18mm.

The Baader is a little better corrected off axis in my f/6 scopes and has a larger field of view than the Svbony.  However the Svbony is much smaller and lighter, and exceptional value for money (about £40 to £45).  I bought the Svbony because of the excellent reviews it had on Cloudy Nights, and am happy to recommend it myself.  

Svbony also sell 8-24 and 10-30mm models, but again I haven't seen these.  Both are much bigger and heavier than the 7-21mm Svbony.  Additionally the 10-30mm has a particularly small apparent field of view, plus only 5 elements and so is unlikely to be as good.

The ones I didn't keep were firstly a Celestron (from a terrestrial scope rather than the usual astro model.  This was because it didn't have a filter thread).  Secondly a clone of the Hyperflex 9-27mm.  There was nothing wrong with the Hyperflex, but both the Baader and the Svbony 7-21mm can be adapted to take a Televue Dioptrx adapter to correct the astigmatism in my eyes.  I gather the astro model of the Celestron 8-24mm has a T thread that a Dioptrx will also fit.

Turning to Barlows, I'd very much recommend a dual 1.5x/2x model on your f/7 as this gives much more flexibility.  These dual models are sold as 2x Barlows, but some 2x models can also be used at 1.5x.  These ones allow the lens cell to be unscrewed from the body of the Barlow and then screwed into the filter thread at the bottom of an eyepiece.  Very often this won't be in the blurb, but on their website the US retailer Agena Astro states whether this can be done or not under the specifications.  I'd also add that the 2x Orion Shorty Barlow that Agena doesn't sell can also be used at 1.5x.

I use the 2x option when atmospheric seeing is good and in conjunction with a 7-21mm zoom will give you magnifications of 68-204x.  However I find that there are many nights in the UK when a 1.5x Barlow gives the maximum that the seeing will allow (153x).  Sure you could use the Barlow at 2x with the zoom set at 9.3mm to get this magnification, but this will give you a smaller field of view.  This because the apparent field of view of nearly all zooms is lower at higher focal lengths.

I've got an Altair 72mm f/6 EDF with a very similar spec to your new scope.  I'm very pleased with mine and am tempted to add the 102mm to the arsenal.  Good luck with yours! 

Dang, somehow I missed replying to this - but thank you so much! This is really helpful advice and I sure do appreciate it. 

57 minutes ago, Dantooine said:

I’ve seen 5 people get this telescope on here in the last few months. All of them have been very happy with it. One much preferred it over his dob and has posted very detailed observations and has pushed it to its limits.  The list of his observations has blown me away in the very short time he’s had it (jealousy).

I’ve a friend who bought the 80mm version, he does the photos stuff, not my thing at all but has shown me some amazing pictures. The quality and build is just something that will not disappoint. I’ve spend heavily on diagonal, eyepieces and mount for this telescope and truly love it. 

Thank you for this, I really appreciate it. Ofc, everyone is different - but it is reassuring to know other people are happy with the scope considering how limited my own experience is. I will take the leap of faith I think, and buy it - and see how it all works out. If it really doesn't I can always sell up and try again. 

In the meantime, I shall have to get saving every spare penny - gotta get me that new car, so I may even have the space to indulge in two different setups - and new place to live, preferably under darker skies! 

1 hour ago, bomberbaz said:

Imaging eh, that's my que to leave this conversation. I have "very" limited experience with this and will leave it there.

Strange you say a 200P wouldn't fit in the car, it is only around 1.2 metre in length once removed from base but as you say, not fit for imaging so it matters not.

Aha sorry, didn't intend for that to be a kind of shutdown! I'm definitely interested in imaging, although my primary interest at the moment would be observing - for which I acknowledge a dob would be better. Sadly, genuinely cannot travel with it.

My car's boot is 1.1m in length with the two back seats folded down. Its 0.445m in length with the back seats up, which is necessary if I am travelling with family/friends. The boot's width is 1m. So yeah, trust when I say I'm not exaggerating when I say a dob would be too big to fit in my car. And I cannot afford another car right now. I'd have to tie the thing to the roof 🤣

12 hours ago, bomberbaz said:

Another consideration for you.

I get your aims regarding footprint  but maybe you are not fully aware of the space involved with a 102 refractor plus mount and tripod or a simple 200 dob. 

I have not owned a 200 dob but have used one and am aware of the size of it. I do have a 102 frac plus mount/tripod and I don't think the difference in space used is that much different.

Also a 200P dob is around 200 quid cheaper which would easily cover the cost of extras such as a decent zoom eyepiece, a telrad finder and maybe a barlow.

 

I have used a 200p dob multiple times before. The tube itself of one of those suckers is literally too big to even fit across the back seat of my car, yet alone the tiny boot. Forgetting my lack of storage space for a second - considering my goal is to carry my scope across the country on holiday, its just not practical for me to buy a scope that I cannot even fit in my car. I don't live under bad skies, bottle 4/5, but I travel pretty much constantly (except, you know, my travelling has drastically reduced since March). 

Now, I'll gladly admit that other than using a dob, I have very little experience with scopes. But one of my acquaintances has pretty much the same size car. He says the ability to break down a setup into various pieces makes it easer to fit everything in the car. If he is travelling especially light and focusing on observing only, he forgets his Goto mount and cracks on with a decent alt az mount instead. He'll even take a little refractor and alt az mount on worldwide flights. He never travels with his own dob, and says he never would, although he happily sings its praises when it is set up at home. 

My other thought is that I would love to venture into imaging, and many people have either told me not to even bother with a dob for imaging anything other than planets, or that it is very difficult. Idk about this; but generally the people I have spoken to seem to be of the opinion that a decent little refractor is a decent place to start with imaging. 

Ultimately, I don't know. I feel like every time I get close to making a decision on my setup, something else makes me doubt it entirely. I am constantly reminded (not always by people) of the fact that I know nothing and it is really starting to drag me down before I've even started. Perhaps I just need to take the plunge and see what happens.