Tiny Clanger

10 minutes ago, Carbon Brush said:

I am in the 'get a MAK' camp given your description.
Have you considered a Bresser 127 MAK?
I have not used this particaular scope. But have been impressed by the quality of their refractors when placed against similar Skywatcher product.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-mc-127-1900-maksutov-cassegrain-ota.html

Yep, if I was buying my first mak now (instead of during lockdown when the things were rare as rocking horse manure) I'd prefer the Bresser 127. The only reservation I have with the Bresser refractors is the non-standard finder shoe (and comically bad supplied optical finder) but it looks as if their mak comes with an RDF, which is all you need to point at the Moon anyway.

57 minutes ago, Arcturus- said:

What's 'LBM?'

I think it's a variation on L.G.M.

As Bosun21 said, a mak. The advantages are that they are physically short, while having a long focal length, which makes them both lighter and easier to securely mount.

I have a skywatcher skymax127, not wildly expensive and it weighs just a shade over 3kg.  I can use up to a 6mm eyepiece with it giving somewhere around 250x magnification before eye floaters are too intrusive. What mount and tripod you choose to put it on will be the greater part of the overall weight, mine works well on an AZ5 (comes in at under 3kg) and a sturdy photo tripod , making the whole setup under 8kg.

On 08/05/2024 at 19:58, Buqibu said:

Hi all,

I'm currently in a foreign country where I have the opportunity to buy a telescope (at home this isn't the case and ordering isn't worth it because import fees double or triple the prices). I currently have a Celestron Astromaster 102AZ, which I learned on and have been using for a good 3 years. However, the limitations and relatively poor quality of that telescope and especially it's mount (my bold) are starting to really bother me, so I want an upgrade. Here comes the problem: I can only carry with me on the plane 2 backpacks. One of these would be dedicated the the scope. So I am looking for something that can fold down in some way or something that is a very (very!) short OTA, and something that is lighter than 10kg when fully setup. So far I've come to the conclusion of either a TableTop Dobsonian or some sort of small Cassegrain. I would like the aperture to be no smaller than 100mm, and preferably around 5 inches so it can be a visual upgrade from my astromaster. Budget at max would be around 450-500 euro. I want to know if this is at all possible, or if I'm asking for too much haha. Thank you for reading and I appreciate all replies,

Kind regards,

Buqi

If it's the mount & tripod that you have identified as the main weakness in your setup, get that sorted out first. I assume that your current telescope has a standard dovetail rail ? A new mount compatible with a standard Vixen type dovetail will be less delicate to pack into a rucsac than a telescope, and many photo tripods close down into short, compact packages. I'd suggest as well as upgrading mount and tripod you could consider adding one of the Baader filters that reduces chromatic aberration to make your current 'scope work better for you https://www.firstlightoptics.com/achromat-semi-apo-filters.html A filter would be certainly be easier to pack than a new 'scope !

You've not said what country you live in, or what country you are visiting, or how much you have to spend, so it's difficult to be specific about exactly what you might choose to buy, but photography equipment shops are more common than astro ones, so you will probably be able to see some tripods on display, maybe even handle them. Most quality photo tripods can be bought without a photo head, and have a 3/8" protruding screw to fix a head to. A lot of alt az heads with an under 8kg carrying rating use that 3/8" screw fitting too.

As to heads which fit those photo tripods, I've used a 102 refractor a similar size to yours on a skywatcher AZ5 and found it vibrated too much, the same for a premium alt az head with a similar tall vertical arm arrangement. I've had far better experiences with the more compact alt az mounts which hold the OTA out at the side of the head, like this https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth-astronomy-mounts/berlebach-castor-ii-altazimuth-mounting.html

and even this, which was rather strained and very close to the stated carrying capacity with a 102mm f7 on it, but OK at lower magnifications, and very much improved by use of a counterweight https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth-astronomy-mounts/omegon-az-baby-mount.html

I've not owned one of these, but read that they have been used with 100mm fracs, and have the advantage of slow motion cables (which you can easily remove to pack) https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth-astronomy-mounts/sky-watcher-az-pronto-alt-azimuth-astronomy-mount-wo-tripod.html

On 09/05/2024 at 18:30, Buqibu said:

I suppose I'd get it out of the box before taking it with me. Will that negate import fees?

Import regulations, taxes and fees vary enormously from country to country, you need to check your home country government advice on personal imports from the specific country you are visiting. Taking it out of the box certainly won't negate any fees, it might avoid them, or it might get you in trouble if an inquisitive customs officer notices you are trying to evade paying ...

You need to remove the mirror cell from the tube to get to the clips which hold the mirror in the cell.

If the clips are pressing on the mirror, the glass distorts, there needs to be a tiny gap between the mirror surface and the side of the clip that faces it.

It sounds scary, but if you are very careful it's not hard to take the cell out (best mark the outside of the scope tube and the edge of the cell before you start with some masking tape or similar, to help get it lined up exactly the same way round when put back together to minimise any collimation loss) I've managed it with a 250 newt and I'm a weedy ham fisted fool.

The usual advice is there should be a gap big enough to allow a sheet of paper between the glass and the clip.

Plenty to read here : https://stargazerslounge.com/forum/185-getting-started-with-observing/

1 hour ago, cloudyweather said:

Why am I asking?  The Starfield has been out of stock for a few months and I could get the Askar, but I'll wait a little longer if needed.

Can't help you decide, but can point out a returned starfield with a reduced price available : https://www.firstlightoptics.com/offers/offer_starfield-102mm-f7-ed-doublet-refractor_431919.html

31 minutes ago, Raulvdzande said:

i thought maybe a full telescope like scope and everything else with is is a good idea, is it? and if yes which ones are good than

 

There are no simple answers to your question, if there were, there would only be one telescope available in that price bracket.

As others have said, you need to slow down and do some research, otherwise you could make a very expensive mistake.

You said you could carry a 10 to 12kg weight ... that's not much, and makes me wonder if you are either small or quite young ?

1 hour ago, Raulvdzande said:

i live on a farm
its a clear route from the place i keep the telescope and the place i use it
now i can carry 10 to 12KG
no i dont have electrical power available but i can use batteries and if realy needed i can make it so i ave electrical power
i live in a smal town with no big buildings so a clear sky
i live in the netherlands

OK, so no limitations on storage or moving the kit apart from a weight limit.

A biggish dobsonian (200mm aperture and manual, not a go-to with motors) will be well above 12kg , but if split into two parts (base and tube) to take it out you might manage. Check the weight of anything you consider, sturdy tripods and mounts are not light, neither are telescopes.

As you are somewhere populous, there should be a club within reach where you can see some telescopes in use, that should be your next step.

12 hours ago, Raulvdzande said:

i keep it at home and i have a big enough space to storage it and use it and i want to use to to see stars, deep sky and planets

For anyone to be able to give you a useful answer, you need to give far more detail.  What you have asked is like someone going to a car forum and asking what is the best car to buy to be cheap to fuel, be a 4x4 to drive up rough mountain tracks, comfortable to carry a big family on a long drive on holiday, and do 200kph on a racetrack

Is your home an apartment, a house, a house with a garage or other secure storage?

Is the route from storage to where you will use the telescope level and clear, no steps, rough ground, narrow doors?

What kind of weight of awkward shaped yet delicate equipment could you confidently carry from your storage to viewing place? Some setups in your price range are over 35kg.

Do you have electrical power available at your viewing place ?

Where you live do you have dark rural skies, city lights, or nearby bright lighting you have no control over ?  Tall buildings or mountains or trees obstructing your view in some directions? Those factors can have an enormous impact on what you might be able to see, even with a great telescope.

Where are you ? We don't even know what continent you are on, some makes of telescope which will be recommended may only be easily available in the UK, or EU, or USA ...

2 hours ago, RFaber said:

We used the 25mm ocular, found a group of clear stars, located them with the finder scope (the finder scope wasn't aligned with the primary scope), but was completely unable to locate them or anything in the primary scope. No matter how much we searched and tried focusing, we did not manage to get anything but a uniform grey view inside the primary scope. Once or twice we saw a bright shape shaped like the UFO, but I suspect that was just a nearby streetlight reflecting on something.

 

The 'UFO' was probably a very out of focus star, possibly the shape you saw was caused by your attempt at collimation. As bosun21 said,  use just the correct extension tube for the diameter of eyepiece, also ensure the front section of the flextube dob is fully extended and locked in place.

A poorly collimated laser in a stock skywatcher flextube focuser is a recipe for disaster - I know, I have a 250 flextube ! Using the provided extension, the laser (even after being collimated) moves as you touch the focuser, and tilts as you tighten the screws that hold it in place.

This is a good explanation of the various ways to collimate https://garyseronik.com/collimation-tools-what-you-need-what-you-dont/

Gary Seronik also gives the clearest account of how to collimate I've ever come across https://garyseronik.com/a-beginners-guide-to-collimation/

I found the best method with a laser is this  https://www.tomhole.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/blaser.pdf a particularly useful thing as it's easy to see the bottom of the barlow and the faceplate you add to it through the open section of the flextube.

You might be able to find either a window clamp or a hide clamp intended for birdwatchers etc spotting 'scopes that would suit whatever form the balcony rail or barrier takes ? That would remove the awkward tripod leg problem, and make them able to use a small 'frac . or binoculars. I'd want a secure tether on the instrument as well though, just in case ...

10 minutes ago, Vic L S said:

Thanks for the insight. I'm always a little anxious buying/ selling online, but I think even more so with astro gear. 

You hear more about buyers being scammed, but how are sellers protected? Is it easy to get scammed by a buyer, if they just put in a claim on PayPal stating the item has not arrived/ damaged, and insists on a refund? Is that something that happens often with these things? 

I'd always prefer to meet in person but that's not always possible, so just wondering how others went about it if things come to being posted. 

It's good to know that there is usually good buying and selling etiqeutte from users on this forum though. 

Best not treat this forum as just a marketplace, partly because that's precisely against the rules and the spirit of the place. Read this if you've not already done so:

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/105855-forum-code-of-conduct/#comment-1044622  (but note the requirements for seeing the buy/sell section are now 25 posts and a month's membership) and these

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/383673-important-change-to-buy-sell-access/#comment-4144265

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/419332-buy-sell-safety-warning/#comment-4462445

Personally I'd not buy anything sight unseen from someone with little posting history, someone who offers no clue about how they may actually have used the kit they want to sell, has no apparent interest in being part of the community. Other red flags for me would be someone who does not show photos of the sale items, whose sale text is just the manufacturer's blurb copy/pasted with no hint of personal experience, or does not specify at least a county as their location while saying they are happy for collection.

I've bought the majority of my kit from people on here, always paid by bank transfer to secure the item, even if I was collecting in person days later. I was confident to do that because the sellers were (are ! ) active members on here with a reliable history who were well known to me. My trust has not been betrayed, and I have some really nice kit I simply could not have afforded otherwise. Thank you all, you know who you are !

I've not sold as much, but again people have paid me by bank transfer (I don't, and won't, do paypal ) and if the item was posted I've PM'd the recipient a photo of the proof of posting you get at the P.O. as soon as I've sent it off. Even for small low value items items (sent non tracking) the free proof of posting receipt shows the address the package is being sent to as well as the date/time and how much postage was paid.

ABS I keep an eye on, but to be honest unless something was very local so I could see it before paying cash, I'd not risk it. ENS Optical in Birmingham are dealers in second hand gear, I've no idea what their buying prices are like, their selling prices often appear rather close to the new price. I've not used them myself.

See also 'salute'.

5 hours ago, Bivanus said:

Simplest example : Latin - 'salutare' / Romanian - 'salut' / English - 'hello' ( or 'greetings' )  

'Salutation' is an English word meaning a greeting, we did not escape the Latin influence.

41 minutes ago, jp1977 said:

The images don;t really capture the level of detail I was able to enjoy, but I can improve on this, I'm sure - can only get better from this point - consider me hooked"

 

And so it begins ...

Just unscrew and remove it.

The link didn't work for me. I wonder if it is pointing to this though ?

I think OP has already told us what the 'scope is when they say,

" I found this site, along with some delightful reviews of the Seben Big Boss 1400-150. Oh well, I guess it was free... "

Amazon reckon : "Seben's Big Boss 1400-150 reflector telescope is, because of its perfect workmanship and enormous performance data, the unquestioned top telescope of Seben's astronomy series. Undreamed of possibilities become true for the ambitious user of Seben's Big Boss telescope because of its huge 150mm aperture and the tremendous focal length of 1400mm." https://www.amazon.co.uk/Seben-Boss-1400-150-Reflector-Telescope/dp/B00692THU2

It's a Bird Jones (or possibly Jones Bird ?) design, which the above ad avoids saying by using the term catadioptric.

1 hour ago, LondonNeil said:

 clear outside is confusing me.   I have now worked out the bottom bar is the moon though.

Have you clicked on 'how to use' at the top and followed the tour ?

OK, so cross that possibility off the list.

You tried various eyepieces, and it showed in all of them. Could you try removing the diagonal and seeing if a straight through view still shows the problem ?

The only other kit related (rather than seeing related) possibility I can think of is something inside the 'scope protruding into the optical path and causing diffraction (similar to the spikes caused by the  secondary supports in a Newtonian)

30 minutes ago, quasar117 said:

That's definitely a plausible answer. The old refractor is a 60mm Simmons generic department store telescope. Can't remember  the focal length/ratio  but guessing its around F/9.

As it happens I'm going for a eye test this afternoon so will ask the question about astigmatism.

Timely !

Not sure if it's a good thing if the answer is your eye or not ... it would absolve the new 'scope tho' !

5 hours ago, quasar117 said:

...  as before the Star appeared to be 'hairy' around the circumference and not pinpoint like the stars in the background starfield. Also if my eye was not perfectly centered the star would distort and create a spike.

In-focus revealed concentric rings. However, out-focus I could not discern any rings it just appeared as a solid white circle. Is this normal?

For comparison I dusted off my old department store "toy' refractor. I was surprised that when focused on a star, the star appeared more pinpoint than viewing through the Starfield 102. Very strange.

Whilst I'm happy with the lunar views, I still felt something is not quite right when viewing stars. Could it be just the seeing again?

 

 

I wonder if what you are seeing is astigmatism in your eye showing up in the Starfield, but not in your 'toy' refractor ?

As I understand it (i.e. not very much) any astigmatism your eye may have will show more with a setup's greater exit pupil. If  the old 'toy' 'scope has a higher f number vs the Starfield, perhaps the smaller exit pupil it gives allowed you to see pinpoint stars ... it could also be the reason you never saw the problem in a mak.

15 minutes ago, Simon Stewart said:

I'm thinking about using solar film. Might you be able to point me in the direction of a guide for making a filter with film?

 

https://astrosolar.com/en/information/how-to/how-to-make-your-own-objective-solar-filter-for-your-camera-or-telescope/

48 minutes ago, Zermelo said:

I'm sure this point has been made previously in these pages, but there's an enormous irony in so many people using, as a prime observing list, a set of objects that was created specifically for the opposite purpose.

I've previously thought that this would make a good quiz question (Only Connect?) if I could only think up two or three other examples of "things that were being widely used for a purpose diametrically opposed to their originator's intentions".

OK, how about post-it notes (accidental discovery of weak re-positionable adhesive by 3M researcher trying to formulate a strong glue), umbrellas (originating as parasols to create shade)  and that famous pill, intended for blood pressure lowering and anti-angina medication use, Viagra ?