Tiny Clanger

The adapter I bought was the Opticron one they recommend on the page I linked to, this is it https://www.opticron.co.uk/our-products/accessories/binocular-tripod-mounts/binocular-tripod-mount-for-binoculars-to-50mm-og Plenty of similar ones can be found all over the internet, but I thought I might as well be sure and buy the Opticron one,it was no more expensive than the cheap far eastern ones , as I bought it with the binoculars as a package from the only place which had them in stock at the time (lockdown #1 , 'Tring astro. I just looked and they are out of stock at the moment ) I like the binoculars, they are an improvement over the cheap 10x50s I bought from Jessops 20 years ago, better made, sharper images and waterproof ( glass & metal gets dewed up on cold nights) but that's all I have to compare them with . Heather

Hi, Many modern binoculars have a threaded hole which takes a standard sized screw . There are adapters (in many shapes & sizes) available which screw into the hole, and then screw onto the standard screw size which protrudes from a photographic tripod or monopod. I second the binocular sky website as a good source of info, I took their recommendations and bought the Opticron 10x50 WPs , and the adapter Opricron suggest for that model , see the 'accessories' tab on this page https://www.opticron.co.uk/our-products/binoculars/adventurer-t-wp-binoculars/adventurer-t-wp-10x50#accessories I already had a monopod and a small ball & socket head , and I use those to steady the binoculars on. Amazon basics have a monopod for about £15 https://smile.amazon.co.uk/AmazonBasics-WT1003-67-Inch-Monopod/dp/B00FAYL1YU/ref=sr_1_6?dchild=1&keywords=monopod&qid=1610656719&sr=8-6 , a ball head makes using the binoculars easier as you can tilt them up , without it the binoculars would always be fixed at right angles to the monopod. I just did a quick search on amazon : tripod ball heads £7-£11 and had over 500 results, here's a random example : https://smile.amazon.co.uk/WIFUN-Camera-Ballhead-adapter-Bracket/dp/B08NJ8BGFV/ref=sr_1_26?dchild=1&keywords=tripod+ball+head&qid=1610657673&refinements=p_36%3A700-1100%2Cp_72%3A419153031&rnid=419152031&s=electronics&sr=1-26 Plenty of more expensive monopods and other heads available , but those will do the job. Hope that helps ! Heather

Thanks for the suggestion, but I'm not going to get involved in the photo side, I'm not able to afford the kind of kit I'd need to do a proper job by my standards, plus it really just doesn't seem to me an attractive thing to do to me, I'd rather spend my time looking through a simple 'scope on an alt az.!

😀 Photography adds some extra uphill on to the already steep astronomy learning curve ! I've been a photographer (pro and am.) for most of my adult life, but after initially thinking ... hmm, could use my knowledge, skills and extensive kit to take some astro photos ... I did my research and decided it is too much faff, complication and expense to do it 'properly' . Especially as I have a wide range of lovely Nikon cameras, which are less ideal for this game than the Canon range. So I'll dabble, maybe buy a DSLR tracking mount one day , stick a Nikon on a 'scope for a quick untracked Moon photo , but that's about it. I went looking at some of the places I've sourced second hand kit from , all businesses offering some sort of guarantee, (I'm too neurotic about photo kit being a delicate mix of optics, mechanics and electronics to buy off an unknown individual ). Strewth, second hand prices seem to have exceeded what I paid for some kit brand new this time last year ! I'd be happy to buy again from 'snap it up' who sell second hand kit through amazon, and give a 90 day guarantee on everything, or a year on their 'renewed' stuff which costs more, but gives you confidence. They give really accurate descriptions and check the cameras & lenses properly, One of the Nikons I bought off them had not a single mark of use beyond the shutter count (less than 1k) , it could have been brand new. https://smile.amazon.co.uk/s?me=A2IDEEXIP4KMWY&marketplaceID=A1F83G8C2ARO7P other places I've bought second hand photo kit recently over the internet from, and had really good experiences have been Wilkinson Cameras https://www.wilkinson.co.uk/preowned/ and Camera World https://www.cameraworld.co.uk/used-camera-equipment.html Worth a look at their prices, obviously with them you are paying for a guarantee and the confidence it gives , so ebay should be much cheaper. Once you have an actual camera in your hands, and wonder what on earth to do with it , see if Tony Northrup has an instructional video for your particular model (or one very similar) here https://northrup.photo/tutorials/camera-tutorials/ , his presentation is good, clear, well paced , camera specific and authoritative, usually with links for experienced folk to jump past the basics he starts with. Actually, never mind waiting, skim through his vids of the models you are considering, he won't perhaps cover the astro photography relevant details, that's not his area, butyou will get as good an idea of what the camera handles like as you can without getting your own hands on ! Heather

Most consumer level DSLRs are initially sold new as a package with a zoom lens (something like 18-55mm) which hardly adds any cost to the body only price. They are both common and cheap to buy secondhand as people frequently upgrade from them. Not an ideal tool for astro photog. , but if you are new to DSLRs and want to use the camera for general purposes too, one compatible with your camera body would be a good starter to learn on. Heather

Interesting that they dress the OTA up with nicer accessories in the U.S. than the UK , perhaps over here we are too parsimonious to pay for them ! Heather

Going wowee is what it's all about ! The 25mm BST , directly compared with the stock 25mm , is worth what you pay for it in my opinion . Mind you , I bought mine second hand on here from someone called KP82 ... 😀

Here's my 'how to' guide , edited for clarity: In daylight line your telescope up with a distant , non moving object (TV aerial , top of street lamp, church tower, etc) the further away the better. Using the 25mm eyepiece (or the highest numbered one you have) and without any Barlow , centre the chosen object in your view. Don't be surpruised if it appears upside down, this is normal for astronomical telescopes ! Then without moving the telescope tube, swap to the 10mm eyepiece (or whatever lower numbered eyepiece you may have) This increases the magnification and decreases the field of view. Again, look through the eyepiece , and move the telescope carefully until the object you chose is right in the centre of view . Now tighten the knob(s) on the mount to lock the tube in that position . Look through the eyepiece again to ensure you didn't accidentally shift the tube while tightening . If you did, loosen the controls and repeat the first steps. Then, being very careful not to knock the tube, turn on the red dot finder (RDF) , it will probably click on, then the button will continue to tun, turn it all the way until it turns no more. This is because many RDFs have adjustable brightness, and you want it as bright as possible to see the dot in the daylight. Move behind and in line with the RDF to sight through it and spot the red dot. Now fiddle with the two adjusting buttons or dials until the red dot appears to lie on the distant object you selected. Go back to the 10mm eyepiece, ensure the scope is still pointing accurately at the distant object, double check the RDF. Keep adjusting until the red dot is on your target, which is exactly in the middle of the view of your lowest numbered eyepiece. Once you've finished, don't forget to turn the RDF off (although the cell lasts for ages ) It sounds like a long process, and the first time it can be, but once it's done I've found mine stays accurately aligned unless it gets knocked. It's much easier to do the process in the daylight, and means you won't waste time when you could be seeing stars . Hope that helps Heather

OK, First an easy one : the protective cover should be taken off , the smaller hole in it has uses , but for the moment , leave the small cap on . The cover is to keep dust from falling into the tube and onto the mirror when the telescope is being stored. The red dot finder (RDF) needs to be adjusted to line up accurately with the telescope tube. Remember you are magnifying your view a lot by using the telescope, so you only see a tiny part of the sky . The RDF needs to be accurately lined up to that tiny part of the sky. To do this there will be some small dials on the side of the RDF. I posted a long explanation of how to do this some months ago, I'll find it and give you a link . Heather

I've no idea whereabouts in the world the OP is , they don't say, but in case they are in the UK, around here the 127mak comes with a 1.25" diagonal, RDF and the standard (rubbish) SW EPs https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-127-ota.html Lower spec. accessories for us , but I think, (I've not converted $ to £ for years now !) cheaper . Heather

Hi, Did you spend some time lining the red dot finder up so it matches the view through the telescope ? It is best to do this in daylight , choosing a distinctive target a few km away, something like a tower which will be easily recognizable ... remember the view through an astronomical telescope will usually be be upside down . If you try to do this at night, it is hard to be sure the star you see in the telescope eyepiece is the same star the red dot is on . You were pointing the open end of the telescope at the sky , weren't you ?!

My verdict is to use my heritage 150 dob instead, I've not had the sort of plentiful long clear nights where I'd feel I have time to waste !

Yep, watched and read his reviews before buying my 127. Also found various pages on here interesting for this and smaller SW maks ... http://www.waloszek.de/astro_sw_mak102_e.php

Hi and welcome. A similar query got plenty of suggestions before Xmas To give good recommendations we do need to know your budget, and what sort of place you are intending to view from ... e.g. suburban back garden, dark rural spot, brightly lit place with many streetlights in view ? If your budget is under around £75 best go with binoculars and some sort of support to hold them steady. Heather

I can absolutely understand why an introductory , general undergrad. course would suggest binoculars as an initial tool : many students would have access to some already from other interests, or by borrowing from a family member. If not , acceptable ones can be bought from around £50 new. The same cannot be said for telescopes ... I don't know about other UK educational establishments, but my uni has always had a local observatory available for undergrad.s to use for free, so no need for an amateur telescope unless the student wants to buy one out of personal interest. https://www2.le.ac.uk/departments/physics/news/news_items/the-university-of-leicester-opens-the-most-advanced-astronomical-teaching-facility-available-at-a-uk-university

Excellent result, hope you've communicated your appreciation directly to the council , the more encouragement they get for this the better ! Heather

You seem set on the idea of goto though , it's the single consistent thread through your suggestions ! Sorry I can't help you with any of that, I'm firmly in the camp of folk who think finding things for yourself is a big part of the fun, and contributes hugely to the sense of achievement . Heather

For DSLR lens filters I keep filter wrenches like these , in my kit, but they'd probably be too great a diameter, might be worth a search to see if smaller ones are made. The shoe sole or rubber glove trick can work , as can a couple of rubber bands, one wound tightly round the circumference of each filter rim to give grip. It helps to have small hands, If yours are large, ask someone with dainty mitts to try ! Heather

OK, so for observing only (for the moment) you have plenty of options still ! When I said best 'scope for DSO vs best for planets/Moon was a conflicting pair of requirements it is because ideally the first needs a wide aperture to gather as much light as possible, whilst the focal length is less important. However, for planets and the Moon these are relatively bright objects, so less aperture is fine, but you want greater focal length to provide more magnification. Big aperture=big glass , so many observers of DSOs go for a reflecting telescope , a Newtonian on a mount or in Dobsonian form on a simple wooden base. A big mirror at the bottom of a tube in a reflector is far cheaper to make than big lenses (actually compound lenses of two or more elements) in a refractor. Long focal length = long tube * , so you are going to find limitations in portability for many options there. My journey (so far !) was 1) inherit Celestron 114EQ (the much derided 'Jones - Bird design) Use it a bit, hate the flimsy EQ and unsharp image 2) Lockdown #1, £200 spare cash from not leaving home , buy telescope .... I wanted something simple, reliable and cheap, bought a Heritage 150 dob ( the bigger brother of the one Theropod alludes to above, which in the UK is called the Heritage 130) The heritage 130 and 150 close down to roughly half length for storage, and have table top bases. I'd not pop one in a rucsac (too big a diameter on the base) but the 150 is easy to store in my small house. Any reading of threads here on the subject will tell you I love it , it is great . 3) I reckoned my views of the planets and Moon , whilst good in the dob, were a bit less impressive after 5 months viewing Mars Jupiter and Saturn. The 150 has a wide field of view and gathers a good amount of light for Messier objects etc, but the focal length of 750mm means a 10mm eyepiece gives magnification of 75x . So I bought a skymax 127 mak which has a focal length of 1500mm, in that the same 10mm EP gives 150x magnification. Which telescope I use depends on what I will be observing , horses for courses an' all that. Which is why, given your transport limitations, I thought binoculars and a small mak on a photo tripod would be a good combo for you, altho' I'd agree with Theropod that a heritage 130 could be a better choice if you have space for it in the van . If you go for a simple mount, all your budget can go into the best possible optics, if you want a goto mount , less will be available for the bit you look through. My modest £200 telescope has turned into about £800 of kit, none of it top of the range, but all good for my requirements : two telescopes, and alt/az mount, a couple of viewfinders, a better star diagonal, some better eyepieces ... it's shown me some fantastic things, and I consider it money well spent . Heather ^ except in a cassegrain/maksutov which sort of folds the light path .

Forgot to say, my 6x30 RACI is the skywatcher model, altho' there is no branding anywhere in sight on it , just a small sticker on the box it came in. I don't have direct experience of the az3 tripod , but when I was investigating az mounts found that the az5 is rated to carry 9kg itself, but paired with the aluminium tripod (which I guess is the same one as yours) the combo is rated at 5kg. I already had a strong , stiff , photo tripod ( a Manfrotto 055, it weighs about 3kg itself) which has a weight rating of 9kg, and would cost about £150 new if bought now (Ive owned it for about 25 years ) , so that's what I put the mak & az5 on. The mak 127 is a substantial little lump of metal and glass and weighs around 3kg, it works really well on the tripod & mount combo. If I needed to use the big Manfrotto a lot for photography ( I have travel tripods which are fine for most purposes) I'd be really torn between the skywatcher steel one , or seeking out a second hand manfrotto . I suspect the photo tripod closes up smaller (it has 3 sections vs the skywatchers 2 ) and I've always liked the click locks which are a fast and positive way to extend the legs. On the on the hand, the skywatcher has a larger platform to seat the mount on, weighs more ( hard to find specifications, but I've seen around 7kg being quoted ) more mass is good for stability, and it is simpler ... I like simplicity, less to break or go wrong . Heather

Quick reply while having a brief coffee break : the 6x30 RACI I got in the summer was from a camera shop , I've dealt with Bristol Cameras and Carmarthen Cameras, not sure which one was the RACI vendor, both gave good service . Just popped the RACI on the kitchen scales, it weighs 263g, I have the shoe for it placed close to the established balance point on the Heritage tube so having it there vs having it on my mak will not mean faffing with the heritage's balance. The Rigel weighs 66g, it doesn't make a significant difference to the balance of either 'scope. I found swapping from BST to the stock EPs messed up the balance of the heritage, you really notice the difference with a dob base, what I did was find a big hefty magnet ( removed from a damaged audio speaker) , stick some felt on the side to stop it scratching the 'scope, and that sticks on the bottom end of the tube when using a BST to balance it . My BST 15mm weighs 173g, the stock 20mm 40g ! Heather

Apart from it being smaller than the telrad (which would have taken up pretty much the entire length of the 127 mak tube) I specifically bought the Rigel Quick finder because it not only has circles rather than one spot ( half a degree and two degrees, not the same as the telrad's ) and adjustable brightness, but it also has an inbuilt pulsing option. Bythe way, both Rigel and telrad come with sticky pads to fix their bases on your telescope tube : don't know about the telrad, but the rigel has two bases included for different tube diameters (very handy, one for my mak one for the dob) The telrad and Rigel bases are not the same as a standard finder shoe, so you can't just slot them in . On the Rigel QF , just by the on/brightness/off knob is a second, smaller one which lets you adjust it from steadily on through a range of speeds of blinking on/off. The slowest on/off pulse is about 2 seconds on , the same off( I just checked !). You can select whatever combo of brightness and blink speed (or none) that you find convenient Very handy, I've the Rigel and a 6x30 RACI , and having both available has made the few viewing sessions I've managed since mid December much easier. I believe you can buy an add on for a telrad to make it pulse, but it comes built into the Rigel . Heather

I though woolly bears were carpet beetle larvae ?

I think every Theropod would be well advised to take a particular interest in rocks from space ... 😀 🦖

2) is that a thinsulate onesie ? 😀 Fab! Never seen one of those before I have some Rohan over the head tops (Olfios ) with similar thinsulate between a polycotton outer and a soft knit inner, the oldest one has stopped lofting after what must by now be 30 years of frequent use and washing, seemed expensive when I bought it, but it's served me well. They advertised them as warm as a Guernsey pullover, but lighter, wind resistant and easy to wash and dry, which they were. Washing a down parka must have been fun, I (reluctantly) washed my down gilet in the height of summer, it took 7 hours of tumble drying with tennis balls, and lots of hand clump breaking to make it lovely again, which made me decide that when my jacket needs washing I'll be happy to pay an expert to do it ! All the clever technical fabrics in the world, and you still can;t really beat wool and down (in dry cold conditions anyway ) Heather