Tiny Clanger

Jealousy is a terrible thing, but I fell prey to it reading the OP ... I have a 127 mak on back order from  FLO ... will it be in the recent delivery from the importer ? Won't it  ? Will it get to me while Mars is still impressive ... the suspense is killing me ! 😟

Hi Kyle,

In case you didn't get the original manual along with the scope, you can get it online here

https://www.manualslib.com/manual/116323/Orion-Skyquest-Intelliscope-Xt10.html#manual

3 hours ago, climbingmagnet said:

Hello, 

Total beginner, UK based. I bought a Skyliner 250PX at the beginning of the year and had some joy looking at the moon.

I have the two stock 10 and 25mm eyepieces that came with the scope and I bought an Omegon 6mm

Tonight I managed to use the 6mm to look at Saturn and can see the rings. I also looked at Mars (and I think Jupiter), but they were just small bright spots, couldn't really see many distinguishing features.

Couple of questions:

1. I find that things move quite quickly out of view and find it quite hard to adjust the scope into a precise position. I'll adjust it and if I let go, it moves slightly. So I always have to hold it to try and keep the things in view. Any tips to try and get a more precise movement.

2. If I want to get greater magnification to see the rings of Saturn more clearly or see Mars better, what's the best approach. A magnification accessory or another eyepiece (or both)?

 

I'm surprised you can't see any features on Jupiter or Mars , I can make out bands and the GRS on Jupiter and the southern ice cap and various dark markings on Mars with a far smaller 150 mm diameter mirror skywatcher and an 8mm eyepiece. In addition to the two sets of excellent suggestions above, I'd try to improve things by making a simple shroud (if you  don't have one already) to block stray light from sneaking in through the open section of your  'scope.

The planet scudding across and out of field of view is inevitable with more magnification,  the greater the magnification, the smaller the area of sky you see, therefore the quicker the planet crosses it. All you can do is either buy a mount which tracks the object for you, or spend some time patiently learning to gently nudge the Dobsonian mount by tiny increments . There's a lot to learn !

Heather

3 hours ago, Steely Stan said:

Yep, so it seems!

Heather, as you are fairly local to me (I'm Kettering) do you have any tips for slightly darker skies near to home? The light maps look terrible in the Midlands but just in case there is a tiny dot of dark you know about? ...or is that like asking a mushroom forager for their best spots? 🙂

Phil

Hello neighbour down the A6

I'm on the edge of the (plague) borough of Oadby & Wigston, on the south side of (plague city) Leicester. At the moment I've not really ventured far from my own back garden apart from a trip to a rural layby with a path beyond it which I knew had a wide flat grassy margin and is arable (having curious cattle come to suss you out is bad enough in daylight ...)  That was so I could get a good  look at comet Neowise, which was lost in the glow of the city to the north from my home.

I've visited plenty of rural places in S. Leic.s / N.Northants in the course of other interests, and need to think about their possibilities for safe night time parking and openness of aspect for 'scope views. I think the Pitsford reservoir car parks are shut at night , but need to check out the Brampton Valley way : as I recall most of the car parks along there are surrounded by trees ...

I came across this group https://www.eastmidlandsstargazers.org.uk/discover/ who have a couple of locations you can pay £20 p.a. to access , but they are both north of Leicester. I've not joined them, I spend too much time on the computer as it is ...

If I find any good spots, I'll let you know, honest  !

51 minutes ago, DaveL59 said:

well glass is considered to be a fluid, so I guess over a long enough period of time it could if left undisturbed eventually flow such that the lens changes shape. That'd apply whichever orientation you store it in but in our lifetimes and our grandchildren's even it'd not be noticeable. Grease in the focuser on the other hand might flow if temperatures get high enough but other than that I'd expect they'd be just fine.

I seemed to recall the 'glass is a liquid' statement triggering the QI klaxon , so just checked , and it is an amorphous solid . No worries about it flowing over time either :

"Whatever flow glass manages, however, does not explain why some antique windows are thicker at the bottom. Other, even older glasses do not share the same melted look. In fact, ancient Egyptian vessels have none of this sagging, says Robert Brill, an antique glass researcher at the Corning Museum of Glass in Corning, N.Y. Furthermore, cathedral glass should not flow because it is hundreds of degrees below its glass-transition temperature, Ediger adds. A mathematical model shows it would take longer than the universe has existed for room temperature cathedral glass to rearrange itself to appear melted."

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fact-fiction-glass-liquid/

To be honest, I would have said liquid too , right up until Mr S. Fry told us otherwise !

Be sure you appreciate the size (both diameter of the base and length of tube ) and weight of the solid tube version. I was sad to realise back when I started looking for affordable 'scopes as a step up in quality from a cheap 114 newtonian on a wobbly eq , that there was no way I could safely store the skyliner in my small house. I was about to give up and spend my £200 on yet another second hand camera lens instead when the 150 heritage arrived in the shops. I'm very happy with it.

Both scopes come with the same pair of eyepieces by the way, and the 10mm is poor, you will want to replace it whichever scope you buy. The difference in magnification is due to the focal length of the telescope.  Whatever you buy, it needs to be used outside, there's really no point paying for a decent 'scope and then pointing it through window glass.

I recommend reading Kim Stanley Robinson's Martians trilogy ( starts with Red Mars, then  Green Mars then Blue Mars) which may be sci fi, but has a good basis in fact .They  were written around 30 years ago, and our information about the Martian surface may have moved on (it's at least a decade since I read the novels) but they portray an entirely believable political struggle between the 'terraform it as far as possible' faction and the ecology minded .

Welcome !

Yes the slope is slippery. Also steep and long ...

Heather

3 hours ago, Dexterous said:

My first post on this forum . Coincidentally my first scope arrived yesterday and it is the same as yours . I am completely new to stargazing though, have never looked at sky with anything I own except my eyes . Still going through the basics of it now . Hoping I can find sequence of baby steps I need to take to be able to see intersting things in this ever expanding universe . 

Any ideas where to start ...

 

Welcome, it's a fun 'scope, I bought mine a few months ago and have seen plenty from a suburban back garden.

First thing to do if you haven't already , with the 'scope extended and an eyepiece in it, balance the tube so when the screw on the side is loose the tube stays level.

Second thing to do, in the daylight line the 'scope up with a distant , non moving object (TV aerial , top of street lamp, whatever)  the further away the better. Using the 25mm eyepiece, centre the object in your view. Then swap to the 10mm eyepiece , which increases the magnification and decreases the field of view. Shift the 'scope again until the object you picked is bang in the centre of view once more. Now tighten the knob on the side of the mount to lock the tube in that position ( look through it again to ensure you didn't accidentally shift it while tightening . If you did, sort it out )

Then, being very careful not to knock the tube, turn on the red dot finder (RDF) do whatever acrobatic contortions you need to get behind and in line to sight through it and spot the dot. Now fiddle with the two adjusting screws until the dot lies on the distant object you selected. Go back to the 10mm eyepiece, ensure the scope is still pointing accurately at the distant thing, double check the RDF. 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 may well be a faff, but once done I've found mine stays pretty much 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 the clouds roll away one night soon and there's things up there to see .

Stellarium is a good open source free windows program to show you what you may be able to see from a particular place and time, it has an online version too https://stellarium-web.org/

This thread on here is one of a vast number of freely available resources  : https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/196278-what-can-i-expect-to-see/

Heather

1 hour ago, Ouroboros said:

Musing on why this sudden increase in not so neighbourly lighting and it occurred to me that lights are just another of those consumer items that have become much cheaper to buy. Also cheap to run because of developments in LED technology, and they’re marketed as yet another must have for the consumer.  “Must have” but “don’t need” just about sums it up. 

Yep, my nice neighbour had her adult child return home to shield with her , and he seems to have spent a lot of time browsing ebay and buying tat , including at least 7 solar powered LED coloured lights of various types, turning her small back garden into a hideous mini Las Vegas. Luckily only one light was spoiling the dark in my garden, and they shifted it when I asked nicely, but I'm hoping the short daylight hours will curtail the time some of them glow.With a bit of luck, the winter rain will do for some too...

Solar LED lights are remarkably cheap and bright now days.

1 hour ago, kiwiinlondon said:

Thanks, I was a little put off by the cost of a light shroud so good to know people have made their own. 
 

Good point about not expecting everything in a basic model. Really helpful to know limitations before buying one though so I’m aware of what trade off I’m making 

I’m going to take a look at the 150 now that I know I could make a shroud for it  - thanks again 

 

 

To inform myself of what might be possible with the heritage 150 I read my way through this 6 year ,  nearly 200 page thread which is about the US version of the slightly smaller 130 heritage,  which is available under a different name there in support of a charity. It's well worth a browse

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/463109-onesky-newtonian-astronomers-without-borders/

A shorter thread on here, featuring a very useful video by a member here (which I first found via youtube, so belated thanks Lockie !) about making a light shroud and PTFE taping the focuser

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/356601-new-product-alert-heritage-150p/page/3/

The Maksutov scopes (often abbreviated to Mak ) appeal to me, they are reminiscent of the catadioptric telephoto lenses that were around in photography back when film was the thing last century .  Whilst Maks do offer a longer focal length, their construction makes them more expensive for a similar light gathering ability ( the mirror diameter ) . You gather less light for your £, but gain in terms of magnification. 

This is good news for viewing detail on planets & the Moon, but, guess what ? Yep, there's bad news too - with higher magnification it's harder to line the scope up to see a thing , and once you do , the thing drifts out of your eyepiece faster ! Also any wobbles in the mount are magnified, and a cheap tripod bundled with a low price scope is likely to be another weak point in the setup.

Having said that, now I've used the heritage 150 for a few months and started up the steep learning curve of observing with it, I don't regret my purchase one little bit. It;'s shown me detail on Mars, Jupiter and Saturn, enabled me to see Uranus , various Messier objects and double stars from my suburban back garden.  However,  I do have a 127 Mak on order , an extra tool in my observing armoury , not a replacement, I will use both. The two types have advantages for different types of object. The 127 mak would be outside  your budget as you'll need a tripod and head too, but the 102mm mak with a simple manual mount would be within.

Tough decisions eh !

5 hours ago, keora said:

Thank you to those who suggested the optical illusions I've seen are due to eddy currents. If I use the telescope inside, it's only 3 or 4 feet from a heated radiator. So there will be eddy currents in the air. I would never have guessed it.

The advantage of viewing from a first floor room is that I can see stars/planets which are low on the horizon. If I use the telescope in the garden, I've restricted vision because of nearby houses, street lights, trees...

Distortions due to warm air currents are sometimes visible on hot sunny days ( remember them ?) above heat radiating surfaces like tarmac roads . You can even see a mirage of a pool of water on a perfectly dry  road ahead caused by convection currents , I've seen a few over the years. Come the festive season (or a birthday cake !) look carefully above a candle flame in a draught free room and you may be able to see a small ripple effect.

As for location, I have a similar problem, tiny garden, many houses nearby, but fortunately a gap to the east with just fences and one tree, and some sight to the south with one blasted big tree right in the middle of it. North and south-west to west are hopeless directions for anything low. The first evening I got my 'scope home I happened to notice  Saturn was visible from the back bedroom window , but not the garden : 'scope precariously balanced on it's own delivery cardboard box got me my first ever sight of the rings, through a double glazed window ! Trust me, you can see far better without window glass and air currents in the way ...

If you can find a relatively open patch of ground to take your 'scope to you'll see stuff far more clearly , as well as being able to point the 'scope overhead .  At the very least, could you switch the radiator off and open the window for a couple of hours before observing ? Keep the room door shut to isolate it from the warm air in the rest of the house ? The other thing that may be helpful is a program like the  free open source Stellarium, where you can set your location and run the time forward to see what is where in the sky, and plan your observing accordingly. I've added a panorama of my back garden as a background in Stellarium, so I can see when Saturn vanishes behind that blasted tree ... it's a faff to set up, but it has helped me enormously.

Hello kiwiinlondon,

with a £300 budget you are going to have to make compromises. A lot of enthusiasts would say that is barely enough to buy a basic go to mount and tripod , this is the cheapest I can see on FLO , a mount, tripod & extension Pillar:  £285 https://www.firstlightoptics.com/all-mounts-motors/sky-watcher-az-gti-wifi-alt-az-mount-tripod.html

And that isn't even the type of head recommended for astro photos (an equatorial or EQ mount ) for which (with go to ability) add at least another £100. Sorry to sound rather gloomy, but I've spent ages over the last 6months researching budget options for myself, and my conclusion is that the best route for a beginner with less than about £500 to spend is to buy a basic, affordable, simple, portable but well thought of 'scope as a starter instrument. If you get swept up by the hobby, long term, such a 'scope can be kept as a 'grab & go' tool for holidays or quick evening trips to darker skies once you've saved up for an all singing & dancing telescope of your dreams. By then you will know what aspect interests you too, so can make an informed decision about type of telescope, and will be able to make informed decisions on buying second hand to keep costs down.

Best starting point for browsing what is affordable, but not a toy : https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes.html

Be aware that you will soon realise  the telescope package you get will probably have some very basic accessories you will soon want to upgrade . The eyepieces that are included are generally cheap , and the finder that helps you aim the 'scope may be inadequate too. My choice was this, costing £200 :

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes/sky-watcher-heritage-150p-flextube-dobsonian-telescope.html

It's a larger version of the 130p heritage (which is on the beginner's list above ) and has done me proud in the 4 months I've used it from a suburban back garden, I'm happy with it, but understand it has limitations.  I've added a 'shroud' made of black foam sheet to exclude light from the open section (big sheet of foam , £13 ) , when the red dot finder became just too much of a pain in the neck, a RACI viewfinder (essentially a little telescope that you don't have to perform acrobatics to look in, also helpful for pointing the main 'scope at faint objects ) which was about £50, and a few slightly better eyepieces ranging from £20 to nearly £50 each.

The RACI finder and the eyepieces can all be easily swapped to a different telescope if ( no, who am I kidding, when !) I upgrade, and I enjoy the tinkering and research and learning of a low cost, low tech approach, but, as they say, your mileage may vary ...

26 minutes ago, keora said:

The effect I see when looking through the eyepieces of my new telescope is intermittent. It can be seen on both a 20m and a 4m eyepiece. In the background there seems to be ripples and eddies which slowly move across the image that I see. The distortion seems mainly associated with looking at a big, bright object - the moon. Perhaps I rarely see the effect when I look at planets or stars because the image is black with just a few stars or a planet.

I don't think it's caused by looking through a window pane - I often look through the window pane with binoculars and I've never seen the effect.

I'd agree with DaveL59 , it sounds like air currents ( I previously wondered if it might be some diffraction ) . Is there a radiator under the window ? If so, the thermostat willl turn the heat up when it's a cold clear night, increasing the distortion. The reason you've not noticed it in the binoculars is likely down to the far lower magnification you have with them, probably no more that 10x.( It's the first number in the e.g.  8x30 you find marked on them . The second is the diameter of the front 'objective' lens in mm.)

Your telescopes magnification depends on the eyepiece you use in it, and the focal length of the 'scope, which in your case is  1000mm . Divide the focal length of the telescope by the focal length of the eyepiece.

So with your 20mm that's 1000 divided by  20 = 50 , or with the 4mm 1000/4 = 250.  So you are magnifying everything ( both what you are hoping to see, and the atmospheric or other problems in the way !) a lot more with the 'scope than the binoculars.

The general way to avoid annoying air currents is to set the 'scope up outside (with the caps on the front and the eyepiece holder) , leaving it to adjust to the outside temperature for a while before you begin to observe, and to avoid standing it on materials that soak up heat in daytime and radiate it up and out at night (like concrete and stone) , but rather set up on a grassy area if possible. It's inconvenient, and a faff, but at least it costs nothing !

When I got my scope a few months ago (one of these https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/sky-watcher-heritage-150p-flextube-dobsonian-telescope.html ) it came with a couple of 'get you started' type cheap eyepieces, a 10mm and a 25mm. With nothing to compare them with (except some even worse ones that came with a 'scope I inherited) I was unsure if I'd appreciate the difference with more expensive ones, so cautiously bought a skywatcher 17mm plossl for around £20. I chose 17mm because the magnification fell between the two I owned, so if it turned out they were comparable, I'd not have duplicated what I already owned. The 17mm is far sharper and better than the  bundled eyepieces, and I've added a 32mm of a similar type, which is also fine for someone on a tight budget. 'Plossl' is a specific arrangement of lenses inside the eyepiece, and plenty of brands offer them. The plossls are harder to use in low mm /high magnification eyepieces, so I spent double that on one of the well recommended  BST Starguider EPs for my 8mm , this is generally regarded as a 'budget'  range !

Hope that helps

Heather

2 hours ago, keora said:

Thank you for all the useful comments. It's all new to me.

Here's a video of the telescope:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XkB3xNHuas

The reviewer says the eyepieces are trash but overall it's a good beginner's telescope.

This is a specification for the telescope:

https://www.argos.co.uk/product/5067718

I normally would have bought a scope after visiting a specialist retailer. There's not many where I live and the nearest one in South Yorks was shut because of the virus. Which is the reason I decided to buy something cheap 'n' basic from Argos.

The ripple effects I've seen looking through the eyepiece are odd. Is it because the collimation is out? I suspect not. I bought the scope four weeks ago, the box was undamaged. It's only been used outside twice because the skies have been so cloudy. The rest of the time it's been sulking in the back bedroom. Occasionally there's been fleeting minutes when the clouds have cleared and I've used it looking through the window at the planets and the moon. Aiming the beast at something is a bit tricky, I think I've now got the hang of it.

I've decided to buy a couple of better quality eyepieces once I've read all your advice again..

 

Was the strange ripple effect seen only when you looked through the 'scope and the window ?  If so,  perhaps it was down to the window glass .

If not, does it happen with both eyepieces? Does the effect rotate if you rotate the eyepiece ? If so, at least you know it's something easily replaced.

That youtuber you linked to has some, er, interesting vids:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6d48ZfrVSiQ

and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpRRM_teNys for instance.

He will even show you where to buy a

" portable, light-based energy device that uses complex wave-forms of light, accurate down to a 10-millionth of a second, to generate an energy field that enhances your own "chi" or life-force energy. Most people can feel it working within seconds! Watch is the Perkl-Light is put in "machine clearing" mode in which the Perkl-Light covers a full spectrum of harmonic frequencies to clear the energy from and charge a quartz crystal! " here

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N_CAjz5x6PU

 I think you will get far more reliable telescope advice from the folks on here , but do mention your budget to get the most appropriate suggestions.

Is this it ?

https://www.argos.co.uk/product/5067718

The ExploraScope branding is not obvious on the page, but the eyepieces sound as if they match the OPs post.

51 minutes ago, Physopto said:

Sorry Heather it is from Latin !

Quote :“Amateur” comes from “amatore”, Latin for “lover”. It means “someone who does something for love rather than money” or “someone motivated by love rather than money”.

Derek

As I understand it, the Romance languages evolved from Latin way back, around the time when the Roman western empire collapsed. That 'amateur' has the French ending strongly suggests it arrived in the English language via French, not straight from the Romans, who were pretty much professionals .

18 minutes ago, Louis D said:

Dielectric just means multilayer vapor deposition creating a 99% reflectivity (at 45 degrees) mirror.  They also don't tarnish like an aluminized or silvered first surface mirror.  I like my GSO/Revelation dielectric diagonals quite a bit.  I would skip the quartz substrate option, though.  I've got both and can't detect any difference.  The cheaper diagonals also tend to not be as well made mechanically, I've found.  You get flex with binoviewers or heavy eyepieces.

Well, thanks for answering one of the questions I had, but was too idle to search for , or to get round to asking.

So much to learn ! I love it.

The origin of the word amateur is from the French, meaning lover of something, i.e. you pursue the hobby for enjoyment , not for payment. If the enjoyment goes, and disillusion sets in only you can decide if it's likely to be permanent or not, and if there will be any point in having money sat uselessly tied up in unused kit.

Living on the western edge of the landmass means you get more precipitation then we do in the middle or east of England, not a dramatic difference like relocating to the Canaries or Arizona I know, but perhaps a more plausible move .

In the final analysis, one of my rules of life is 'If it's not fun, don't do it.' 

Heather

Back when this launched (2016 I think) I was teaching some 11 year olds ( I'd 'done' space with them the year before as a supply teacher because the regular teacher was delighted to hand over any and all science to me ...  ) . The pupils were suitably impressed when I showed them how to get the classes name on OSIRIS- REx ( along with thousands of others !) and very pleased with the certificate we printed out and stuck on the notice board. Wonder if any of them saw mention of the arrival at Bennu and remembered ?

24 minutes ago, Louis D said:

The pistol grip style tripod heads get recommended a lot for binocular usage on either monopods or tripods:

They do, and I spent ages trying to find one a couple of months ago ... if I recall correctly , the only one I found was about £50 , Manfrotto make a travel tripod for around the same price which incorporates such a head, but the head is not detachable from the short and thin legs, which make the thing too low for binoculars.  I decided I'd try to keep my expenditure down, and just used a cheap far eastern mini ball head I already had for an action cam. atop an unbranded monopod.

I can see the trigger action would be easier to use in the dark wearing gloves than the little locking thumb lever on the ball head though. If anyone tracks down a trigger head at a bargain price please post a link, I'd be very interested .

1 hour ago, TopperHenly said:

I wasn't sure as a new member I was allowed to post link but here is Amazon link to binoculars:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Auriol-10-30-60-Zoom-Binoculars/dp/B00I8PB0LC

Yep, look at the photos on that page, see the one with the little black disc taken off, showing a metal threaded hole ? That's the tripod adapter socket.

Heather

OK, so this is the one I bought:

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Opticron-Binocular-Tripod-Mount-Binoculars/dp/B005XXZCR0

if you search amazon for monopods for cameras I'm sure you'll get thousands of results, ranging from £15 to how much ?! . My personal preference is for click locks for the sliding sections, rather than ones where you have to tighten a rotating collar, and I'd go for one which has a grip so you can use it like a walking pole on your way to your stargazing spot . Do be sure that you choose a monopod long enough so you can comfortably stand with it extended to hold the binoculars above your eye level so you can look up !

Best reference I found when looking for information before buying my (modest £80) binoculars was

https://binocularsky.com/binoc_mount.php

Hope that helps

Heather

Hi and welcome,

first thing to check : do your binoculars have either a screw thread or a little cover you can unscrew to reveal one? It will be on the part that links the two halves of the instrument and lets you adjust the eye spacing, and will be the objective (not the 'eye') end ? Most binoculars sold recently do.

If so, there's thousands of simple L shaped brackets available . Camera tripods have a standard sized screw, so any will fit . I bought some new binoculars a few weeks back, I'll find a link to the bracket I got at the same time, it was about £10. If not ... well, there used to be adapters that clamped on the central bar, I had one from decades ago, it was all plastic and not good.

I own several photographic tripods, but choose to perch my binoculars on top of a monopod, which might suit you better : it's light to carry, easy to shift your point of view, simple and relatively cheap. You could get a monopod and a cheap ball head (which goes between top of monopod and bottom of the binocular adapter ) for under £30, which would only buy you a very basic (and probably too short to use standing up ) tripod

17 minutes ago, Shaun_Astro said:

Guys, may I suggest keeping your answers concise!  XD

As mentioned a dob isn't a photography platform, visual only or dslr m48 adaptor and moon pics. 

Planets imaging consider a celestron c9.25 and eq6 minimum! 

Are answers addressing the OPs concerns  limited in length here ?

If so, I may be in the wrong place ...