Spile

Astronomy Talk - Launched in 2009, NASA’s Kepler revolutionized our understanding of other worlds by discovering thousands of exoplanet systems. 10 years after Kepler ended, NASA launched TESS to continue the revolution by finding planets around brighter, nearby stars. Ground-based telescopes have been critical to understanding the planets and their host stars throughout this discovery renaissance, with Keck Observatory at the forefront. Dr. Ciardi will explain why space missions like Kepler and TESS need ground-based telescopes, and how Keck Observatory plays a leading role in the world of exoplanet discovery and characterization. Thursday, March 4, 2021 5:00 PM Hawaii Standard Time Free and Open to the Public Keck Observatory Astronomy Talks are supported by the Rob and Terry Ryan Foundation Kepler, TESS, and Keck Observatory – Driving Our Understanding of Exoplanetary Systems – W. M. Keck Observatory

So are you going to be taking orders?

My budget solution is cap + washer 🙂 This and Gary Seronak's guide is what I follow: http://uncle-rods.blogspot.com/2009/07/zen-and-art-of-telescope-collimation.html?m=1

I think the star test is the simplest, easiest and most accurate way to check collimation. I follow Gary Seronik’s no-tools collimation advice https://garyseronik.com/a-beginners-guide-to-collimation and can recommend the Small Optics guide at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCVi6UI5BvXm9lyZg5AG0X1g/videos More details: http://uncle-rods.blogspot.com/2009/07/zen-and-art-of-telescope-collimation.html?m=1

Excellent - very informative. It would be useful to have some information on the process of swapping between the EP and the sketching pad. For example... getting used to the light change, head light or handheld light, closing observing eye when sketching. Thank you

My wording was not very helpful so I have edited the original. I was attempting to suggest that the OP looked for reasons other than collimation for reasons described in the above link.

I suspect that collimation of your mirrors (if needed or possible on your I00P ) is not going to improve the view of the moon with your new eyepiece. Try comparing the trapezium in Orion and splitting Castor with both eyepieces.

I use all three parts of the Affinity suite. The latest version 1.9 is a bit temperamental but an update should hopefully settle things down. As for a video editor, I am using Open Shot since Serif ceased developing MoviePlus X6.

"Being hit in my retina by the sheer, live, almost 3D brightness of seeing something like the trapezium or the Castor double through an eyepiece." It knocked me sideways when I first saw this in my eyepiece and it still impresses me. I have only ever seen this "effect" through the eyepiece and never in an image. An astrophotographer can share their image but all I have is something in my memory that I am unable to share and can only pitifully try to explain with words. Help!

I am finding that less is more. Spending quality time with my friends, looking at them for longer and sketching them is increasingly more stimulating than being a space tart.

I had a similar mixed night as well. I thought atmospheric conditions weren't ideal. Turbulence probably. I spent a lot of time looking at M31 and environs with my 42mm WA. Sigma Orio cheered me up after failing to get M51 (the moon didn't help) or split Alniatak again.

My 200P came with a straight through finder. On its own I found bending to use it uncomfortable so I added a sighting tube. This helped. The addition of a Telrad made targeting much, much easier because 8/10 times I can go straight to the EP. I am only using the straight through finder to "tweak" where I look. For example looking for a pointer that is not visible to the naked eye. This means that my time looking through the straight through finder is much less. I am sure a RACI would be easier on my back than my straight through finder but it's no so much of an issue for me now.

I am going to reduce the number of targets per viewing session in order to spend more time with my "friends". I want to improve my sketching skills and start recording every target.

It took a while to get the focus correct with this finder. The large ring had to be turned a few turns to achieve focus. I then used the smaller ring to lock it into place.

Fixed plus content copied to here

Done - see above

If I had to chose between a RACI and a Telrad, the latter would come first.

I've put some thoughts together on the zoom eyepiece... https://astro.catshill.com/the-zoom-eyepiece The “stock” eyepieces that came with my 8″ 200P Dobsonian were great for me to get started. A new owner should definitely get used to them before considering any “upgrade”. For me, the stock 25mm produced good results but the 10mm was dim and I was disappointed with the clarity of what I was seeing. I did consider going down the conventional path of getting a few, mid range or better eyepieces in the 6, 8, 12, 15, 20mm range but in the end I took a totally different path and chose a Zoom eyepiece. A Zoom eyepiece sounds like the perfect solution: a wide range of focal lengths available in a single ocular, to be changed as simply as twisting the barrel. Zoom eyepieces are of course a compromise. Budget zooms tend to have narrow fields of view at the long-focal-length end, they can be heavy, their many glass elements result in internal reflections and loss of contrast and brightness, and of course they’re more expensive than a single mid-range eyepiece. There are a number of advantages for a zoom. There is no need to swap out eyepieces in order to find the ideal focal-length of the object being observed. You will have everything from 24 to 8mm with the twist of a hand. For a non-tracked telescope that convenience and speed is a useful feature. At the short-focal-length end, they actually tend to have longer eye relief and wider fields of view than Plossls, Kellners, and Orthoscopics. With the addition of a low power, wide-angle eyepiece and a Barlow having just three oculars can be very convenient. With the 200P I have a 50X to 338X magnification range! With all optics, you get what you pay for. If you buy a very cheap zoom eyepiece, don’t expect it to perform anything like as well as a single eyepiece. I did consider a good budget zoom eyepiece like the Celestron 8-24mm eyepiece. At twice the cost, the Baader Hyperion IV zoom and Barlow combo is not a budget option but considering this is an all in one option you may be saving money in the long run. With bright, sharp, crisp images, a “widefield” AFOV ~70 @ 8mm, 2” mode with camera threads, barlow friendly, comfortable eye relief with no blackouts or beaning it is considered the best zoom on the market and get superlative reviews. I cannot praise the Baader Hyperion IV zoom and Barlow combination highly enough. It has made a massive difference to my observing in terms of what I can see and the convenience of my observing. The only other ocular I have is a 2″ Revelation/ GSO 42mm wide (65°) angle. It is ideal for targeting and looking a wide field objects. So with the 2″ supplied adapter fitted, I now no longer use 1.25″ eyepieces. It may seem strange to spend half a much on an eyepiece as I did on my telescope but I am so glad I did just that.

Like this?

I don't think the Baader Hyperion IV counts as stock, cheap or small. As I said, with the Telrad yes it does change the centre of gravity but I have yet to be convinced that with a 8" OTA it is worth my doing anything about. I will keep reading others experiences.

I wouldn't be without SkEye

I echo the advice others have given in terms of nothing buying any optical "upgrades" until you exhausted the potential of the 200P 'as is'. I have the same telescope and I've been delighted with it. Spending time working through Turn Left at Orion with your binoculars will be a fantastic way to identify targets and their location. I had my previous telescope from 1968 to 1971 and I only bought the 200P two months ago. I don't consider 50 years with binoculars wasted at all. It meant I knew exactly what to expect when I started using the Dobsonian. Maybe I did wait a bit too long though 🙂 There is wealth of fantastic resources on the internet I could only have dreamt of when I had my first telescope. These are some of my favourites (Star Gazer Lounge is first of course) http://skymaps.com/downloads.html - Getting used to the sky https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCNXzteckwM7bKNNLwWu5OLw - The monthly “What to see in the night sky” videos of the Sky at Night YouTube channel http://www.deepskywatch.com/deepsky-atlas.html - I printed out The Sky Version on A4 http://www.deepskywatch.com/Articles/what-can-i-see-through-telescope.html - What you will actually see! https://stellarium-web.org - As well as this web one, install the local version on your laptop/desktop http://stellarium.org and the app is good as well https://lavadip.com/skeye - I use this app on my telescope! https://www.lightpollutionmap.info - Don't get too depressed! http://clearoutside.com/forecast - So you don't worry about not having a telescope https://www.cloudynights.com - I think of this as the US equivalent of SGL https://garyseronik.com/no-tools-telescope-collimation and https://garyseronik.com/a-beginners-guide-to-collimation mindlefulness training when you see others spending ££££ on lasers https://www.12dstring.me.uk/fovcalc.php and https://astronomy.tools/ - useful tools

Sorry to necro-post but I am interested in finding out more about counter balancing a Dobsonian. The Telrad and Zoom eyepiece on my 8" Skywatcher means that in the horizontal position there is a change in the centre of gravity. I have therefore (temporarily) added a weight to counter this. However, I was observing without the counter weight a few nights ago and I cannot say I noticed a difference. I am wondering if counter balancing a 8" OTA may be unnecessary as... Most observing taking place with the OTA closer to the vertical rather than horizontal position. The friction of the handles picking up any slack anyway. Thoughts welcome as I am not convinced that lugging a dead weight down my garden is worth it.