Jasonb

Hi all,

I'm keeping my eye out for a tripod upgrade, and found this on a second hand site.

It's listed as a Meade LX200 Field Tripod. From what I can see it's an older model, and I'm finding it hard to suss out what kind of quality would it be, what weight could it take etc.? I currently have a 130P Reflector and I don't do AP, do I don't need a massive tripod/mount, but I am looking to improve on the aluminium one that came with my scope. The seller says its from a Meade 10" Classic Telescope and that the the tripod is spec'd to handle gear up to 50kg for vibration damping, but I'm not sure how accurate that is.

Thanks in advance...

Cool, thanks for explaining that.

12 hours ago, Spile said:

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

Interesting, may I ask why? I find star hopping using binoculars to be easy, the magnified view and the right way up and around. The RDF is fine for point the scope at a target, but no use for star hopping. Obviously I've never used a Telrad, but while I'd imagine that the rings on it etc would help with star hopping, I think I'm right in saying it's not magnified?

Anyhow, would love your take on this, as I do realise I've never used either so am just guessing really...

Thanks @Pixies Yep, a RACI is definitely on the cards. I don't know if I'd get a Telrad as well, I on;y have a 130 Reflector so both might be overkill on the scope, but I think a RACI (probably the Astro Essentials 9x50) would be a great replacement for my RDF, and would really help with the star hopping. Of course, I haven't used the scope itself in ages, Sunday was my first outing since early Jan and I was only using my binoculars. I have 3 new BST EPs that I haven't even got to try yet!

We keep on getting snow warnings, but no snow, and it was 10 degrees outside today! Practically summer!

Wow, first time observing in well over a month. There's been a lot on, I haven't felt very motivated, and the weather's been crap!

But this evening I looked out and saw pretty clear skies, AND it's actually not freezing out. So I grabbed the Moore Winter Marathon (1-25 Naked Eye/Binoculars) and tried to spot a few more.

I have a few left to get in this list. I quickly found M44 once my eyes adjusted (which I had seen before) and I was able to use that to star hop down to M67, which was faint but visible, and that was another off the list.

Next up was M41, and I was lucky, as while it's low enough on the horizon for me, a gap in two houses gave me a chance to find it, using the obvious guide of Sirius. Once again it was faint in my Bortle 5 skies, but after a min or two I could just about make it out.

Still using Sirius, I was able to star hop up to find M50, another faint one and I definitely couldn't see the heart shape, despite the day that's in it! Using the FOV feature in Skysafari, really helps with star hopping.

That was it I'm afraid, only a short 20 minutes or so, but it was good to get out and do something. Here's what I have left on the this list...

3: Triangulum Galaxy (M33). Still can't find this, and if it wasn't for the fact that I've seen pictures of it here on SGL, I'd start to doubt that it exists. I think this is just down to light pollution where I am, and I hope to spot it when I'm in darker skies.

19: Fornax Constellation. This is just too low on the horizon, I'll need to be able to view very low to the South in the early evening to see it. That won't happen from my back garden, will have to drive to somewhere nearby.

21: M48. I could find the right area, but it's just to faint from my back garden.

24: M93. Too low in the horizon at the moment, will be higher later in the evening, but probably too faint as well!

So that's 4 left out of the first 25, and then the next 25 are waiting for me...

I have one of these, the Skywatcher StarQuest 130P. When researching it I was wary of the primary mirror not being collimatable, but read a few reviews saying that it wasn't an issue at all, and decided to trust those reviews.

When it comes down to it, it's a good scope, but it is a budget one, and there are going to be some 'shortfalls' because of that. As already said, the focuser is cheap, and I have added some Teflon tape to reduce the give on the focuser tube. 

I have struggled with collimation of this scope; as people have said the secondary is collimatable. I think my struggles have been down to just lack of experience and also things like the give in the focuser tube, which means that there is a variance in the view through the cheshire. To be honest, having the primary collimatable as well would probably introduce yet another variable. At least I can trust that the primary is ok, and focus on the secondary (pardon the pun!).

So, Amazon.de continue to impress me, as the tape arrived today. 

I took a couple of pics of the scope through a Cheshire tube, the first one is the view with the focuser tube all the way out, and the second one is the same view but with me lifting the end of the Cheshire, showing how much play there is.

Then I took out the focuser, and inside the tube you can (just about) see three white strips of tape. They have ridges on them, that stand proud of the tape itself. I originally was going to put the Teflon tape between these strips, but I realised I'd probably need 3 or 4 strips of Teflon tape to get up to the level of the ridges, so instead I just put the Teflon tape over the existing tape. The Teflon tape is wider, so I kept the excess away from the channel where the teeth run.

Once I'd added three strips of Teflon tape, one over each existing white strip, I put the focuser back in again, and you could immediately tell it was tighter, with a lot less play. Screwed it all back together and I'm quite happy with it. Took less than 5 minutes in all.

Still interested in how you get on with that other focuser @Zermelo, let me know if it does the job for you!

First time posting in this thread, got two BST EPs from FLO today, which means my initial plan of getting three of them to replace the stock EPs that came with the scope is now complete, as I'd already got the 8mm BST last month.

Sounds like a plan Heather!

I should have been clearer, I was specifically talking about Skywatcher level tripods, and at that level I'd be looking at Steel whenever I upgrade!

Ah, isn't it always the way! The moment I asked the question, I decided to give it one more go, and got it working! After adding the Barlow to my Equipment in Skysafari, I then needed to add it to the FOV options. Here I was only selecting the Barlow, I should also have been selecting the Telescope and EP as well. All sorted now...

Hi there,

I'm a newbie getting used to Skysafari and I was recently told about adding my Eyepieces to the software so I can get correct FOV circles when using it. This has really helped with my star hopping, when what I see through my EP matches what I see on the screen.

However, I've just got a Baader 2.25x Barlow, and I don't know how to add it to Skysafari to change the FOV circles. Any ideas how to tell Skysafari whether I'm using my 10mm on its on, or with the Barlow?

Thanks..

Cool, thanks Banjaxed. Whatever I upgrade to, whenever I upgrade, it won't be a aluminium tripod.

Thanks Heather, good advice, and something to keep an eye out for in case something pops up!

Yes, and the Sly Tee is one of those dual mounts.

So, £139 for the AZ5 and £109 for a steel tripod (both on FLO), compared to £169 for the AZ4 with a steel tripod. That's a bit of a price jump. Good job I'm not buying! 😀

7 minutes ago, Tiny Clanger said:

I looked at both az4 and az5 carefully having a tripod already to put whatever I bought on. The anomaly of the az5 quoted limit is down to the weakness of the alu tripod, the statistic for the head alone is that it's rated for 9kgs . Which is why I went with the extra money for the az5. My tripod is rated for 11kgs, so I don't imagine I'll ever need to upgrade either !

What I find weird is that the lighter duty tripod gets bundled with the heftier head, and vice versa ....

Heather

Exactly, why put an Aluminium tripod under an AZ5? Though I don't know if it's Skywatcher or FLO that are making that pairing. And to be fair to FLO, you can easily buy the AZ5 and they sell a separate steel tripod that would fit it. Didn't know you had the AZ5 Heather, I take it you're happy with it?

That's true John, but sometimes all I have to go on from sites etc. is the figures they have, like Payload. That said, if you had an AZ5 and put it on a steel tripod, I'd expect its capacity to increase.

16 minutes ago, banjaxed said:

I used to have an AZ4 which was ok but since I changed it for an AZ5 I find it much better to use with the slo mo controls. Used to have a EQ mount but it was rarely used.

That's interesting, I looked at both of those (of course, just looking, not buying!) and the AZ4 comes with a steel tripod and is listed with a payload capacity of 6.8Kg and the AZ5 comes with a Aluminium and a capacity of 5Kg. Seems weird the AZ5 is 'worse' than the AZ4?

So the way I see it, whenever I do plan to upgrade a mount it really looks like I'll be fine with an AZ, unless I plan to do long exposure imaging, or unless I like the convenience of tracking.

I have noticed that when you reach a certain price point with AZ Mounts, they seem to become dual ones, which I'd never be looking for. The AZ4 looks like it's around the right price/payload capacity for me, but I think I'd miss slow-motion controls.

Anyhow, I'm not upgrading anytime soon, but it was interesting to here the different opinions, I learned a lot. As suggested, I am going to try my EQ1 in EQ mode some night (whenever it gets clear again) to see how I feel operating the scope that way.

Thanks again!

Well, I've had no luck with finding that tape locally, so Amazon it is, it should be here next Tuesday (though my last few orders all arrived days earlier than expected).

Loving this thread everyone, thanks for all the replies and discussion.

Yep, that's exactly what I was looking at on the web, Amazon.de have it (works for me as I'm in Ireland), but gonna try another shop locally here tomorrow before ordering it.

Thanks...

3 hours ago, Zermelo said:

That was the plan, yes.

I don't know how heavy it is (still en route), but I imagine not significant compared with the weight of an EP.

Ah sorry, I thought you had it already. Hope it arrives for you soon, let me know how you get on with it.

Thanks for all your replies, I do like asking questions on here, always get interesting and informative responses.

It does sound to me that if I were to look at upgrading my mount/tripod, an AZ would do me just fine, as I really have no plans to do imaging (I think that's a rabbit hole I'd never escape from).

Thanks again...

Very helpful replies again, thank you! 

@ZermeloYep, I checked, and my focuser has what looks like three teflon strips as well. I do think that I'll add some more to tighten it up, the post @Chaz2b referred to seemed to have good success with this.

That Helical focuser looks interesting, so you're basically attaching the helical focuser directly to the focuser of the telescope, and using it as a fine focus and the main telescope focuser as a coarse focus? Definitely seems like a good cost-effective upgrade for only £31, thanks! How heavy is it, do you know?

First step is getting the default focuser sorted, I tried a local shop today but they didn't have an Teflon tape, reckon I'll get some online instead.