wibblefish

I do find ScopeNights app on iOS is more accurate than clear outside and at least it sometimes gives me a flicker of hope as it updates via the met office during the day (though usually I watch small patches of green fade to yellow then red )

Urgh double post

@John Lucky! This is basically mine most weeks at present!

I have a Rigel on order and am going to have to play with where to put it.

My current thinking is to shove it further along the scope as my issue with the rdf at the back of the refractor is apl the yoga when at or nearing zenith.

I expect I’ll do what @Tiny Clanger is suggesting and try some blutak or something and make sure it looks ok before commiting with the sticky pad🤔

42 minutes ago, Goose0211 said:

Thanks all. 

People mention eyepieces which are better and some that aren’t.

Is it a one fits all scenario with eyepieces or is there something I need to look out for in terms of what will fit the 150p FlexTube?

In terms of fit as long as you get the right body width for the diagonal then they will all fit i.e. 1.25" vs 2" (I am guessing the 150p will be a 1.25").

In regards what you want them for there are the choice is endless as a variety of different eyepieces that do different things (i.e. wider angles, more magnification etc.) as well as provide different levels of "eye-relief" (i.e. how close you have to get your eye to it to achieve a full viewing angle. Usually you need to select a combination of eyepeices at different focal lengths to achieve wide field vs close up. Some people will also recommend a "zoom" lens which means you don't need to keep swapping len's and could be useful if you aren't quite sure what magnification you want.

The standard ones supplied with most telescopes seem to be a 25mm (wide) and a 10mm (close up), in my telescope (sky-watcher) the 10mm was a bit poor but the 25mm was fine but neither had good eye relief (I couldn't use my glasses for example if I wanted to, the 25 was ok but the 10mm was very bad in this regard).  That said I would suggest you see how you go before upgrading but if you do want to upgrade there will be plenty of people on here who can recommend certain ones / brands.

I eventually replaced mine with a BST Starguider set of 25 / 18 / 12 which are often recommended and the step up in eye relief and quality was very large.

There is a thread below which can help on deciding the right lengths and there is a Field of View calculator (you plug your telescope measurements into) which can show you the differences between eyepieces on various targets for an idea.

14 hours ago, John said:

Yes, it is well regarded and comprehensive but I think I prefer the presentation of double stars in Instellarium where you get an immediate indication of the aperture that might be needed without having to go to another section.

I'll dig the Cambridge Atlas out and give it another chance though, next time it's clear.

 

Is that the interstellarium deep sky atlas? Any good?  I have been looking for something star charty and have been looking at various ones. Ive not used one before but Id like to have something I can use to plan and at the scope to supplement my phone app. 

Apologies for not replying but I have now caught up, thanks for the replies all.

Very interesting to see about the tripods my father in law usually enjoys a good diy project so maybe I'll set him to making a wooden one during the summer

I think I will go down the finders route initially though annoyingly I can't order a 6x30 RACI from FLO (they only have the RA) but I cant order a Rigel from elsewhere ... double shipping from two different companies  Thats an interesting idea @Tiny Clanger I might have to look into one of those as marrying up the angles to the phone app can sometimes be a pain, maybe some sort of plastic over the display to dim it down might be an easy mod  

I have had my telescope since early Nov and managed 12 nights according to my notes. I generally am only able to go out from about 830 in the evening at the earliest though most nights its still been clear when I finish and am usually out for a couple of hours plus pack up time.

I am located about 20 mins from the North Norfolk coast for reference. 

I have had the odd quick look night for 5 mins peering through a gap in the clouds but the main reasons I am not out are purely 100% cloud cover or rain etc.

I dont worry about the moon nights as you can see other things or just moongaze but I guess it depends what you want to do.

Keep the telescope in the garage and there is almost zero cooldown on my 90mm refactor nor have I had any issues with dewing.

10 hours ago, Tiny Clanger said:

Cloudy weather is expensive isn't it ? The mind turns to buying stuff to use when eventually those clouds clear ...

As you know from past posts, I've done the RDF annoyance thing and spent some cash on a RACI and a Rigel Q.F.  The Rigel is great for lining up actual visible things, and it has rings (half degree and 2 degrees) similar to the telrad (by the way, you can change to those sizes of ring in stellarium's telrad overlay ) which is handy for star hopping but the RACI was my first buy, and it is a great help for feint stuff as well as so much easier to look through on a reflector. Depends what you want to find, having both is good, but if I had to choose just one to supplement an existing RDF it would be a RACI,

I'm  reluctant to suggest anything much about eyepieces because I really don't  know what works well in refractors (except of course that the best eyepiece is always somewhere above all but the richest individual's budget) but I wonder if you might go for a low magnification one than the stock 25mm  , try the FLO eyepiece view simulator thing (another great way to while away some work time) and check out what would be reasonably cheap and give a wider view .

I was lucky enough to score a second hand star diagonal for the mak, like you I thought the stock one a flimsy insecure horror, and had added a skywatcher  or stella mira £69 one ( they seem identical) to my wishlist to buy eventually  ... then a second hand one came up .... Much nicer made, and far more solid and secure . I've not compared the original & replacement visually as just the physical improvement is enough to convince me it's a good 'un.

A heavier, stronger, tripod is always a good idea . I was lucky to already own an old but good photo one (Manfrotto 55) with an 11 kg rating , so had enough money to get an az5 mount to put on it, possibly expensive overkill for a 127 mak , but if I'd the cash I would have gone even bigger & stronger for a sky tee ... Back before electronically stabilized  lenses were invented it was a photographer's rule that a cheap camera on an expensive tripod would  beat an expensive camera on a cheap tripod  , and it seems I've rolled that belief over to astro kit !

This fantasy shopping lark is fun, as long as you keep the credit card locked safely away ... 🙂

Heather

 

 

Yeah I think finders solve my immediate issues is the way to go. I might have a browse for second hand photog tripodsI hadnt realised they could take mount heads but I guess its just a pin type system.

17 minutes ago, Louis D said:

The effect will be more muted, depending on the hardness of your soil.  I observe from a small concrete pad.

No hardness in the soil atm sometimes things sink 🙈

3 minutes ago, Louis D said:

Get some anti-vibration pads.  I made my own from Sorbothane from ebay.  Especially with a rigid metal tripod and mount, they knocked vibrations down from 3 seconds to 1/2 second for me.  A wooden tripod is another good alternative.

Interesting, I do most observing on the grass so I didnt think of pads. Will look into it thanks!

15 minutes ago, John88 said:

Thanks for the pictures and the info gonna be tough choice eventually between the 90/660 or a Skymax 102 I think although I will probably change my mind before they come back in stock again 😁

Interestingly that was pretty much my choice and in the end I went for the refractor mostly on a punt because it was in stock. Be good to know how you fare with either of them! 

Thanks both.

Yeah I figured on either the finders or tripod next. I likely will go for the finders since its my biggest annoyance at present.

I don’t intend to get another telescope any time soon but I did go and have a nosey around but alas I find myself split between ideas either a 127 Mak for high mag stuff or an 8” Dob for more light gathering. Guess I will see how my observing develops over the next year or so. 
 

Works internet better come back on soon or life is going to get expensive looking at all the toys I dont need 😎

5 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Nice and sharp images.

Photos tend to exaggerate CA since sensors are more sensitive in those wavelengths than human eye - but you can give comparison of subjective feel you had at eyepiece. Is it less or equal to that in images?

I would say much less, I was actually surprised to see the purple fringing in my photos as it wasnt readily apparent in the eyepeice observation.

Added some phone camera shots of the moon the other day maybe help judge CA etc?

1 hour ago, John88 said:

Hi

 

I'm looking at possibly getting this scope too

Couple of questions 1. How long is the tube? Looking at getting something fairly compact as storage is at a premium. (can't seem to find it on the net) 

2. How is the scope at high magnification on Planets etc is the there a lot of chromatic aberration and better suited to wide views? 

 

Thanks in advance 

 

 

Let me see.

1) the tube is roughly 75cm from where the diagonal ends to the front of the telescope (fully retracted). The tripod with legs extended is slightly wider than this.

2) It is more suited to wide views. I have only been able to view Mars and under highish magnification (12mm and x2 barlow) whilst small it does resolve some detail if the seeing is good (shadowing on surface only). There is definatey some CA, I found it bothered me more on star splitting Rigel for example has a bright halo rather than Mars. On lower magnification it hasnt bothered me overly nor when viewing the moon though again it is present at the edges to a degree. The main issue I found with high magnification is focus shake likely from the light tripod. I also had issues with running out of focus trying to use a short barlow plus filter. 
 

There is definately curvature at the edges of the view where you see some stars becoming an elongated shape. It seems pin sharp in the main field of view and focuses fairly well.
 

That said the handling is very good, the pronto head moves well and holds where it is aimed. Slow motion works well and I have tracked a fast moving satellite or some such the other night. Its nice and lightweight generally and I have had zero issues with cooldown or dewing during sessions. The supplied eye peices the 25mm is good but the 10mm is not, both lack decent eye relief.
 

It excels at wide fields, bright star clusters, though I have found brighter nebula, some DSO and split some doubles (Castor etc). Likely its more limited by my experience than the telescope itself.

Hope that helps.

5 minutes ago, lunator said:

Hi Wibblefish

I have had a couple of clearing nights here so I thought I would have a look at Rigel.

23/01/2021

In my new ST80: 80mm/400mm on an alt/Az mount it took x133 to split Rigel. I was then able to just split them at x100 with a 4mm orthoscopic.

25/01/2021

Using my OMC250. 250mm/2250mm on an EQ6. I was able to split Rigel at x70. This is the lowest magnification I can get on this scope. It was close but obvious. It was very clear at x94. 

With your scope the pair should be split at x110 but I think the seeing will make it quite hard. If you can get your magnification up to x130-150 I think you would split it easily and then be able to split it a lower mags.

Cheers

Ian

 

Thanks for the info Ian, yeah I haven't be able to get a clear night to have another go yet but I will try it when I can! 

My works internet is out so I am bored and browsing FLO to plot some upgrades for the next few months / year  

Telescope is a skywatcher 90/660 (f7.3) short tube refractor on an AZ pronto (aluminum) mount. I am observing from bortle 4 so my app claims though there seems a lot of light source pollution in several directions from street lights + neighbours windows and security lights + my neighbour is now cutting down all their big trees which were providing some additional darkness. I am fairly new to the whole astronomy thing but loving it so far, I have been having a go at different types of observations even where I know the telescope is not as suitable (i.e. faint DSO, splitting doubles) but its fun to try 

As I am not planning on getting another telescope for a long while I am trying to work out what (if anything) mechanically I could add / change would make a difference to maximize what I can do, so far I have added:

- BST short x2 barlow, seems good and sharp but I cannot focus it if I add filters (run out of focuser length), I can add the filter directly to the diagonal but that doesn't seem like a great idea to be swapping things in and out of the diagonal during sessions. Can always wave the filter over the EP at worst  

- BST Starguider 25mm, 18mm, 12mm, these are a great improvement over the stock 25/10

My wish list thus far is:

- RACI 6x30 + Rigel Quikfinder, I made a whole thread on this but effectively it would replace my super bright cheap RDF and binocular combo I am using currently to try and locate targets through the murk at times

- BST Starguider 8mm, this would give me probably the last useful EP for high mag (+ barlow) stuff like double splitting etc.

- Di-electric stardiagonal, my current is a plasticky job that seems to work itself loose every so often plus it can be a pain to unscrew to get the BST EP out at times (and its marking their barrels but I guess its not doing any real damage)

- Steel tripod, my current tripod while super light tends to experience a lot of shake at high magnification (so 12mm + barlow primarily) but seems steady otherwise but I imagine replacing it with something more sturdy would help to a degree

- Filters, not really sure if they are super worthwhile, I have an ND one for the moon which is very useful and I guess something that might help reduce CA halos on brighter objects maybe but I am not sure wether it would make much difference

- Camera mounting kit, I have a m43 dslr so that might be a fun new dimension at some point though the telescope + camera + mount are not ideal for anything serious

- Focuser upgrade, I think there is a Skywatcher duel speed focuser but I am not entirely sure if its compatible

Anyhoo, if anyone cares to venture any opinions on what to prioritize, anything I may have missed or whether or not to bother with some / all the items / bother upgrading anything feel free   

I have this telescope, I am a beginner though so not sure how much use a review would be but happy to answer some questions / give some thoughts if you wanted

I don't have any experience of the type of filter but I would imagine you will get better views on a darker night as a general rule with any filter as you will have more light to work with. That said M42 is a fairly bright nebula from what I have observed so it is likely still fairly visible even in bright moonlight unlike some other DSO's.

I would suggest you try it on both nights with and without the filter to see what you think is the best option 

4 hours ago, keora said:

I’ve been using binoculars for more than a year to look at the stars. I thought I’d try a telescope so I bought a cheap one from Argos (Celestron Explorascope 114AZ Newtonian Reflector Telescope, Aperture 114mm, Focal Length 1000mm, Focal Ratio f/9, Star Pointer red dot finderscope. Original eyepieces replaced with 32mm and 9 mm Skywatcher Plossls.)

 

This was three months ago. I used the scope only for short sessions, because of poor viewing conditions. Then last night I had a long session because the skies were clear. I found the whole process very difficult.

 

The red dot finderscope seems only to work with bright stars. If I pointed it at a dimmer star, it disappeared once I had moved the finderscope to cover it. It seems that the light from the weaker stars is absorbed by the objective, so you can’t see it. You have to point the telescope where you think the star might be, and hope for the best. I tried finding Tejat and Propus in Gemini as a route to M35 (It’s in Turn Right at Orion). I could see them with the naked eye but they disappeared as soon as I turned the finderscope on them.

 

I did manage to identify Uranus using binoculars, it was a few degrees south of Mars, very faint and with a blue tinge. I focused the telescope on Mars, which was easy. It was harder moving the scope down to Uranus because there weren’t any other stars to guide me. When I did locate Uranus with a 32 mm eyepiece, focussing was difficult, the slightest touch on the focuser or scope made the image quiver and move out of focus. Minor movements of the eye made the image turn black and then reappear. Obviously some optical effect, possibly caused by wearing glasses. I think I tried to get a bigger image by changing to a 9mm eyepiece, but then couldn’t find the planet. 

 

It seems to take lots of experience and skill to use a telescope effectively. What do forum members suggest I do?

 

Yup I have a whole thread on RDF issues though mine is more related to light pollution and annoying angles  I think my conclusion was to replace the RDF with a quikfinder and a 6x30 finderscope at some point! Still the issue you describe is exactly my experience with RDF, they are just to bright and it can wash out the stars, plus keeping both eyes open I find it difficult to integrate the dot and the background at times. Usually I use binoculars to hunt the area, then guess where to the put the RDF if there isn't an obvious star (or others to jump off from) and pan around with the telescope on my lowest magnification.

Well done on Uranus, I don't think I have ever managed to spot it though Mars is always quite nice but its hard to find / focus at higher magnifications. I suspect mine is down to a combination of the telescope chromatic aberration and telescope shake likely due to the aluminum mount. I'd suggest you go through and tighten everything up and maybe consider putting some extra weight hanging hang in the middle of the tripod (be careful not to endanger the tripod / telescope) which might help. Also I found if you can set it up and get the telescope ahead of where Mars is, then let it drift through the eyepeice so you don't get focus / altaz shakes at the same time as observing

Going to a higher magnification eyepeice will often have the opposite effect, you will get a dimmer image due to physics, I vaguely remember it is something like if you double the magnification the resultant image is four timers dimmer but I am sure others will know more  

Lots of experience certainly required but that is something that just comes with practice.

My only suggestion other than to keep browsing forums and reading is simply to plan out a ready to go session ahead of time which is something I am now trying to do to maximize telescope viewing time especially with the UK weather keeping me indoors mostly. I also keep a small book with my nights viewing, times, visibility, weather, targets, what was observed which is good to see how things are progressing etc. I have had my telescope since Nov and after a few unplanned sessions I am currently trying out seeing different types of objects to see what I like doing and how the telescope performs such as star clusters, constellations, nebula, galaxies and currently on double stars (I am hoping for a good moon session at some point and views of Saturn / Jupiter in the future)  

8 minutes ago, LeeHore7 said:

I left my scope with the caps off and the and the ep end slightly downwards in a cool room and thd ep caps off but shall keep them on loosely from now. I'm loving my Skymax 127 so glad I didn't sell it, it's doing everything I ask of it so far and giving me plenty, I was like a child again last night, hopefully Saturday evening will be good so far for another session and like to test it on small galaxies as andromeda will be to big to fit in clear skies. 

Sounds great, look forward to hearing about it, I am currently keeping tabs on the various types of telescopes for future upgrades to my 90mm though don't tell the wife since I have only had this one a few months bwahaha  

Good times always good to get out especially with the new kit! Sounds like you got plenty in, I am still totally in awe of M42 and Pleiades especially since switching out my stock EP for some BST ones, surprised the difference it makes. The UHC sounds interesting will have to have a read up, I am yet to play much with filters, I have an ND polariser for the moon which has worked nicely and I have a yellow #8 to trial to see if it assists on bright objects to reduce the CA slightly. 

I am yet to have a proper lunar wander myself, sounds fascinating, I can only usually get at the moon when its full due to the angles of the garden / opposite houses and the few times I have managed its been to hazy for more than a couple of quick snaps on the camera phone so here is hoping for some clear skies at some point  

Ah Rigel, I am definitely going to keep trying to crack that one  

Interesting note on the Telrad dewing, I was debating getting a quikfinder to replace my annoying RDF (Telrad is probably toooo big) I suspect they have similar dewing issues but everyone does rave about both of those finders! 

54 minutes ago, LeeHore7 said:

Thank you, yes, there's always something to forget to do during the excitement of clear skies and setting up. When I brought everything in from outside I kept all the caps off the scope, ep and camera because of fogging up and put them back on this morning was this correct? 

That is what I do, I leave the EP cap on but loose and point the telescope at a slight downward angle to avoid dust (and let any dew run out if needed - hasnt happened so far).

Congratulations on your first session outside and here are to hopefully many more! The Skymax 127 sounds like a good telescope from the reviews I have read on here / elsewhere, I nearly ended up with a 102 instead of my current one so its always interesting to hear about how they perform

54 minutes ago, Orange Smartie said:

If it helps, it just took a little patience and close watching. The brighter star is so bright and the seeing was very turbulent, such that the main star was sort of boiling away continually. If I let the star drift across the FOV and didn't touch anything,  every so often the atmosphere would be good enough just to see the tiny star lying close to its larger companion....and once I knew what I was  looking at, it was much easier to see again.

I will give that a go, I was having plenty of high mag shake and some CA with the refractor to which didn't help, have tightened the tripod and got a filter to try next time to  

Congratulations! I have Rigel on the list to try again at splitting it 😎

I was super excited to split Castor last time out and find Andromeda (though it took a few nights!) also in previous sessions. I may have to try some of the targets you have mentioned 🥳