NGC 1502

Sounds as if you like it........a lot 😁 I’m sure I could too, your high quality but no frills kit is just what suits me. Enjoy.......Ed.

OK thanks, I get that 😁 you were just trying to replicate the “fuzz” that you saw, not the level of detail on Jupiter..... Good advice above to sort it, cheers, Ed.

Hi and welcome to SGL. WOW !! If you’re actually visually seeing THAT much detail on Jupiter then rejoice big time...... What you’ve posted is more like super high resolution by a very experienced imager....... Ed.

One way to get to our target - With both my 8” & 10” Dobs, I can get a 34x 2 degree apparent field of view. ( large exit pupil but sometimes that’s ok ) From the great square of Pegasus on a basic star chart, eyeball where Phi Aqu / Neptune are. As best as you can aim your Telrad / RDF at that spot on the sky. No joy ? Try a ‘sweep’ of the area. Try again......cos it’s worth it 👍 Of course, loads of other ways, optical finder or technology being others. Although I don’t choose to use technology I’m certainly not against it........whatever gets you out under the stars is good. Cheers, Ed.

Great view of Neptune & Phi Aquarii from SE Essex. Staring at the appropriate area of sky with the unaided eye the combined glow of planet and star could just be seen, Phi Aqu. obviously the major contributor. I used my 8” Dob and the RDF nailed it instantly, this must be the easiest occasion to find Neptune. At 44x Neptune’s bluish (to my eye) colour was very obvious. Definitely agree with earlier comments regarding the similarity of the appearance of Albireo. Best view of Neptune’s tiny disc was at 200x. Possibilities of another clear slot on Saturday evening 👍 Ed.

It’s a bit like a scratch on a car, no affect on performance, but may drop the price. Having said that I can’t see any scratch on the objective in the pic, not saying there isn’t one with close inspection. For any prospective buyer it depends how fussy they are. Ed.

Hmm yes, I can understand your concern. But looking at the pics and text in the link you posted for part AVT-1011, it says to ensure the lock knob engages the notch........so I think you’ll be fine if you do that. But I agree, don’t know why the whole of the notch side doesn’t simply have a full length bevel. Ed.

Many thanks, info passed on. Ed.

Sorry I forgot the colour has changed. The one for sale is gold colour, thanks for any info, cheers, Ed.

Hi all. A non astronomy friend who’s selling kit once owned by a late relative has a Skywatcher 180 Maksutov tube assembly to sell. I’ve been asked how much to ask. It’s not in top condition, so I do realise it’s difficult to say, but I’d be grateful for a ball park figure please. Thanks in advance, Ed.

All you need to do is attach the AVT-1011 to your TV ring mount and then the scope can be fitted to your Skytee mount, sorted, nice and simple with no electronics to slow you down viewing the night sky. You don’t need to buy any other dovetail because the AVT-1011 is a dovetail itself. Ed.

The required part is - Vixen/TeleVue mount adaptor ( AVT-1011 ) This part attaches directly to the standard TeleVue ring mount and allows mounting to a Vixen style clamp. I think you will find this part will fit any TeleVue ring mount from decades back to current models. Don’t know if it’s kept in stock by UK companies or special order so check out various websites. HTH, Ed.

If you live in London then you may like to go along to Baker Street Astronomers who meet in Regents Park. Most astronomy groups I’ve come across are very willing to help, and as they observe under London skies they should be a valuable source of assistance. Hoping you progress with astronomy, a fascinating lifetime hobby 👍 Ed.

I do think that cleaning telescope mirrors sometimes being regarded with fear is unnecessary, perhaps being “ quite tough and impervious “ a bit overstating it, if you don’t mind me saying so 😐 although you did mention to avoid scratching. But if you proceed with due care then it’s a routine job that need not be a worry. And I’ve seen some really grotty mirrors that still gave a good view, so no need to rush to clean unless contaminated with salt air or tree pollen etc. Definitely no offence meant......but just in case a newbie reads and gets out the Brillo pad........😀 Ed.

Thanks for the Genesis review, never owned one but could be tempted at the right price and condition. At a dark site it’s amazing what can be seen. In 2012 the only scope I took to Kelling was my 70mm Pronto and somehow I didn’t feel I’d made a bad call, more liberating actually and I had a great time, so a Genesis would be very nice. Having spoken to Al Nagler at Astrofest and son David at Kelling I really ‘get’ why these old scopes remain popular for some of us. Cheers, Ed.

Yes, they will have been manufactured in 1979. Additionally I have the same in the monocular version also made in 1979, even more compact and portable 👍 The Zenit 35mm cameras ponged heavily because of the solid leather case, almost addictive but hopefully legal.......😳 The Zenit E had a built in selenium light meter, the first camera I had with a meter, but my Weston III was more accurate, so that plus the unreliable nature led me to get another non metered Praktica Nova 1 that’s still going strong but never used.....Happy days........ Ed.

Hi Chris. I had thoughts of buying the BH 12” myself. I think the tube assembly could be made lighter by bolting the side bearings directly to the tube, once you’ve decided what angle you’d like the focuser and the balance point if you remove the heavy finder. That would remove most of the plywood box. Just a square of the original plywood would keep the side bearings the same width to fit the mount. Also you then wouldn’t need the slip ring above the side bearing box. The optical finder and metal bracket is much heavier than a Telrad. You would need packing pieces top and bottom of those plywood squares to make it fit the tube and a strong job. The base could be made lighter too. The very thick ground board could be triangular instead of square. You could cut a circle out of the front board......etc. Most Dobs are a work in progress, at least thats what I’ve always found, but lots of cloudy nights gives us time to sort it 👍 Perhaps you may like to let us know how you get on ? Cheers from Ed.

Indeed those Ruskies made great bins. I had a Tal 110mm Newtonian on a bomb proof EQ. It gave a ‘refractor like’ view of doubles - Airy disc with diffraction rings - a clubmate had the 150mm. These scopes could easy outlive their owners. The Russian 35mm cameras like the Zenit E were not so hot I’m afraid, mine was a bit of a disaster zone for breaking. I also lost count of the photos I took that were grossly overexposed because I forgot to stop down the manual preset aperture - shooting at f2 instead of f11 in bright sun is not good.....😬 Sorry for thread drift.....Ed.

Indeed I’m familiar with that very scope as it was my local club’s main scope until 2003 when our members built our 16” truss tube Dob. Jim refigured the mirror to f4.3 others did the rest. Lifting the 12” Beacon Hill means you won’t need to pay to go down the gym 😁 so it was even cheaper than you think 😁 We have replaced it with a 12” Lightbridge but had to drive to north of Manchester to get it....... Enjoy, Ed.

John is correct with his USSR answer. I also have those 8x30s purchased in 1984. If you check the serial number the first two numbers tell you the year of manufacture. Great bins, just the job for casual birdwatching as they only take up a corner of a backpack. And although 8x30 bins are not generally recommended for astronomy don’t rule them out for that. From my large town location it’s surprising what modest bins can show, M13,92,31,15,44,39, Double Cluster, wide doubles like Nu Draco and Double Double ( the 2 main components not 4 !! ) etc etc are all easy and of course the magnificent M45 Pleiades. Being easy to handhold helps of course. Ed.

Good previous post from DaveL59. I’d just like to add that although I really like manual Dobs, and a Dob with smooth movements is a pleasure, a Dob with sticky movements is a right royal pain. Top tip - whatever works for you and gets you under the stars is the way to go 👍 Ed.

The question of whether to find objects by manually aiming the scope or using go-to technology has long been debated. Probably one is not harder or easier than the other, once you get the hang of it that is.... For many like myself manually star hopping is a pleasure, and watching others fiddling around for ages with setting up and using a hand set looks like a pain in the derrière. And watching someone trying to acquire sky objects manually and not succeeding is painful too..... I think it’s best to find out what suits you by reading up online or in books and magazines then try it in practice. As you already have an 8” Dob, assuming it’s a manual version, then your cheapest option is to learn how to use it. Do an online search for how to manually find sky objects, the book already mentioned - Turn Left at Orion - is brilliant and well worth getting. Gradually you should find that acquiring the brighter objects is a snap, and then you can move on to the fainter stuff. After a year or two you will hopefully find yourself not wanting to do it the hard way using technology that just slows you down and frustrates. You may find precisely the opposite of course.......only you can finally decide what suits you, not me. The question of collimation often comes up. It’s really not hard, again once you’ve learned how. For many, it’s a non issue. Some find that collimation is necessary every time you set up. But if that’s the case then with a solid tube Dob perhaps something is loose, too much gap between the primary mirror and clips - just a smidge is enough. Or maybe the spider vanes are not secure. If something can flop about then collimation is easily lost..... Please do not give up the “biggest” hobby there is, good luck..... Cheers from Ed.

It’s for when the doppler shift of the prominences or part of the prominences are very different from each other. The majority of the time the tilt tuner is not needed and the best view will be with it in the untilted position. Hope you get it fully sorted, Ed.

Late to this thread, however - I’ve had a Lunt 35 Ha for 10 years and I’m familiar with those screws and springs. Their purpose is to return the front etalon cell to the non-tilt position after using the tilt tuner. Most of the time the tilt tuner is not needed, the best view being with the front cell in the non tilt position. So at the last resort if you cannot find suitable replacement screws and springs is to simply tape the front cell in the non tilt position. Most of the time you will still get the best view. Also with the tape covering the tiny gap, dust cannot enter. That’s how I know about those screws and springs because I dismantled to clean the 2 element objective. Dismantling in this manner does not involve disturbing the etalon, that comes off as a fixed unit. If it were me I’d repair if I could but tape as mentioned if no suitable parts could be found. Ed. Edit - without the 2 screws and springs the etalon cannot fall off because it’s also held by the oblong brass plate with 4 screws on the opposite side to the tilt tuner control.

Hi Alan. At the risk of thread drift - your dad taking few pics but playing with his kit reminds me of someone I once worked with. He was always upgrading his cameras and lenses, but we never saw any of his pics. He would come in to work with his Pentax over his shoulder wearing it as if he couldn’t leave home without it. One exceptionally gloomy day he came in for the night shift, I greeted him as usual, his reply - “ do you know it didn’t get above 1/30th at 2.8 all day long........” But I think I was probably as obsessed as he was, even though all I could afford at the time was my Praktica Nova 1 with 50mm Domiplan lens, but I was proud of my Weston III lightmeter.......👍 Happy days......Ed.