Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

PeterStudz

Members
  • Posts

    974
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

PeterStudz last won the day on May 19 2023

PeterStudz had the most liked content!

Reputation

2,377 Excellent

3 Followers

Profile Information

  • Location
    Southampton

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This is excellent! Although I don’t have the experience here I’ve been following this hoping for a positive outcome. Well done and all the best.
  2. For my 8” Dob I use the PushTo feature in an app called PS Align Pro. Finds targets within a low power eyepiece every time. I’ve even used it to find planets, eg Venus, Jupiter, Saturn and Mars in daylight. Astro Hopper is similar but this works better than Stellariaum. For tracking that’s good enough for visual I made an EQ platform for about £85 from these instructions. It’s easier than it looks. Then you’ll have PushTo and tracking for a bargain price.
  3. The “metal cam” is used to engage/disengage one of these motor drives. Since you don’t have one you can ignore it. https://www.microglobe.co.uk/skywatcher-ra-motor-drive-with-multi-speed-handset-for-eq2-mount-p-11423.html
  4. I had a feeling that you might be in the US - no worries and thanks for the reply. If you are strapped-for-cash then it can be a difficult hobby to get into. Mind, if you live in a location that’s blessed with dark skies it will help! You can make a Dob base without tube rings. You just need to make something called a “tube cradle” - basically a simple plywood box. This is an old site but it explains everything. Inc making a Dobsonian telescope from scratch. But at the end there are details about making a mount. However, It can be made even simpler than shown. Might be worth having a look at the link near the end “Photos from Builders”. Good luck! https://stellafane.org/tm/dob/
  5. Sure it needs 160mm? According to Celestron the tube width is 139.5mm. In which case 140mm will fit - £29 from FLO, or there’s a pair on Astro Buy & Sell for £15. https://www.celestron.com/products/powerseeker-127eq-telescope
  6. The AZ3 would be an upgrade compared to the EQ1 that the OP is missing. Well within the weight limit too. Although from what’s been said I’m not sure that they have the tube rings?
  7. If I was in this position (In fact I’ve had a much larger reflector that came without a mount) I’d make a Dob base out of a bit of cheap plywood. Which is exactly what I did. For this size of reflector a table top Dob base would the easiest. Really easy to make and you could knock one up over a weekend. There’s plenty of instructions/examples on the internet. Although a cheap option it’s not difficult to end up with something far more stable and straightforward to use than many rather more expensive commercial alternatives. But of course some people aren’t into DIY.
  8. One of my most memorable and satisfying nights included locating the galaxy M81 from my Bortle 7 back garden. This in the early days and my first galaxy. All using a 4.5” reflector on a wobbly EQ1 at near zenith with just a cheap red dot finder. I was over the moon!
  9. This is a very good point. And for me Andromeda looks more impressive in my 10x50 binoculars than my 8” Dob.
  10. Very nice! I have a soft spot for Laphroaig. Not so much the taste, although I do like it, but the fact that my late mother gave me a bottle as a Christmas present from when I started drinking until she passed away. So it has memories!
  11. I haven’t done that. But the above involved plenty of tasting. Mind, it was free as it was part of “work”, so that encouraged the “tasting”.
  12. That’s a good summary! Although I’m a fan of Scottish whisky. Especially from Islay.
  13. Although the title is ‘WHISKEY AND STARGAZING”. So I presume that gin, brandy, cider etc are OK. And I drink whisky not whiskey 😀
  14. Thanks! I prefer visual, but do find the smartphone only images fun and interesting. And to see what I can do with something that I already have. It doesn’t cost anything and if I need to use a computer or laptop then for me it loses that straightforward simplicity. Not that I have a computer or laptop! They are also handy to help record my sessions - especially if I tag an observation report to the image. Transparency is one of those things that you learn to appreciated with experience. On that night I’d already taken a look at M81 and M82. Something that I’m familiar with. And this confirmed that transparency could have been better. I’d certainly seen these two better in the past from my back garden. The app that I used - AstroShader - does a good job of keeping the background sky dark when under an urban sky. When taking a smartphone image through a telescope, using the stock camera app, it also magnifies the surrounding light pollution. And you then need to go through a load of hoops trying to minimise it. Which is why you are always at an advantage (aren’t you always!) when taking a smartphone image at a dark/darker site.
  15. I really enjoy seeing what you can do with a smartphone. And apart from an adapter (which cost me £9.99) and a few apps of around £2.99, it hasn’t cost me anything. Just about everyone has a smartphone and it’s something just about anyone can do. Even without a telescope. Your image reminds me of the first time my daughter saw the Orion Nebula. She wasn’t impressed! Although it was in Bortle 7 with a small 4.5” reflector and I doubt that her eyes were dark adapted. However, just hovering our phone camera over the eyepiece showed colours and literally had Alice jumping up and down. And that was without even taking a picture. It kind of saved the night and got her very much interested in Orion.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.