Collimation service?

[Zachariah]

It seems to me that collimating your scope is the biggest problem facing us novices today.

Well isnt there enough experts amongst us that could offer to do it or teach for a small charge? I know I would gladly pay someone who locally to me to help me.

[Stephen]

It would be a redundant service, it would be out of collimation by the time you got it home, and by the time it got dark enough to use the scope

I'm sure if you could find a local astro group, there would be someone who would be happy to run you through the process (without charge!)

It's one of those things that I think you should put the time into learning, there are several very good guides on the net.

Once it makes sense, it's a 5 minute job each time you go out

[Zachariah]

Thanks like riding a bike I suppose, easy when you have done It and you never forget. I have looked at the tutorials and still not got it. Even bought a laser and thats nevef the same each time I use it. I give up

[paul schofield]

I agree Zachariah, sounds like a plan. And you would probably only have to be shown once. And if the collimation was out when you got home at least you would know what to do. Then again an Astro group showing you would be cheaper. I might learn better myself and approach Dragons Den with it, ha. Instructions that come with a new reflector should say on page 1, Lets Collimate. Once the scope is put together of course. WHY IS IT SO DAUNTING ?

[Space Bat]

Not sure why there is a need for collimation all the time O.o

I used to have an 8.5" Newt that seldom required collimating which was made in mid 80's

My CPC I have collimated it 3 times in same many years..

Are modern scopes made so collimation is a frequent activity...genuinely perplexed by this....

[John]

....I used to have an 8.5" Newt that seldom required collimating which was made in mid 80's.....

Was that an Astro Systems (Luton) one by any chance ?.

[Space Bat]

Was that an Astro Systems (Luton) one by any chance ?.

It was and yes - lol it had a collimation free design...Doh....

But are scopes of a modern era that susceptible to losing collimation? Would have thought mirror backs of today being somewhat more advanced

[John]

It was and yes - lol it had a collimation free design...Doh....

But are scopes of a modern era that susceptible to losing collimation? Would have thought mirror backs of today being somewhat more advanced

Low engineering tolerances and cheaper materials I think. As you say, the Astro Systems scopes were engineered to an accuracy where all that was required on collimation was a small amount of fine tuning occasionally. I think they said they were aiming for "refractor like" collimation stability. Their tube walls were thicker than modern scopes and the cells were accurately machined to fit into the tube precisely.

I've found similar standards of engineering with Intes scopes from Russia but not from Skywatcher / Celestron / Meade newtonains, or from Orion Optics to be honest.

That said, I also think that collimation has achieved a "bogey" status that is undeserved. It's no more complex than giving a guitar a quick tube before playing IMHO.

[Zachariah]

I made the mistake of using a laser on my new scope thinking it was out. Now not sure if it was, the laser can be so much out. I laser it then look through the focuser and its miles out! Ugh!

[umadog]

I don't think it's a case of low engineering tolerances or materials being of low quality. A small amount of fine-tuning for a solid-tube reflector seems to be par for the course. Many people report their solid tube Chinese dobs (especially the smaller aperture ones) as maintaining collimation very well. Making a Newtonian sufficiently sturdy to completely obviate the need for collimation would involve design sacrifices and be rather hard (think expansion and contraction on temperature change). You will end up with heavy telescope, thicker spider vanes, etc. Furthermore, there is no way you can make a truss-tube Dobsonian collimation free: that's not due to material quality, it's just the nature of the beast. Collimation is here to stay, I'm afraid!

What you expect from the scope is that it maintains collimation throughout the elevation range and doesn't drift too much during the night. Asking for it to be effectively collimation free is too much: the tolerances at faster focal ratios are fractions of a millimetre.

Finally, it's worth remembering that out of all modern telescope designs, the Newtonian is the easiest to collimate. It's easier than SCTs, because they have a curved secondary which itself has to be axial aligned. I've even heard that it's easier than refractor (yes, some of them are collimatable [if that's a word]), but I don't remember why.

[patomlin76]

I also wouldn't let collimation (or the need for it) worry you.

For example I found luckily that my scope was collimated very well to my eyes straight out of the box. I have used it a few times and have not worried about whether I need to re-collimate.

I tested it first thing last evening and it still seemed OK - concentric circles on an OOF Jupiter. And this was after 3 or 4 assemblies and disassemblies of the scope. Given that both primary and secondary mirrors are held in place (quite firmly) with screws and fixings, I will only be forced to collimate if I knock the scope quite badly. However I still do a quick out of focus check on every use....

[RikM]

I think it's the idea that you have to adjust something that puts people off. We have become so accustomed to things just working without any effort or input from us that to have to actually pick up a screw driver can be quite an ordeal for some. Then there is the idea that 'I might break it'

My Father was an engineer (toolmaker) before he hung up his spanners and moved to Turkey, so I didn't think twice and my first scope was an f/5 Newtonian. I check with a Cheshire every time because I have to hump the scopes through the house to the garden and it only takes a minute to check and tweak if necessary.

I do play the guitar and I check the tuning before I play, same as I pinch the tires on my push bike every morning to see if they need any air before riding to work.

People have simply forgotten how to do things for themselves and so expect it to be harder than it actually is.

[Jiggy 67]

I don't understand why people panic over collimation. As far as I'm concerned its all part of the hobby that we have bought into. Much of this hobby is about the equipment and the maintenance of it, the vast majority of the posts on here are about equipment issues and we are all proud of our equipmnet, sort the collimation yourself, its not that complicated and when you take your scope out, after you've done it yourself, the improved results will be that little bit more satisfying

[umadog]

The main reason people "panic" over it is that they don't understand what they're actually doing. This isn't their fault: most collimation guides are lists of instructions which don't explain the underlying logic. Often they just give the impression that the goal of collimation is to "align the optics." Not very enlightening. I know the steps are simple in principle, but if you don't understand what each step is for then you're very likely to get stuck and be unsure which knobs to turn or how to reposition the optics in order to get the desired result.

The goal is to get the primary mirror focal plane and the eyepiece focal plan to coincide with one another, and to make sure all the light gathered by the primary mirror reaches the focal plane. This is described very well indeed here:

Telescope Reviews: Useful info about secondary mirror alignment

Telescope Reviews: Concise thread about autocollimators+improvements

I know the second thread is aimed at autocollimators, which most people don't use, but the theory is still very useful.

[Mr Q]

It seems to me that collimating your scope is the biggest problem facing us novices today.

Well isnt there enough experts amongst us that could offer to do it or teach for a small charge? I know I would gladly pay someone who locally to me to help me.

Actually, you can collimate a scope without understanding what you are doing simply by following each step and doing exactly what is shown to do.

Yes, it can seem confusing but pictures of how to do it are better than words and moving pictures (video) better. Try this video link - its about as straight forward as you can getCollimating a Newtonian

And if you want to know if your scope is out of collimation, do a simple star test as described in this linkThierry Legault - The collimation

[Bart]

one of the most frustrating aspects of collimation is running back and forth from the back of the scope to the front whilst adjusting the primary. It was ok while I had a 750 mm long scope, but the new one is too long for my arms to reach. I've discovered the barlowed laser technique, so am going to see how I get on with that.... It appears to be very good, and easy, esp at night, in the 'field'.

Barry

[ollypenrice]

The first suggestion of an astrosoc was a good one, surely? There is a list of clubs on the website of the Federation of Astronomical Societies which itself Googles instantly.

I don't think it's true that collimation is always easy. It can be complicated if something is significantly wrong with the location of the secondary rather than just its position on its adjusters.

Olly

[umadog]

Yes, I know you can do it without understanding. What I'm saying is that you're more likely to get stuck or become concerned if you don't understand it. This is particularly the case if the instructions are wrong or misleading.

[todd8137]

if it was a mobile service were the person called round then some one would be in work for years hahahah