Collimation Anger

[Mr Q]

   I am so frustrated with all the collimation posts not only on these forums but at other sites as well. Why? It seems NO ONE knows about or how to do a simple star test. More money is spent on collimation devices instead of more important tools like eye pieces, atlases, etc.

   Yea, I have given up on these posts. I have tried and tried with no success or very little. Seems all the posters think the collimation is off even before looking at a star for a quick test to see IF any adjustments are needed.

   And then there's the problems of collimation tools that need collimation themselves, loose focusers, etc.

   I LOVE to help out beginners but, in this area, I give up, seemingly wasting my time and getting extremely frustrated on the whole subject.

   Is it too much to do a simple star test first? Its not that these posters don't know how to do one - almost every one I tried to help, I posted the below links and to no avail. What's so hard about aiming the scope at a bright star, inserting a medium power EP and then racking the focuser out or in from focus and looking at the light and dark rings to see if they are concentric to the secondary mirror "spot" at the center???

   Sure SOME scopes may come in the mail that need adjustments but these are far and few between. But as many as are mentioned here and on other sites, I doubt very much this is the case.

   So is anyone else as frustrated as I am with this "newbie" problem?

    For the last time, here's the links:

http://w1.411.telia.com/~u41105032/kolli/kolli.html

http://legault.perso.sfr.fr/collim.html

   

[triton1]

I always do a star test,takes seconds

Jonn

[HumptyMoo]

I am very new to the whole amateur astronomy thing, got my scope late December last year. I understand where you are coming from but to be fair, collimation when explored for the first time is a very bewildering process. Well if you are anything like me it is. I have done a star test and "think" what I am seeing is OK. But that's the thing, there is no experience to fall back on to confirm and set the mind at ease.

Remember that a lot of newcomers to astronomy will have raised expectations of what they think they should be seeing and after an hours viewing will think "hmmm it's not what I thought, wonder why....oh hang on, you need to collimate". It's only after the allen bolts and screwdrivers have twisted that they then realise they need help....Robert's your fathers brother.

Everyone falls the first time

Me, I'm yet to fall, pretty sure I'm good for now but am certainly not looking forwards to the time I know beyond doubt I need to start messing with things

Anyway, hang in there, I probably wouldn't have star tested if it wasn't for SGL users.

[bambuko]

Perhaps some anger management clinic can help

and avoid newbs until full recovery

and... even if it is OK as delivered that doesn't mean it will remain so forever, so not touching it, only delays the inevitable

one will have to learn to collimate sooner or later.

as for the star test... it is not a substitute for collimation - it only tells you how good things are, it will not tell you how to rectify things when you find that you need to, so we are back to learning to collimate.

I don't understand what frustrates you?

Is it the fact that newbs try collimating perfectly good scopes or is the fact that they are having difficulty collimating?

[andyman]

Perhaps some anger management clinic can help

and avoid newbs until full recovery

and... even if it is OK as delivered that doesn't mean it will remain so forever, so not touching it, only delays the inevitable

one will have to learn to collimate sooner or later.

as for the star test... it is not a substitute for collimation - it only tells you how good things are, it will not tell you how to rectify things when you find that you need to, so we are back to learning to collimate.

I don't understand what frustrates you?

Is it the fact that newbs try collimating perfectly good scopes or is the fact that they are having difficulty collimating?

+1

[astromerlin]

Remembering back when I first started and bought my SW250 secondhand the views weren't great and decided I needed to collimate the scope. I didn't know what a star test was and a few searches on the internet I found I needed a tool for the job, I purchased a cheshire.

I found it a difficult task doing my first collimation, I'm pretty good at sorting things being an enginneer but I just could not get my head around it. Nearly a month of posting on this forum asking questions, a fair few mentioned "just do a star test". I browsed about a star test and followed the instructions.

I mostly do imaging so I need spot-on collimation, one thing I found here in the UK is the seeing is generally poor at the best of times.

I have only once in the 4 years since I've started seen a 'text book' star test image in the EP, mostly the concentric circles are a washy ever changing smurge, ok It looks about right but is it right.

I found mostly it is not. I can get closer collimation quicker by using a cheshire and I can do it whilst it is still daylight, clear dark nights here are so precious I save them for imaging and observing.

[F1Bird]

   I am so frustrated with all the collimation posts not only on these forums but at other sites as well. Why? It seems NO ONE knows about or how to do a simple star test. More money is spent on collimation devices instead of more important tools like eye pieces, atlases, etc.

   Yea, I have given up on these posts. I have tried and tried with no success or very little. Seems all the posters think the collimation is off even before looking at a star for a quick test to see IF any adjustments are needed.

   And then there's the problems of collimation tools that need collimation themselves, loose focusers, etc.

   I LOVE to help out beginners but, in this area, I give up, seemingly wasting my time and getting extremely frustrated on the whole subject.

   Is it too much to do a simple star test first? Its not that these posters don't know how to do one - almost every one I tried to help, I posted the below links and to no avail. What's so hard about aiming the scope at a bright star, inserting a medium power EP and then racking the focuser out or in from focus and looking at the light and dark rings to see if they are concentric to the secondary mirror "spot" at the center???

   Sure SOME scopes may come in the mail that need adjustments but these are far and few between. But as many as are mentioned here and on other sites, I doubt very much this is the case.

   So is anyone else as frustrated as I am with this "newbie" problem?

    For the last time, here's the links:

http://w1.411.telia.com/~u41105032/kolli/kolli.html

http://legault.perso.sfr.fr/collim.html

Bit harsh! As one of the accused who has posted about collimation issues I think you have rather missed the point. Yes, of course people know about star tests. The problem is what to do about it when your star test shows that your collimation is off. I've read a lot of posts and articles about collimation over the past few weeks as I struggle with mine and not one of them is from someone who had messed with their set up for no reason. Yes this is a beginners thread but no my scope is not brand new. I consider myself a beginner as I am still learning and after 12 months this is my first time at the dark art of collimation. Sorry if I'm misunderstanding your point but perhaps if newbies bother you so much you should steer clear of the beginners threads?    

[callisto]

   I am so frustrated with all the collimation posts not only on these forums but at other sites as well. Why? It seems NO ONE knows about or how to do a simple star test. More money is spent on collimation devices instead of more important tools like eye pieces, atlases, etc.

   Yea, I have given up on these posts. I have tried and tried with no success or very little. Seems all the posters think the collimation is off even before looking at a star for a quick test to see IF any adjustments are needed.

   And then there's the problems of collimation tools that need collimation themselves, loose focusers, etc.

   I LOVE to help out beginners but, in this area, I give up, seemingly wasting my time and getting extremely frustrated on the whole subject.

   Is it too much to do a simple star test first? Its not that these posters don't know how to do one - almost every one I tried to help, I posted the below links and to no avail. What's so hard about aiming the scope at a bright star, inserting a medium power EP and then racking the focuser out or in from focus and looking at the light and dark rings to see if they are concentric to the secondary mirror "spot" at the center???

   Sure SOME scopes may come in the mail that need adjustments but these are far and few between. But as many as are mentioned here and on other sites, I doubt very much this is the case.

   So is anyone else as frustrated as I am with this "newbie" problem?

    For the last time, here's the links:

http://w1.411.telia.com/~u41105032/kolli/kolli.html

http://legault.perso.sfr.fr/collim.html

Bah Humbug

Dont worry "newbies", just post a question if you need to

[nucleardwarf]

I do wonder what Mr. Q's very first attempt at collimation turned out like?, was it spot on or did he, like many others, struggle to understand.

Perhaps Mr. Q was perfect from the off, not many are though.

[brantuk]

"as for the star test... it is not a substitute for collimation"

I don't believe Q was saying this at all. I think he was asking why (when a star test is so easy to do) don't beginners use this to first test if the need for collimation exists at all - especially when so advised. They do seem to jump the gun sometimes and start fiddling before establishing if they need to collimate - then ask questions after the fact - then assume something else is causing the problem.

There's no way I'd ever get angry about this cos it's just human nature to fiddle - but there's plenty of text and video descriptions of what to expect to see (in and out of focus) - before actually fiddling with screws. And it is the first thing that should be checked - especially first time through an, often described as, "somewhat daunting" procedure.

I took me 2hrs first time - now it's 5mins - dunno what all the fuss was about. Driving Test syndrome I call it lol.

[MrFinster]

Something is always easy when your familiar with it.

You may want to remember that when you start negative posting about being fed up about new people coming in to the hobby who dont quite grasp certain principles straight away or are not as methodical / logical in a beginners section.

This attitude is the reason why people who may be interested in getting into the telescope world shy away from asking questions for fear of appearing stupid and being on the receiving end of educated snobbery and intellectual arrogance.

[F1Bird]

If I didn't need to collimate I personally wouldn't have gone anywhere near the screws believe me! The idea of collimation has terrified me from day one!

[Moonshane]

In fairness I don't think this was intended as a 'go' at newbies at all, just a frustration that well intentioned advice is not apparently considered. Personally, I don't do star tests as part of my collimation process but many do and it's a valid test.

my problem with star tests is the need to use high (as far as I know not medium) power and that the star must be exactly central (not sure how you ensure this unless you have a reticule eyepiece). any adjustments require re-centering of the star.

[Tiny Small]

My 10 inch newt can lose collimation driving between my house and my observing site. Why is it then unlikely for it to lose collimation traveling thousands of miles by ship then being thrown into the back of a lorry?

Also, it's all well and good saying why do people do this or why don't they do that when the answers are right there, but that is only helpful if you know what questions to ask and if you know where to look for your answers. Most people new to astronomy don't have a clue where to start and very likely have no idea which bits of a telescope do what, or even what they are called. Experience is a wonderful thing to apply to hindsight, but how do you get experience? You don't get experience through doing things right, that's for sure. Experience comes by learning the correct way through experimentation and mistake.

Why get angry?

[mashedpotatomountain]

i find this a bit of a shame…not because you're frustrated, that's understandable - but i think this post will be read by many newcomers who were already nervous about asking a question.

ok so not everyone grasps the concept straight away...it's just one of those things that's confusing until you get your head round it - remember how bewildering it was the first time you got behind the wheel of a car?

i've not had a problem learning collimation myself, but have had my fair share of other queries - and yes you feel bad for asking questions that have been answered 1000 times already - but reading old posts will never beat direct interaction and feedback from experienced members.

i don't visit other forums…i'm massively grateful for all the help i've received here, the endless patience the SGL community has for helping newcomers is the reason why i don't go anywhere else.

rich

[andyman]

Dont make me angry...you wouldnt like me when i am angry and then my shirt starts to split and i turn green....them darn newbies

[itmo]

Problem with star test is that you can do that only on a sky which is observable. It will be dark and you want to look at stuff. Better to practice collimation in a well lit room. Also cheshires dont need good weather to be accurate. And once you know what you are doing, you can try finetuning the collimation with a star test. Cheshire will also help you adjust your secondary, a star test wont. 

[HumptyMoo]

Dont make me angry...you wouldnt like me when i am angry and then my shirt starts to split and i turn green....them darn newbies

Jolly Green Giant trying to get ISP technical support?

[ChrisLX200]

The problem with colimating optics (we're talking Newts and SCTs mainly) is the number of possible adjustments that are available, and _knowing_ when you have it correct. For a newcomer that is the most difficult thing - how many turns of the screw? What do I look for to tell me it's right?

For me the plethora of colimation tools doesn't help - there are so many different types and no way of knowing which is best. Simple Cheshire eyepiece? Lasers of various type and makes? What do I adjust first?

If I take my scope(s) apart then generally I will use a tool like the Cheshire to re-assemble everything back in it's correct place in relation to each other. Mirrors central, secondaries lined up with focuser and so on. That should get reasonably close to good colimation. I did make a laser colimator once but don't use it now because I found it too dependant on the accuracy of the eyepiece-tube and focuser (and you want the optics aligned with those out of the equation).  However, and I'm with the OP on this, the final arbiter of exact colimation is the Star Test. Your highest magnification eyepiece is used and yes, you do need a good star image for best results. If you can't _see_ a good star image because the 'seeing' is awful on a particular night then don't worry too much about the fine colimation adjustments! The poor seeing will negate any possible improvements anyway.

Really, the best way of learning is to be with other experienced astronomers - a club observing session perhaps - then it can be pointed out to you exactly what to look for using your own scope. Once learned it's a skill that's with you for life. Trying to follow diverse instructions offered here, even if given in all good faith, will be confusing on the night.

ChrisH

[kirkster501]

If folks want to use collimation devices in the UK with our pathetic weather, where we have to wait weeks to see the stars, good luck to them.  Take your attitude somewhere else please, you are not welcome here with that approach. Seems you might not have enough in your life to be worried about.

[RikM]

I star test my scope as a matter of course but I don't consider it as accurate or easy as collimation using a Cheshire. I can make a relatively large misalignment of the primary (as checked with a Cheshire) and don't see a noticeable change in the star test diffraction pattern.

To me, this suggests that collimation using my Cheshire is more accurate (certainly easier and with greater confidence in the result) than star testing. The level of detail I get at high power concurs with this, as do my star shapes in images.

If you are graced with fantastic seeing conditions, premium optics and are just looking for 'okay' then a startest may well be sufficient. For greater accuracy and confidence, learn to use a proper tool and trust it to deliver.

[andyman]

Jolly Green Giant trying to get ISP technical support?

i was refering to the green goblin off spider man...i wil lhave you no 

[AlexB67]

I've seen some rough conditions here in my Bristolian backyard skies too Rick. Good star tests can be tricky when that happens, especially to begin with early in a session. For the star test finetuning it is best done well into a session when the scope has really settled and tube currents are gone I find. 

[Purplehayze104]

took me a 12 months to pluck up the courage to do a collimation, thought things looked ok till i bought a cheshire an omg it was all over place took me 2 hrs to finally get it how i think it should f looked thanks to the good people of SGL's patience & advice i felt confident enuff to do this, glad he never awnsered any my questions

[Uranium235]

I use the cheshire too, but as an out-and-out imager I dont really have the option (or time) for star testing. Most testing is for field flatness - which is a bit of challenge with a 5" newt and a full frame CCD camera.

But we have to remember that many people getting into astronomy (including me when I first started) dont have a scientific or professional background - they're just ordinary folk, and if newbs get bombarded with a bunch of mathematic formulae and confusing diagrams they will run a mile or just glaze over. Its only with practice, study and asking loads of questions will you get anywhere.

Or.... you could just circumvent the whole business and get a refractor