why dont skywatcher make accessories to go with their scopes?

[Daniel-K]

why don't skywatcher make accessories to go with their scopes? for me i find DIY a bit of a chore and don't exactly go looking for things to do. i would rather be able to buy something knowing full well its going to fit my scope rather then having a bodge job or bought buy a 3rd party company.surely there's a market for SW to make stuff like secondary heaters dew shields etc.etc just to fit a specific model.

[ronin]

Not worth it to them, they would come up against every small supplier of similar items.

In simple terms they make telescopes, and probably more accurate they assemble telescopes from their items and other items engineered for them.

If they made accessories for every scope they have then that is a large number of accessories, and there is not a large market, I have 5 scopes and just one or two accessories - a flexible focus adjuster cable thingy and a bubble level. No heaters for any.

Accessories will be sold in small quantities and there is a lot of possible accessories to produce+support, so to Synta it simply is not worth it. As Synta tend to go for lowest cost then if a heater breaks that is a liability that they would have to replace. Also look how fast people throw the supplied finders for better independant made ones.

What eyepieces do you have?

[Daniel-K]

I have a 28mm 68°MV and a 18mm 82° ES

[Luke]

I wish I could buy another plastic cap for my Skywatcher 400p flextube (to go at the end of the tube instead of the fabric one that keeps falling off), I've not seen any third party ones either.

[Myopicus]

@ Daniel-K

'Botch' job, if you please!  Bodging is something quite different, involving chisels and a pole-lathe.    

[Chris Rowland]

I think it's preferable that scope and mount manufacturers stick to what they are good at and leave the other things to people who are good at those things.  And that there are a few de-facto standards, EP sizes, filter threads, dovetail sizes.  One of the reasons the GEM mount is so popular is that you can mix and match mounts and scopes.

An Astro dealer can be a great help.  When I got my NS11 GPS (My first commercial scope!) I asked what else I needed and was sold a dew shield.  A SCT, especially a big one, will dew up almost instantly without one.

Chris

[DanLXIX]

@ Daniel-K

'Botch' job, if you please!  Bodging is something quite different, involving chisels and a pole-lathe.    

Not at all - botching something up is making a mess of it, bodging something up is quickly putting something together to do the job without much time taken. Similar in many ways, but very different 

[brantuk]

I agree entirely with Daniel - how many times have we heard of having to replace the latitude bolts on SW scopes cos the supplied ones got bent, or having to weld in a lug to attain higher elevation at northern locations - without sliding off the lattitude bolt. Or having to strip down a mount to clean it up and re-assemble with decent grease cos the supplied gunk seizes up. Or adding collimation knobs or springs to facilitate an essential adjustment.

These are basic things for which the scope shouldn't need any modification at all in order to fulfill the job it's made to do - and it wouldn't add a lot to the price. Higher standards and q/a are called for I think - even if it does cost a few bob more.

[John]

These are basic things for which the scope shouldn't need any modification at all in order to fulfill the job it's made to do - and it wouldn't add a lot to the price. Higher standards and q/a are called for I think - even if it does cost a few bob more. 

Orion Optics scopes always have cost "a few bob more" but up until quite recently their standard focusers were poor and the tube rings / dovetail bars really crude.

There is room for improvement in most brands I think.

[Astro Imp]

These are basic things for which the scope shouldn't need any modification at all in order to fulfill the job it's made to do - and it wouldn't add a lot to the price. Higher standards and q/a are called for I think - even if it does cost a few bob more.

It would be nice to think that good quality fittings come as standard but if they are successfully selling their products why should they change. 

[Myopicus]

Not at all - botching something up is making a mess of it, bodging something up is quickly putting something together to do the job without much time taken. Similar in many ways, but very different 

Hmmm . . . speaking as a professional pole-lathe turner, green woodworker and teacher; as a community we 'bodgers' are definitely trying to reclaim 'bodge' as positive terminology.

Hence my pedantic 'Outraged from West Dorset' type comment.  Sorry, it's a vocational duty.  

(when you turn your hobby into your career, nobody warns you that you will have to find new hobbies. Dammit.  But here we are . . .)

[brantuk]

"There is room for improvement in most brands I think."

Absolutely John - I couldn't agree more.

"but if they are successfully selling their products why should they change."

Yup - lot's of companies have the same attitude nowadays, not just in astronomy either - I find it sad Alan.

[Moonshane]

you can have whatever you want if you pay the price. Skywatcher sell the basic scope with basic bare bones accessories at a great price. OOUK sell top rate optics in a light tube with a better or worse focuser for a bit more. you can pretty much buy everything you'd ever want if you have the money but the numbers of people wanting to buy 'more specialist widget X' are probably quite limited and to set up tooling, employ staff and then export it would be a risky project.

then people like us moan that they are ridiculously expensive for what they are and don't buy them (or only buy used).

I don't blame companies like Skywatcher for specialising and leaving small scale products to smaller companies/one man bands. most people have no clue as to the number of hours that go into developing and making small numbers of sometimes complex products.

[Pig]

I agree with most of the comments about manufacturing costs etc.. but as for some of the essential elements that make it a "telescope"  producing very poor focusers and other adjustment components like bendy bolts I feel  is just wrong  Basic issues like these would cost but a few spondoolies to make them a lot better, they do not have to be top notch.

[Alien 13]

I do like skywatcher products and most of the issues are because we push the design to its limits.

The ED80 for instance is never adverised as an astrograph so should we be supprised that the focus slips when we hang a dirty great camera on the end.

The bendy bolt mount issue is more evident when its used for imaging and its constantly being adjusted.

These problems might seem cheap to fix but a few extra £s at the skywatcher end could end up £30-£40 when retailed.

Alan

PS I might be alone here but i personally think that the skywatcher grease is better than anything else available.