Jump to content

sgl_imaging_challenge_2021_annual.thumb.jpg.3fc34f695a81b16210333189a3162ac7.jpg

Dodgy scopes


starman1969
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have got the 76mm Zennox  reflector  and there is nothing wrong with it  as I live in a high rise flat with a balcony unfortunately I cant have a big telescope  , I had this scope for about 5 years now and get good views of the moon  , and planets  and star clusters. the telescope is identical to the sky watcher  version as they are made in the same factory in China , the eyepiece's are not brilliant but the scope works fine , if I want to use a bigger telescope I have a 400mm reflector in the observatory where I work .

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can remember long ago,when I was a youngster of 14,i could,nt afford much at all,but I noticed that the renouned company of Charles Frank of Glasgow were offering a starter kit Refractor.Basically it was a long cardboard tube,within which another tube slid to achieve focus.The lenses were plastic,and I think you could increase magnification,as you slid this inner tube.

It was total rubbish,an absolute joke.Not even the moon could be brought to a sharp focus,plus of course you could.nt hold the dam thing still.

I,m surprised at this company for offering such rubbish.

Mick.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting post re Charles Frank's cardboard 'toilet roll telescope'. aren't Celestron,-the maker of some very fine,and expensive, gear-,also responsible for those 50mm refractors that I see in Asda every so often that promise 'magifies 548 times' with a box covered in Hubblesque pictures?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting post re Charles Frank's cardboard 'toilet roll telescope'. aren't Celestron,-the maker of some very fine,and expensive, gear-,also responsible for those 50mm refractors that I see in Asda every so often that promise 'magifies 548 times' with a box covered in Hubblesque pictures?

They shouldn't do that. It gives a false impression of what you can see. I doubt even with a light bucket at a dark sky site you would see anything resembling those pictures on the telescope boxes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SR-4 H-9 and H-20 "eyepieces" are usually horrible plastic affairs. However, I have found sticking half-decent EPs in such scopes can improve them beyond recognition. Even cheap as chips Kelner EPs produce very acceptable images in these scopes. Not brilliant, perhaps, but Galileo would have given an eye for view like that. I stuck a 28mm Kelner from a defunct pair of bins in a similar cheap scope and suddenly it was very usable. At 25x mmag in the Zennox 76/700 you suddenly get 2 deg FOV at 25x. Very handy indeed. The wider field allows much greater ease finding anything (compared to the minute 0.7 deg even with the 20mm Huygens). The lower mag makes everything nice and bright, and reduces the effect o aberrations. The tripod is often a weak point as well, I agree, which is why I turned a wobbly 4.5" F=500mm on EQ1 (please do not sneeze within a 5 mile radius) construction into a usable little mini-Dob.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if you can still get the 2009 Galileoscope ?  That £20 one

I suspect that it would provide much better views than the scopes in the OP, of course you have to provide your own tripod/mount but at least given how light it is, any half decent camera mount will do instead of needing a dedicated astro one

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • 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.