Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

What would I need?


Recommended Posts

Hello everybody!

I have some questions about upgrading some things on a telescope. I'm a newbie on astronomy and equipment.

Last week a decided to buy a telescope to see the stars and planets a little closer so I rushed into it without doing any research and bought a small scope (Sky-Watcher Skyhawk-114 Catadioptric Newtonian Reflector Telescope). When I got the scope I looked online at what you can and can't do with it. With the EPs that came with it I couldn't really see any details and the image of Jupiter, Mars and Saturn were quite blurry so I ordered myself a 12mm Meade 5000 HD-60, a SW 2x Deluxe Barlow Lens and a light pollution filter. With the new things that I got the image was so much better but I still felt it wasn't enough.

The EQ mount has a little fault, the cog wheel under the RA scale is very stiff even when the RA knob is unlocked and when I spin the RA handle you could see little bits of metal falling from the cog wheel.

This fault made me a bit happy to be honest because I had a reason to return it, get a full refund and go for something bigger.

Today I spoke to the guys I bought it from and they will take it back from me.

The new scope that I'll get on Monday is SkyWatcher Explorer 200P EQ5.

I think I made the right decision, the possibilities of the SW 200P being so much greater than of the SW 114.

My question is about EPs and filters

What EPs and filters would I need to see the planets and DSO in greater detail? Will I be able to have a clear view of the planets if I got full power on it? Can I get a 2.5mm EP and use the 2x barlow?

What low power EP and what Filters would I need to have for a good view of nebulaes, galaxies and and other DSO? Should I go for a 32mm, 40mm??

I don't know anything about filters. I will get a set of 4 Sky-Watcher Lunar/Planetary Filters with the new scope.

My budget is around £250-£300 for EPs and filters. Would 3 EPs (including the 12mm Meade that I already have) be enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi emyliano2000,

Have you seen the thread below? It gives you a fair idea what you can expect to see. The larger scope will definitely give you a better chance to see more detail as long as your expectations are realistic.

Good luck and clear skies!

HJ

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 200P with EQ5 is a good combination. It gives you 1000mm of focal length at f5 so you'll be able to see a lot of stuff with the right choice of eyepieces. But the max magnification of 400x is a bit of a proud boast in UK skies - around 200x is a more realistic expectation and that's on a night of good seeing and clear transparency.

I like looking at planets and moon around 150x to 200x - so that would suggest eyepieces around the 5mm to 8mm range give or take 1mm. For larger objects like galaxies and nebulae a lower power with wider fov is more appropriate - say 15mm to 25mm giving 40x to 66x mag. Something around 30mm will frame open clusters quite nicely at 30x mag.

This is a very rough guide though - you also need to consider quality of the glass - at f5 the scope will be less forgiving of poorer quality eyepieces than say an f10 scope. Also - expect to have to learn how to use eyepieces - a lot of newbies don't realise you have to adapt your eyes, pick the right conditions, choose the best object elevations, use averted vision for some objects, cool the whole scope to ambient temperature, scrutinise the object, and employ dew control. There's a lot more to it than just sticking an eyepiece in and expecting picture quality views. Hth :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm new so I can tell you what I've learned or think I have learned.  Maybe my newbness can explain (or be corrected!)

Once you own a scope which can do 200x magnification that's probably what you will see when you look at Jupiter, the Moon, Saturn or Mars.  Atmospheric conditions usually limit us to about 200x.  Now if you live in the middle of the desert or someplace with great seeing I believe up to 400x is realistic.  With higher magnifications you also magnify atmospheric disturbances.

The bigger your scope the more light it gathers and focuses on your lens.  SO, the fainter objects you can see.  The popular planets are pretty bright so with them it isn't an issue.  To see the details in some fuzzy gas cloud you just need to gather alot of light.  In a big scope at 100x magnification the object is brighter than in a small scope.

FWIW, I actually used 400x magnification on Saturn the other night and it DID flicker in and out of sharpness.  It was kinda neat but the sharpness of the smaller 200x image you see feels more proper.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi. That's a nice scope choice there and a 200p is a nice aperture for you, which will be good for planets and dso. To get the best out of your scope you are advised to use a dark site(a place away from light pollution etc) as then you can pick more detail up and as the 200p is manageable to transport then if you have to travel to find one this will not be a problem. To located dso(faint fuzzys sometimes referred to) I use a 20mm and 28 mm wide angle eyepiece . And for planets as the skys in this neck of the wood are not always great and can restrict magnification considerably, then something like a 8mm would be a useful eyepiece(televue plossl is a good eyepiece which would work well with your f5 scope)  . I hope this information is of help to you and welcome to SGL

  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try out the eye pieces that are supplied with the scope for a month or so. This will put you in a much better position to decide what you need to improve. If you then seek more advice from the experienced members give the budget you have for replacing the eps. This will help no end with the suggestions given.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I just found by way of a Google-search tells be this has a "Corrective-Lens" in the focuser to give it a 1000mm focal-length. Is this not what is called a "Bird-Jones" telescope. Here's the piece:

http://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/forum/skyhawk-1145-t493.html

The give-away being the addition of the word 'Catadioptric' in it's title. Seems there's another version, without this, which is straight-foreward at F/5.

Interesting,

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Dave In Vermont said:

From what I just found by way of a Google-search tells be this has a "Corrective-Lens" in the focuser to give it a 1000mm focal-length. Is this not what is called a "Bird-Jones" telescope. Here's the piece:

http://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/forum/skyhawk-1145-t493.html

The give-away being the addition of the word 'Catadioptric' in it's title. Seems there's another version, without this, which is straight-foreward at F/5.

Interesting,

Dave

The Skywatcher Skyhawk 114/1000 is a Jones-Bird design. The "corrective lens" has two functions. The first is to give the 1000mm focal length and the second is to correct the spherical aberrations of the spherical primary mirror. The term "catadioptric" refers to the fact that the telescope uses a combination of mirrors and lenses in its design, but it is still a Jones-Bird telescope. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtonian_telescope

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SW 200p is a very nice set-up, and in the long term you'll get a lot more out of it than the Skyhawk. It should come with 10mm and 25mm eyepieces - the 25mm should be good enough but the 10mm may be poorer. Even so, and especially with the 12mm Meade and Barlow you now also have, it will be enough to get you going. Compare the 10mm and 12mm (x100 and x83 magnifications respectively) to see if there is a big difference in quality. Try both with the Barlow to give x200 and x166 - again, look for the quality, is it usable?

There is a big difference between the theoretic magnification of a telescope - x400 in this case, and what atmospheric conditions actually allow you to see. Weather and light pollution (especially in the London area) will reduce this considerable. Many people say that x200 is really the maximum in the UK, perhaps less in London, before your image begins to degrade and further magnification is pointless. Generally I observe the planets at about x120 to x180, although I can often push up the Moon to about x250.

Due to atmospheric conditions, it is a good idea to observe the planets when they are quite high in the sky. If you look at them low your line of sight will pass through more of the Earth's atmosphere and reduce image quality. Remember too that image quality can change very rapidly over a few minutes - with patience and experience you will get fantastic views but not always. The more you observe, the more you will begin to tease out new features.

There are a great many EPs available with different characteristics and prices, so use what you have and take your time in upgrading. EPs can be quite a personal choice, so if you have an opportunity to visit an astronomy club, you may find members will allow you to try their EPs - and you will begin to get a feel for what you like (and don't!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all I wanna thank you for your lovely comments.

The thing is that now I've got some extra money that I can use for an upgrade of the EPs and filters. This happens very very rarely and I wanna do it now rather than wait for a month or longer when I might not have it anymore. I'm the father of 2 girls and it doesn't come cheap, trust me :).

So, the SW 200p f/1000 comes with the standard 10mm, 25mm EPs and the Deluxe 2x Barlow. I'll get a free Sky-Watcher Lunar/Planetary Filter Set 1.25" worth £30 and I already own a 12mm Meade 5000 HD-60 (don't know where this will fit - to see the Moon?).

As far as I know the SW 200p can take 1.25" and 2" Eps.

My budget is £400 (can't go higher).

This is what I found:

First of all I wanna get a better quality 2x Barlow:   Bresser SA-Barlow Lens 2x 1.25" - £98  or  TeleVue 2x Barlow 1.25" - £93.5 (I would go for the Bresser)

FIlters: I don't know exactly what to get because I will probably use both 1.25" EPs and 2" EPs and I can allocate around £100 - £120 for filters (please help). Will probably need the filters for the low power 2" EPs if I wanna have a chance to see some DSO. I was thinking of the Orion  2"Ultrablock Filter - £88, Baader or Explore Scientific 2" filter - around £80

For the high power EP I wanna get a 8mm and use the 2X barlow. This is what I found: 8mm Baader Hyperion 1.25"/2" Modular Eyepiece - £95  or  8mm Skywatcher SWA-70 1.25/2" Dual Fit - £85.5  or   8mm Orion Stratus 68° Wide-Field Eyepiece 1.25/2" - £120.36 (I would go for the Baader)

For low power EP I was thinking to get one of the next: 28mm Explore Scientific 68° Maxvision Eyepiece 2" - £84  or  28mm Explore Scientific 68° Argon Purged 2" - £136 (a bit too much)  or  TeleVue 32mm Plossl Eyepiece 1.25" - £97.95  or  SkyWatcher Aero ED 30mm SWA 2" - £110  or  32mm Orion Q70 Wide-Field Telescope Eyepiece 2" - £82.64

If I go for the more expensive ones I will go over budget with £42 and I can't do that. £10 - £15 over is not the end of the world.

I would really appreciate it if you could help me out on this one.

Thanks in advance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check out this:

http://www.bresser.de/index.php?lang=1&lang=1&cl=alist&searchparam=&cnid=b96abee08660a2f682e3561345b8593a&attrfilter[Brand][Explore%2BScientific]=1&fnc=mfexecutefilter

Bresser have three very nice Explore Scientific EPs at good prices - at least a couple of people here have bought them and are very happy. The Explore Scientific 68° Ar Eyepiece 34mm (2") will cost about 117 pounds with shipping. The 24mm and 16mm are also pretty attractive. Check for Meade as well, they have a Series 5000 Super Wide Angle Eyepiece 28mm at about 88 pounds. The EPs are ex-display, but no complaints that I've heard, and they're really at very good secondhand prices.

By the way, congratulations on the shopping list - it's awful sweet! Nothing there I wouldn't be very happy with :icon_biggrin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And Bresser also have their ex-display Barlows on offer, both the 1.25" and the 2". As you're looking at dual tubes for the 8mm, I might be very tempted by the Bresser 2" Barlow at about a tenner more than the 1.25" that you quote.

http://www.bresser.de/en/Sale/Display-Items/BRESSER-SA-Barlow-Lens-2x-31-7mm-1-25.html

http://www.bresser.de/en/Sale/Display-Items/BRESSER-SA-Barlow-Lens-2x-50-8mm-2.html

The Hyperions are good EPs but I have heard some people are less than impressed with them in fast scopes, you might want to check this...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there, avoid Baader Hyperion ep's, they get soft at the edges in an f/5 scope, esp. the 200P.  Also, if you must get filters get the 2" ones as these can be used with both 1.25" and 2" eps by screwing them onto the 2-1.25" adaptor.  However, having said this, I would avoid filters for the time being until you get more viewing experience and know what you are looking at. 

Your other suggestions of ep's seem quite well-considered, but I suggest you also look at the BST Explorers/StarGuiders which work very well at f/5, after this the Explore Scientific range are also very good at f/5.  Good luck with your choices.  The ES ep's can be found on the FLO website and the BST's here:
 http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_odkw=bst+staguiders&_osacat=0&_from=R40&_trksid=p2045573.m570.l1313.TR0.TRC0.H0.Xbst+explorers.TRS0&_nkw=bst+explorers&_sacat=0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In your 1000mm focal length scope, 28mm will give x35.7, 32mm will give x31.25 and 34mm will give x29.4. The difference between the 32 and 34mm is really pretty minimal, between the 28 and the 34mm a little more noticeable.

In comparison, the 25mm EP supplied with your scope will give x40 although it will be a very different view to a 2" wide angle.

DSOs really do come in all shapes and sizes, but some can be seen best at low magnifications. Some people use typically x10 binoculars for certain targets, so no, I wouldn't say the 34mm would be too low power at all.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that I would be wary of the 34mm, not on the basis of mafnification, but of exit pupil. In an f5 scope a 34mm eyepiece will have an exit pupil of 34/5 = 6.8mm, and with the maximum pupil diameter being in the region of 7-8mm and decreasing with age, that seems a bit close for comfort to my mind. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I am aware the Meade 5000 swa, ES Maxvision and ES68 eyepieces are all optically identical and produced by the same manufacturer and so should all have the same performance in your scope. I have the 16mm and 24mm ES68's and they are very good in my f6 scopes. In fact the only downside is that I would probably have preferred twist up eyecups like you get on the Meade/Maxvision versions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎6‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 05:30, Cornelius Varley said:

The Skywatcher Skyhawk 114/1000 is a Jones-Bird design. The "corrective lens" has two functions. The first is to give the 1000mm focal length and the second is to correct the spherical aberrations of the spherical primary mirror. The term "catadioptric" refers to the fact that the telescope uses a combination of mirrors and lenses in its design, but it is still a Jones-Bird telescope. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newtonian_telescope

I've read that this design is a bear to collimate due to the corrector lenses at the bottom of the focuser.  Is that true?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ricochet may well be right: the Maxvision and Meade really are pretty identical - except that when Meade brought out theirs, they charged almost double. So maybe the Meade had the first selection of the run optically, or just maybe Meade were being a little greedy :icon_biggrin:.  Nevertheless people have claimed the Meades (and Maxvisions) get very close in performance to some of the more expensive Pentax and Televue EPs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.