Some help please.

[Jayfawkes99]

Hello.  I didn't know where to post this so I'm hoping this is the correct place. 

Back in may i had purchased my first scope from Amazon . The Celestron 127EQ PowerSeeker Telescope.
 

I purchased it for a few reasons. It got decent reviews.  It was in my price range. And i took a trip to cheery springs State park here in Pennsylvania. 

I'm having a blast with it. My problem is planetary viewing. I am still using the stock lenses it came with. And i did collimate the scope. The lenses it came with are 20mm. 4mm. And a 3x barlow. I contacted the manufacturer and they told me that i need to center the planet in the 20 mm. Then put the 4mm and do the same thing.  They told me to not use the Barlow lense cause it cut out a lot of light. 

The thing is a few days ago. I was trying to get Saturn into view and i wasnt getting a clear image of the rings like i had seen in some of the customer images. 

Is it a problem with not having better lenses. Or is it just causei can tend to be impatient sometimes? Any help or advice is appreciated. I will be hopefully making another scope purchase in the near future but thats a little ways away.

[cloudsweeper]

If it is properly collimated, you should get a fairly sharp view with the 20mm eyepiece (magnification x50), although the image will be small.  But then using the 4mm EP will give you x250, and at that mag, the image will generally be looking "softer" - especially if the atmospheric conditions ("seeing") are poor/not stable.

You would get a better view with say a 10mm EP (x100), or you could try the Barlow with the 20mm (x150).  Losing some light should not be a problem with a bright object like Saturn.

Better EPs will give better results across a range of objects and field of vision, but your stock 20mm should still give you a reasonable view.

Don't even bother trying the 4mm with the Barlow - a mag of x750 is simply impractical, no matter what the sales spiel tells you!

Doug.

[ronin]

The barlow should be reasonable, will depend on how good the barlow is overall but that is the same with everything.

The barlow will not "cut out" a lot of light, it will likely drop the amount by say 5% - doublet lens and 4 faces at 1% loss on each face. What it does do is increase the image and so you have collected X amount of light and made it into an image twice as big so it is just less bright across the image, should be about 1/4 the brightness or intensity.

Better items - barlow and eyepieces - should show a better image, it should hopefully be sharper. But there is as ever the trade off between cost and the result.. Many (myself) do not use a barlow. I would not barlow a 10mm eyepiece to achive the equivalent of a 5mm eyepiece, I use a 5mm eyepiece. So there is the option of buy an eyepiece and not a "better" barlow. Never been 100% sure of the advantages a barlow brings, having one does not really double the effective number of eyepieces you have.

[Peter Drew]

If you are planning to get another (better?) telescope soon then I would persevere with what you now have, it will provide plenty of experience that will pay off later. The planets are low for some time now so will not give of their best, you will not get visual images to match those taken with cameras and digitally processed. If you keep your magnification to 150x or less your chances of a good view will increase.  

[newbie alert]

Your 20mm will give the better image but the image size will be small because of the focal length of the scope...the 4mm will be bigger but you will lose the sharpness of the image..maybe a 10mm/12mm size would suit?

Don't get caught up on the images you see in the magazine's.. just get the max out if the equipment you own..and learn as you go.i just give a for instance..

This is Jupiter using a 12mm ep..phone up up to the lense..(affocal)

 

 

[newbie alert]

And this with my camera (lucky imaging)

[Wpit]

yes, the advertising photos I have seen are often unobtainable on smaller scopes and never without adding image capture and processing. We have to live with and enjoy the small blurred images, which will result in the search for the ultimate scope and mount and the perfect viewing night!

Will

[ronin]

If you are thinking of a new scope soon then do not buy anything. Just found out that the scope is1000mm focal length and a tube length of 504mm. it is what is described as a Bird Jones design. There is already a barlow in the focuser - how did you perform the collimation you mentioned?

The principal is good but the implimemtation on a mass produced scope is poor. By rights the internal barlow system should be designed to match the scope, on an mass produced scope they simply put an inexpensive barlow lens - least costly negative achromatic doublet -  into the focuser.

4mm eyepieces are not really worth having until you spend a reasonable amount on one. Know this from experience. Still it was only one eyepiece so no great loss.

As you seem to have a barlow in the system do not put another one in. 2 tend to just not work, likely because of where the image plane falls. The scope is best used for kow to medium magnification say 80x to 100x. So at 1000mm focal length do not realistically think of less then a 10mm eyepiece. Owing to the arrangement I seriously doubt that even an Astro Tech 8mm Paradigm would work ($60). A 12mm one might and thinking ahead the PAradigms would be good for any future scope.

Case of might be worth a purchase and if the result is still not great then just keep it until the new scope.

As I seem to recall the scope is a short focal length spherical mirror with the barlow in the focuser to "stretch" it out to 1000mm.

I had thought it might be a 127 Mak and wondered who supplied a 4mm eyepiece with a 127 Mak, that was when I read the Celestron site and read the focal length and tube length details. How long have you had the scope ?

[Jayfawkes99]

14 hours ago, Peter Drew said:

If you are planning to get another (better?) telescope soon then I would persevere with what you now have, it will provide plenty of experience that will pay off later. The planets are low for some time now so will not give of their best, you will not get visual images to match those taken with cameras and digitally processed. If you keep your magnification to 150x or less your chances of a good view will increase.  

Like i said the purchase of another scope wonr be for a while. Im content with what i have for now. I just want to get the most out of it before i do buy another one. And the images im referring to are the customer images you can see in the reviews section on Amazon. Either taken by holing a phone camera to the lense. Or buy attaching actual camera with proper attachments

[Jayfawkes99]

4 hours ago, ronin said:

If you are thinking of a new scope soon then do not buy anything. Just found out that the scope is1000mm focal length and a tube length of 504mm. it is what is described as a Bird Jones design. There is already a barlow in the focuser - how did you perform the collimation you mentioned?

The principal is good but the implimemtation on a mass produced scope is poor. By rights the internal barlow system should be designed to match the scope, on an mass produced scope they simply put an inexpensive barlow lens - least costly negative achromatic doublet -  into the focuser.

4mm eyepieces are not really worth having until you spend a reasonable amount on one. Know this from experience. Still it was only one eyepiece so no great loss.

As you seem to have a barlow in the system do not put another one in. 2 tend to just not work, likely because of where the image plane falls. The scope is best used for kow to medium magnification say 80x to 100x. So at 1000mm focal length do not realistically think of less then a 10mm eyepiece. Owing to the arrangement I seriously doubt that even an Astro Tech 8mm Paradigm would work ($60). A 12mm one might and thinking ahead the PAradigms would be good for any future scope.

Case of might be worth a purchase and if the result is still not great then just keep it until the new scope.

As I seem to recall the scope is a short focal length spherical mirror with the barlow in the focuser to "stretch" it out to 1000mm.

I had thought it might be a 127 Mak and wondered who supplied a 4mm eyepiece with a 127 Mak, that was when I read the Celestron site and read the focal length and tube length details. How long have you had the scope ?

I honestly couldnt tell you how i did it. I know i bought the eyepiece. I followed the instructions. Luckily it wasnt too out of wack. It still seems to be holding and i travel with it a lot. My girlfriend lives 25 minutes away and her 11 year old son and i have a blast with it. 

I got it on may 11th of this year i believe. 

Like i said. I just really want to get the most out of this one before i get another one. I was going to actually shoot to have one of each kind cause her and i are talking about buying a house next summer and i want to put a skyshed in the back yard. 

And i will most likely invest in those astro tech lenses. Are the insertion diameters on leses universal? But they seem to fit my budget more then a lot of the ones i was looking at. 

[Les Ewan]

With Saturn being so low in high northern latitudes you cant expect too much over the next few years I'm afraid.Personally I would ditch the X3 Barlow and buy a good quality X2 one along with a decent 10mm eyepiece. As for your issued 4mm it may be good it may not but  Saturn tends to bear high magnifications well  when good seeing allows and when higher in the sky.

Les.

[Charic]

The Skywatcher Skyliner was my  proposed fix after only using the 127EQ for one night!
I cleaned, collimated and cooled the 127EQ and the Moon looked great, but nothing else did?
I even user 'better' eyepieces ................you will really enjoy a better scope, but you still may learn something with the 127EQ? Setting up and alignment is what I learnt, but discovered its a complete waste of time on the 127EQ compared to my present scope. I found the 127EQ frustrating to use and it has limited use astronomically.
I'm surprised they still sell them, but the advertising helps! It really should not be a beginners scope, too much too learn, and too little  gain to keep you interested. I couldn't even give mine away, but eventually sold it to a high street outlet here in the uk. My opinions are just that, the scope gave me my first real wow moment looking at the Moon,  but the 200P Skyliner outclasses the 127EQ considerably,especially in the visual department and is totally suitable for my needs, which is for visual use only, though there are other scopes available.

[Jayfawkes99]

6 minutes ago, Les Ewan said:

With Saturn being so low in high northern latitudes you cant expect too much over the next few years I'm afraid.Personally I would ditch the X3 Barlow and buy a good quality X2 one along with a decent 10mm eyepiece. As for your issued 4mm it may be good it may not but  Saturn tends to bear high magnifications well  when good seeing allows and when higher in the sky.

 

[Jayfawkes99]

11 minutes ago, Les Ewan said:

With Saturn being so low in high northern latitudes you cant expect too much over the next few years I'm afraid.Personally I would ditch the X3 Barlow and buy a good quality X2 one along with a decent 10mm eyepiece. As for your issued 4mm it may be good it may not but  Saturn tends to bear high magnifications well  when good seeing allows and when higher in the sky.

Les.

I am still a complete novice with a lot of this. And unfortunately i do not have really any clue when it comes to basic physics. Is their any helpful websites, books, or even apps to help me get a better grip on a lot of this? Like unfortunately  ( and i know it probably makes me look bad) . But i didnt know that about Saturn. What are good resources for someone like myself to get a better understanding of all this when tracking and viewing planets?

[Jayfawkes99]

7 minutes ago, Charic said:

The Skywatcher Skyliner was my  proposed fix after only using the 127EQ for one night!
I cleaned, collimated and cooled the 127EQ and the Moon looked great, but nothing else did?
I even user 'better' eyepieces ................you will really enjoy a better scope, but you still may learn something with the 127EQ? Setting up and alignment is what I learnt, but discovered its a complete waste of time on the 127EQ compared to my present scope. I found the 127EQ frustrating to use and it has limited use astronomically.
I'm surprised they still sell them, but the advertising helps! It really should not be a beginners scope, too much too learn, and too little  gain to keep you interested. I couldn't even give mine away, but eventually sold it to a high street outlet here in the uk. My opinions are just that, the scope gave me my first real wow moment looking at the Moon,  but the 200P Skyliner outclasses the 127EQ considerably,especially in the visual department and is totally suitable for my needs, which is for visual use only, though there are other scopes available.

Do you not recommend Celestron all together? Or is it just a prefrence? I was looking at other brands. Unfortunately i tend to stick with amazon when doing my online shopping. Due to free shipping and the rewards points i get with the credit card. I am willing , obviobviously, to shop elsewhere. Just want to know if i should avoid the brand all together?

[Charic]

Have you researched the freeware program called Stellarium? Many of us will have it or have used it. 

[Red Dwarfer]

Celestron do an accessory kit for the PowerSeeker range with 9mm and 15mm Kellners and three filters http://www.celestron.com/browse-shop/astronomy/visual-accessories/eyepieces/powerseeker-accessory-kit

I have that 4mm kit lens with one of my Celestron scopes and found an upgrade an improvement ... I would highly recommend the Celstron X2 Barlow too ... 

[Charic]

31 minutes ago, Jayfawkes99 said:

Do you not recommend Celestron all together?

No!, just the 127EQ from experience .......there will be other scopes of similar frame & size in other brands  maybe, that are equally bad.
The scope I have now (the replacement )  is reportedly the UKs best selling, so its good enough for me, but things can get better as the scopes get bigger (more aperture ) especially for visual use, but there are limits to overcome and assess, and I think for now, the 200P is just fine for my needs.

 

Correction!.........most popular telescope, not best selling as I remarked, but it could be that too?

Also of note, the 127EQ has a corrector eyepiece so that you could use the scope for terrestrial observations. Learn what you can from your present scope, take your time upgrading, as the Stars won't be leaving anytime soon, see the 127EQ as part of your learning curve.

[Red Dwarfer]

17 minutes ago, Charic said:

The Skywatcher Skyliner was my  proposed fix

That is the scope I intend to order from FLO this weekend , a 200P and a couple of BST Starguider lenses ... I`m just trying to figure out the best focal lengths for this particular scope ... any advice would be very appreciated . 

[Charic]

A 12mm BST Starguider,  the 8mm Starguider and  the 32mm  Skywatcher Panaview all work very well.

The scope has a focal ratio of f/6 so a 6mm provides you with 200x magnification ( which matches the scopes aperture - all good stuff ). Starguiders don't come in 6mm so I chose the William Optics SPL in 6mm, great eyepiece. Have even tried the 6mm Delos, no benefit except for the wider field of view, the image still looked the same?

The 12mm BST will hit the sweet spot, where this scope is most comfortable at  100x power,  which might seem low when theoretically the scope could reach 400x (twice the aperture - but no, not a great idea, yet fun to try? but the moon at 375x is ok.
Studying  Planets at that power on this scope, Nah!
The 12mm can be comfortably Barlowed to 6mm so the 12mm is an ideal first eyepiece , the 8mm is a nice one too, (my first).

Any of the eyepieces in my signature work fine for my eyes on my scope. With the Starguiders, you can get discounts for multi-purchases, First Light Optics now have them, as you rightly stated, but I've had mine a little longer from the auction site, although the oculars were all brand new, its your choice.

If you had any Plössls in mind, those Revelation Astro's (purportedly GSO made) are fine examples and very cheap too, don't let their cheapness dissuade you, there is a very interesting report that compares them to some very desirable eyepieces, and the result is very surprising! best of all, they work for me!

[Red Dwarfer]

18 minutes ago, Jayfawkes99 said:

Do you not recommend Celestron all together? Or is it just a prefrence? I was looking at other brands. Unfortunately i tend to stick with amazon when doing my online shopping. Due to free shipping and the rewards points i get with the credit card. I am willing , obviobviously, to shop elsewhere. Just want to know if i should avoid the brand all together?

Celestron is one of the top brands , alongside SkyWatcher , Meade , etc. I have 3 Celestron scopes so far and can`t recommend the brand enough ... It`s just sometimes the kit lenses that come with beginner scopes can be a little ropey and need replaced , but usually one is quite good and the second less so . 

[Red Dwarfer]

22 minutes ago, Charic said:

A 12mm BST Starguider,  the 8mm Starguider and  the 32mm  Skywatcher Panaview all work very well.

The scope has a focal ratio of f/6 so a 6mm provides you with 200x magnification ( which matches the scopes aperture - all good stuff ). Starguiders don't come in 6mm so I chose the William Optics SPL in 6mm, great eyepiece. Have even tried the 6mm Delos, no benefit except for the wider field of view, the image still looked the same?

The 12mm BST will het the sweet spot, where this scope is at its most comfortable, 100x power, might seem low when theoretically the scope could reach 400x (twice the aperture - but no, not a great idea, yet fun to try? but the moon at 375x is ok.
Studying  Planets at that power on this scope, Nah!
The 12mm can be comfortably Barlowed to 6mm so the 12mm is an ideal first eyepiece , the 8mm is a nice one too, (my first).

Any of the eyepieces in my signature work fine for my eyes on my scope. With the Starguiders, you can get discounts for multi-purchases, First Light Optics now have them, as you rightly stated, but I've had mine a little longer from the auction sight, although the oculars were all brand new, its your choice.

Okay , many thanks for the information ... I was thinking something along the lines of one high power and one medium power ( or one high one low ) ... They don`t do a 32mm or 40mm in the BST range as you know , but I have a SW Plossl 32mm which should be fine for now ... It`s the 3.2mm that gives the x375 magnification according to the calculator on my phone 1200 divided by 3.2 ... great for the moon but overkill on the planets , but what about DSOs at x375 , would it be just too dark on all but the brightest clusters ? 

The 12mm is top of the list at the moment then either 8 or 18 , the 12 and 18 with a Barlow would give 6mm , 9mm , 12mm and 18mm which is a good range .

[Charic]

Low power for the DSO's and a dark site, no man-made illumination.
Get your eyes adapted to the darkness, works wonders!

M31 through my scope is just a mere wisp of a slightly grey patch of almost nothing, I can just pick out the core, thats all I see. From a dark site, it starts to fill the eyepiece with detail. even my 25mm eyepiece is not wide enough to take it all in, so went for the 70° PANAVIEW. That works a treat for my needs.

M31 is massive, yet so diffuse, so spread out, you need low power, wide angle, and plenty of photons to see the Galaxy in all its glory.

Your 32mm Plössl or the standard 25mm issued with the scope will work, just depends on how much field of view you need?

I own the 3.2mm and the 5mm, as they complete the set, I use them mainly on the Moon, as that target is big and bright and close, If I try to look at  Jupiter, the image will be washed out, fuzzy.

There's no perfect eyepiece to have or use, but at least one of my eyepieces on the night will produce a satisfactory image given that the seeing conditions comply?

[Red Dwarfer]

13 hours ago, Wpit said:

yes, the advertising photos I have seen are often unobtainable on smaller scopes and never without adding image capture and processing. We have to live with and enjoy the small blurred images, which will result in the search for the ultimate scope and mount and the perfect viewing night!

I usually just make sure the moons around Jupiter and Saturn are tack sharp to begin with then , following the advice on here , just watch the planets for a while and when your eye starts to adjust surface detail will start to reveal itself . 

[Red Dwarfer]

1 hour ago, Charic said:

M31 through my scope is just a mere wisp of a slightly grey patch of almost nothing, I can just pick out the core, thats all I see. From a dark site, it starts to fill the eyepiece with detail. even my 25mm eyepiece is not wide enough to take it all in, so went for the 70° PANAVIEW. That works a treat for my needs.

M31 is massive, yet so diffuse, so spread out, you need low power, wide angle, and plenty of photons to see the Galaxy in all its glory.

I have read a lot of people recommending low power for deep sky objects and that is the advice i`ve followed . But what about the smaller more elusive stuff like the M57 Ring Nebula , what magnification do you find brings out the detail of the outer ring ? 

I tried to find the M31 late one night last week but it was in predawn light so no luck on that front , though Venus wasn`t far behind it so I had a gander at that instead ...

Have a look at this screen cap from twitter a couple of days ago . It shows the M31 if it was much brighter and next to the Moon for scale ...