Telrad finder

[devdusty]

Does anyone have any advice or comments about the Telrad finder. I have been in touch with First Light Optics about problems aligning my finder with my Skywacher 90 mm refractor, and they have suggested it as a solution.

However from my light polluted back garden I can only see stars down to magnitude 3.0 to 3.5 with the naked eye ,so would it be worthwhile?

Thanks for any advice.

Chris.

[Charic]

Hi there, the Telrad used in combination with the various guides is a good option, just makes for easy star hopping, however there is no magnification to the image, what you see is the same with just eyes alone.

From a darker site, the Telrad on its lowest light setting was going to be a better option for me if I could not see the black reticule in my standard 9x50 finder scope, however I don't use the Telrad  or own one at present, as I need to wear my glasses in order to see the reticules sharply. 

Other than that try one out, if its not for you or your liking, or too big an item for the 90mm scope, it well sell on! I've had two units and sold both.

[spillage]

I have one attached to each of my scopes. Really easy to use and great for just sticking the scope onto a bright star.

[Hayduke27]

I don't even have a finder scope, just a Telrad and it works great.

[John]

The Telrad is a great "zero power" finder. For your 90mm refractor though I think the Rigel Quikfinder makes even more sense because it's "footprint" on the scope tube is quite a bit smaller. Otherwise the Rigel Quikfinder is very similar in use to the Talrad except that it projects 2 illuminated circles against the sky rather than the Telrads 3. The Rigel looks like this when viewing through it:

 

[ollypenrice]

I'm a long term Telrad fan, in part because one of my three has been going strong since late in the last century! I also like the fact that it runs on proper batteries rather than those short-lived, droppable and unfindable aspirin-like annoyances. I prefer it to a red dot finder because the large outer circle gives a scale on the sky. If you are short of naked eye stars this means that you can still estimate a starting position by placing the Telrad relative to stars you can see.

I'd say it was one of my 'desert island' accessories.

Olly

[Anne S]

I’ve owned both a Telrad and a Rigel Quickfinder. Both are excellent. The Telrad is a bit big which is why I fitted the Quickfinder on my 102mm refractor. It fitted between the rings and allowed me to fit a finder in the normal position. They are both very easy to adjust as they are fitted with 3 knobs which are easily accessible.

There are other small red dot finders that fit in a finder shoe but they can be a bit bright at the lowest setting. I’m thinking of the William Optics/Altairastro style. They are very solid and keep alignment pretty well. They tend to need an Allen key to adjust though.

Personally I find a red dot finder is perfect fo show where the telescope is pointing before a star alignment is done, after that the electronics largely take over.

Anne

[Astro Imp]

I've used both a Telrad and Rigel Quickfinder. 

IMO the Telrad is better if you have room, the design of the Rigel puts the adjustment knobs in an awkward position whereas the Telrad's adjustment is right in front of you and is easily accessible. 

[Louis D]

6 hours ago, ollypenrice said:

I'm a long term Telrad fan, in part because one of my three has been going strong since late in the last century! I also like the fact that it runs on proper batteries rather than those short-lived, droppable and unfindable aspirin-like annoyances.

My first Telrad died when the AA alkalines corroded in it.  Despite replacing the batteries and holder, I could never get it to light up again.  On the flip side, the original CR2025 button cell in my 18 year old Rigel QuikFinder is still going strong and hasn't corroded at all.  It's not annoying if you never need to replace it because it never dies or corrodes.

[ronl]

I use a Rigel , which I find to be perfect for me, it's lighter than a Telrad, and is

much smaller, and perfect for a 90 mm refractor, and as John has said, it has

a smaller footprint, personally I would go with the Rigel QuikFinder.

 

[ollypenrice]

5 hours ago, Louis D said:

My first Telrad died when the AA alkalines corroded in it.  Despite replacing the batteries and holder, I could never get it to light up again.  On the flip side, the original CR2025 button cell in my 18 year old Rigel QuikFinder is still going strong and hasn't corroded at all.  It's not annoying if you never need to replace it because it never dies or corrodes.

I guess you are better at remembering to turn the thing off than I am! If I forget to turn off the Telrad for a few days it doesn't matter. If I forget to turn off my 'diddy battery finder' I have to drive 25 miles to find a tobacconist with the right replacement! Dark skies come at a certain cost!!

lly

[iPeace]

Telrad, Rigel - both brilliant. Yet, yeeeeeeeeeet... I have given them up for the simpler red dot variant. While I absolutely love the red target circles, I came to the realization that I was faffing about too much trying to get myself aligned correctly behind so as to actually see them! I'm ready to accept this as one of my personal flaws - but I just find it so much easier to make that single red dot appear in the finder; I find myself no longer bobbing my head around trying to see those red circles.

I have taken a liking to Baader's SkySurfers.

[tomato]

+1 for the Telrad, although like Olly I often forget to turn it off after the initial star alignment.

Still going strong after 3 years on the original batteries, but will keep an eye on the corrosion issue.

[Erla]

Telrad is the cheapest and the best piece of kit I've purchased. Even if you see just one star - telrad is brilliant to calculate your way to the places your eye can't see.

[spillage]

1 hour ago, ollypenrice said:

I have to drive 25 miles to find a tobacconist with the right replacement!

Are ebay and postal deliveries in France not that good. Never really though about stuff like that? I do keep looking a houses near the Pyrenees, there are some bargains to be had. Maybe one day!!

[devdusty]

Thanks for all your comments and advice. Perhaps I am being a bit thick but surely the Telrad has still to be aligned with the main telescope.?

I would like to see one in operation if there are any users in the Exeter, Devon area.

Chris P

[John]

8 minutes ago, devdusty said:

.. Perhaps I am being a bit thick but surely the Telrad has still to be aligned with the main telescope.?

 

Good question and yes it does (as does the Rigel Quikfinder). Both devices have 3 adjustment knobs on the front and you use these to align the finder direction to match the view through the main scope as you would an optical finder.

Once done, you can remove the Telrad / Quikfinder from it's base on the tube for storage / transport and it should still be aligned OK when it goes back on.

 

[Louis D]

28 minutes ago, John said:

Good question and yes it does (as does the Rigel Quikfinder). Both devices have 3 adjustment knobs on the front and you use these to align the finder direction to match the view through the main scope as you would an optical finder.

Once done, you can remove the Telrad / Quikfinder from it's base on the tube for storage / transport and it should still be aligned OK when it goes back on.

 

Close, the Telrad's are on the back facing the user whilst the QuikFinder's are on the front, facing away.  I actually find having them facing away easier because I don't have to work my fingers between my eyes and the Telrad to adjust them.
 

 

2 hours ago, iPeace said:

Telrad, Rigel - both brilliant. Yet, yeeeeeeeeeet... I have given them up for the simpler red dot variant. While I absolutely love the red target circles, I came to the realization that I was faffing about too much trying to get myself aligned correctly behind so as to actually see them! I'm ready to accept this as one of my personal flaws - but I just find it so much easier to make that single red dot appear in the finder; I find myself no longer bobbing my head around trying to see those red circles.

I have taken a liking to Baader's SkySurfers.

Or simpler yet, go with a green laser sight if your local laws allow it, and you're careful with it.  They're much easier to use near zenith than any unitary power finder.  I keep both types mounted and use whatever works best for the moment at hand.

[Tomatobro]

Best bit of kit for navigation. Can dew up quite quickly so as the Red Santa to bring you a dew shield

[John]

10 hours ago, Louis D said:

Close, the Telrad's are on the back facing the user whilst the QuikFinder's are on the front, facing away.  I actually find having them facing away easier because I don't have to work my fingers between my eyes and the Telrad to adjust them....

 

Quite right - I've not owned a Telrad for a couple of years - I'd forgotten where their alignment adjustment knobs are !

I agree that the Rigel's are a little easier to operate.

[Swoop1]

I struggled to use the straight through finder supplied with my scope, particularly at higher elevations. I therefore upgraded to a right angled finder with higher magnification. I then struggled to get the scope pointed at the right bit of sky. Cue adding a Telrad. I stuck the mount to the OTA using the front ring of the scope as a rough guide to mount alignment. Once the Telrad was on the mount, a bit of attention to the adjustment and it is now an easy task to get on target.

I have even added a vinyl covered pad to my kit to keep my knees dry if I need to get low to sight.

[Charic]

swoop1..........Although I need glasses to see the  Telrad reticules, the other issue for me was the reach, as my Telrad was mounted the far side of the original finder scope. I also feel that the Telrad is better equipped for a Refractor scope where your behind the scope all the time, then the Telrad is there right in front of you where it should be!
For now, I have just got so used to using the standard 9x50 finder, and with keeping both eyes open, the target simply lines up in a flash.
I also have a RACI, and didn't like it, or more to the point didn't have it correctly aligned, as my images were still tilted. Still not sure I need the RACI so once I have secured a new 'O' ring of the correct size, I may move it on!

[Kriss Craik]

On 05/12/2017 at 22:49, devdusty said:

Does anyone have any advice or comments about the Telrad finder. I have been in touch with First Light Optics about problems aligning my finder with my Skywacher 90 mm refractor, and they have suggested it as a solution.

However from my light polluted back garden I can only see stars down to magnitude 3.0 to 3.5 with the naked eye ,so would it be worthwhile?

Thanks for any advice.

Chris.

Hi Chris,I think you will be fine with the finder suggested. If you think about it this way, the finder gets you in a close enough location to move to the eyepiece using a low mag you can then star hop to your desired location.

the fact you can only see a limited number of stars means you have fewer starting positions to star hop from, but also means you are less likely to start in an incorrect position.

Hope this helps

[ollypenrice]

On 07/12/2017 at 00:44, Louis D said:

 

 

Or simpler yet, go with a green laser sight if your local laws allow it, and you're careful with it.  They're much easier to use near zenith than any unitary power finder.  I keep both types mounted and use whatever works best for the moment at hand.

This is true but they don't like the cold. In european winters they dim and fail quite easily. Another trick with these is to keep them in your pocket and shine them through the finder scope which does a reasnably accurate job of orientating the beam. Very handy for initial polar alignment through polar scopes, too.

Olly

[Louis D]

On 12/7/2017 at 11:48, Kriss Craik said:

the fact you can only see a limited number of stars means you have fewer starting positions to star hop from, but also means you are less likely to start in an incorrect position.

Being at a truly dark site can be disconcerting trying to find recognizeable constellations because so many more naked eye stars are visible that they can obscure familiar asterisms.