Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

stargazine_ep3_banner.thumb.jpg.5533fb830ae914798f4dbbdd2c8a5853.jpg

Recommended Posts

Why crave for long eye relief, and then restrict it with a raised eyecup? Why conceive wide fields optics only to make them narrow with same raised eyecup? My Myriads and Nirvana/TS/William clones have a rotating eyecup that resists turning firmly, they never spin unless I want them to. The Meade/Maxvision 18mm/82° and 34mm/68°, on the other hand, possess a rubber eyecup that also serves as a grippy external frame. These oversize grips offered so much leverage to the turning mechanism, they triggered it often with no will on my part. 

Almost each time I handled them, the integral cup spun, reducing the eye relief and field, plus it made me doubt if I had fully seated and locked them in the diagonal. The 34mm was the worst offender, its mechanism had almost no resistance at all. That was very annoying, when you observe you want quietness, your gear shouldn't be doing irritating things of its own.

Having had enough of that, I lifted the rubber with a handy little tool I always carry in my back pocket: the Dunlop Ultex guitar pick. Ultex is plastic, but it's the glassiest pick material, dump it on something hard and its sounds almost like glass foil or stone foil, if such a thing was possible (Dunlop's more rubbery Tortex was great but it's outdated, just compare). Still Ultex is flexible, a mandatory quality of guitar and bass picks. And it won't scratch anodized aluminum.

A 1mm thick pick did the job after a 0.73mm colleague broke; not tough enough. 0.60mm's give out the most harmonics but they were too thin at first sight for this. I don't play 1mm's anymore, they mute too much harmonics, however this one got a nice alternate occupation.

20171228_192520.thumb.jpg.3cd7d40d6131ad42bc8ec1f561c8a40c.jpg

Experience from many other little jobs similar to this one made me keep the broken pick when most folks would dump it right away. Never trash something until the work is over. This piece of scrap plastic proved the ideal tool, with the right curvature and bite, to remove the crystalline superglue that remained on the metal cylinder.

20171228_192642.thumb.jpg.513437536631a465c8ce8496f6eaa004.jpg

The mechanism is simply a stud that moves inside a curved slot.  I wiped the now-useless grease, and filled the slot with a short piece of electric wire to block the stud. Sorry for the blurry shot.

20171228_193432.thumb.jpg.02408406a8437f96c6c2dbf92d326556.jpg

No need to glue the wire, the tight-fitting rubber housing keeps it in place. I did put three drops of glue to attach the rubber to the inside metal housing. I kept the caps on, but I should have taped them to better protect the lenses against tools and glue, big sin here! I didn't use superglue, I'll wait and see if that all-purpose Pattex sticks hard enough to both metal and rubber. If it doesn't, superglue it will be. The "tire" fits the "wheel" tight enough that even no glue could do temporarily.

20171228_193942.thumb.jpg.4c8a28dd306b77e31519cb4fe2487cdd.jpg

Did the same with the 34mm:

20171228_202120.thumb.jpg.ae219831301d6baf28faa038b56947b0.jpg

Interesting how the crown's edge has some green anodizing that was destined to match the green deco of the eyepiece, had it been sold under the Meade brand. It was impossible to lift that massive rubber housing with a pick, I had to do it with a screwdriver, but it inevitably scratched the black barrel, which I patched up with a black marker. These are the black smears under the wire.

There is some risk in opening a high-grade eyepiece, so don't try before you have praticed on cheap or damaged ones. It also voids the warranty, be careful. Waterproof eyepieces are obviously a no-no for that mod! Assuming one could unscrew the sealed parts, humid air would enter through the thinnest opening, and ruin the anti-fogging protection.

I hope this is interesting even if you don't get to use the tip. I didn't know what I would find in there, nor did I know how I would fix the sloppy eyecup. Simply opening a bits drawer made me notice that piece of wire, bulb switched on inside my head. I had considered drilling the frame to insert a locking screw but what an awful lot more work and risk it would be!

Somehow it escaped my mind that I also own a 24/82 Meade/Maxvision ocular that has a turning integral rubber frame and eyecup, but much firmer fortunately; I might do the same mod for it or not. And a 7mm Panorama, if a preliminary, partial takedown shows it can be done safely. I'll keep you posted.

Edited by Ben the Ignorant
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I often find that if you don't wear glasses, long eye relief can be a pain, causing blackouts. Twist up eyecups fix that nicely. It seems your mod stops the mechanism working and locks it in the lowest position. Is that correct?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it stops it and locks it in the position that leaves maximal field and eye relief. I don't want twist-up, I never had a problem with blackouts, and these eyepieces don't have excessive eye relief. But the real problem was the twist-ups twisted when they shouldn't.

I don't wear glasses, by the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks to me that removing that "stud" would allow you to remove the entire rotating assembly and examine the inside to determine what sets the friction. I did this with a Celestron Regal zoom and discovered that it was three pads made of the exact same flocking material that we use to line the inside of Newtonians. Replacing those changed the eyecup from something that would fall down if you so much as looked at it to something that will only rotate when desired. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Ben the Ignorant said:

Yes, it stops it and locks it in the position that leaves maximal field and eye relief. I don't want twist-up, I never had a problem with blackouts, and these eyepieces don't have excessive eye relief. But the real problem was the twist-ups twisted when they shouldn't.

I don't wear glasses, by the way.

I guess I'm referencing eyepieces like the 32mm Plossl where the long eye relief makes it hard to hold head position and allows reflections and glare. Also, Delos have sliding eye guards which, if set correctly, really help with eye position. So, if it's not needed on this particular eyepiece, fair enough, but perhaps Richochet's suggestion is worth looking into to keep the functionality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not really sure why you kept the eyecups on them when they don't do anything but add bulk and weight when in the fully down position.  On the SWAs in particular, they steal a few millimeters of eye relief due to the rubber's thickness.  On the UWAs, they are flush with the top of the eyepiece due to a raised eye lens area, so the eyecup doesn't steal any eye relief on them.  I rather like the sleek look of my decloaked eyepieces.  That, and they take less room in the eyepiece case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im all for decloaking bulky eyepieces, having never been a fan of extendable eyeshields. It seems to be fashionable to stick massive bodied eyepieces in today's scopes, as if the bulk improves performance. TV Radians had a poorly design eye shield that used a click-stop mechanism, which extended as soon as you picked the eyepiece up. Junk, as were the over rated Radians! Pentax XW's, which I love, are also burdened by unnecessary bulk, due to their extendable eye shield. Reading the leaflet that comes with the XW's, it says "New American Size!" :evil5:  It sheds some light on the real reasons for bulking up eyepieces. It's fashion, and like the hairstyles of the 1980's, sooner or later will hopefully dissapear forever!

Don't get me started on undercuts!!:mad:

Edited by mikeDnight
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decloaked eyepieces are not my thing, they are cold to the touch, and I prefer the grip of rubber. My personal response is to keep the eyecup down all the time. The following pics describre how I did it on the 18mm/82° Maxvision/Meade.

First I peeled off the rubber, which the Pattex universal glue had not kept in place, as I expected and hoped because I have planned another solution since yesterday. Superglue would make maintainance hard and clumsy, plus it's a mess. Glue blots, eek!

20171229_151624.thumb.jpg.3e352da21b865743fb758aa33d4a0801.jpg

A jeweler's screwdriver took care of the brass screw that keeps the teflon ring in the slot. On the black housing is the sticky silicone grease that would always be exposed, stain fingers or other things, and risk making its way onto the lenses.

I fully degreased it. This time I put serious protection over the lenses, taped caps on both ends!

20171229_153632.thumb.jpg.03233a178a6ca65bcbe732b44df595bf.jpg

Next step: mark the middle-line of the three bulges, 13.5mm on each side of the zero. Pencils marks, a check with a magnifier, rectifitying the marks' position, and making a permanent mark with a needletip punch. See the small dent on top of the zero.

20171229_155353.thumb.jpg.5bea91ad3e76205da9dff04e872ec12d.jpg

Draw a cross centered on this dent, make it more visible with a fat pencil, make the screw hole with a 3mm punch.

20171229_160653.thumb.jpg.c90b1fb6e6924b91c59b9b64ee75a95b.jpg

Through each hole in the rubber, another mark with the needletip tool is made in the metal. Then it's pre-drilled at 2.5mm diameter, the required size for a 3mm tap. The tapping and threading kit is the one sold regularly in every supermarket in Europe for 20€, and it always worked splendidly. Oil the tool before each pass, and stop turning when you feel resistance. Clean the tool and re-oïl. Only two or three passes were needed, this alloy is soft.

20171229_171206.thumb.jpg.9a063590bde4e6df8ae13b720a8ac3bd.jpg

When tapping any diameter, large or small, I never use the full length of the levers, that would exert too much torque, and possibly break the super-hard but brittle steel. I work slow but safe.

This time again guitar saddles provided the 3mm Allen screws that saved the day.

20171229_170439.thumb.jpg.69fc7ab276f5677b47bc5e1c83eefa70.jpg

And the final reassembly. Saddle screws come in several lengths because guitar strings sit at different heights, I had a choice between three sizes, one is flush with the thick rubber skin, great! The screws keep the rubber from sliding off the frame, while the segment of electric wire still jams the mechanical slot (see the previous post).

20171229_175739.thumb.jpg.b2a8e89f8dcd4ee302917f0816d6cd4d.jpg

The extra screws don't look extraneous, and if I ever sell the eyepiece, just removing the wire restores the mechanism. No need to cut through hardened glue and leave vicious little hard particles close to the optics, just undo the screws.

Volià! The eyepiece is now a single block, no play, no worry from grease or unwanted motion, peace of mind!

Edited by Ben the Ignorant
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Ricochet said:

It looks to me that removing that "stud" would allow you to remove the entire rotating assembly and examine the inside to determine what sets the friction. I did this with a Celestron Regal zoom and discovered that it was three pads made of the exact same flocking material that we use to line the inside of Newtonians. Replacing those changed the eyecup from something that would fall down if you so much as looked at it to something that will only rotate when desired. 

I tried inserting film between the rotating barrels but there was not enough room, very tight assembly. The only material that would fit was a single layer of tape that was torn after a few rotations, and disassembly was required to extract the debris; that's why I settled for the other solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

Im all for decloaking bulky eyepieces, having never been a fan of extendable eyeshields. It seems to be fashionable to stick massive bodied eyepieces in today's scopes, as if the bulk improves performance. TV Radians had a poorly design eye shield that used a click-stop mechanism, which extended as soon as you picked the eyepiece up. Junk, as were the over rated Radians! Pentax XW's, which I love, are also burdened by unnecessary bulk, due to their extendable eye shield. Reading the leaflet that comes with the XW's, it says "New American Size!" :evil5:  It sheds some light on the real reasons for bulking up eyepieces. It's fashion, and like the hairstyles of the 1980's, sooner or later will hopefully dissapear forever!

Don't get me started on undercuts!!:mad:

 

Read with interest, I’m always modding stuff !!

But ouch, I’m a big fan of TV Radians ? I’ve compared them with other top eyepieces like Naglers, Vixen LVW.  I do agree that I’d prefer a simple twist up eyecup on Radians. But if a Radian eyecup is too loose, it’s an easy fix to put more tension on the internal spring that runs on the notches that are revealed when the ring with the TV logo and focal length info is removed. It’s a good plan to tape a cardboard circle over the eyelens to protect it prior to dismantling. It’s a bit fiddly, but a long term fix. If you carefully reduce the diameter of the spring, that tightens the movement of the eyecup.

Happy new year to all, including mikeDnight ? from Ed.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NGC 1502 said:

 

Read with interest, I’m always modding stuff !!

But ouch, I’m a big fan of TV Radians ? I’ve compared them with other top eyepieces like Naglers, Vixen LVW.  I do agree that I’d prefer a simple twist up eyecup on Radians. But if a Radian eyecup is too loose, it’s an easy fix to put more tension on the internal spring that runs on the notches that are revealed when the ring with the TV logo and focal length info is removed. It’s a good plan to tape a cardboard circle over the eyelens to protect it prior to dismantling. It’s a bit fiddly, but a long term fix. If you carefully reduce the diameter of the spring, that tightens the movement of the eyecup.

Happy new year to all, including mikeDnight ? from Ed.

 

Sorry Ed, I was having a grump! I'm feeling better now!! :angel:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mikeDnight said:

Sorry Ed, I was having a grump! I'm feeling better now!! :angel:

No apologies needed Mike, as always, YMMV.  I do think that quite genuinely, different peoples like or otherwise of a product, depends on so many variables that it’s tough to know what would be good for us.

Then there’s the everlasting go-to or manual debate, imaging v observing, etc.......in my local club we have every type of amateur astronomer possible, and we are all best mates, except when it comes to the very last mince pie at the Christmas social.........?

My apologies to the OP for the thread drift on my part.

Cheers from Ed......?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to lock the 34/68's slack hull. Like for the 18/82, I removed the brass screw and its teflon or delrin ring thanks to a jeweler's screwdriver (that needed to be thinned down a bit to match the screw):

20171230_164833.thumb.jpg.0bef99807ec5ec957fba06e95d8aad00.jpg

Look at the mess I made with a screwdriver when I had to forcefully pry out the glued rubber! After this mod only screws will hold it, not superglue that has to be cracked at every maintainance.

This eyecup has recesses that helped me put the 3mm punch at the precise location, but the rubber is so thick the punch couldn't get through. I extracted a little rubber bit with an awl...

20171230_173407.thumb.jpg.e98dee456f1c9447fc3b06ec1178180b.jpg

...and finished the job with a drill:

20171230_172130.thumb.jpg.d662e99aa97a6d7716fc74eb9905af0c.jpg

Following this I marked the aluminum barrel through the holes made in the rubber, no chance of error thanks to those helpful recesses. Tapped the holes as explained in the previous post, and reassembled the whole thing. While I did all this the housing holding the lenses was stored away in a corner where nothing but an earthquake could touch it.

20171230_185424.thumb.jpg.9b9b541aa653e1bdb81fcb1c1d2b4fc0.jpg

The tool bits in the cap were used to deburr the aluminum barrel after drilling and tapping it. Couldn't place the drill inside the barrel but simply holding the bits in my fingers and spinning them a few dozen times did the trick. Note the safety caps remained taped till the last moment. Protecting the lenses is priority number one in these activities.

During the tapping I suddenly felt a tiny itch inside an eyelid. A piece of aluminum had flown out, might also have landed on an unprotected lens, waiting for a cleaning session to cause a scratch. Manual tapping can't make shards fly but the previous job with the drill did, these microscopic things take surprising paths.

They stick to clothes or anything and fly off at the slightest disturbance. So, don't drill or file metal close to lenses, and clean the workplace plus the ground when you're finished. Tedious but needed! Needed but tedious, I know. :hmh:

As for the 18/82 some guitar saddle screws keep the eyecup from sliding up or down, while the wire added inside the slot impedes rotation. Making this optical jewel of an eyepiece trouble-free was a must. Now there's nothing but enjoyment from it!

Edited by Ben the Ignorant
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Ben the Ignorant said:

I removed the brass screw and its teflon or delrin ring

Actually, from my disassembly experience, I think it's nylon.  It's more durable than teflon and slipperier than delrin, but not as slippery as teflon.

I find it interesting the lengths you've gone to to eliminate eyecup movement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Louis D said:

I find it interesting the lengths you've gone to to eliminate eyecup movement.

Well, Louis, I didn't know how much of a commitment it would prove to be, but when I started opening the eyepieces to look for a solution, I had to go forward.

 

The 24/82 hand grenade was next. It didn't resist the rhino attack either. Don't try to fight the rhino from the Dunlop zoo, it's tougher than you. All guitarists know that! :icon_biggrin:

20171231_112138.thumb.jpg.b5f458301b7cc6be9ac57527469e7264.jpg

But the truth is this hull was barely glued to the aluminum cylinder. Only one small glue blot to crack. Wasn't too little because the rubber is quite tight. No scratches or dents on the shiny but soft metal have to be deplored thanks to the tough but flexible and slippery nature of Ultex.

 

The much bigger brass screw required only a regular screwdriver, no need for special tool here.

20171231_113550.thumb.jpg.4224553cb1b0b9cbdf2f9e96906dab0e.jpg

 

Lifting off the rubber revealed this:

20171231_114524.thumb.jpg.69528382f3b943ad8eec8921c17a37e7.jpg

That grease is not just useless there, it's also filthy. All of it was wiped off with picker-upper paper, and the film residue was taken care of with solvent. This was close to my lenses?

 

20171231_115257.thumb.jpg.6dcf44fd69e0e4363782db893aeb9bae.jpg

The corresponding grease and crud inside the cup.

 

To make marks for the 3mm punch at the right and consistent height I slid the awl on a pile of things:

20171231_152427.thumb.jpg.e729dfdfba5ab26168842042feb22990.jpg

The recesses made centering easy. Punching/drilling/tapping went as before, nothing new to say or show.

 

Checking the screws turn freely after deburring:

20171231_165217.thumb.jpg.f986e1c8b6b656ccbfcb962a338b88f7.jpg

 

Adding the wire which fills the slot to keep the sliding gear from moving:

20171231_170909.thumb.jpg.5a23a340986072110ca370f8f86a0470.jpg

 

The best moment is the final reassembly:

20171231_172058.thumb.jpg.2d13f22c97883be3a80a464f9461e12d.jpg

 

Or so I thought, because the collar snapped out of place.

20171231_172726.thumb.jpg.cddb7583dda8d49bc43d2a86f9950308.jpg

I assumed it was superglued but no, a sharp ridge around the eyecup keeps it there. It moved during the rough handling of pushing hard to put the tight-fitting giant eyecup into place. I might superglue that one next time I work on my eyepieces, for now it's enough.

And before you feel sorry for me, what am I doing, tinkering and posting on the internet when I should be preparing for the New Year? Well, my mother's birthday occurs in the last days of the year, and my family couldn't regroup today, so we bundled the two events in one evening, and ate too much celebrated them on Friday.

In my book I'm already in 2018! Happy New Year to you all!

 

Edited by Ben the Ignorant
typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're done modifying them, it's time for a group shot of all your modified eyepieces.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not yet, Louis; I still have a 7/82.  :headbang:

 

Who's to say keeping a pet rhino in your home is a stupid idea? Mine helped me again do a job too hard for me alone! Plus, the animal is more delicate than you thought, he didn't scratch anything.

20180102_010824.thumb.jpg.6f6f1f770683a1d7814bf0d7a8569c46.jpg

Pulling the rubber away revealed a screw. What is it for?

 

It's not standard; screws with such a long slot usually call for a 1mm thick screwdriver but this one didn't even accept a 0.8mm. Another pick unlocked that key; my 0.60mm Dunlop for bass has nearly flat sides, replaced the screwdriver without suffering a scratch. I assume those non-standard screws are made as oddballs to discourage people with ordinary tools to tamper with them. But what if you know what you're doing, or are at least ready to learn at the cost of some risk?

20180102_011410.thumb.jpg.7749f5d58ed4cec117a83d017f3f56ae.jpg

The screw has a plastic ring at the tip that acts as the finger in the usual sliding mechanism I want to neutralize. Don't you love that golden shine?

 

As in the previous eyepieces, I inserted a piece of electric wire in the slot. Pushed till I felt resistance. No need to dismantle anything here thanks to the different design, what a relief! And no need to drill and tap and clean the mess of oil and metal debris, even better!

20180102_012836.thumb.jpg.85c518d371bba8f8ddd8bec5b16140ba.jpg

After a quick visit to the surgeon to have a brain grafted, I remembered to tape the caps that protect the glass. Tools close to lenses and no secure caps?

 

Cut the wire, leaving a little slack outside.

20180102_013135.thumb.jpg.147427e9c8abeb2c321bd0f328a8b41b.jpg

 

Pushed it inside again, it dispappeared but was a bit too long, it filled the place where the screw had to enter. No prob, just twisting the mechanism made the wire come out so I could recut:

20180102_013538.thumb.jpg.e6d7b580a849ea8b3548c491e39835fd.jpg

And yes, that was planned, not just luck. Before cutting I checked if twisting the barrel would made the wire come out, and it did. :hello2:

 

A tad too long again, did the cut again. On the last time a needle helped me grab it from the shallow pit and pull it out for the next trim.

20180102_015924.thumb.jpg.198e1df46f04fdb5a2bf554164631aa9.jpg

Only three cuts were required, half a millimeter each. I had not been too unaccurate, nice for an operation done for the first time.

 

I forgot to take a pic of the raised cup but here it is now, locked at the minimal height, the only that works for me:

20180102_020456.thumb.jpg.e04ae6645d1d092c1820aa2cf5dbbdb3.jpg

It climbed seven or eight millimeters, and reduced the field to 50 or 55 degrees, I guess. Why did I study features, compared brands and models and prices, brainstormed so many details about panoramic eyepieces, only to have that superb wide field cut down? No, my 82's must remain 82's.

Some unusual tools, procedures and materials intervened here, but only the result matters. Now when I slide the 7mm in the diagonal I don't doubt the locking screw is tight because I feel the eyepiece turning. Is the whole eyepiece moving because the screw is loose, or is it just that twist-up cup playing tricks on me again? I don't have those worries and questions when I stargaze now, I just look at the stars. 

Edited by Ben the Ignorant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎31‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 22:42, Louis D said:

If you're done modifying them, it's time for a group shot of all your modified eyepieces.

Okay, now. :happy11:

20180102_222526.thumb.jpg.29cd9b92e732a5ad60f48a3bc6338e3f.jpg

Here's the new family. They all have something new in common, their wild spinning syndrom has been cured. No crippling from the surgery, just stitches that look like the oculars were born with them. Little shiny allen screws that could pass for factory installed. The main change, the grafting of a wire, is inside, and it's reversible. In the Sky Panorama's case things are even better, no external mod shows.

What is to be seen is there's nothing to be seen. Someone who knows Panorama's would notice it doesn't twist anymore, if they handle it. But unlike many mods, that one leaves no visual clue it was performed; best kind of mod, I would do all of them like that if it was possible.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find a thread like this to be quite an eye opener.  Do all astronomers use the eye cups on their EP's?  If I am being honest I don't think I've ever utilised an eyecup on an EP in the year since owning a telescope.  To take that further I have an eclectic EP collection and couldn't even say which EP has an eyecup and which do not.  I just hover above the EP and use my eye!  Am I the only one that does this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the eyecups and their positioning important in two respects:

- a guide to rest the eyebrow on to ensure that my eye is correctly positioned.

- to minimise the effect of stray light getting between my face and the eyepiece top which causes reflections on the eyelens surface reducing contrast.

With the eyepieces that I have with adjustable eyecups (eg: Delos, XW's) I find that the outermost position of the eyecup is the best one for me. I don't wear glasses when observing.

I really don't like hovering my eye off the top of the eyepiece. I don't find it relaxing and the potential for those contrast robbing reflections on the eyelens is there.

The eyepiece is the point where we interface with our scopes though so precisely how we do that will be a matter of personal preference I reckon.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Jagerduffers
      Hi
      could anyone tell me how I can reset the atomic time on a LNT SMARTFINDER SCOPE for Meade etx 90.
      i upgraded to a LNT SMARTFINDER RED DOT SCOPE. But now I cannot set the time on the scope
    • By Stefann
      Hi everyone, about a month ago i got my first telescope. Wasn't sure what to get but i wanted something portable and easy to setup and use. After some internet "research" i decided to go for a refractor on a manual alt/az mount. The telescope was on a 50% sale so i decided to go for it , the Meade infinity 90.
       
      The package:
      The scope came in one big box, everything was inside. Included was the optical tube, the mount, 3 eyepieces (6.3mm, 9mm and 26mm), a 2x barlow lens, 90 degree diagonal, red dot finder, an eyepiece holder for the mount and a few manuals. The optical tube:
      The tube has a 90mm (3.5in) aperture and 600mm focal length. It looks and feels as a quality instrument, it has a small dew shield and the focuser is smooth when you move it back and forward. As expected the lens looks to be coated. It has a dovetail bar on it with 3 holes for screws. The mount:
      Light but stable, made of aluminium. It has 3 extendable legs, and 2 slow motion cables (alt/az). One screw to mount the tube on on top (adjustable back and forward). The eyepieces and barlow:
      All 3 are modified achromat eyepieces, the lenses are made of glass and are OK for the beginner, but i would suggest upgrading if you can. The barlow is bad i even think that the optics are plastic (not sure), it is usable if you don't have other options but this should be the first upgrade in my opinion. Observing: First light:
      The telescope arrived in the morning so the first thing i did after a quick setup was to adjust the red dot finder. I looked at some mountains about 20km away, the view was nice and very detailed using all eyepieces. Combining the 6.3mm with the barlow got me a bit blurry view, but the barlow in combination with the other eyepieces was ok. Night came and it was a moonless and clear night (only light pollution from the city i live in). I saw orion right infront of me, "marked" it with the red dot finder where i thought M42 should be and looked through the 26mm eyepiece. It was a bit blurry but after adjusting the focus i could see some nice pinpoint stars and also something fuzzy, i realized it was the orion nebula. After letting my eyes adjust to the view for a few minutes i started seeing 2 faint "wings" on both sides and in the center were 4 very tiny stars, i didn't expect to see that on my first night. I followed my target for about 15 minutes using the slow motion controls , it was easy to do. Also tried the 9mm eyepiece and with it the 4 stars were more easily seen but the faint clouds got fainter so i moved back to the 26mm. Next target was venus, i tried all eyepieces + with combination with the barlow. It looked like a very bright half moon without any details. When using the barlow the view was ok but purple glow was showing around the planet, without the barlow the purple wasn't noticeable. I also looked at the star Sirius which looked nice, bright and much bigger then any other star i could see that night. After Venus went down i decided it was enough for day one. Moon:
      I expected it to look good, but not this good. I was observing the moon for a couple of nights until it got full. I could see a lot of details at the terminator , with low and high magnification. When the moon was full it was very very bright and it looked best with the smallest magnification using the 26mm eyepiece. Jupiter and Saturn:
      I got 2 opportunities to look at these 2, the first time i think the "seeing" was bad. I could only see Jupiters 4 moons and the planet was a bright disc without any details at any magnification i tried. Saturn also wasn't very good, i could see the rings but they were blurry and "dancing" around. But the next time i had the chance to look at these planets the conditions were much better, first target was again Jupiter. With the 26mm eyepiece i could see a white disc with 4 moons.With the 9mm i could see the moons again but now the disc had very faint 2 bands without any color. The view was best with the 6.3mm eyepiece, the 2 bands were clearly visible and on the upper belt on the right side there was a small dark dot, i am not sure if it was anything . Next target was Saturn, event with the 26mm eyepiece i could see that it has rings, i switched to the 6.3mm right away and wow there it was, Saturn and its rings clearly visible, i even think i could spot the cassini devision, but it might have been my eyes playing tricks. I tried using the barlow on both targets but it was making the image blurry, but at this point i had purchased a higher quality barlow and the views were very nice with it , but the  max magnification i could use that night was 133x, anything higher and the image was getting wobbly (probably that was due to the atmosphere that night). After that some clouds came in and it was time to get back to bed (got up just to see the planets in 4am). Conclusion:
      I think i got what i wanted, a small and very portable telescope for some basic amateur observing. I do recommend this telescope to anyone as a first telescope or even to an experienced astronomer who is looking for something light, portable and being able to set it up and start observing in 2 minutes. Also i would recommend you replace all of the eyepieces and the barlow. I got me a few plossl eyepieces and a nice barlow, it was worth it.
      Feel free to ask me anything regarding this telescope i will be more than happy to answer.
      Sorry for any spelling mistakes this review probably contains

      Also i am attaching a few images i took directly off the eyepiece using my smartphone (handheld).


      The Telescope

      The Moon:

      The Moon:

      Venus:

      Saturn:

      Jupiter:

    • By Simple-Human
      Managed to get this Telescope as my first (second-hand for £40, hardly used). Just wondering best objects to aim to see (I got a cheap moon filter which is all I have really had a chance to spot in the night sky so far).
      Hoping as the hobby goes to invest in a more expensive one (any thoughts on next step up also welcome).
      I have only had a few goes with it so far and found the Azimuth mount to be easy to use, but there is a metal rod which you can turn to slightly alter (don't think this is moving across the equatorial) however you can only turn it so far before the thread at the top falls out (is that normal?).
      Any other random tips also welcome!
      https://www.astroshop.eu/telescopes/skywatcher-telescope-n-76-700-astrolux-az-1/p,5010#tab_bar_1_select
    • By Miguel1983
      Hi,
      just received this mount today and mounted my scope and accessories, as i was trying to get everything balanced i immediately noticed the RA and DEC aren't smooth at all even at almost full load (see pic) , not handy for balancing i would say.
      Other than that everything seems Ok, the motors do make a short cracking sound wen start and stop slewing, but that's normal i guess, it's not belt driven so..
      Got it running via EQMOD too so HC remains in its package.
      Maybe a little point of criticism, SW should have made the motor cables more flexible.
      Also strange that the counterweight shaft of this tiny mount is 20mm and the shaft on my EQ6R is 18mm.
      I need to check if my EQ6 polemaster adapter fits this mount, let's hope so.
      If anyone has this mount to i'd like too hear if RA and DEC are also not smooth and if a fix is possible.

      Thanks
       
    • By merlin100
      I'm tempted to go down the route of getting myself a brand new reflector...  My friend's old Meade 114/900 is a good telescope, but I want something of my own and with a bit more light gathering power.  To this end, I've been looking at a couple of different models and manufactures.  
      https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes/skywatcher-explorer-130.html
      https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes/skywatcher-explorer-130p.html
      https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-130m.html
      https://www.amazon.co.uk/Meade-Instruments-Polaris-Reflector-Telescope/dp/B01FG8JEGG
      I must admit, the Skywatcher Explorer 130M floats my boat, as it's motorised with a speed controller.
      Any thoughts or observations?🤔
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.