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.

sgl_imaging_challenge_banner_the_milky_way_winners.thumb.jpg.0a840852a676f881f4a849dd8099085d.jpg

louizi

what am I doing wrong

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, louizi said:

I didn't see it last night nor early this morning when I came out to look for it... So yes its possible I dont see it tonight and for a few days too.

we ARE near a new moon.... so, it may be Sunday before you see a crescent

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, lenscap said:

Do you  use planetarium software like Stellarium?

It is a free download for your PC.            http://stellarium.org/

You can input your location & any date  & time you like and it  will show all the celestial objects that you can observe.

Cartes  du Ciel is similar.                         https://www.ap-i.net/skychart/en/download

 

Really??

That would b awesome thanks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, bottletopburly said:

Good luck 😉 I’m sure your skies will be darker than ours unless your i n the city that is 👍 

Thanks...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 05/12/2018 at 19:49, louizi said:

Iv attached a photo of my telescope.

Well that looks a lot better than I was expecting you to post - I would think you should be able to see something (possibly even a fair bit), in that.  If the erecting eyepiece is causing problems I think I'd try without it you probably won't need an erecting eyepiece when you look at the stars or moon.  You will probably find that you don't need the moon filter either until you have it sorted.  Esp. at times when the moon is only a crescent.  I never use one.  It just makes me think that the fewer bits and bobs you have in the way the least there is to cause problems.  I think I'd also lose the Barlow.  2mm is still quite a magnifying EP - do you have an Eyepiece with a higher number on it, maybe a 10mm or a 20mm.  That would be a better place to start - just the focus tube and a higher number Eyepiece - start with getting the moon focussed in that and see what you can see.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 06/12/2018 at 04:00, louizi said:

I tink I can get a wood worker to build me a tripod from wood.

And about astronomy in Nigeria, we are still in the dark ages. I know very little myself but when I point to the sky to explain some things to friends they are usually full with amazement or doubt.

Am not an astronomer not even a physicist, am a microbiologist but star gazing, the moon, planets, galaxies and all heavenly bodies have been a kin interest of mine, my difficulty with numbers and calculation was what discouraged me to pursue astronomy. I probably would have been one of the very few Nigerian astronomers . :)

Astronomy is the very oldest of sciences, and ever since people first looked up at the sky at night.  There were and are those who considered and consider themselves astronomers, but they did not and do not have an optical aid like binoculars or a telescope. 

Don't be discouraged by the mathematical aspect.  I'm not one for the numbers myself, and yet I've been an amateur for quite a number of years.  In order to choose just the right eyepieces, all you need to know is the focal-length of the telescope; 700mm in the case of your own.  Eyepieces range from 4mm to 40mm, in general.  That range is pretty much set in stone, for most telescopes.  The most common barlow is a 2x, followed by a 3x.

Let's take a 15mm eyepiece...

700mm ÷ 15mm = a power of  47x

Place the 15mm into a 2x-barlow...

700mm ÷ (15mm ÷ 2x) = a simulated 7.5mm, and for a power of 93x

Place the 15mm into a 3x-barlow...

700mm ÷ (15mm ÷ 3x) = a simulated 5mm, and for a power of 140x

It is around that power and up where the planets are seen larger and well enough to note their details.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Alan64 said:

Astronomy is the very oldest of sciences, and ever since people first looked up at the sky at night.  There were and are those who considered and consider themselves astronomers, but they did not and do not have an optical aid like binoculars or a telescope. 

Don't be discouraged by the mathematical aspect.  I'm not one for the numbers myself, and yet I've been an amateur for quite a number of years.  In order to choose just the right eyepieces, all you need to know is the focal-length of the telescope; 700mm in the case of your own.  Eyepieces range from 4mm to 40mm, in general.  That range is pretty much set in stone, for most telescopes.  The most common barlow is a 2x, followed by a 3x.

Let's take a 15mm eyepiece...

700mm ÷ 15mm = a power of  47x

Place the 15mm into a 2x-barlow...

700mm ÷ (15mm ÷ 2x) = a simulated 7.5mm, and for a power of 93x

Place the 15mm into a 3x-barlow...

700mm ÷ (15mm ÷ 3x) = a simulated 5mm, and for a power of 140x

It is around that power and up where the planets are seen larger and well enough to note their details.

 

Thank you so very much for this info and the encouragement. Am grateful. But I have a small issue, I only have a 20mm, 12.5mm and SR4mm eyepiece

And a 2X Barlow and a 1.5X erector eyepiece.

Can 700mm÷ (12.5mm ÷ 2X)= 6.25 and a power of 112x help me see details of the planets?

Secondly, is this calculations below correct?

1.5X erecting eyepiece placed into a 2X Barlow then a 12.5mm eyepiece placed inside the 1.5X eyepiece = 12.5 ÷ (1.5 X 2) = 12.5 ÷ 3X =4.16mm

Therefore 700 ÷ 4.16 = 168x power?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, JOC said:

Well that looks a lot better than I was expecting you to post - I would think you should be able to see something (possibly even a fair bit), in that.  If the erecting eyepiece is causing problems I think I'd try without it you probably won't need an erecting eyepiece when you look at the stars or moon.  You will probably find that you don't need the moon filter either until you have it sorted.  Esp. at times when the moon is only a crescent.  I never use one.  It just makes me think that the fewer bits and bobs you have in the way the least there is to cause problems.  I think I'd also lose the Barlow.  2mm is still quite a magnifying EP - do you have an Eyepiece with a higher number on it, maybe a 10mm or a 20mm.  That would be a better place to start - just the focus tube and a higher number Eyepiece - start with getting the moon focussed in that and see what you can see.

Thanks JOC,

I have a 20mm, 12.5mm and a 4mm

2X Barlow and 1.5X erecting eyepiece.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great profile photo of you and your new scope. You look very proud and should be. Once you get things sorted, you’ll be loving spending time under the stars with it.

I’d recommend just sticking to the 20mm eyepiece to start. You’ll find things much easier and be able to bring them to a sharper focus. Once you feel confident, then start increasing the magnification. The most important thing, first of all, is to ensure you have your finderscope well aligned. i imagine you have, based on your daytime shots, however it may still be a little out. Make sure you have a particular very small section of that electricity pole centred in both the finderscope and the eyepiece to ensure it is at least roughly aligned. Simply having the pole in the finder and also in the eyepiece at the same time doesn’t mean it will show you what is in the finder through the eyepiece at night, as the pole is a lot larger (visually) than many of the things you’ll be looking at in the sky.

Best of luck and I look forward to reading that you have everything under control and are loving the views!!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Am grateful for your interest in helping me find my way to becoming an a mature astronomer. I will definitely update my experience on this platform as I become better.

Thanks again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, louizi said:

Thank you so very much for this info and the encouragement. Am grateful. But I have a small issue, I only have a 20mm, 12.5mm and SR4mm eyepiece

And a 2X Barlow and a 1.5X erector eyepiece.

Can 700mm÷ (12.5mm ÷ 2X)= 6.25 and a power of 112x help me see details of the planets?

Secondly, is this calculations below correct?

1.5X erecting eyepiece placed into a 2X Barlow then a 12.5mm eyepiece placed inside the 1.5X eyepiece = 12.5 ÷ (1.5 X 2) = 12.5 ÷ 3X =4.16mm

Therefore 700 ÷ 4.16 = 168x power?

 

Yes, at 112x you can certainly make out the planets' basic features; the moons of Jupiter, the rings of Saturn.  Mars would probably be featureless.  Venus is the third brightest object in the sky, after the Sun and Moon.  Venus is always featureless, regardless of aperture and magnification, however it exhibits phases just like the Moon: a crescent, quarter-phase, half-phase, gibbous, and full, but it would need magnification to see the phases clearly.  The planet may also need to be dimmed in order to see the phases, due to its overwhelming brightness, and with a filter attached to the bottom of the eyepiece, like so...

183100629_variablepolariser7.jpg.b822d701680f7efd0439e995b73d30c1.jpg

But it's at about 150x and above before the planets really become worth the while. 

I don't understand how you would insert a 12.5mm eyepiece into a 1.5x erecting-eyepiece.  Do you mean a 1.5 erector, like this one...

635786891_erector1_5x.jpg.b6ba233bacfd774984efa62f3860c67d.jpg

I would need to see clear, close-up images of your eyepieces and accessories to answer your last question; the top of the erecting-eyepiece and its specs-label in particular. 

I'd also like to see the focusser of the telescope, and without anything inserted into it; no caps, no eyepieces, like so...

focusser3a.jpg.7d0dcc75367b6d0e87aa57d6f224f19d.jpg

...if it's not too much trouble.

 

Edited by Alan64

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the help...

These a pictures of what you asked for.

Hope its detailed enough.

IMG_20181210_000818.jpg

IMG_20181210_000414.jpg

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   1 member

×

Important Information

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