RACI vs non RACI...

[Guest]

I would like to upgrade my 9x50 finderscope on the Sky-Watcher Skyliner 200P. Whilst I do like the finderscope, it's a pain to use in the near vertical position, literally! 😯

I would like to go for the right angled version, but not sure about corrected image or not. Do those of you who use the corrected image version get mixed up, when going back to the main scope eyepiece? 🤔

Any here use the non corrected image version and like it? 🤔

[John]

I had a RA but not CI once by accident (mis-described by the seller). I didn't get on with it although it actually worked OK.

I find RACI works for me. I guess I like the finder view to look like the star charts I use and also the illuminated reticule finder, if I am using one alongside the optical one.

I seem to be able to make the switch to "scope view" when I look through the eyepiece.

It's all about personal preferences I guess

[banjaxed]

I don't get mixed up at all in fact I wouldn't be without mine now especially on a dob. 

[steveex2003]

Personally find CI secondary to the comfort convenience of the right angle. I only use RACI's regardless. Not having to change back or neck position, particularly for near zenith targets is it's own joy for me.
Others mileage will surely vary.

Edited June 24, 2020 by steveex2003

[Pixies]

Have just moved to using a RACI. I find the disorientation of the reverse image is worse for a finder than the actual scope image. The RACI finder is a great upgrade - BUT it's very hard to use a RACI to find the starting point. 

With a straight finder, I keep both eyes open and align the finder to the starting point. You'll soon be aligned and know where you are pointing. But with a RACI, it's very hit and miss. A Telrad or Quikfinder (or even a red dot finder) will help with the initial alignment.

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Pixies said:

Have just moved to using a RACI. I find the disorientation of the reverse image is worse for a finder than the actual scope image. The RACI finder is a great upgrade - BUT it's very hard to use a RACI to find the starting point. 

With a straight finder, I keep both eyes open and align the finder to the starting point. You'll soon be aligned and know where you are pointing. But with a RACI, it's very hit and miss. A Telrad or Quikfinder (or even a red dot finder) will help with the initial alignment.

I can align the straight through one no bother, by just keeping one eye open. 

I guess I'll have to do a bit more research first... 

[John]

2 minutes ago, Pixies said:

Have just moved to using a RACI. I find the disorientation of the reverse image is worse for a finder than the actual scope image. The RACI finder is a great upgrade - BUT it's very hard to use a RACI to find the starting point. 

With a straight finder, I keep both eyes open and align the finder to the starting point. You'll soon be aligned and know where you are pointing. But with a RACI, it's very hit and miss. A Telrad or Quikfinder (or even a red dot finder) will help with the initial alignment.

You went for a 60mm RACI I seem to recall ?

I actually find a 30mm RACI easier to use than a 50mm as the sole finder on a scope because it shows 6 degrees of sky and does not swamp the field with stars.

On the scopes I have a 50mm RACI I usually have an RDF or similar as well just to get straight to the right area of the sky quickly and easily.

 

[Pixies]

1 minute ago, John said:

You went for a 60mm RACI I seem to recall ?

I actually find a 30mm RACI easier to use than a 50mm as the sole finder on a scope because it shows 6 degrees of sky and does not swamp the field with stars.

On the scopes I have a 50mm RACI I usually have an RDF or similar as well just to get straight to the right area of the sky quickly and easily.

 

Yes. I wanted something to match my binoculars. I like to scan the area with the bins, first. I'm in a Bortle6 area too, and the 6x30 finder was making hard work of finding the guide stars I wanted.

[John]

I'm bortle 5/4. So that makes a difference to the finding arrangements, I can see that.

 

[Whistlin Bob]

I do use a Corrected Image and now and again I briefly go the wrong way when swapping between finder and eyepiece but it's not a problem at all- more just momentary forgetfulness. 

I used a straight through finder for a couple of years on my 200p. I found the addition of a quikfinder to be better than the both eyes open method anyway and when I switched to a RACI my only regret was that I hadn't done it sooner- used in combination with SkySafari I find I can start hop with certainty to almost anything quite quickly in my Bortle 5 skies. 

When I upgraded to a 14" I moved the 2 finders to the new scope and wouldn't be without them now. Other people get by fine with different arrangements, but for me it's absolutely the way to go.

[IB20]

I added a telrad on my 200p, it made a huge difference in tandem with SkySafari, even for higher targets. I rarely use the finder scope now.

[Pixies]

20 hours ago, John said:

I'm bortle 5/4. So that makes a difference to the finding arrangements, I can see that.

 

Last night was unexpectedly clear, so I got the scope out for a cheeky little session. However, as this was the first clear night I've had for 3 weeks I was caught out by how bright the sky was. I thought I'd go for the obvious target M13

But at 1am, the sky was still so light I couldn't even make out the keystone asterism. I ended up having to use my binoculars to find it, then roughly get the finder pointing in the right direction. But when I did, I could see the cluster in the finder view!

It might be too much for dark skies though. I'll see. Perhaps if it is, I can make a mask to step-down the objective aperture of the finder.