Jump to content

stargazine_ep45_banner.thumb.jpg.71f13bfceacd5e3df366d82c2b6f5f9b.jpg

Recommended Posts

Hello all,

I always been fascinated by astronomy and finally purchased a celestron nexstar 8se. Setup went smoothly but I'm a little stuck on the lens. I attached the star diagonal to the telescope and focused in on an object. I was able to see a part of the leaf on the plant in my house and I attached a picture of that. Moving the telescope left and right allowed me to see other things. I then took out the 25mm lens and can see through that when not attached to the telescope. I can see my sandals and feet through the lens and attached a picture of that. I then inserted the 25mm lens into the star diagonal and that's where all hope gets lost. I see white (assuming that's my wall) and yes the cover on the telescope is also off. No matter where I move the telescope. All I see is white. I tried last night in clear skies and pointed towards some clear stars using the skyportal app to align but I didnt see anything except pitch black through the lens. I also played with the focus but nothing. Am I doing something wrong, I would think the 25mm wouldnt be so zoomed in that I cant see anything? Thanks for any help you can provide me. Looking forward to exploring!!

20201114_094232.jpg

20201114_094312.jpg

20201114_094431.jpg

20201114_094514.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 37
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

All. Thanks again for all your advice. I went back out in the nice sun (on eastern time). I turned on the finder scope and pointed it to trees behind a home about a half mile away. I could tell it was

It's very much to do with the sensitivity to brightness of the viewers eye.  I can look at the Moon with a 20" without needing any filter whereas my wife would need sunglasses to look at a full Moon w

The vast majority of the time that I'm observing the moon, I am using quite high magnifications, which has the effect of dimming the brightness of the image making it comfortable to observe for extend

Posted Images

This type of telescope (An SCT) , has quite a narrow view and is often used for small targets like planets.

It will not show much unless you are close to the focus position.

It would be best to try at night with a bright easy to find target so you can find the focus position , the moon is ideal for this.

Attached is the size the moon will look using your 25mm plossl, but the moon is very small in the sky ,

(the yellow circle is the view in your viewfinder)

Are you using a finder to get close to your target.

As the view is so narrow unless you are in exactly the right spot you will miss the target which is why a finder is fairly important with this kind of scope

(but you need to align finder and scope together)

 

The blue circle shows the view through an average finder.

 

Also your telescope is not designed to focus on close objects , to look for focus during the day try to find a far off target a few miles away , like a church steeple or hilltop

 

 

 

If you have a GOTO mount you must polar align then do a star alignment before the GOTO will find your targets.

Image11.jpg

Edited by fifeskies
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Try to focus on something out of your window that is a far away as possible to see, then adjust your focus (which has quite a lot of range in this type of scope) till you achieve focus OK. If your finder is aligned this will help you aim the scope, but if not try to see the image of the object in view as best as you can without the 25mm EP in place. You should be able to see if you  are on or near alignment with the object. Once lined up with a distant object you should be able to then adjust you finder scope so that it is aligned with your telescope to make it easier to get things in view. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you both for your input. I was not using the finder scope so will try to align an object far away or a star tonight with it first and then try to find it through the telescope. That would have helped If I tried that. Your picture of the moon is something I was expecting to see but the moon wasnt out last night. I think when it's up there, using the finder scope to find the moon and then the telescope will make it better. 

I need to play with the focus, that might be also why I'm not seeing anything as you mentioned it has quite a lot of focus and I'm not going far out as I should. As a backup, I ordered the starsense auto align and have the skyportal wifi so will try with those two to see if it can make things easier. In the meantime I'll try to find far away objects to see if I can locate them using the scope once it gets dark here. Again, thank you both for the quick replies!

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a lot of focus travel on the Schmitt Cassegrain scope, keep winding the focuser gently and you will get there. As above, a distant target is needed. As the SCT uses a moving mirror to focus, there is a HUGE focal range, the advantage being that whatever accessories you have in the optical train, it can reach focus. Unfortunately you won’t really know which ‘way to turn’ so to speak until you get close to focus. Once there though you’ll find you won’t have to turn it that much to stay in focus.

PS the minimum target range to reach focus would probably be around 50 metres (I’m sure I’ve managed to get a pigeon in view at this range whilst messing about in daylight hrs). You won’t be able to focus on anything indoors.

Edited by Alkaid
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally, I'd take the scope outdoors during daylight and get used to the focus on distant objects (maybe buildings at the end of the street or somesuch) NOT the sun, obviously.

With your 25mm eyepiece in, and aimed at something like a distant building, move from one end of the focus to another and you WILL finf the focus point somewhere. As others have said, the range in the SCT is massive and you'll feel like you're turning that knob forever.  When you've got focus, play with the scopes movement and get your head around how much of the object you're seeing and how the movement works. On my 9.25" a house brick fills the view at around 200m.

While you're playing, set the finder scope up. Aim the scope at a specific point (TV aerials are my favourite), then twiddle with your finder until you can see the exact same thing bang in the centre. For exatra points put a more powerful eyepiece in the telescope, make sure the image is in the centre and check the focuser again. That will make finding objects in the sky so much easier.

When you do get out under the sky, the focus will be at a different point than viewing terrestrial objects, so there's more focus winding to be done. However, once you've focused on one thing, focus on other objects, or with different eyepieces, or different weather conditions, will only be a few turns, if that.

If you're looking at a star in the finder and the view through the telescope looks like a white dinner plate with a black hole in the middle, that's normal (and usually referred to as "the donut"). What you're seeing is the star out of focus and the black part is the shadow of the central obstruction (the secondary mirror in the middle at the front). Moving focus one way or the other will reduce the size of the donut until it focuses into a beautiful star.

StarSense is great, but it does add a level of complication to start with and takes a bit of setting up and getting used to (probably a night or two, truth be told). Once that's done it's terrific and allows alignment in under five minutes. But to start with I'd play with the scope without it for a while and get used to slewing around and using the finder.

Oh, sorry. Welcome aboard SGL 🙂

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

All. Thanks again for all your advice. I went back out in the nice sun (on eastern time). I turned on the finder scope and pointed it to trees behind a home about a half mile away. I could tell it was focused on something brownish because I was no longer seeing the blue sky. I started from the knob all the way to the left and slowly starting turning it clockwise. After some focusing I could clearly see the leaves moving in the wind on the tree in crisp quality. I then started to explore with the knob and what I can see with the focus and got the hang of the scope finder and how to find an object. Looking forward to trying it out tonight! Cant wait to see the moon. I also got the 2x barlow lens and the celestron zoom eye peice that goes from 8mm to 25mm so once I get familiar using the basic lens and finding stars, I'm going to explore with the other lens and really go into detail. I'm so thankful to have found this community and I appreciate all the help you given to this newbie!! I am going to spend quite some time on this website and learn as much as I can. 😄

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 8SE on GoTo is a fine telescope.  You'll soon get used to it.  At first, you can align on a planet or one star, esp. if you go for targets close by.  To get more field of view, you could later get a 2" diagonal and low power 2" eyepieces.

Have fun!

Doug.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember those days well as my first scope was a second hand LX200GPS 8". My first attempt was on a freezing cold, crystal clear night. Fingers numb as hell, feet like blocks of ice!  I was lucky that evening. My first "star" I tried to get aligned on and in focus turned out to be Saturn - can you imagine how that felt! Well, the rest is history.

A word of warning though - this hobby can get expensive really, really quickly. Take care with purchases, don't buy cheap eye pieces - there is no cheerful when buying cheap.

A couple of things to consider - if you want to view the moon, get a "moon filter" - sounds stupid, but at these magnifications, it's as bright as hell and secondly if you live in an area that gets dew, I'd suggest getting either a dew shield or straps. Nothing like dew to cut short a clear sky session! (a dew shield can be made cheaply though if you are that way inclined)

Have the best of fun out here on clear nights, and back here on overcast nights

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi and welcome to SGL from Wet Wales

 

A tip for using the Finder is to keep both eyes open when you are looking through the Finder.

Both eyes open works in the same way as using a range finder.

Use the left eye to look at your target and the right eye to look through the finder, then just move the scope until they come together.

Good Luck

 

Pat

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/11/2020 at 00:25, tenpinmark said:

if you want to view the moon, get a "moon filter" - sounds stupid, but at these magnifications, it's as bright as hell

I'd avoid a moon filter, and invest the money in a low magnification eyepiece. Of course, the moon is rather bright at low magnifications (but not brighter than observed with naked eyes). But, as detail is the most interesting thing, you will soon switch to higher magnifications, which will dim the apparent brightness rapidly. My moon filter is one of the least used items; and I'm observing with scopes up to 18".

Stephan

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

 (but not brighter than observed with naked eyes).

sorry but that is not the case for me

when my 10 inch scope gathers all the light from a 10 inch circle and pushes it through my tiny 5mm eye pupil circle I can assure you it is far brighter than looking direct at the moon without a telescope , especially if the magnification of the eyepiece is low.

 

It allows 2500 times as much light through so even at higher magnification it is still uncomfortably bright

 

Without my 10% moon filter I cannot bear to look through my big scope at the moon.

I get the large dark "sunspot" effect in my vision if I try it like a bright sun will do during the day, that never happens looking at the moon with a naked eye.

 

I don't feel I need the filter with my smaller refractors at high magnification however unless the moon is near to full.

 

Image11.jpg

Edited by fifeskies
Link to post
Share on other sites

The  areal brightness of any extended sky object (galaxies; moon) remains the same, when viewed through a scope - it's just a much larger part of the retina covered by the enlarged image, creating the impression of higher brightness.

Stephan

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Nyctimene said:

The  areal brightness of any extended sky object (galaxies; moon) remains the same, when viewed through a scope - it's just a much larger part of the retina covered by the enlarged image, creating the impression of higher brightness.

Stephan

 

which is why the "perceived" brightness gets uncomfortable and a moon filter can be an asset.

The energy falling on the retina is far larger.

 

The common understanding of brightness will be described as an image "too bright to look at" without a neutral density filter to reduce it (to 10%  typically)

 

A full moon in an 8se will be too bright for many viewers without a moon filter.

I personally find it helps to see the moon as well , for me the contrast change brings out more lunar detail.

 

Edited by fifeskies
Link to post
Share on other sites

I observe the moon regularly with my 12 inch dobsonian and don't find the need to use a moon filter :dontknow:

If you find it uncomfortable by all means do though. I have a moon filter with me at outreach events in case any one looking though my scope would like to use it.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's very much to do with the sensitivity to brightness of the viewers eye.  I can look at the Moon with a 20" without needing any filter whereas my wife would need sunglasses to look at a full Moon with the naked eye!    🙂

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

As aperture goes up I am fairly sure the exit pupil will increase wider than the eye will open to under a bright view of the moon.

So after a while there will not be any brighter a perceived image as much of the light is being lost, but there will be finer detail resolved in the bigger scope.

This will also vary with age. (older among us have a smaller maximum iris opening)

 

The use of a moon filter has another benefit if you are going to other objects after the moon as dark adaptation is not lost as badly.

Edited by fifeskies
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Peter Drew said:

It's very much to do with the sensitivity to brightness of the viewers eye.  I can look at the Moon with a 20" without needing any filter whereas my wife would need sunglasses to look at a full Moon with the naked eye!    🙂

Its the same with sound  🙄

What I consider quiet can be regarded as a cacophony by some others 

 

Makes creeping about in the middle of the night a challenge at times (for astronomical reasons I might add).

 

Edited by fifeskies
  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The vast majority of the time that I'm observing the moon, I am using quite high magnifications, which has the effect of dimming the brightness of the image making it comfortable to observe for extended periods.

I would not start looking for targets that need dark adaptation after observing the moon. Usually because such targets are not at their best anyway when the moon is in the sky !

 

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, fifeskies said:

sorry but that is not the case

when my 10 inch scope gathers all the light from a 10 inch circle and pushes it through my tiny 5mm eye pupil circle I can assure you it is far brighter than looking direct at the moon without a telescope , especially if the magnification of the eyepiece is low.

 

It allows 2500 times as much light through so even at higher magnification it is still uncomfortably bright

 

Without my 10% moon filter I cannot bear to look through my big scope at the moon.

I get the large dark "sunspot" effect in my vision if I try it like a bright sun will do during the day, that never happens looking at the moon with a naked eye.

 

I don't feel I need the filter with my smaller refractors at high magnification however unless the moon is near to full.

 

Image11.jpg

It can, in fact, be shown that the surface brightness of an extended object cannot be increased by a telescope. This is a rather surprising bit of science but also a misleading one since, subjectively, we don't see it that way. While it's technically correct that the surface brightness can't be increased, I've always found this to be a rather 'dry' point since, in order to see fainter objects, we need a bigger telescope. What's really happening is that a smaller telescope, in increasing the object's image size, is spreading the light out too far and dimming it. More aperture allows for the object to be spread out over a larger area without being so badly dimmed. So telescopes do make faint objects bright enough to see but they do it by making them bigger rather than brighter.

Olly

Edit: Think of a a rear bike light made of one LED. It won't be very visible at a distance. Add another twenty LEDs of the same brightness, and it will be.

Edited by ollypenrice
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, fifeskies said:

Yes as much as I love the moon I sometimes resent its presence on the few clear nights we seem to get as it rules out a lot of other targets

It rules out extended deep sky objects such as galaxies and a number of nebulae types but asterisms, open and globular clusters, planetary nebulae, double stars, asteroids and the planets are still quite accessible in a moonlit sky :smiley:

 

Edited by John
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

It can, in fact, be shown that the surface brightness of an extended object cannot be increased by a telescope. This is a rather surprising bit of science but also a misleading one since, subjectively, we don't see it that way. While it's technically correct that the surface brightness can't be increased, I've always found this to be a rather 'dry' point since, in order to see fainter objects, we need a bigger telescope. What's really happening is that a smaller telescope, in increasing the object's image size, is spreading the light out too far and dimming it. More aperture allows for the object to be spread out over a larger area without being so badly dimmed. So telescopes do make faint objects bright enough to see but they do it by making them bigger rather than brighter.

Olly

Yes - Surface Brightness (brightness per unit area) is the same as with the naked eye, but the telescope enlarges the image, so the integrated brightness over that area effectively increases.

Doug.

  • Like 1
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 AlvinP
      Hello,
      I've been on these forums a couple of times for the last 2 weeks and ive found amazing advice, on telescopes, mounts and eyepiece. Besides reading countless of information on the internet about various equipments; pros and cons; and i got some queries about how to upgrade my setup.
      My original purchase was a 15x70 Celestron Binoculars last year, and boy ive seen amazing things with it, specially globular clusters, Jupiter and Saturn and the Orion's Nebula; for me these were amazing; i still use them given how easy it is to look at the sky with them and how bright and full everything looks.  A couple of months ago i got a 70x400mm Gskyer Telescope with an AZ mount (The cheap 99$ one that Amazon is displaying on all its adds for the last two months)  it came with a 25mm and a 10mm eyepieces as well as a x3 barlows (which i didnt even count as part of my scope as it is too bad quality and i havent managed a single decent view with it).

      Currently My Celestron Binoculars (x15) seem better for visualizing the sky than the 25mm eyepiece (x16) (things seem a very bit dimmer). And since the Barlow is a "no go", the 10mm (x40) eyepiece is what i really use, it has decent zoom and detailed views , it is my go to eyepiece most of the nights.
      However from reading all around, ive read that most of the stuff that come with the Telescope (aside from the scope itself) are actually really bad quality, specially no name brands without even webpage, so if i were to maximise my telescope i should update some of those items.
      -Recently i ordered a new Start diagonal to replace to default one (ive heard on Refractors its usually the weakest link next to eyepieces) as well as an economic x2 Barlow lens
      Keep in mind i recognize my 70mm cheap telescope will not suddendly become the Hubble Telescope, and that it doesnt matter how hard i push it, in the end such a low scope will be bound to hit its limit pretty fast, thats why i avoid 70$+ eyepieces and barlows for now.
      I expect to keep using this telescope for a good couple of months; at least until around August, when Jupiter and Saturn are more in the night sky, rather than morning.

      Now, im very satisfied with my current telescope; while the phone mount is garbage and the phone weight and the sound of my heartbeats pretty much shake the telescope out of position, as well as how cheap the mount is; it still gets the job done for seeing interesting stuff in the sky and i have managed to do some AP for some of the globular clusters, bunch of 1-2s images (with the wrong lens), not the best, not even good pictures; but decent overall for my equipment. I am currently interested in stargazing in general and some minor AP (as i dont have a camera, currently an Iphone 7s with the mount) Buuut im interested in borrowing a camera for the low sky photos without a telescope.
      I do most 97% of my Skywatching on my backyard, i live in a small country, there is some light pollution, but i can see the pleiades and the orion's nebula core on the naked eye most nights (so i guess its not that contaminated lol)
      Now; currently i like finding stuff by myself and show it to the other people around me who cant be bothered to find the moon in the sky, so setting up, finding and seeing stuff is part of what i like. 
      With all the above in mind..... Id like to plan ahead for my next purchases.
      First, im thinking a x3 barlow lens (to replace the original crappy one) and a 15mm lens (to have a bit better view than the 10mm, but less spread than the 25mm) in two or three months (with this id be able to check if my new eyepiece outperforms my default ones, but given the quality of the scope, i dont expect this to be noticeable).
      And Afterwards id love to get a new Scope, but im not quite sure what i want... and i would like some advice and help in choosing my next Scope upgrade.
      -I entered with and im liking the refractors; however i dont wanna spend 300-400$ on another refractor that is 20-30% better for triple the price
      -Ive heard really long focal lenght might bring some distortions; and also make the scope much bulkier, annnd most importantly i know that magnification is not everything; so a 1000mm long tube would prob bring too much magnifications for me to use properly on my backyard skies. So i think id settle for a maximum of 600-700mm.
      -Originally i was againts Newtonians in general, those inverted views scared me, i have a hard time of my own with my finderscope. Then i found out that Reflectors are the name of efficiency as they have more value per aperture than refractors; and as someone once mentioned "There is not really up and down in space, you will get used to it" annnd its true... save for references on the ground, like buildings, trees and mountains to help you locate where you are in the sky; once you are on it, you dont need right ups and downs.
      -I did see some 90mm Orion's Refractors as well as 90-102 Celestron Astromaster Refractors (these are 350-400$)
      -Im thinking a 130mm reflector is what im looking for; i think the 130mm aperture is a nice upgrade for my 70mm, and will keep me occupied for quite a long time; ive read about Orion SpaceProbe 130EQ and Celestron Astromaster 130EQ (ive also read, Power Seekers and Astromaster's are made out of pretty much garbage lol) Ive read that the main issue is the constant collimation required for them; but ive also read its something that can be learned and once you get used to it; its a pretty easy thing to do to keep getting amazing views.
      -Ive also seen people recommending  6-8'' Dobsonians; i know the deal with them; if anything i could aim for a 6'' one i found a litter under 300$ ive read they are amazing values for their aperture
      So, TL;DR: I have a 70x400mm Telescope, im new to stargazing, im really amazed and excited by what im seeing with my current scope, but would like an stable upgrade before the end of the year that will last me a year or two. I am interesteted both in regular and deep sky stargazing and astrophotography;  im not currently interested in an motorized mount; could deal with a regular Equatorial mount. But overall i am looking for  more aperture (100-150mm) to have clearer views; than focal lenght for zoom.

      Im also open to the fact that at one point i might have to get a scope for stargazing and another for AP; but would like an upgrade that could help me all around for both while i get initiated.
      ------------------------------------------------------------------
      Sorrry for the Huuuuuuuuge post, i was very excited while writing it; please let me know what you think and if there's anything else you'd want me to add to help understand my situation, thanks in advance!
       
       
    • By Lotinsh
      Hello, my budget is around 150/160 EUR, I was wondering what telescope should I buy? I need some suggestions as all I know is that bigger is better. I am currently looking at StarRider 80F400EQ, is it any good? Also I'm from Europe if that's relevant.
    • By Pincs
      Hi I've got an 8" dobsonian and I just got a dslr to connect to it. Obviously there's no tracking so what kind of things can I capture. Will I be able to do dso and planets?
      Thanks
    • By Goldenmole
      Good day fellow gazers at the sky! I recently joined and i would just like to say how wonderful everyone is (a special shout out to George Gearless)!
       Can anyone suggest a good reflector within my budget shown in the title? While i'm here i'd just like to say about the app, Nightshift. It is proffesional, clear and tellls you when to observe, and what you can see, for the next year! It also pinpoints your location exactly, so it is really accurate.https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.waddensky.nightshift. Anyway, that's me done! Thank you all so much for your time
    • By Fraserhead728
      Hi All,
      Here I am probably asking the same age old question. Just wondering what eyepieces I should be using to impress myself with the views of planets and the moon with my telescope. D=70mm, F1=900mm, F/13. I’d really like to see some detail but I’m not sure if that’s possible with this beginners scope or not. Thanks for any advice you can offer.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.