Is this Jupiter?

[fullmoon]

Hi all.

So I caught some of the moon earlier(which was great) before it disappeared behind some houses.

Then I focused on a star to the SW. I've added some pics. I'm guessing it's Jupiter... what do you think? I just held my phone up to the lens and snapped.

 

Also, is this the type of view I would expect with my eyepieces? And are there any recommendations for any eyepieces? I struggled to focus it a bit and I had to be delicate when focusing, as it seemed quite wobbly. But then I suppose it only takes a small amount to remove from the view.

The telescope came with a 10x and 25x lens and a 2x Barlow.

I was using a 25x with a 2x Barlow.

Edit. Sorry should have said its a skywatcher explorer 130.

All advice welcome.

 

Cheers

Edited January 23, 2023 by fullmoon

[Knighty2112]

Yep. Jupiter. If you look south and a little higher up you’ll see Mars too if clouds allow. 
 

Edited January 23, 2023 by Knighty2112

[fullmoon]

1 hour ago, Knighty2112 said:

Yep. Jupiter. If you look south and a little higher up you’ll see Mars too if clouds allow. 
 

Brilliant, thanks. I thought it might be but I wasn't 100% sure. Still getting used to the app and planisphere. 

 

Think I was expecting hubble images through my scope haha. 

Just tried to view it again but I'm struggling to focus on it. Best I can get is the same as the image above I took.

[andy fearn]

Are you trying to image from inside your home, there appears to be a reflection to the right as if behind extra glass. you would do better outside.

[great_bear]

Hi,

I’ve got a couple of really nice telescopes - a 150 with a custom mirror, and a Mak 180 on a big, sturdy HEQ5. 
 

BUT - I still regularly use my (wife’s) 130 Explorer like yours. It doesn’t really give up *that* much to its much more expensive, bigger siblings - especially when paired with an eyepiece like a Starguider 5mm or even a 3.2mm if the sky is steady. 
 

I remember when we first got the 130 Explorer thinking that we wouldn’t get to see great views, but we’ve since had some jaw-dropping views from it. 
 

The supplied 10mm and 25mm eyepieces are kind of “OK” for lower power views, but the 10mm + Barlow never got me very good planetary views. 
 

Nonetheless, the biggest factor in getting good planetary and lunar views is the not just a clear night, but a clear night PLUS a steady sky and for us not to happen to be right under the jet stream (which happens a lot) and to be outside and a few feet away from the house and not be trying to observe something that’s right above other people’s rooftops. 
 

Persevere and you’ll be rewarded in time with some very memorable experiences. It’s a good telescope. 
 

One thing that can help with focussing is to just put a large clip on the focused knob to give you some fine-focus control. 

Edited January 23, 2023 by great_bear

[fullmoon]

1 hour ago, andy fearn said:

Are you trying to image from inside your home, there appears to be a reflection to the right as if behind extra glass. you would do better outside.

Yeah, I'm viewing it from my lounge through a bay window. Not ideal. But the image was just to show what I'm seeing through my eyepieces. Just to see if it was what I should be expecting really. I just held my phone to the eyepiece, not even thought about imaging yet, still struggling find polaris haha.

[fullmoon]

1 hour ago, great_bear said:

Hi,

I’ve got a couple of really nice telescopes - a 150 with a custom mirror, and a Mak 180 on a big, sturdy HEQ5. 
 

BUT - I still regularly use my (wife’s) 130 Explorer like yours. It doesn’t really give up *that* much to its much more expensive, bigger siblings - especially when paired with an eyepiece like a Starguider 5mm or even a 3.2mm if the sky is steady. 
 

I remember when we first got the 130 Explorer thinking that we wouldn’t get to see great views, but we’ve since had some jaw-dropping views from it. 
 

The supplied 10mm and 25mm eyepieces are kind of “OK” for lower power views, but the 10mm + Barlow never got me very good planetary views. 
 

Nonetheless, the biggest factor in getting good planetary and lunar views is the not just a clear night, but a clear night PLUS a steady sky and for us not to happen to be right under the jet stream (which happens a lot) and to be outside and a few feet away from the house and not be trying to observe something that’s right above other people’s rooftops. 
 

Persevere and you’ll be rewarded in time with some very memorable experiences. It’s a good telescope. 
 

One thing that can help with focussing is to just put a large clip on the focused knob to give you some fine-focus control. 

So a stargazer 5mm and 3.2 would be a recommendation?

I have a day off on Friday, so fingers crossed I can get outside and try the telescope properly. 

Good tip about the focus knob as I seem to shake the whole setup when adjusting it.

 

Thanks for the reply

[great_bear]

14 hours ago, fullmoon said:

So a stargazer 5mm and 3.2 would be a recommendation?

Depends on whether you’re planning on being Barlow-free or not. 

I’m Barlow-free because:
1. It’s less hassle & confusion on a night
2. I don’t want excess glass in my “regular” top power (unless designed-in)
3. I don’t like figuring out the mathematical leapfrogging required to reach an effective Barlow strategy
4. Good Barlows are actually quite pricey compared to Starguiders
5. I don’t like some of the side effects of Barlows - many eyepieces don’t play well with them.

Of course, some people will undoubtedly disagree, but personally I’ve no regrets about being Barlow-free.

With regard to focal lengths, these days I’m reluctant to recommend specific eyepieces to those starting out, but I will say the following:

Highest Power:

• 3.2mm - The highest power that gets reasonably satisfying lunary/planetary views under good conditions with a 130p Explorer and a good-quality eyepiece. Most nights, this will be usable - just not every night.
• 4-5mm - A good fallback for when the sky steadiness is too poor for the 3.2mm

Lowest Power:

• 24mm - A nice wide eyepiece at around this length will show the maximum wide field that the 130p allows.

Others:
As to what might fit nicely between those two extremes of high and low, there's a huge range of options, all down to personal preference and budget.

Brands:
As for brands overall, well that’s a whole new conversation! But I will say, when it comes to being well-corrected off-axis at (i.e. stars etc. that are not in the middle of the view) at a focal ratio of F5 (like the 130 is), there are not many 'budget' eyepiece product lines that work well. The Starguiders certainly do - at least for 15mm and shorter focal lengths.

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by great_bear
Expansion of details

[fullmoon]

On 23/01/2023 at 23:29, great_bear said:

Depends on whether you’re planning on being Barlow-free or not. 

I’m Barlow-free because:
1. It’s less hassle & confusion on a night
2. I don’t want excess glass in my “regular” top power (unless designed-in)
3. I don’t like figuring out the mathematical leapfrogging required to reach an effective Barlow strategy
4. Good Barlows are actually quite pricey compared to Starguiders
5. I don’t like some of the side effects of Barlows - many eyepieces don’t play well with them.

Of course, some people will undoubtedly disagree, but personally I’ve no regrets about being Barlow-free.

With regard to focal lengths, these days I’m reluctant to recommend specific eyepieces to those starting out, but I will say the following:

Highest Power:

• 3.2mm - The highest power that gets reasonably satisfying lunary/planetary views under good conditions with a 130p Explorer and a good-quality eyepiece. Most nights, this will be usable - just not every night.
• 4-5mm - A good fallback for when the sky steadiness is too poor for the 3.2mm

Lowest Power:

• 24mm - A nice wide eyepiece at around this length will show the maximum wide field that the 130p allows.

Others:
As to what might fit nicely between those two extremes of high and low, there's a huge range of options, all down to personal preference and budget.

Brands:
As for brands overall, well that’s a whole new conversation! But I will say, when it comes to being well-corrected off-axis at (i.e. stars etc. that are not in the middle of the view) at a focal ratio of F5 (like the 130 is), there are not many 'budget' eyepiece product lines that work well. The Starguiders certainly do - at least for 15mm and shorter focal lengths.

 

Sorry for the late reply, mad busy yesterday.

Brilliant, thank you for all that info, it really helps.

I actually quite like the idea of Barlow free but obviously not experienced enough to make a good informed decision. 

I've just had a look at the starguider eyepieces. And not sure I want to take the plunge on £165 worth of eyepieces for a £200 scope....... just yet anyway. But, if you're saying the cheaper 1's are a bit of a waste of money then I may just invest in 1 for now. Failing that, if you could recommend anything around £60-£80 Mark for a  2-3 eyepiece set that could work well, that would be great. But I also don't want to waste money on something if its not going to be that great, so if that's the case I may have to slowly build up my eyepiece collection. 

Happy to hear your thoughts.

 

Cheers

[great_bear]

7 hours ago, fullmoon said:

...not sure I want to take the plunge on £165 worth of eyepieces for a £200 scope....... just yet anyway. But, if you're saying the cheaper 1's are a bit of a waste of money then I may just invest in 1 for now. Failing that, if you could recommend anything around £60-£80 Mark for a  2-3 eyepiece set that could work well, that would be great. But I also don't want to waste money on something if its not going to be that great, so if that's the case I may have to slowly build up my eyepiece collection.

As I say - I've got exactly the same scope (albeit now on a go-to mount), and bought it when my daughter was born, so I've spent thirteen years now buying and selling eyepieces for that scope, which has been an both an interesting and frustrating experience; as it has a focal ratio of F5, it means most eyepieces will struggle to produce sharp stars at the edges.

At the same time as I bought the scope, I purchase a set of cheap, but reasonably good Plossls that came in a nice case and cost about £100. Similar kits are still available today and cost £150-£199. I even added extra focal lengths, but the short focal-length ones are almost unusable because you have to press your eye right up against them. 

They now sit at the bottom of a cupboard and haven't been used for years. They probably never will. I only keep them for nostalgia.

Plossls like that cost £20-£40, but as FLO says: "best suited for telescopes with f-ratios f6 or slower"
(plus as mentioned above, you have to press your eye right up against them in the short focal lengths)

After many years trying many eyepieces, I'd say that the three cheapest eyepiece ranges that work well with that telescope are:

Planetary II's - £38

• Focal lengths less than 8mm are not very sharp overall and can suffer from glare when looking at the moon and bright planets
• Focal lengths above 9mm are not sharp at the edges (and don't seem to be made anymore - probably for that reason)
• The exactly same eyepiece optics are sold at a higher price as the Skywatcher Planetary UWA's in a different body with (sadly) worse glare issues

BST Starguiders - £55 
(sold as “Paradigm Dual ED” in the USA)

• Remarkably good in the short focal lengths, with (only minor) glare on the moon with the 5mm
• The longer focal length ones (the 18 and 25mm) are not sharp at the edges

Celestron X-Cel LX - £89

• Similar optical performance to the Starguiders but better/different build quality
• Some focal lengths are better than Starguiders, others may be worse

The important thing to remember about eyepiece cost, is that optically (as people sometimes say) "the eyepiece is one half of the telescope" - they are precision devices that are difficult to make cheaply to a high standard. Don't waste your money on sub-standard ones - the Starguiders set a very good standard, at a very good price for what they are.

If you're a bit short of cash, then build up a collection one eyepiece at a time.

Edited January 25, 2023 by great_bear

[Franklin]

7 hours ago, fullmoon said:

I've just had a look at the starguider eyepieces. And not sure I want to take the plunge on £165 worth of eyepieces for a £200 scope.

Keep an eye out on the classifieds and astrobuynsell, BST starguiders go regularly for around £35/£40 a piece, I don't think you can get any better value really.

The BST's are very good and could be all you ever need. I'd try the 5mm before buying the 3.2mm, more power isn't always a good thing under our skies.

Definitely need to get the scope outside and give it time, 1/2hr at least, to cool down. Away from the house and try not to view objects above neighboring houses if possible, the heat rising from house roofs will cause your views to look like you're viewing through a swimming pool, blurry images and unable to focus.

[fullmoon]

8 hours ago, great_bear said:

As I say - I've got exactly the same scope (albeit now on a go-to mount), and bought it when my daughter was born, so I've spent thirteen years now buying and selling eyepieces for that scope, which has been an both an interesting and frustrating experience; as it has a focal ratio of F5, it means most eyepieces will struggle to produce sharp stars at the edges.

At the same time as I bought the scope, I purchase a set of cheap, but reasonably good Plossls that came in a nice case and cost about £100. Similar kits are still available today and cost £150-£199. I even added extra focal lengths, but the short focal-length ones are almost unusable because you have to press your eye right up against them. 

They now sit at the bottom of a cupboard and haven't been used for years. They probably never will. I only keep them for nostalgia.

Plossls like that cost £20-£40, but as FLO says: "best suited for telescopes with f-ratios f6 or slower"
(plus as mentioned above, you have to press your eye right up against them in the short focal lengths)

After many years trying many eyepieces, I'd say that the three cheapest eyepiece ranges that work well with that telescope are:

Planetary II's - £38

• Focal lengths less than 8mm are not very sharp overall and can suffer from glare when looking at the moon and bright planets
• Focal lengths above 9mm are not sharp at the edges (and don't seem to be made anymore - probably for that reason)
• The exactly same eyepiece optics are sold at a higher price as the Skywatcher Planetary UWA's in a different body with (sadly) worse glare issues

BST Starguiders - £55 
(sold as “Paradigm Dual ED” in the USA)

• Remarkably good in the short focal lengths, with (only minor) glare on the moon with the 5mm
• The longer focal length ones (the 18 and 25mm) are not sharp at the edges

Celestron X-Cel LX - £89

• Similar optical performance to the Starguiders but better/different build quality
• Some focal lengths are better than Starguiders, others may be worse

The important thing to remember about eyepiece cost, is that optically (as people sometimes say) "the eyepiece is one half of the telescope" - they are precision devices that are difficult to make cheaply to a high standard. Don't waste your money on sub-standard ones - the Starguiders set a very good standard, at a very good price for what they are.

If you're a bit short of cash, then build up a collection one eyepiece at a time.

Thank you for that lengthy reply, very helpful. I think by what you've mentioned I will get the starguiders, and take my time. 

Also just to add, I'm not sure if I'm reading this right, but I didn't realise the scope was F5. I thought it was different. Let me find the spec and attach it. Please tell me if I'm looking at the wrong thing.

 

And touching on what you said earlier. What a great night tonight was for viewing. I was out in my back yard for a good 30 mins or so playing with lenses and looking at the moon. And to be honest, I found I got the most success with just the 10x and no Barlow. It was nice to see the whole moon in the eyepiece but also detailed enough to see that huge crater in the middle. Best night so far tonight. 

 

Thanks again!

 

 

[fullmoon]

7 hours ago, Franklin said:

Keep an eye out on the classifieds and astrobuynsell, BST starguiders go regularly for around £35/£40 a piece, I don't think you can get any better value really.

The BST's are very good and could be all you ever need. I'd try the 5mm before buying the 3.2mm, more power isn't always a good thing under our skies.

Definitely need to get the scope outside and give it time, 1/2hr at least, to cool down. Away from the house and try not to view objects above neighboring houses if possible, the heat rising from house roofs will cause your views to look like you're viewing through a swimming pool, blurry images and unable to focus.

Brilliant, thanks for the tips! Will look at the classifieds when I get a bit of time. 

 

Cheers

[great_bear]

49 minutes ago, fullmoon said:

I'm not sure if I'm reading this right, but I didn't realise the scope was F5. I thought it was different. Let me find the spec and attach it.

Oh! - You've got the spherical 130 Explorer! The F7 - that might change things a little.

I've got the 130P Explorer. What a different a P makes! Not the same scope at all. Apologies for the confusion!

The Starguiders are still a good option but not the 3.2mm - that's too much magnification for an F7 scope.

Unless you're feeling adventurous and have the time to dabble in buying/selling eyepieces, you might want to hold off upgrading and take your scope to a local astronomy club to try out other people's eyepieces in it.

Because with an F7 scope, you're getting a higher level of performance out of the supplied eyepieces than I am familliar with, so I can't say how much improvement you've get by upgrading - and you've got more eyepiece options available to you at F7 compared to F5.

Apologies again for my confusion.

 

Edited January 25, 2023 by great_bear

[fullmoon]

7 hours ago, great_bear said:

Oh! - You've got the spherical 130 Explorer! The F7 - that might change things a little.

I've got the 130P Explorer. What a different a P makes! Not the same scope at all. Apologies for the confusion!

The Starguiders are still a good option but not the 3.2mm - that's too much magnification for an F7 scope.

Unless you're feeling adventurous and have the time to dabble in buying/selling eyepieces, you might want to hold off upgrading and take your scope to a local astronomy club to try out other people's eyepieces in it.

Because with an F7 scope, you're getting a higher level of performance out of the supplied eyepieces than I am familliar with, so I can't say how much improvement you've get by upgrading - and you've got more eyepiece options available to you at F7 compared to F5.

Apologies again for my confusion.

 

No worries, my fault for not being specific with what I have.

I have a few more questions anyway for a separate post so might incorporate eye piece recommendations into that haha.

So, has yours got a parabolic mirror inside then? I've read a little bit about that. Do you find they give a noticeable better performance? Just for my own curiosity really.

 

Cheers

[fullmoon]

16 hours ago, Franklin said:

Keep an eye out on the classifieds and astrobuynsell,

Just a quick 1. Where are the classifieds? I can't find them?

 

Thanks 

[JOC]

6 minutes ago, fullmoon said:

Just a quick 1. Where are the classifieds? I can't find them?

You won't find them until you've got enough post counts by chatting in the astro sections of SGL

[JOC]

Oh and there is an awful lot of stuff above about trying to get as close as possible to the subject, Barlows, 3.2mm EP's etc.  Seeing conditions in the UK most of time don't often let me get that close in my F4 200P newtonian.

A 130P with a 3.2mm EP is getting around x200 effective magnification.  That's about the maximum I find works on nights with good conditions.  However, in the UK those nights are very rare.  You can actually have a good time viewing the night sky at lower magnification and that can be better/necessary for some of the night sky objects.  In particular the OP may find jupiter better at lower magnification and also if you go OUTSIDE.  Telescopes aren't really ideal used inside.  The whole thing is to take them outside, wrap up warm and be prepared to get cold - you will get much better views.

I have a barlow - about the only thing I've ever often used it for is unscrewing it and using the bits to help attach a camera - you are far better off IMO just buying EP's at the magnification you want - as noted above decent EP's like Starguiders aren't fortunes to buy.

Edited January 26, 2023 by JOC

[great_bear]

2 hours ago, JOC said:

Seeing conditions in the UK most of time don't often let me get that close in my F4 200P newtonian.

A 130P with a 3.2mm EP is getting around x200 effective magnification.  That's about the maximum I find works on nights with good conditions.  However, in the UK those nights are very rare.  You can actually have a good time viewing the night sky at lower magnification and that can be better/necessary for some of the night sky objects. 

It turns out the OP's scope is a 130, not a 130P so a 3.2mm eyepiece is way too high.

200x is the maximum I can get out of my 130p but reaching 240x is usually possible on my Mak180 or 8" Dob, and on a good night, between 1am and 2am, there can be a period of about 30mins where 280x is no problem, and one can see the swirls on the clouds on Jupiter.

[great_bear]

2 hours ago, fullmoon said:

So, has yours got a parabolic mirror inside then? I've read a little bit about that. Do you find they give a noticeable better performance? Just for my own curiosity really.

I've never seen them side-by-side to judge.

Parabolic mirrors just allow shorter telescopes to be made (e.g. F5 instead of F7) at the expense of adding some 'coma' distortion at the edge of the view. The other disadvantage of shorter scopes is the limits it places on eyepiece selection. You've got more options.

Edited January 26, 2023 by great_bear