SKYWATCHER STARTRAVEL-102 (EQ1)

[bivvie]

Hello, I visited my local telescope/camera shop recently to buy a telescope and DSLR, i didn't really know what the best equipment to buy would be. After about an hour being shown various models i bought the skywatcher startravel-102 (eq1) 4" f/500 achromatic refractor, an eq1 equatorial mount,and tripod. I also bought a nikon d5000 DSLR. Could anyone tell me if this is a good combination? When looking at Jupiter using just the telescope its just a whiteish image with no detail at all, am i doing something wrong? The brochure showed images of nebulae and galaxies taken with this telescope, is it me or have i been mugged?. Would be really grateful if someone could give me a few pointers.

Thanks

[Ant]

Skywatcher is a good brand - not the best - but a lot of people here have a skywatcher scope / mount. (I have).

The 102 F/5 will give you some nice views at low powers - but don't expect to *see* the same as the images that you see on the packaging. But it will show some blue halos on brighter objects - this is normal for this design of telescope. This scope is much more suitable for big deep sky objects, like open clusters and not for the higher powers used on planets.

I cannot for the life of me remember which focuser the 102 has - you may be OK to attach the Nikon to it. Almost certainly you won't have bought the adapter you need.

The EQ1 is right at the lower end of the EQ mounts, it's not really suitable for astrophotography, the 102 is probably too heavy for it, the mount I'll bet isn't driven (it needs to be driven to track the stars).

HTH

Ant

[bivvie]

Thanks for your response, i realise i will need a motorised mount for what i want to do which is deep sky objects, the focuser is a dual fit 1.25/2". I did indeed buy the camera adapter and have tried it but couldn't seem to focus correctly, the image was probably worse as it didn't seem to be magnified.I did ask for an idiots guide when i bought them both as i'm a complete novice but i didn't realise that it would be as difficult as this. There doesn't seem to be a motorised mount available for this type of scope in the skywatcher brochure, should i buy a different scope, if so, any recommendations?

Many Thanks.

[bivvie]

Thanks for your response, i realise i will need a motorised mount for what i want to do which is deep sky objects, the focuser is a dual fit 1.25/2". I did indeed buy the camera adapter and have tried it but couldn't seem to focus correctly, the image was probably worse as it didn't seem to be magnified.I did ask for an idiots guide when i bought them both as i'm a complete novice but i didn't realise that it would be as difficult as this. There doesn't seem to be a motorised mount available for this type of scope in the skywatcher brochure, should i buy a different scope, if so, any recommendations?

Many Thanks.

[pvaz]

Astro photography is a complicated hobby. My recommendation is for you to get your scope out for observing a bit. Learn how the mount works, how to track and locate objects (start with M31, M45, M13 and others from the Messier catalog). Adding the camera without knowing the basics of astronomy may be a bit too much. Astronomy isn't rocket science, but it ain't the easiest hobby either so you need to give yourself sometime and learn the basics.

You will need all this skills. Then try some photos, start with the moon and move on from that. Learn what software is needed.

You can read the primers in the imaging section or buy some books such as:

Beginners guide to astro-photography

[John]

While your ambition to take pictures of deep sky objects is great you do need to understand that you are embarking on what is possibly the most complex, technical and potentially frustrating aspect of what is already a fairly complex and technical hobby. The images in the brochure probably were taken with a similar scope but what the brochure does not make clear is the considereable skill, technical knowledge, time and experience that goes into producing such images. Plus it's almost certain that the scope was put on a much more sophisticated mount to make those images.

The good news however is that you have bought a nice, portable scope with which to learn about whats in the night sky by observing visually. What you see will not be anywhere near the photos (apart from the moon which is really impressive) but, once you understand what you are looking at, what you can see is fascinating nonetheless.

Whether you class all this is "being mugged" I don't know - Photography shops are good places to buy cameras but not telescopes I find - in all honesty I doubt the the salesperson had any practical knowledge or experience of astro-photography.

I hope you will enjoy your new equipment all the same

John

[TheThing]

The SW ST102 is an excellent scope! Well done on a brilliant purchase. I had one until very recently and it was a cracking scope which gave great views of the plants, moon, DSO etc etc. Mention is made of blue halos, but I never had any problems with haloing around bright objects at all with mine.

If you're just starting out, get hold of a copy of 'Turn Left at Orion' (which should really be supplied with all nes scopes to beginners!) and a good sky map (Sky and Telescope's Pocket Sky Atlas or the like) or a planisphere. Start learning your way round the sky and get used to the scope before you try anything else.

A coupls more eyepieces (EPs) and a moon filter are also essential.

I believe that when connecting a camera to a refractor scope like the ST102, you need to remove the diagonal or you will have difficulty achieving focus. Start with something that doesn't need long exposurers like the moon and se how you get on from there.

Don't worry though, you haven't been mugged! You've made a good purchase that'll see you right for a long time.

[RichieP]

I have got a ST102 and its a good scope for the price - something which is true of all Skywatcher scopes - so don't worry, you haven't bought a lemon.

Things to be aware of:

1) You need to use the star diagonal (or purchase an extension tube) to use this this scope visually - it won't acheive focus with an eyepiece inserted directly into the focusser.

2) The short focal length (and this is typical of pretty much all short focal length achromatic refractors) design wil give you wonderful, low power widefield views. At higher powers, and on brighter objects, chromatic abberation (i.e. the purple halo you will see around objects) will become quite noticeable and you may want to invest in a minus violet filter to sort this out.

3) Again, due to being a short focal length achromatic refractor, you wil find it doesn't perform that well at higher magnifications (say over 100x) so isn't the best scope for planetary and lunar observing.

Regards

Richard

[bivvie]

Many thanks to all for your helpful advice, i realise i have a lot of learning to do as well as adding more equipment, a driven mount bieng the 1st thing. Does anyone know of any local clubs or societies i could join, i'm sure i would learn a lot faster spending time with more knowledgeable people. I live in clacton on sea in essex.

Once again thanks.

[TheThing]

2) The short focal length (and this is typical of pretty much all short focal length achromatic refractors) design wil give you wonderful, low power widefield views. At higher powers, and on brighter objects, chromatic abberation (i.e. the purple halo you will see around objects) will become quite noticeable and you may want to invest in a minus violet filter to sort this out.

3) Again, due to being a short focal length achromatic refractor, you wil find it doesn't perform that well at higher magnifications (say over 100x) so isn't the best scope for planetary and lunar observing.

Sorry, I have to disagree. I never encountered any noticiable halo around bright objects (either blue or purple) with this scope, so I believe it to not be as bad as is sometimes made out.

It DOES perform more than adequately at high mags. I frequently used mine up to 165x with a 6mm EP and 2x Barlow and on occasion up to 250x with a 3x Barlow, with no ill effects. Seeing is more likely to limit the magnification required.

[jgs001]

You will need an extention tube to get focus with an SLR. Both my Fracs do. The ST80 I did use for imaging for a while, and you can use it for getting widefield results. I would suggest investing in a SemiAPO filter which will help with the CA, but it'll still show up on bright targets. The downside... you lose a lot of the blue in Nebula etc, so M42 ends up looking red, and M45 loses a lot of the Nebula. It's almost certainly a Rack and Pinion focuser, so the drawtube will probably slop about a bit, this is easily resolved with some self sticky teflon tape (about £6) or possibly even some sticky back plastic.

As for high mags, I spent many an hour using my ST80 at 160x (upper limit) viewing the moon and found it easy to use without any real issues, although I was using a Fringe Killer, before getting the SemiAPO filter, to remove the CA.

[Macavity]

I think, with the EQ1, the main problem will be balancing all this stuff (camera etc.) on the back end. As others have suggested, it is perhaps not the optimal scope for astrophotography. BUT I have had quite good results in removing the "purple haze" with either the "fringe killer" or "contrast" Baader filters. I then obtain some nice full(er)-disk shots of the Moon and (filtered!) Sun, that way.

Perhaps an easier method of learning the basics astrophotograpy with the ST102 (and lessening balance problems!) is to get a cheap Webcam, remove the 1.25" diagonal, and stick in one of these:

Lumicon 4.5in Length drop-in Extension Tube 1.25inTelescope Accessories | Rother Valley Optics

An ever useful thing for your future in astrophotography and more besides. I sure the SLR will be handy, and you will untimately get a sturdier mount...

[RichieP]

Sorry, I have to disagree. I never encountered any noticiable halo around bright objects (either blue or purple) with this scope, so I believe it to not be as bad as is sometimes made out.

It DOES perform more than adequately at high mags. I frequently used mine up to 165x with a 6mm EP and 2x Barlow and on occasion up to 250x with a 3x Barlow, with no ill effects. Seeing is more likely to limit the magnification required.

Well you are entitled to your opinion as I am mine. I think though you'd be in a minority if we had a poll of ST102 owners as to whether it shows any CA. What would be the point of APOs if a F5 Chinese achromat showed no noticeable CA?

As for the max magnification, I was merely commenting on my own comparison between an F5 ST102 and and an F10 Evostar 102 - the Evostar was much better at higher mags. Again its just my opinion and my particular experience.