Jump to content

SkySurveyBanner.jpg.21855908fce40597655603b6c9af720d.jpg

Another hello from Hampshire

Spectre486

By Spectre486
in Welcome

Recommended Posts

Spectre486

Spectre486

Posted
Posted

Hi folks!

Good to be here finally. Been reading a lot of the forum for advice on a new hobby that's been too long in the making for me.

Loved astronomy ever since I could first read books, and probably even before then just from the pictures :)

Now finally at the tender age of 34, I have the time and a bit of money to spend to take my awe of the universe to the next level!

A bit about me :

I'm 34 like I said, married and live in Southampton. I'm a biologist/toxicologist by trade. I've spent the past 25 years playing computer games as my main hobby, so it will be good to get out into the open air again! :)

My wife is certainly happy about my new astronomical interest too, although maybe not so much when she sees my astronomical credit card bill (sorry bad joke already).

Astronomy wise......

I don't have a telescope yet. I don't even have binoculars yet. I can kinda sorta ish find my way around the sky though based upon my general interest over the years.

I've spent the past week or so with my head in web pages learning about telescopes, eyepieces and other accessories - getting more and more excited by the minute. The wife just smiles and nods at me now - she's seen it all before from when I was a PC geek hehe.

So.....after a week or so of learning about what's available, I "think" I have settled on buying a Celestron CPC 925 SCT as my first scope. A bit overkill for a beginner I hear you thinking.....but I have my reasons.

I'm still not quite sure about the eyepieces though. I contacted FLO recently and a nice gentleman called Martin gave me some helpful suggestions in general and recommmended the following eyepieces to get me started :

Skywatcher Panaview 32 or 38mm for low power

Baader Hyperion 10mm for high power.

My initial brain splurge of questioning at Martin went off on a rant about how great Televue were based upon the reviews and posts that I'd read. Al Nagler had me convinced until I heard back from Martin, but I couldn't work out if he was just pointing me at EP's FLO sold (as FLO don't seem to stock Televue EP's) or if he genuinely thought they weren't worth the extra money and was trying to save me a few pennies.

If you were in my position, would you go for Televue eyepieces if you could afford a little extra? I had my eye on the 35mm Panoptic for low power and the 12mm Nagler for high power.

I'm happy to spend a bit extra on some quality EP's, but are they really THAT good? Any advice on EP's and a decent 2 inch diagonal to go with the lower power EP would be much appreciated! :p

First light for me is still some way off unfortunately - and no, that's nothing to do with the appalling weather in Southampton atm.

I have to get Christmas shopping out of the way before I can see how many sheckles I have left for my CPC. Hopefully I'll be unwrapping it in mid december or failing that, it'll be early January.

Anyway, I'll stop rambling now.

See you round on the forums and if somebody could stop Michael Fish from rain dancing - that would be great :eek:

Ciao for now.

Frazer.

Edit : Almost forgot, can anyone recommend a good observation chair? Don't get any bright ideas about me making one myself - as Doctor Leonard McCoy used to say, "I'm a doctor, not a brick layer!" :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 35
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Nexus 6

Nexus 6

Posted
Posted

Hi Frazer,

Welcome to SGL.

I have owned my 925 for just over a year now it replaced my Celestron 6se (my 1st scope). It’s a great scope, really quick to set-up, great optics, strong solid mount, the gps is handy as well. The only problem is its weight! (Scope without tripod 58lbs/27kg) It is a fair amount to lift by yourself but manageable.

As for using quality eyepieces, I believe with a slow scope @F10 ,which the 925 is, you may not really need ultra quality but it is worth it for the extra class in the delivery of your views. I would highly recommend Televue, as would others on the forum. Pentax are highly regarded as is Meade series 5000 to name a couple more brands worth considering. For a step up in diagonal quality I went for a William Optics Dielectric and it was definitely an improvement on the standard Celestron diagonal that comes with the 925 plus it will take 2” ep’s. As for a chair I don’t use much in the way of comfort just a small plastic stool. I no there are dedicated observing chairs that you can buy and am sure you will get some feedback on those no doubt.

Good luck with the kit, whatever you decide to buy

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesM

JamesM

Posted
Posted

Hi Frazer and welcome to the forum.

I wouldn't worry about how much you spend as a 'beginner'. To be honest we're all beginners really because everything changes so quickly be it kit or the cosmos itself. If you can afford it, go for the largest aperture in what ever type of scope you want and if you choose one from a respected manufacturer, you will always get the majority of your money back should your interest wane and you want to sell it on. I unfortunately do not subscribe to the notion of a 'beginners scope' - no one ever buys a beginner's pair of glasses! :):D

Eyepieces are a little trickier. Martin at FLO is an honest helpful guy and in my conversations with him, we both agreed that you need to spend a certain amount to receive quality but it is very easy to spend a lot more for very little gain and I believe Martin is more than likely trying to help you to spend less money rather than trying to push a sale of 'their' stock. Increases in the 'Field of View' make a lot of difference to price, especially if you want an image sharp to the outside edge of the eyepiece. Some people like to scan the Milkyway for instance whilst keeping their eye at the eyepiece and some cheaper eyepieces can reveal a degree of distortion as stars appear to slip around the central view of the eyepiece, I believe its called the pincushion effect and again, this is something that price can help alleviate. If I was making a recommendation, I would choose the Pentax range - not cheap but not quite as expensive as TV units and are good enough to use on the most demanding of kit should you want to change your scope in the future.

Clear skies in the meantime

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesM

JamesM

Posted
Posted

...I forgot the diagonal question - I would go for the dielectric type not because it will show you a higher reflectivity than say a 99 per cent reflectivity type (the jury seems to be out on this one) but because the surface is harder wearing and you won't feel so nervous in the future when you come to clean the mirror itself.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spectre486

Spectre486

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks folks for the warm welcome, and for taking the time to answer my questions.

I had another email exchange with Martin at FLO and it became apparant very quickly he was indeed being very helpful.

As I said to him, I've had bad experiences in the past buying expensive kit with PC vendors, so I guess I was naturally on my guard.

I now feel much more reassured and less confused from talking to him and reading here. So if any newbies in my position are reading this - speak to Martin at FLO :)

I've settled on his suggestions on EP's now. So I think I'm ready to bash the plastic. I just learnt from my wife that she has already bought me some binoculars for Christmas - so I'm trying to twist her arm to let me play with them early hehe.

Thx again all.

Frazer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • 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.