Jump to content

NLCbanner2024.jpg.2478be509670e60c2d6efd04834b8b47.jpg

Just a few QUESTIONS!

lw24

By lw24
in Discussions - Scopes / Whole setups

Recommended Posts

John

John

Posted
Posted
This was one of the things I was going to check. Annoyingly, it seems that 2 inch eyepieces/filters cost TWICE AS MUCH!!!

Surely I don't need a 2 inch filter for looking at the moon, it's not exactly like you need widefield capabilities too see it...

Of course :). But you are not only going to be looking at the moon are you ?.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply
lw24

lw24

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Of course :(. But you are not only going to be looking at the moon are you ?.

Well, what else would I need a CA filter for? Jupiter and Saturn (not at all interested in Venus tbh).

I can see Jupiter in the sky with a naked eye, so widefield not needed, same with Saturn.

Sorry if I'm wrong but that's what my knowledge is telling me. It may be that :)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John

John

Posted
Posted

Sorry :( - I was trying to be helpful with my comment on 2" filters - trying to think ahead, as it were. I've seen many folks invest in the smaller filter size, then realise that they wanted to go to the larger format and have to re-invest. I was thinking of filters for deep sky objects such as UHC and / or O-III's which have a big impact on nebulae in particular.

The Startravel 120 is a good low to medium power scope but not great at high power planetary and lunar viewing because of the CA. The fringe killer type filters will help but won't remove the issue completely.

Sorry if my post came across as either impatient and intimidating - it certainly was not intended that way :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lw24

lw24

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Sorry if my post came across as either impatient and intimidating - it certainly was not intended that way :(

Not at all! I was just unsure of your meaning, thats all ;)

Sorry :( - I was trying to be helpful with my comment on 2" filters - trying to think ahead, as it were. I've seen many folks invest in the smaller filter size, then realise that they wanted to go to the larger format and have to re-invest.

Totally understand your point here. I thought you mean CA filters only! For filters for DSO such as nebulae filters (unsure of what they're called), I can understand why I'd want a 2 inch filter.

Cheers! :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lw24

lw24

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'm seriously confused now.

I thought jahmanson was apologising to me (It seemed strange seeing as his post wsn't the slightest bit indtimidating :().

Orion, you must have been replying to an earlier post in the thread :)

All cleared up now!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lw24

lw24

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'm looking at getting the book 'Turn Left At Orion' to go with my telescope as I feel it would show me some things I could look for.

Are there any things in particular you think I should look for with my scope?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
zcapp96

zcapp96

Posted
Posted
I'm looking at getting the book 'Turn Left At Orion' to go with my telescope as I feel it would show me some things I could look for.

Are there any things in particular you think I should look for with my scope?

That would be an excellent investment as it also includes sketches of what you can actually expect to see. It is full of ideas of what to see at different times of the year. Superb value for money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lw24

lw24

Posted
  • Author
Posted
I've just ordered TLaO,

Have a look at Stellarium.

Which scope are you going for? ST120?:)

Yeah, the Skywatcher Startravel 120 on AZ3 mount.

I've got stellarium on my laptop, which I may take out when i visit some dark skies :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ollypenrice

ollypenrice

Posted
Posted

No, the moon doesn't need widefield EPs. Half a degree is not 'wide' until you are using a hell of a focal length scope!! It might be much more comfortable with a neutral density filter but 1.25 will be fine.

The thing to remember about these debates is that all sorts of scopes will give enjoyable views and that a brutal law of diminishing returns applies in spending money on optics. I have spent the money but don't kid myself that the premium scopes are more than a little better than the budget ones. They are a little better, that is all.

Olly

PS, If your take your laptop to a dark site it won't be dark any more. You can use all the red cellophane you like but if you want to be dark adapted use paper charts printed off in advance and a soft red head torch. Seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lw24

lw24

Posted
  • Author
Posted

PS, If your take your laptop to a dark site it won't be dark any more. You can use all the red cellophane you like but if you want to be dark adapted use paper charts printed off in advance and a soft red head torch. Seriously.

Alright, so you suggest printing out constellation maps with M objects marked on them (for example)?

As for a red torch, I happened to have a standard LED torch, and I've taped some red tissue paper over it, seems to have done the trick :)

Sounds like a plan!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RobH

RobH

Posted
Posted

The first scope I got when I got back into the hobby was an ST120 (then branded as Helios), on an EQ3-2

At a dark site, at lowish power, it gave great views, and things like the double cluster, the Pleides, M42 etc looked great.

I still have the scope and have no intention of getting rid of it.

You'll have no regrets getting one I'm sure, and feel free to ask as many questions as you need :)

Cheers

Rob

Link to comment
Share on other sites
lw24

lw24

Posted
  • Author
Posted

At a dark site, at lowish power, it gave great views, and things like the double cluster, the Pleides, M42 etc looked great.

I still have the scope and have no intention of getting rid of it.

You'll have no regrets getting one I'm sure, and feel free to ask as many questions as you need :)

Cheers

Rob

Thanks,

You say that the Pleides and M42 looked great. I will look for those when I first get my scope.

On that note, are there any other things you reccommend I look at straight away with my telescope?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
solo

solo

Posted
Posted
It seems you want to know what "the best" is, down to all conceivable angles, but you are asking for detailed information which you expect to be given for free. Is anyone else getting annoyed?

You're out of order there ,mate. This guy is a beginner asking for help and we should be doing all we can to give him the benefit of our experience.:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
paraman

paraman

Posted
Posted
It seems you want to know what "the best" is, down to all conceivable angles, but you are asking for detailed information which you expect to be given for free. Is anyone else getting annoyed?

What a miserable response to a request for information, its nonsense like this that makes newcomers reluctant to ask questions:mad:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ant

Ant

Posted
Posted
It seems you want to know what "the best" is, down to all conceivable angles, but you are asking for detailed information which you expect to be given for free. Is anyone else getting annoyed?

This is the help section - thats what this section is for... Hopefully when you ask for help next time someone won't react in the same way to you!

Anyone? I need some questions answered!

Sometimes you may have to wait more than an hour for an answer.

Cheers

Ant

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.