I've never had a telescope, although I've used a couple. However, I've been hankering to get a small one, especially since recently the night sky has been exceptionally clear. I think it is mostly due to fewer contrails, although, in general there is less light pollution now. I probably should have asked for advice here. Ah, well. In any case, I decided to go with a SkyWatcher Skymax 90mm Maksutov-Cassegrain. It comes with a EQ mount, but I didn't want another tripod, so got the table-top version. "Anticipation" is now my middle name! :)
Best wishes,
Bob
Originally Posted by rfrazier
Brilliant Bob- Hope you enjoy gazing at the night sky
I had a good quality scope that my grandad bought me, It got slightly damaged and I ended up selling it to a friend of my dads for ten bob!!
I have a couple of scopes now but hardly ever get them out!!
I'll have to get one down from the loft now!!!!
Cheers, John
Nice scope the SW90 and good to use especially now as there are planets in our hemisphere, if have always liked refractors but these need a bigger set up generally, a portable maksutov is great to have around.
I have this app StarMap3D and it is brilliant for astronomy, only 99p and shows you accurately where everything is and when it’s visible..
Thanks for the suggestion. I have a skymap app already, which seems to do a reasonable job.
Best wishes,
Bob
Maybe try starting with some 10x50mm binoculars - and get familiar with the constellation and stars - if you're still interested then maybe get a 3inch refractor or 6inch reflector with equatorial mount and somewhere steady to put the tripod (those were the guidelines from my astronomy degree anyway). Smaller scopes don't have so much light gathering potential - and small objectives with higher magnification eye-pieces just 'stretch' the image like expanding a balloon or blowing up a pixilated image, rather than increase the resolution.
Try and allow at least 10mins to let your eyes adjust to night vision after being under artificial light or looking at screens / TVs.
It's a wonderful hobby! Unfortunately the best stars come out in the winter although the milky way is never not an awesome sight,
Good luck
Martyn
This is very interesting. I've taken some reasonable pictures of the moon and stars with my dslr. I have thought about getting a telescope to fit the camera to, but they are expensive. This one seems very good for the price. Is it possible to mount a camera on it?
Sure. It uses the same general method for attaching a SLR to a microscope. You get a T-ring for your camera (standard ring with the appropriate mount for your camera, e.g., I have a PK one for my Pentax), then you get a T-ring adapter which you attach to the T-ring. The T-ring adapter slots in where the telescope eyepiece did. Unfortunately for me, it looks like my t-ring adapter for my microscope are going to be very slightly the wrong size, but the T-ring will work fine with any adapter I get.
Best wishes,
Bob
Thank you.
What does the table top mount look like? I can't see that online.
One handy thing to make, will be a dew-shield/lens hood. Depending on the temperature, you might need to heat it
Rob.
I think that it is a standard EQ1 mount with a table top tripod. Thanks for the suggestion about the dew-shield/heater.
Best wishes,
Bob
Here are a couple of pictures with the camera mounted. It can either be mounted where the eye piece goes, or directly.
Mounted through the eyepiece.
Mounted directly.
It can be used as a pretty standard long lens, as well as for viewing the sky, although you need to be a dab hand at focussing.
Here's a picture I took next to the telescope (inside, looking through a window), with a 18-55mm lens set to 55mm and my Pentax K10D.
Here's a picture using the telescope as a 1250mm long lens.
They don't show quite the same thing, as I took one next to the other. Neither is cropped. Also, I need some practice focussing.
Recently the night sky hasn't had the moon or any of the closer planets at a reasonable hour. I've been tempted to do a really late night viewing, but too much work. It turns out that teaching remotely from home takes more time and more energy than doing it in person. One interesting thing, however, is that students also seem to be working harder and are more prepared for tutorials. Perhaps they have fewer distractions.
Best wishes,
Bob
After midnight is a good time for back garden viewing.
The neighbours lights will be out, and the heat distortion from roof tops and buildings will be reduced.
The led streetlights have had a negative effect.
The quality of the sky is not as good as it was with the old sodium orange lights a few years ago.
I've finally been able to get around to using this for a bit, and there is a waxing moon. So, a first effort.
Best wishes,
Bob
Very nice result.
Dr. Bob,
Apologies for intruding upon your thread but I hope that you might like to see my one successful shot from my attempts at lunar photography.
This was taken with a Sky-Watcher Heritage 130P FlexTube 130mm Dobsonian and my smart phone looking down the finder of the lens. Compared to your shot, it's out of focus and far from crisp, however, I am strangely proud of it.
While admiring the simplicity of the Dobsonian, it's not the best for tracking or indeed photography, certainly not at the level the Heritage offers. Yet the interest is rekindling and I feel the need to have a telescope with tracking and a good camera mount, as the one thing I could never do with the Dobsonian is see the Messier objects. However looking at the moon, even through a basic instrument, one which Galileo would have delighted in, continues to instill a sense of joy and wonder.
Please post up some more shots when you have time.
David
Very good job Bob!I've finally been able to get around to using this for a bit, and there is a waxing moon. So, a first effort.
Best wishes,
Bob
That picture looks okay. At the edges where there are shadows and light for good constrast is pretty sharp. I would think that the moon was pretty bright when you pictured it.
I don't know enough about telescope mount to give any advice about which one, or which kind. I started out using a simple tripod mount last night, but it was too difficult to keep the moon in the frame, so I quickly switched to the equatorial telescope mount. Tracking was much easier with it. (Although my mount is an equatorial one, I have no good reason to prefer it to a altazimut mount.) I can also see an advantage to mirrorless cameras with telescopes and shooting bright objects, such as the moon. No mirror snap vibration to account for.
Best wishes,
Bob
I visit stargazers lounge regularly to look at the astrophotography there.
If I lived in darker skies I'd have already spent a fortune on kit.
As it happens, my regular camera gear and a decent mount means I can dabble somewhat successfully at some deep sky objects. Nothing beats the real equipment, but it keeps my itch scratched for now.
I did recently buy a set of Canon 15x50s. They are pretty amazing things.
Absolutely love that picture of the Moon, Bob!
It's just a matter of time...
Smashing pic of the waxing crescent moon Bob
Here's a pic of a Waxing gibbous moon that I took with a cheap (Bootsale) 500mm lens and my Nikon D40, As i've aged I struggle to see sharp focus so I usually take loads of pics moving the focous slighly and then deleting the bad ones on the pc!!
Alas my Opicron HR80 and camera adapter didn't arrive today as it should have, It was posted on monday morn at 0945, Should have arrived at mine before 1pm tuesday but the PO failed in their quest to honour delivery
John..
I had my Vixen Custom-80M out for the first time in a couple of years 2 days ago. I had a go at taking photos of the moon with my iPhone through the eyepiece. They came out pretty well.
[QUOTE=Phil Lee;5431420]I had my Vixen Custom-80M out for the first time in a couple of years 2 days ago. I had a go at taking photos of the moon with my iPhone through the eyepiece. They came out pretty well.
Yes, I'd agree
Beautiful image. I've been so tempted over the years but never taken the plunge.I've finally been able to get around to using this for a bit, and there is a waxing moon. So, a first effort.
Best wishes,
Bob
Nice pictures, Phil!
This one isn't as well framed, as I was testing a couple of things.
Best wishes,
Bob
The limitation that I've encountered is that with more magnification, I need a longer exposure, or higher ISO. My DSLR only goes up to ISO 1600, and it is pretty much garbage above 620. So, with a lower ISO and a longer exposure, the moon is moving too fast for me. With the highest ISO and a shorter exposure, it isn't very sharp. Here's an example. (Using a 2x barlow, and not a very good good one at that.)
RLF
Last edited by rfrazier; 29th May 2020 at 22:52.
I need to get a new visual back for my Vixen. 0.965” eyepieces just aren’t as good as 1.25” ones.
Hi Phil
Had this Circle K for a few years, It takes those .965" eyepieces, I was told to get a converion for the 1 1/4" lenses as they much better!
John
I think that this is about the best picturing I can do using the highest magnification I have, and the equipment I have. I think that I'll spend more time looking, and less time fiddling now. :)
Best wishes,
Bob
I'll try and dig out some images of Saturn and Jupiter I took years ago with a very early digital camera held up against the eyepiece, the scope was a legendary Takahashi FS102, my only regret of something I have sold
Sometimes a wide field view of the night sky is a lovely sight, look at Orion's belt just above the horizon..
EQ1 motor drive?
Beautiful pictures, sir. I was able to talk myself out of buying an equatorially mounted Newtonian reflector a few years ago, but now you've set me off again...
Unfortunately for whatever reason I cannot see your photos Bob. I can see others' photos in this thread. The golden rule with Maksutov Cassegrain 'scopes to optimise imaging, is to allow them to acclimate to ambient air temperature … thus avoiding internal thermals from the primary mirror which can store heat and then 'radiate' same … distorting the image. Acclimation can take up to an hour .. depending on ambient air temperature and the telescope's prior storage temperature. Because Maksutov 'scope corrector plates are thicker than those of e.g. Schmidt Cassegrain instruments, Maksutov acclimation time can be lengthy. Imaging performance can also be optimised by flocking the interior with e.g. self adhesive black velour … thus reducing internal reflections and increasing contrast. The rear baffle tube can easily be flocked by rolling a section of flocking material into a tube and inserting same into the baffle tube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FPFZbqbjbP0 … the only You Tube demo found but there are might be others
Resultant contrast increase after flocking:
https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/1...-a-6se/page/6/
A roll of self adhesive matt black velour flocking material can be bought from Wilko … usually displayed on their fabrics stand.
https://www.wilko.com/en-uk/search?q...=1&pageSize=24 … choose the matt black velvet finish velour
Telescope dealers also sell flocking https://www.firstlightoptics.com/mis...-material.html
If necessary the main tube can also be flocked but it's the baffle tube which causes most of the internal reflections thus reducing contrast.
Another modification to improve contrast is to use a longish dew shield. These can cost c. £30 for a 90mm Maksutov but a DIY dew shield can be made by cutting the base off a suitable diameter plastic flower pot and lining same with flocking material . I've just made one for a Minolta 500mm mirror lens … the internally flocked plastic flower pot (shimmed with additional flocking to be a friction fit) slides over the existing short lens hood.
Skywatcher, Celestron and Orion telescopes (and others) are all made in the same Synta factory in China and very often share the same optics ... but supplied eyepieces and accessories vary. They are all made to a price thus internal baffling can be rather 'average' in all of them … hence internal 'flocking' is one procedure which can improve their performance.
BW
dunk
"Well they would say that ... wouldn't they!"
Thanks for this, dunk. There is some internal reflections with the layer upon layer of tubes I have when going for the highest magnification. I think that I've often baffled my flock, so, perhaps I'll try it the other way round for this.
About the pictures. Odd. It is likely either you are blocking my website's IP address, perhaps by blocking my hosting service (zen.co.uk), or my hosting service is blocking your ISP.
Best wishes,
Bob
PS Unless, dunk, you are using a very old browser, not being able to see the pictures started after 11am (BST) yesterday, and you are getting a "certificate expired" warning. Then the reason is a complicated one involving SSL CA root certificates, branches, cross signing and the like. Nothing I can do about it.
RLF
Last edited by rfrazier; 31st May 2020 at 09:46.
Problem is my old iMac's OS ... using my Macbook Pro with later OS I can see your pics Bob ... and they look pretty good.
BW
dunk
"Well they would say that ... wouldn't they!"
If you do find time to retrieve those images I'd be keen to see them.I'll try and dig out some images of Saturn and Jupiter I took years ago with a very early digital camera held up against the eyepiece, the scope was a legendary Takahashi FS102, my only regret of something I have sold
Sometimes a wide field view of the night sky is a lovely sight, look at Orion's belt just above the horizon..
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
