|
Any Astronomy goons in the LA area? I'm thinking of getting into this hobby. I already own a pair of 7x50 binoculars and a military compass and I want to go out one night and look around a bit to see if I like it before dumping any money into this. Any recommendations as to where to go? Is my equipment good enough to start out with or am I wasting my time? It's pretty bright here in Westwood, but the good thing about living in CA is that it's warm all night all year round. Pretty big improvement from living in Chicago, where you have to be seriously stupid to go star gazing 6 months out of the year. INTJ Mastermind fucked around with this message at 01:56 on Jan 4, 2010 |
#
¿
Jan 4, 2010 01:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 03:28 |
|
|
Thanks for the reply. I found a dark park nearby and took the girlfriend and my binoculars two nights ago. We both liked it a lot and are interested in getting a telescope / accessories. Here's what I have already: 7x50 binoculars <- Given to me as a gift by my grandfather. Seems to be a military model from some Russian manufacturer. Has milliradian markings seen through the optics. And a red coating on the objective lense (any idea what that does)? Surefire 6P LED flashlight <- Lights up the whole drat park! Incredibly useful for navigating a strange new place at night. Military lensatic compass w/ tritum <- Glows in the dark using RADIATION!!! Netbook w/ Stellarium? <- Worth bringing? Or are printed sky charts good enough? I'm ordering a red filter for the flashlight ($30), and picking up a pair of folding chairs. WARNING! 100 questions below... As for chairs, do you recommend the big soft ones you see at the beach, or the small metal ones like you see at an office? The big ones look more comfortable but also more bulky. Don't want to knock the telescope over by accident while moving the chairs around. This might be a stupid question, but how big exactly is say a Orion XT-6 or XT-8? Online pictures don't really give me a sense of scale. Also, how does a Dobsonian mount work? Do I put it on a tripod? Place it on the ground or on a table? If I put the XT-6 on the ground, how high up will the eye piece be? Comfortable enough to view from sitting in a chair? Does the ground have to be perfectly level for this to work? Is a padded carrying case ($80) worth it? I'll be driving out to nearby parks all the time to observe. Has anyone been to the Griffith Observatory in Los Angeles? They have a star party and telescope info session in two weeks! Do they let people bring their telescopes to the grounds after hours? INTJ Mastermind fucked around with this message at 19:33 on Jan 11, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jan 11, 2010 19:24
|
|
|
Does anyone have experience with the Celestron AstroMaster 130 EQ? I'm leaning towards it over the Orion XT6 / XT8. It has one less inch of aperture, but it's substantially cheaper, and the tripod mount seems to be more portable than a dobsonian mount. I live in student housing, so viewing requires a drive to the park and then a decent walk to find a nice dark spot. And it's an EQ mount, so if I want to try astrophotography, I'm alright, right? Edit: The 130 EQ has a 3 week backorder, but the 114 EQ is availabe to ship next day. Am I hurting myself if I drop too low in aperture? (130mm == 5 in, 114mm == 4.5 in) The 130EQ is $190, and the 114EQ is $130 (+15 for optional motor drive), both with free UPS shipping. Are these good deals, and should I get the motor drive? INTJ Mastermind fucked around with this message at 22:18 on Jan 18, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2010 22:02
|
|
|
Thanks guys. I might get the 130EQ from Amazon, since I have a $50 gift card which will get the price down a bit. Can you recommend a good eye-piece for planetary viewing? Is this good? http://www.celestron.com/c3/product.php?CatID=36&ProdID=230 The 130EQ has a 650mm focal length, so I need to get a shorter eye-piece for the same magnification than say for a 1000mm focal length? Should I get a 2x Barlow lens instead? The 130EQ comes with a 10mm and 20mm eye piece I think. INTJ Mastermind fucked around with this message at 07:21 on Jan 20, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2010 07:07
|
|
|
That's a pretty good idea with the 3x Barlow, looks to be about the same price as a 4mm eye piece and it gives me 2 extra magnifications. The 20mm is an "erector" eye-piece which presents things right-side-up. That won't interfere with a Barlow will it? Will the Barlow cause image degradation (extra object in the light path) vs. simply buying an eyepiece with a shorter focal length? I'm guessing it won't matter too much since I'll be using it for planetary observation and they're pretty drat bright, right?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2010 20:15
|
|
|
Might be a stupid question, but if I balance an EQ mount, do I need to rebalance it when I change the orientation?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2010 11:11
|
|
|
So I bought a Celestron Astromaster 130EQ, and so far it's pretty awesome. Yay first telescope! I also got a Telrad and a 3x Barlow. I found a place about 30 minutes away from my apartment that's pretty good. It's red-level skies, but coming from Los Angeles, it's a lot better than what I'm used to. Also it's at the end of a country road, so there's no lights around. Found so far: M42, M31, Sigma Orionis, That double-star in Andromeda I forgot the name of... One problem I'm having is going from binoculars to my scope. I'm using Turn Left at Orion, and I'm able to find objects pretty easily through my 7x50 binoculars that I can't with my new telescope (Sigma Orionis and M31 Andromeda) to be specific. I feel this is because the binoculars have enough field of view to allow me to easily star hop, I can more easily feel my orientation when holding a pair of binoculars in my hands, and the aperture is large enough to pick up guide stars that aren't visible to the naked eye, yet not too great that I'm overwhelmed by too many small stars. With the telescope, I'm having a lot of trouble star hopping. I have a Telrad finder, but that can only point me at the brightest stars in the constellation, can't see many of the dimmer ones because of light pollution. The lowest-power eye-piece I have is a 20mm (650mm focal length on the scope). That gives me about 32x power. So I'm seeing around 1.2 degrees FOV through the eye-piece. Also, the telescope picks up a ton of stars, so I'm not sure which guide stars I'm looking for. Plus when staring 90 degrees offset into the eye piece on the EQ mount, it's hard to figure out where you're pointed sometimes. Thankfully, the 20mm eye-piece has an erecting diagonal built-in. The telescope is awesome once I find things, but it takes me a while to do that. I can see something perfectly clearly in my binoculars, and I can't get my scope to point at it. Why can't you find it?! It's right THERE! So this leaves me with 4 options. In order of most expensive to least-expensive 1) Buy a finder scope. 2) Buy a 40mm eye-piece for increased FOV. 3) Buy a tripod adaptor for my binoculars and use them as a finder-scope. The mount my 130EQ comes with has a camera tripod screw on the top, I can fit binoculars to that and use it as a "finder". 4) Practice more, suck less. Also, when using the 3x Barlow on the 10mm eyepiece (200x power), it seems I can't get anything in focus. It bounces between being just slightly out of focus both ways. When I knock it down to 100x power with the 20mm it's a lot better. How can I tell if it's a problem with the Barlow? Atmosphere? Collimation? Am I pushing the telescope too much? 200x power on a 5" scope should be ok? INTJ Mastermind fucked around with this message at 09:37 on Feb 10, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2010 09:30
|
|
|
The plastic window on the Telrad doesn't have any coatings on it right? It'll be fine to clean with a wet tissue?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2010 03:04
|
|
|
How do I balance my telescope in declination? The problem I'm having is that by sliding the tube back and forth, I can get it to balance when it's level. However, when I rotate the tube slightly on the declination axis, which ever side points towards the ground wants to drop. It's a Celestron Astromaster 130EQ with a Telrad attached. The RA axis (adjusted by sliding counterweights up/down) balances just fine.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2010 09:41
|
|
|
On my Celestron 130EQ, the drawtube wobbles within the focuser assembly. A couple of layers of tape surrounding the drawtube, and now it fits nice and snug.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2010 18:13
|
|
|
I need to mount a 9x50 RACI finderscope. Has anyone ever drilled a hole in their telescope before? Advice?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2010 09:49
|
|
|
My chair is FIGHT!!! Modified a camping stool tonight by adding PVC pipes that slide over the existing legs. This raises the height so that you can sit and remain at a standing height. The legs easily remove to lower the seat, and for transport. The whole thing weighs a couple of pounds, and was very inexpensive. The rope is used to keep the legs from spreading apart too much when you sit on it. It's tied together with a double fisherman's knot.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 11, 2010 09:01
|
|
|
Are we doing moon pictures now? This was done tonight with an iPhone camera held up to the eyepiece.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 14, 2010 08:49
|
|
|
All of them. Planets count as bright point sources which aren't affected by light pollution. Same for double stars and clusters. Its only the nebula abd galaxies that get washed out
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2010 19:27
|
|
|
Bightest object in the South eh? If it was early in the evening then it's probably Jupiter. If it was a bit later then Sirius Because it's kind of big and orangy I'd guess Jupiter Also If you're using an eq mount with a reflector telescope then you definitely want a way to rotate the tube to Place the eyepiece in a comfortable spot. Google for Wilcox rings. INTJ Mastermind fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Dec 28, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2010 19:42
|
|
|
Yeah you really can't go wrong if it's just $30. However, I would make sure that everything works, focuser travel and rotations on the mount should be smooth but not floppy. Make sure the whole setup doesn't vibrate strongly when you tap it.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2011 17:23
|
|
|
AceSnyp3r posted:I've been wanting to get a telescope for awhile now, done quite a bit of research into what I should be looking for and all. I've looked around on Craiglist a bit and there's a few nice telescopes at good prices in my local area (like a 10in Orion reflector asking $250), but I'm wondering, what should I look at when checking out a used scope to make sure it's in good condition? Ask: "When was the last time you cleaned the mirror?" if the answer is ANYTHING but "Never.", walk away right then and there.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2011 18:47
|
|
|
Jekub posted:My primary and secondary get cleaned about once a year, it's neither difficult or damaging provided you understand what you are doing and take care whilst doing it. Sure, expect most people (non-astronomer's) idea of cleaning out the mirror involves a paper towel and some Windex.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2011 04:26
|
|
|
Just FYI, astronomy binoculars really need a tall sturdy tripod because you need them above your head while standing.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2011 17:39
|
|
|
Ehud posted:I'm pretty short, so hopefully that tripod will be adequate Unless you're a 4 ft midget, a 60" (5 ft) tripod won't be enough for you when you want to get underneath the binoculars to look overhead. Look for something at least 7ft tall.  I personally don't understand why people recommend binoculars as a first astronomy purchase. Small terrestial binoculars aren't all that useful for astronomy (very small magnification and aperture) and large ones cost the same as a telescope and require expensive setups to use properly.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2011 03:02
|
|
|
Inept posted:Someone is selling an Orion XT8 on Craigslist for $275. The telescope seems up my alley as I just have binoculars right now and would like something more. Does this seem like an all right deal? Anything I should look out for if I go to check it out? Figure out why the person is selling it. If it's an amateur astronomer looking to upgrade to a bigger scope, it's likely to be better maintained than someone who bought it as a Christmas gift, and never really used it. For Dobs, collimation is a big thing - the proper alignment of the big mirror in the end with the little mirror in the front with your eyepiece. Almost all Dobs have screws or knobs that allow you to collimate. You might have to collimate yours when you buy it if the user hadn't.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2011 23:38
|
|
|
Xipe posted:Getting my first telescope tomorrow, an 8" Orion dob A 9x50 RACI finder would be a great first investment. Also, Sky and Telescope's pocket sky atlas is great. I pretty much use it for everything. If you have an iPhone, get Star Map Pro.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2011 23:39
|
|
|
I like StarMap Pro. It's more geared towards amateur astronomers vs. the lay public. Includes more stars, and a ton of useful features for when you're in the field.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2011 06:29
|
|
|
I would get the 130EQ. Edit: The reason is that the 114 uses a spherical mirror instead of parabolic (the better kind) and it has a 2x barlow in the lens tube itself to give it more focal length. The 130EQ is more of a regular Newtonian telescope. I've owned the 130EQ myself and it's a great starting scope. Make sure you get the motor drive for it though. INTJ Mastermind fucked around with this message at 16:16 on Sep 25, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2011 03:26
|
|
|
Yes the 130EQ MD is what I recommend. I bought it without a motor but wound up installing one after. So useful when you're showing something to a group of friends, or when you need to walk away for a few minutes to pee.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2011 21:22
|
|
|
Is that the giant glow-in-the-dark telescope domes on sale on the internet?
|
|
#
¿
Oct 19, 2011 23:29
|
|
|
Probably a miss-alignment issue then.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 3, 2011 14:57
|
|
|
Not really. You'll need at least a decent tripod and head combo. It will have to be beefy to deal with the offset load and high mag. Anything cheap will be a waste of time and money.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2012 01:43
|
|
|
jeeves posted:My current issue is the fact that I wear glasses. Have you tried folding down the rubber eyecups on the eye pieces? Most binoculars have either twisting / folding eyecups to accomodate glasses wearers.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2012 01:27
|
|
|
A machine shop should be able to widen the cutout in the tube and drill in some screw holes for you to upgrade the focuser. That is an amazing scope. Looks like it's built well enough to be left as an outside scope. Just get a waterproof tarp and some dissecant packs for the inside.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 4, 2012 18:09
|
|
|
The Telrad is a very nice finder, but it's also extremely big and boxy. You should get the measurements from online and see how it will measure up on your scope. The Nexstar 5 might work better with the Rigel.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2012 01:08
|
|
|
I bought and returned a pair of those 20x80s because of alignment problems between the two barrels. Make sure to check them out carefully when you receive them (and use a good tripod!)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 31, 2012 02:46
|
|
|
Zero One posted:I know this is nothing compared to other photos, but here is my first photo through my new binoculars: Jupiter, Europa (closest) and Ganymede Very nice! I'm glad they worked out for you!
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2012 04:04
|
|
|
The question to ask the seller is: When was the last time you cleaned the mirror? If the answer is anything but: "never", run run run the hell away! The mirrors on astronomy telescopes are front surface, which means the reflective layer is in front of the glass substrate, not protected behind it like on your bathroom mirrors. It's super-easy to scratch and impossible to fix.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2012 17:32
|
|
|
Chiba City Blues posted:I've been mildly into astronomy for a long time now- my birthday is coming up and I'm thinking now would be a great time to get more into it. One of the first posts in the thread recommends a book and some binoculars to start out with. The book is easy enough, but are there any recommendations for certain brands/types of binoculars? The Nikon Action Extreme 10x50 and the Pentax PCF WP II 10x50 are both highly recommended for astronomy use. A compass isn't that useful since the stars move across the sky. It's more important to learn to recognize the constellations - something you can be doing now while you wait for your binos to arrive.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 29, 2013 20:50
|
|
|
If you're interested in birds as well, a pair of modern waterproof fully multi-coated binoculars like the Pentax PCF 8x40 can be bought for less than $100. They'll last a lifetime and outperform any post-war glass.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2013 22:06
|
|
|
Trambopaline posted:Cool thanks for the help. It feels like on the internet it's a lot of grognards who invariably end up asserting that if don't buy 2000$ zeiss optics I might as well be looking through a toilet paper roll and play pretend. I'm a birder/astronomer and loving love binoculars, so bide with me... I would say $100-200 would be the best price/performance type for Porro (the classic style) binoculars, while $200-300 would be the best price / performance for Roof (the slim H-style) binos. For that price, you're getting sharp fully-multicoated optics and solid waterproof construction. You can often find a great deal used for ~50-70% retail. Search the cloudynights classifieds or birdforum. I recommended the Pentax 8x40 based on personal experience with them. They've exceptional optics, are built like a brick shithouse and are water-proof with a life-time no-fault warranty. Drop them? Run over them with a truck? Melt them in a terrible binocular fire? Pentax will replace and repair them for you, no questions asked. http://www.amazon.com/Pentax-65807-8x40-PCF-Binocular/dp/B00076QVPU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1362980332&sr=8-1&keywords=pentax+pcf+8x40 For ROOF bins, you want something called PHASE COATINGS, which is a fancy coating that makes ROOF bins much clearer. I have personal experience with the Nikon Monarch 5. Again, excellent bins for the money. Many birders have them. I dropped a pair and one of the eye-cups broke and came off. Nikon fixed it for me asking only a small shipping/handling fee. http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Optics-...Nikon+Monarch+5 The Bushnell Legend Ultra HD 8x42 is also well regarded, though no personal experience. It has "HD" glass, which the Monarch 5 does not have. HD (also known as ED) reduces chromatic aberration - purple fringing at the edges of things like tree branches shillouheted against the sky. http://www.amazon.com/Bushnell-Lege...hnell+legend+hd Can you spend less? Sure, though I would recommend saving by buying a used version of one of the above. Because they're built tough and waterproof, as long as there's no scratches on the lenses, they'll function as new for years to come. Otherwise, the cheaper binoculars will skimp on coatings, optical sharpness, and build quality. Can you spend more? Of course you can. With extra monies, you get even better coatings (brighter/more contrast) and sharper images at the edge of the field. With a $250 binocular like the Nikon Monarch, you'll get a nice sharp image at the middle, but it often drops considerably at the edge of the field. With a $2500 Swarovski 8.5x42 EL SV, it will stay crisp and sharp right up to the edge. The question you have to ask yourself is, is that worth it to me right now? In terms of pricier binoculars, I've owned the Zen ED3 8x43 ($400) and the Zeiss Conquest HD 8x42 ($1000). I've also looked through a pair of Swarovski 8.5x42 EL SV ($2500). In my non-scientific subjective ratings completely made up on the spot from experiences I had months / years ago: Pentax = Nikon: 90% Center, 50% Edge Zen: 95% Center, 60% Edge Zeiss: 98% Center, 80% Edge Swarovski: 99% Center, 95% Edge. I would recommend 8x40 / 8x42 for hand-held astronomy and birding. I've tried 10x50 but you get too much shake handholding for longer periods of time. They'll really need a tripod for astronomy use and at that point you'd be better off with a small telescope. 10x50 is pretty impractical for field carrying - just imagine carrying your binocular while hiking for miles on difficult terrain. 7x50 is a very specialized optic. It's a favorite of nautical use because it's brighter at night (for finding icebergs) and easier to hold steady on a rocking boat because of the lower magnification. Just as bulky as a 10x50, so not so great for birding, and the increased brightness actually worsens light pollution when viewing stars. (The stars are pin-points so they'll be just as bright, but the background will be brighter, thus reducing overall contrast.) INTJ Mastermind fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Mar 11, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2013 06:52
|
|
|
DAT RAM posted:I've got a little bit of an interest on looking up at the night sky, and my son is starting to gain one as well. We go camping a lot so I figured it'd be a neat thing to have with us for when the sun goes down. You're the sucker the current owner is hoping to hock it off to.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 11, 2013 22:38
|
|
|
Depends almost entirely on the quality and condition of the surface coatings.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 30, 2013 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 29, 2024 03:28 |
|
|
Just getting back into the hobby after being out of it for a few years and ordered myself a new Nexstar 6 SE! My previously owned scopes were a Celestron 5" Newtonian on a EQ mount, and a Celestron 8" SCT on a manual Alt/Az mount. Both of those scopes were excellent, and the 8" SCT especially was a lot of fun, but with Los Angeles's light pollution, finding enough visible stars to begin star hopping was very difficult. So I'm really excited about the GOTO feature in the Nexstar, which would hopefully allow me to start seeing things from the roof of my apartment instead of making a 45 minute drive to darker skies. For those that own one, what do you guys use for power? I've heard that the 8 AA's in the base hardly power the scope for more than a couple of hours at a time, and the big Celestron Power Tank looks kind of heavy and bulky. Online people have given good reviews of 12v lithium ion battery packs, and I'm just curious if anyone's tried one. INTJ Mastermind fucked around with this message at 01:58 on Jan 3, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2015 01:44
|
|