The Official Astronomy Thread

[Kalvaer]

Duly noted thanks. The only thing that bothers me is the Sky-Watcher pricing. Why are they so much cheaper? It must come at a price to build quality...

Nope. (And late reply, but I've been on vacation)

Synta originally used to make things for some of the major brands around the the world, before finally deciding to sell under their own brand name (aka: sky watcher)

If you buy Orion equipment, its made by synta, shipped to the UK usually and then imported to SA.

Skywatcher equipment on the other hand in SA, is shipped directly from synta to SA to the dealers. Skywatcher used to be pretty even with Orion in SA pricewise. That was until the dealership owners changed. The current owner of the dealership in SA is an avid astronomer and is more interested with selling more telescopes to the general public and growing the interest, than making a quick buck. Hence the lower prices.

PS: I dont have any shares in skywatcher.. just know the dealer and he is a really great guy as many here who have bought from him will agree to

 

[mercurial]

At that price it better be!

The 82 deg FoV should be sweet. It's similar to the Naglers.

I promise you it's all worth it. It's a lovely eyepiece. It's built quite tough and sturdy and the eye relief is a dream

 

[Crusader]

Mmm... Might look into investing in some after I buy my third scope, although that's still far in the future.

 

[AllBrain]

Mmm... Might look into investing in some after I buy my third scope, although that's still far in the future.

Like my brother use to say when he was still young: One day when I am big

Got myself the Orion 10mm Sirius Plossl eyepiece and I am very happy with it. On its own without the Barlow lens it’s wonderful to use. With the Barlow lens objects gets a bit dark but you could not expect much with the light pollution in Johannesburg. I will have to go test this setup somewhere in the bush to see what it can do.

I cannot seem to get Jupiter into focus at max magnification. The bottom half of it seems fuzzy and I wonder if this does not point to mirror alignment needed?

 

[Crusader]

The higher the magnification the dimmer the object will become regardless of where you view from. Obviously light pollution does play a role as well but under dark skies the object will also become dimmer, you should just be able to detect it easier.

Fuzziness on Jupiter could be atmospheric conditions. It's pretty low unless you view it after midnight. Check if it is constantly so or if it improves for a couple seconds.

 

[AllBrain]

I usually watch the skies between 21:00 and 22:00 but I think I should try later as like you said Jupiter is still very low on the horizon at that time of the night. I need to start looking for a spot outside Johannesburg that is safe for watching the skies. The light pollution in my complex on ground level is horrible.

 

[mercurial]

Jupiter is quite visible around midnight...

 

[bwana]

Might be useful to some

Free astronomy software for iphone, available today only.

 

[mercurial]

Guys, are any of you familiar with TSA Optics? Their telescopes are quite cheap compared to most of the familar brands. I also wanted to know what the difference between a normal achromatic refractor and a short tube refractor is.

 

[mercurial]

http://lucastronomy.co.za/

 

[Crusader]

Never heard of TSA. A short tube refractor is the same as a achro, the only difference is that they have short focal lengths and thus fast f-ratios. What this means is that they provide a large fov at a low magnification. Problem is that CA is much more severe and it wouldn't work well for planets etc. For widefield views as a grab and go they are good.

 

[mercurial]

Never heard of TSA. A short tube refractor is the same as a achro, the only difference is that they have short focal lengths and thus fast f-ratios. What this means is that they provide a large fov at a low magnification. Problem is that CA is much more severe and it wouldn't work well for planets etc. For widefield views as a grab and go they are good.

Aah, thanks. I think TSA is TelescopeSA Optics, which is a store I've bought from before. Seems like they are coming out with their own line of goodies.

 

[Gaz{M}]

I had the privilege of sampling a 6" orion reflector and an 8" dobsonian recently. Jupiter looked stunning in the 6". Even at 80x power, you can see a lot of detail on the planet and 3 of the moons. It looked something like this:

I then tried 160x power, but the planet moves a bit too quickly to view comfortably. Also, it isn't that much bigger in the eyepiece.

What I learned from this exercise is that magnification isn't as important as clear skies and good optics when viewing the large planets. Also, if you have the money and only want to view planets at high mag, get an autotracking scope.

The huge disappointment was the 8" dobsonian, not the telescope itself, but the view of a rather common galaxy (can't remember the name). I could barely see anything besides the faintest blob. I had to wiggle the telescope just to let my eyes notice the black blob on the black sky.

It looked something like this (with some stars):

In fact, the blob was darker than that, but wouldn't show up on your computer screen.

What I learned from this is that viewing galaxies in the city limits is a waste of time. You need a 12" and dark skies before you will see anything even remotely impressive.

So what advice can I offer? Buy the best 6" you can find, preferably an auto-tracker. Then enjoy stunning planet views in the city. Don't bother going large (>6") because what is the point if you can't see anything that the 6" can't already manage. I also viewed some binary stars, clusters etc. in the 6" and it was decent.

I have finally convinced myself that what astronomers have said in the past is so true: "The best telescope is one you can use often, not the biggest."

 

[Gaz{M}]

PS: I also realised that I don't like the dobsonian mount at all. Yes, it is "easier" to setup and point in a general direction, but the EQ mount gives you micro controls to track objects and once you have practiced, you can point it fairly quickly anyway. With the dobsonian, you have to apply a force just past the point of friction in the mount to get it to move. This usually results in a large jump in the field of view.

 

[mercurial]

Yip, that's why I want to get a Newtonian with an EQ mount and auto-tracking.

 

[Crusader]

Actually a Dobsonian mount is quite easy to use to track once you get used to it and if the mount has a smooth enough motion. I have no problem tracking manually at around 300x.

As for galaxies, they aren't called faint fuzzies for nothing. Even 16"+ won't have details jump out at you. You need to train yourself to see and tweak out every bit of detail. That takes time and effort. Dark skies will definitely help.

 

[Crusader]

Are you sure it was a galaxy and not the Helix Nebula? From the sketch the general shape reminds me of the Helix Nebula.

Which Alt-az mount did you use? (A Dob mount is also an Alt-Az). Most of the Alt-Az mounts that have slow-motion controls have somewhat limited travel needing 'resetting' after about 10-15 mins - at least the one on my refractor does.

 

[mercurial]

It's a hassle to sit and physically move the telescope all the time. We want an automated solution, which is best.

 

[Crusader]

I'm definitely not against an automated scopes. Just want to clarify that a Dob isn't bad at tracking manually - it just take some getting used to. With some practise it becomes second nature without bumping the scope around. Obviously they aren't for everyone but there's a reason that it's the most used scope in amateur hands.

 

[Kalvaer]

but there's a reason that it's the most used scope in amateur hands.

Price Or as the americans say "best band for your buck.

The tube assemble and mirrors on newts and dobs are the same. But the mounts cost money, and there is also a reason for that as well