Go Back   IceInSpace > Beginners Start Here > Beginners Equipment Discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 24-06-2020, 03:11 PM
bluesilver (Peter)
Registered User

bluesilver is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Australia, Tasmania
Posts: 193
Dedicated scope for planetary viewing only

Hi, I currently have a large Dobsonian, but what i am looking for is a solely dedicated scope designed just for viewing planets.
I realise this might be a very broad question, but was hoping i could possibly get some ideas on at least which way i should be looking.
I was thinking of the Skywatcher 180/2700 or the TS Optics Cassegrain telescope C 203/2436 OTA
But then again would something like the 150ED EVOSTAR Refractor OTA
or 120 Black Diamond ED Doublet Refractor OTA
Any adice would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 24-06-2020, 03:23 PM
Nikolas's Avatar
Nikolas (Nik)
Dazed and confused

Nikolas is online now
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,760
If you have the coin then the biggest diameter SCT is what you want. C11 C14 and their MEade equivalents will work really well for planets
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 24-06-2020, 03:26 PM
glend (Glen)
Registered User

glend is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Lake Macquarie
Posts: 5,973
The TS Optics you mention is actually a rebadged GSO Classical Cassegrain 8", f12, as sold in Australia by Andrews. I have one of these, and it is a fine planetary scope, and I am presently studying Jupiter and Saturn through it as they approach their near simultaneous oppositions with earth in a few weeks. There is also a new 10" Truss version of this same CC design, but couild your budget stretch that far, and then you need a good mount, minimum a CGX, so together that is getting up over $7k. Big SCT cost even more and all the usual drawbacks of SCT, like mirror flop, crappy focusing, fogging up, etc.
I would forget the Skywatcher EDs you mention, mostly because they are too short for serious planetary work, and they have colour fringing issues.

If you do have a large Dob it might be fine for planets with a good 2x, 3x etc Barlow lenses before your eye pieces, or a Paracore, cheaper than buying a new scope that requires an EQ mount.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 24-06-2020, 03:31 PM
bluesilver (Peter)
Registered User

bluesilver is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Australia, Tasmania
Posts: 193
Thanks for the replies.
Yes the Dobsonian is a great telescope,
Just was looking for something would deliver more sharper / detailed views i guess you could say.
I would be looking for a new mount also as i might possibly dabble into a little atrophotograghy of the planets, but for now mainly what i go with the best visual scope.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 24-06-2020, 04:52 PM
Startrek (Martin)
Registered User

Startrek is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Sydney
Posts: 2,615
For visual -
Any Newtonian reflector 6” and above at f5 or f6
Your eye piece does the rest
If budget allows go for premium high end quality Televue eye pieces they won’t disappoint
Clear skies
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 24-06-2020, 07:49 PM
mental4astro's Avatar
mental4astro (Alexander)
kids+wife+scopes=happyman

mental4astro is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 4,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesilver View Post
Just was looking for something would deliver more sharper / detailed views i guess you could say.
Peter, thing is you already have a scope that delivers what you want!

Why are you saying that your dob isn't up to the job?

The planets are a low contrast affair. With a 12" dob, your issue could just be too much light, which will overwhelm the subtle planetary detail. But the detail is all there, be it a 12" Newt like yours or a 12" SCT. The larger aperture will also provide greater resolution capability than a 7" or 8" Cassegrain of whatever design.

Have you tried using filter with your dob? Polarizing filters or Neutral Density filters will help tone down the brilliance without altering the colour. Colour filters will help bring out different planetary features too.

I have seen the same level of planetary detail in my 8" f/4 dobbie as an 8" SCT. But a larger aperture out does both of these for planetary detail.

Also, do not expect to see planetary detail in the same way as in photos. Photographs are all very processed to bring out improved contrast and colour saturation that is not the same as with looking through an eyepiece. Remember how I mentioned above that planetary detail is a low contrast thing? The photographic process of stacking and post processing helps to overcome this, but it an construct, not a true representation of how things appear through the eyepiece.

f/ratio is also not a problem. f/ratio is only a photographic parameter. An f/15 cassegrain will give the same image brilliance as an f/5 Newt, AT THE SAME MAGNIFICATION. So again, it's not your scope that is a problem. And both an f/15 cassegrain and f/5 Newt will both have the same amount of "difficulty" of showing planetary detail at the same magnification. It's then how you use the scope in order to help bring out the detail.

By way of example, I have owned two Maks, one a 7" the other a 9". Both Russian made beauties. I actually do find it easier to see detail on the planets in the 7" than the 9" and ONLY because those two extra inched of aperture makes the image that much brighter. However, the detail in the 9" is there, I just need to use this scope a little differently. Filters help a lot. Steady seeing is a must (which brings up another possible solution for you below*), filters also help, but patience is the key.

While aperture is King with astro scopes, the achilles heel of large aperture is seeing conditions. Larger apertures are much more sensitive to poor seeing than smaller apertures. This I've noticed between the 9" Mak vs the 7". This means that being able to use high magnification with a larger aperture can be more problematic than a smaller one. On those nights of poor seeing, I don't bring out the 9" Mak, or the 17.5" dob, but I do use an 80mm refractor or an 8" dobbie, respectively, and stick to lower magnifications as the image will be less affected by heat haze and the session is still a productive one. Most nights you just can't use anything over 150X, and that's that Adapting your planned viewing session to suit conditions is your Plan B.

A friend shared with me this gem that all of us should have as our mantra:
" Plan for 50X per inch, expect 25X per inch most nights, and pack a barlow in case you hit the jackpot!"

* One trick that may you may like to try before anything else is to stop down your 12" dob. Make a mask that goes over the opening of your dob, with a hole in it that is say 8" in diameter. You will then have yourself an 8" f/ 7.5" Newt. You will of course notice that the image will be dimmer (smaller aperture, duh...), but it may help improve the amount of planetary detail you do see - by virtue of that dimmer image! This stopping down of the aperture will also help a little more if seeing conditions are not ideal for a larger aperture. *

---

There are all manner of tricks that are available to us in order to get the best performance out of our scopes both for our eyes and cameras. It's then just a matter of knowing these and remembering them... sometimes easier said than done... This is why I think your post is a great one, as it makes me recall what all the tricks in the box are and then dust some of them off again as sometimes I too forget them! So, great thread, Peter!
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 24-06-2020, 08:11 PM
mental4astro's Avatar
mental4astro (Alexander)
kids+wife+scopes=happyman

mental4astro is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 4,863
There is one other thing that REALLY helps with dobs at high magnification - fine tuning your mount!

I have no problem using my 8" f/4 dob at 320X. Even when using an eyepiece with a modest 58° apparent field of view. I made a series of sketches of a shadow transit going across Jupiter a little while back, and I only used my manual 8" f/4 dob for this at 320X, and not the 8" SCT with tracking I had at the time for this. The whole shadow transit event lasted for two hours, and it was pee easy following Jupiter all this time. I could have used that SCT, but that dobbie is just so much easier to set up and I was just too lazy arsed to set up the SCT, but I knew I could do this just as easily with this dobbie. The trick though is keeping the mount itself tuned up.

Below is the little video I made using that series of Jupiter sketches of the shadow transit. I didn't use any colour filters, just a neat view of Jupiter using a 5mm 58° eyepiece in that 8" f/4 dob.



Tuning up a dob mount means giving it a little TLC at least once a year so that the bearings are moving nice and smooth, and the scope is not sticking or difficult to move. As the bearings get dirty, the action begins to get jerky and more difficult to do very small and fine little nudges. If you haven't treated the bearings with a little cleaning and TLC, then you are in for a surprise once you do!

Where you set up is also important. Lush turf is the worst possible situation for most dobs. The bottom of the ground board sits on the soft turf itself, not the hard ground, and it means that the turf in now part of the mount, and its sponginess needs to be overcome before the scope begins to move, so more force is needed, and when you release the scope it bounces back as the spongy turf springs back - backlash. Lush turf is not a good surface for most dobs.

Alex.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 25-06-2020, 04:23 AM
astro744
Registered User

astro744 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 870
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesilver View Post
Thanks for the replies.
Yes the Dobsonian is a great telescope,
Just was looking for something would deliver more sharper / detailed views i guess you could say.
I would be looking for a new mount also as i might possibly dabble into a little atrophotograghy of the planets, but for now mainly what i go with the best visual scope.
A Newtonian with a first class primary and secondary mirror is one of the best telescopes available for planetary viewing especially when on a driven platform to allow long term study of planetary detail.

If you feel the image in your current mirror breaks down at higher powers even under excellent seeing then consider having the primary refigured. A first class mirror gives the following when seeing allows:

1. Allows higher magnification giving a larger image scale to see more detail.
2. At higher powers the image is less bright meaning no need for polarising filters. Such filters do in fact compromise resolution meaning fine detail will be lost. (I have a Meade model and it eats small craters on the Moon; they simply vanish as I dim the image by polarising).
3. The high degree of polish and surface accuracy of a first class mirror will improve contrast of fine low contrast planetary details.
4. No need for an aperture mask which really only throttles your telescope in terms of resolution. Why do that if seeing permits full aperture viewing even for only the briefest of glimpses. Note if using an aperture mask you want an off axis one to provide an unobstructed view. For a 12” Mirror you will be limited to approx. 4.5” aperture mask, likely a little less. (Pri-sec /2). You need to fit the smaller aperture between your spider vanes. An 8” aperture must would not be possible with a 12” telescope without obstruction and if on axis would effectively give less contrast due to the effects of a greater secondary obstruction ratio.

Having tracking when planetary viewing offers one of the greatest benefits. Not having to constantly nudge the telescope means you can concentrate on the image itself enabling you pick out the finer detail more easily. Yes wide AFOV eyepieces can and do help with untracked telescopes provided they are highly corrected to give a sharper image to as close to the edge as possible in your telescope.

If you feel your mirror is up to the task then it’s likely seeing (local and atmospheric) that is limiting what you can see. (Assuming your telescope is well collimated too). Observe as many times as you can and you will know when you get excellent seeing as the image will suddenly show detail that simply wasn’t seen before. Enjoy!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 25-06-2020, 07:09 AM
Tulloch's Avatar
Tulloch (Andrew)
Registered User

Tulloch is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 275
Hi there, my 2 cents would be to look into a large SCT on an alt/az mount. You don't mention a budget, but IMHO the Celestron Evolution 9.25" would be an excellent choice for planetary viewing and imaging (it's what I use for both).

SCTs have the advantage of very long native focal lengths (the C9.25" has a f/l of 2350mm) which is needed for planetary without being too large physically. The alt/az Evolution mount is easy to set up, tracks well, and is quite suited for planetary imaging also. I found it easier to collimate than a Newt.

It is more expensive than the options you were looking at, but there's one for sale on Gumtree right now

Andrew
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 25-06-2020, 03:12 PM
bluesilver (Peter)
Registered User

bluesilver is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Australia, Tasmania
Posts: 193
Thanks for the replies, a lot of great information there.
I should of mentioned that the Dobsonian is the 16 inch Skywatcher goto version, missed that part out.
For eye pieces, I have a Tele Vue Delos 10mm and a Tele Vue Powermate 2.5X, then just the standard 20 mm and 10mm eyepieces.

So just to help make sure i a reading and understanding this correctly, So to get better image quality / sharpness from my Donsonian, I could possible make one of these aperture masks?
Plus also look at colour filters?
No advantage in looking at something like the Celestron C11, C9.5 unless i want to take photos?
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 25-06-2020, 04:31 PM
GUS.K's Avatar
GUS.K (Ivan)
Registered User

GUS.K is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Medlow Bath
Posts: 419
Peter, when seeing allows, my 18 inch dob delivers some stunning planetary views, far exceeding anything smaller. I use pentax XW, Delos, Baader Morpheus, really any good quality eyepiece and I don't use filters. A well collimated and acclimated dob, and good seeing is all you need.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 25-06-2020, 05:41 PM
mental4astro's Avatar
mental4astro (Alexander)
kids+wife+scopes=happyman

mental4astro is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 4,863
Peter, like Ivan says, your dob as it is is all that's needed. The key is patience.

A mask does two things: it can help when seeing conditions are not optimal, and it will show you what it means to have a smaller aperture in terms of loss of resolution - there's no free lunch anywhere here... but it can help tone down the image if you are still struggling. Get a smaller scope and you lose resolution power too

A filter, colour, polarizing, neutral density, whatever, if it is of good quality won't wipe out detail. If this happens then thete are other issues at play. Colour filters can help bring out some specific planetary details, but not everything at once, and they are a niche item. The one I most use is 80A Blue, a good all-rounder. It helps on Jupiter with showing cloud bands, making the GRS easier to see, and bring out the white ovals, with Saturn to show up a little more cloud bands and ring details, and with Mars to show high clouds mostly along the limb. Other filters help wiuth the same or other details. But even with filters, PATIENCE is the key. Everything about astro needs patience. Expect instant gratification and you will miss out on most of what astro has to offer.

Other scopes, like a C11 or C9.5 is fine but they do require a tracking mount, whether it's for photo or visual. I would suggest to try to get the most out of your dob first because you will learn more this way than rely on a smaller aperture, along with the mount, to only show no more than you can with your dob. For photo, you will be surprised what a good 8" Cassegrain can pull for detail!

You can actually do planetary photography with you dob too, in case you didn't know. A video file is caputured, and then processed using the same stacking and processing software as everyone here uses, and punch out some stunning pics. The software lines up the moving image automatically so there's no issue there.

AND it is possible to get/make an equatorial platform for your dob too. These give you anywhere between 60 to 80 minutes of tracking time. Then your photo capability also expands, and all with the one and the same scope.

See, any options all without getting a new & smaller scope.

But in the end it is all up to you.

Ah, one last thing, if you haven't as yet, look at going to a local astro club meet. There you will find people who will show you how to collimate your scope until it squeals, lend you an eyepiece or too, and let you see through their scopes as to what they, and your, scopes are fully capable of. This way you can make thevery best informed and experienced decision that best suits YOU.

Alex.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 25-06-2020, 06:29 PM
Tulloch's Avatar
Tulloch (Andrew)
Registered User

Tulloch is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesilver View Post
Thanks for the replies, a lot of great information there.
I should of mentioned that the Dobsonian is the 16 inch Skywatcher goto version, missed that part out.
For eye pieces, I have a Tele Vue Delos 10mm and a Tele Vue Powermate 2.5X, then just the standard 20 mm and 10mm eyepieces.

So just to help make sure i a reading and understanding this correctly, So to get better image quality / sharpness from my Donsonian, I could possible make one of these aperture masks?
Plus also look at colour filters?
No advantage in looking at something like the Celestron C11, C9.5 unless i want to take photos?
A 16" Goto Dob!

I reckon that would be ideal for viewing and especially imaging the planets, the amount of resolution you could get with that when imaging would be extraordinary! No need for an eq mount for planetary, alt/az is fine. 3 min videos for Jupiter, 5 min for Saturn. Grab an ASI224MC or the latest ASI462MC and away you go!

Here's a taste with a 14"
https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/6...w-dob-14-goto/
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 25-06-2020, 06:36 PM
bluesilver (Peter)
Registered User

bluesilver is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Australia, Tasmania
Posts: 193
Thanks again for the replies, Lots of great information and greatly appreciate it all.
If you don't mind me asking just one more question, as this has been playing on the mind also a little after reading through the replies.
Say i have a 14 inch Dobsonian which has a, aperture of 355mm with a focal length of 1650mm F4.5 and a Clestron C14 with a aperture of 355mm with a focal length of 3910mm F/11 ( only using these two as they both have the same aperture )
Would the Clestron be better suited for planetary viewing compared to the Dobsonian, and the Dobsonian better suited to viewing galaxies, nebular?
Just thought i would ask while sort of on the topic.
Would really appreciate any information on this.
Thanks again.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 25-06-2020, 06:53 PM
Tulloch's Avatar
Tulloch (Andrew)
Registered User

Tulloch is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 275
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluesilver View Post
Thanks again for the replies, Lots of great information and greatly appreciate it all.
If you don't mind me asking just one more question, as this has been playing on the mind also a little after reading through the replies.
Say i have a 14 inch Dobsonian which has a, aperture of 355mm with a focal length of 1650mm F4.5 and a Clestron C14 with a aperture of 355mm with a focal length of 3910mm F/11 ( only using these two as they both have the same aperture )
Would the Clestron be better suited for planetary viewing compared to the Dobsonian, and the Dobsonian better suited to viewing galaxies, nebular?
Just thought i would ask while sort of on the topic.
Would really appreciate any information on this.
Thanks again.
In a word, Yes. However ...

The planets are small and bright. Really small, and really bright. You need a long focal length to see them clearly, but don't need a "fast scope". However, it is possible with the use of a Barlow/Powermate to get the focal length of the Dob up to that of the SCT. However, the question is, is the optical quality of the 14" Dob equal to the 14" SCT? Probably not. However, is it "good enough"? Only you can decide.

Nebulae are big and dim - really big and (mostly) really dim. You need a short focal length and a fast scope. However it is possible to turn your SCT into a fast(ish) scope by using an f/6.3 focal reducer or (if you really want to spend some money) a HyperStar attachment to turn your f/10 SCT into an f2 scope.

Just my 2c.

Andrew

Last edited by Tulloch; 25-06-2020 at 07:10 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 25-06-2020, 07:12 PM
bluesilver (Peter)
Registered User

bluesilver is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Australia, Tasmania
Posts: 193
Thanks again, appreciated.
Will have to wait until the weather fines up here to give these few things a try.
Really appreciate all the advice and information on this.
It has been greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 26-06-2020, 01:58 AM
ngcles's Avatar
ngcles
The Observologist

ngcles is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Billimari, NSW Central West
Posts: 1,621
Dedicated scope for planetary viewing ... only?

Hi Peter,

The things that will make for a good "planetary viewing only" telescope are (not in any particular order):

(1) Good to long focal length (ie more than 1,500mm f.l) because you can use longer focal length eyepieces with bigger eye lenses and comfortable eye relief resulting in less eye-strain from peering through a pinhole with your eye pressed up hard against the eye lens. Planetary observing takes time and patience until the right moment(s) come along when the seeing settles and everything that can be seen in a particular aperture, becomes visible. Sometimes it can mean many, many minutes before that moment or two comes along. That comfort level is a nice thing to have.

(2) High accuracy, well collimated optic set. Newtonians do tend to need more frequent "tuning" in this department. Refractors and catadioptric telescopes generally hold collimation better. Collimating a telescope is a basic skill and once you are used to it, isn't difficult -- but it is critical to getting the best planetary views particularly with an f/4.4 like the Skywatcher where the difference between "close" and "perfect" is a very small margin and makes a substantial difference on eyepiece image quality.

(3) No central obstruction or at worst a small one. This is why, inch-for-inch, refractors rule. The problem is that they aren't readily available above about 150mm aperture. If the aperture contemplated is above 150mm, a Newtonian with a small secondary is the next best performer. If well made, collimated etc it will normally produce the best and most contrasty visual image. 9/10 nights when the seeing is okay, good or even very good you won't notice a difference between a 'scope with a small secondary and one of equal aperture using a larger secondary. It's on night 10 the difference will become apparent in the eyepiece. It is for this reason catadioptric 'scopes like Maksutov Cassegrainians and Schmidt-Cassegrainians are generally not the 'scope of choice because their secondary mirrors are so large (between 30-40% of the aperture by diameter). Large central obstructions transfer light from the central dot of an airy disc to the surrounding diffraction rings. This is a contrast killer on that 10th/10 night(s). Both these designs have good to long native focal lengths which is nice but large obstructions, which aren't. The secondary in the Skywatcher 16" f/4.4 is 25% which is not ideal either, but somewhat better than all commercial catadioptric telescopes. Kept under 20% by diameter, the secondary size will have very, very little effect on visual image contrast. One thing about Skywatcher telescopes: I have used more than two dozen over the last twenty years and I'm yet to see a "dud" optic set. Routinely they are good to very good for a mass-produced telescope.

(4) Aperture rules. A good big telescope (assuming equal quality optics) will always outperform a good little telescope on planets. You will see finer detail due to better resolving power, more easily and there will be a considerable improvement in colour saturation. In this last department, using a couple of examples I happen to own -- an 18" f/4.9 Dobson-mounted Newtonian -v- a Celestron C8 is a humbling experience for the C8. Viewing Jupiter at similar magnifications where the colours are pretty subtle, the 8" eyepiece image almost looks black & white while the 18" is filled with abundant subtle colour. More light equals more for your cone-cells to work on and a more pleasing, more detailed view.

(5) As with all types of observing, a good telescope is the one you'll be inclined to use frequently. As for this aspect, your personal circumstances are best known to you. It's all well and good to own a big 'scope but no point if the trouble of getting it out and deployed means it sits sulking in the corner of the shed all the time.

The Skywatcher 16" isn't a bad choice at all provided you have some good eyepieces and it is carefully collimated. Lots of aperture = lots of detail + colour. The tracking is a decided bonus meaning the target can be left centred in the eyepiece at pretty high magnification where the image quality is optimal. The size of the secondary mirror (25%) isn't optimal, but there are worse out there. The thing the Maksutov's and Schmidt-Cassegrainians have going for them is good aperture with a relatively long focal length and in a compact, portable package. The con to that is the very large secondary mirror and high cost compared to a Newtonian of the same aperture. As I said, inch-for-inch, refractors rule but generally speaking, they don't have a lot of inches and every one of those inches is mighty expensive for a quality instrument.

The things that make for a good deep sky telescope aren't that different to a good planetary telescope: Quality optics, good contrast elements and ... aperture rules.

Best of luck with your choice,

L.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 26-06-2020, 04:49 AM
astro744
Registered User

astro744 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 870
The brightness of the image as seen visually is determined by exit pupil alone no matter what f ratio your telescope is.

E.g. take two telescopes, one at 200mm aperture, f5, 1000mm focal length and the other 200mm aperture, f10, 2000mm focal length.

Exit pupil = aperture/magnification
also
exit pupil = focal length of eyepiece/focal ratio of telescope

Take the first equation with no reference to any eyepiece.

Say you want 50x magnification. In the first telescope (200mm aperture) exit pupil = 200/50=4mm. In the second telescope exit pupil =200/50=4mm. Both telescopes give the same exit pupil and therefore the same image brightness at 50x, or any other common magnification irrespective of the f ratio of the telescope.

Now to achieve 50x in the 1000mm focal length telescope which is f5 you need a 20mm eyepiece. Exit pupil also is 20/5=4mm. To achieve 50x in the 200mm telescope which is f10 you need a 40mm eyepiece. Exit pupil is 40/10=4mm. Same exit pupil at different f ratios gives same brightness by using different f.l. Eyepieces.

My planetary telescope of choice is a large Newtonian (10 to 16”) with premium mirrors that acclimatise quickly (and stay that way) with around 20% central obstruction certainly no more that 25% and mounted on a tracking platform. When seeing permits this type of telescope excels on planetary viewing.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 26-06-2020, 09:18 AM
mental4astro's Avatar
mental4astro (Alexander)
kids+wife+scopes=happyman

mental4astro is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: sydney, australia
Posts: 4,863
A lot of good info has been posted here. Can be overwhelming though and confusing.

What maybe is being forgotten a little is the learning process that must be undertaken through experience at the eyepiece, and how to take advantage of the gear that you have right now. We here are all very happy to spend your money, , but sometimes it is not spending the dollars that one needs to do...

The following is an article/thread I've written that talks about how to get the most out of your gear AND your human eyes when it comes to the Moon and planets. It also describes what scopes can and can't do, and gives suggestions on what to look for on the Moon and planets. All with the one key point at the forefront - PATIENCE.

Observing the Moon and planets - the good juice and cheats...

I also have a related article to do with deep sky objects that is written in a similar fashion:

Understanding Nebulae - what it is you are looking at

One thing I have done in both articles is use as many of my own sketches that I have done at the eyepiece to show how things appear rather than use photographs as these are less of a true representation of how things appear through the eyepiece.

Take your time, Peter. There is a lot to learn here, and your current scope (be it the dob you have, or a refractor someone else has, or a Cassegrain other person has) it has a lot to offer and teach. Just be patient. It will also help you make much more sense of the good info that has been offered in this thread, not just for you but whom ever should also have the same questions as you.

Alex.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 08:30 PM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Limpet Controller
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement
NexDome Observatories
Advertisement
Testar
Advertisement
Astronomy and Electronics Centre
Advertisement