The 6mm Plössl eyepiece from the Skywatcher Eyepiece And Filter Kit (Skywatcher branded version of the Celestron Astromaster Accessory Kit). 15mm Kellner, 6mm Plössl, 2x Barlow, and 3 filters, lunar; #80A blue; and #25 red.
Straight after unpacking the kit, I tried using the 6mm Plössl eyepiece, looking at the moon, as it was nearly a full moon. Dim image, even before I used the lunar filter from the kit. Add to that its poor eye relief, which made it a pain to try to use. After trying the eyepiece, I put it back in the case and have never considered using it again. It just sits in the case, wasting space.
I'll defend straight-through finders. I grew up using one, fortunately on a very tall scope. By keeping both eyes open I can use them as a zero-power finder and then close one eye when the target is in the fov. RA finders are useless for this, so unless I use the laser as a zero-power finder I can't find a thing with an RA finder.
My wife once borrowed one of those 'point it at the sky and it will tell you what you are looking at' devices. Worse than useless. Firstly, the display overwhelms the sky so you can't even see the star/area you are trying to identify. Despite that the display is too faint to be easily read. Then the pointing accuracy is lucky to be 5* so you could aim it at M7 and be told you are looking at M6, or M8 or some mag 14 galaxy.
I'll defend straight-through finders. I grew up using one, fortunately on a very tall scope. By keeping both eyes open I can use them as a zero-power finder and then close one eye when the target is in the fov. RA finders are useless for this, so unless I use the laser as a zero-power finder I can't find a thing with an RA finder.
My wife once borrowed one of those 'point it at the sky and it will tell you what you are looking at' devices. Worse than useless. Firstly, the display overwhelms the sky so you can't even see the star/area you are trying to identify. Despite that the display is too faint to be easily read. Then the pointing accuracy is lucky to be 5* so you could aim it at M7 and be told you are looking at M6, or M8 or some mag 14 galaxy.
I will acknowledge that you do indeed make a very valid point on the duality of their usefulness. Unfortunately for me though I could just never get my head around (literally) using one. You are quite right about the limitation of an RA finderscope as I discovered the first time out under truly dark skies... I now have a red dot finder fitted as well...
On the other point, I use my phone with skysafari plus which enables you to point at the sky to identify things... It's not too bad but, doubt it has the real discrimination necessary for objects that are close together. I find I tend to use it to identify bright stars during alignments (or even the not so bright for calibration stars on the Celestron mount) & as a handy reference for looking up catalogue numbers & gauging what I should be looking for
I'll defend straight-through finders. I grew up using one, fortunately on a very tall scope. By keeping both eyes open I can use them as a zero-power finder and then close one eye when the target is in the fov. RA finders are useless for this, so unless I use the laser as a zero-power finder I can't find a thing with an RA finder.
This is a very good point. I've often stuggled with the ergonomics of my straight through finder when using the C6 on it's Nexstar mount. I've always used it "both eyes open", as you can train your brain to overlay the crosshair on the sky directly. Yeah, I have enough light pollution that the black cross is quite visible against the sky. This is just how I used to aim when shooting with a red dot scope.
I'm hoping to get a RACI finder one day, to save my neck from the pain. Your point makes it appear this may be "one step forward, one step back". Perhaps a RACI AND a red dot would be ideal?
Carlton's thread intention has already been delivered Thankyou
W
Straight through finderscopes... I have binned or onsold pretty much every single one that ever came with a scope I bought or whatever... Why: because I simply cannot contort my neck into the ridiculous positions necessary to actually be able to look squarely through one.. irrespective of what sort of mount I was using...
.
I partly agree. I find 6X30 straight-through finders pretty good if mounted at the top end of the telescope where one can easily look through it with both eyes open. I have them mounted that way on one refractor and two Newtonians.
Certainly, the classic refractor finder - placed next to the focuser - is often pretty useless, unless looking at something near the horizon or one has no problem with being a contortionist.
Regards,
Renato
Lewis,
Why the "issue" with a flip mirror diagonal??
I have both the 1.25" and 2" Meade flip mirror systems and they are great!
A quality mirror which can be used both for visual and imaging...
I also make use of Vixen flip mirrors - I have many!!! The mirror is absolute rubbish - OK as a visual "finder" but no good as an image mirror.
(I remove the mirrors and turn them into beamsplitters for spectroscope guiding. The vixen body with T threads is great.)
All astrophotography related gear , many pics over and over and over and ..wait for it over again of the same stuff all are amazing but endlessly boring to .. thankfully its quite cheap to pull off
* Eyepiece solar filters. They crack when overheated and when an eye is behind the eyepiece this will result in blindness and no opthomalogist can help you. Furtunately they are not sold anymore - as new.
* Straight-through large binoculars on tripod. Only useful for terrestial viewing or astronomical objects low in the sky. Otherwise, you have to be in a very acrobatic position to look through the eyepieces and the tripod is in the way as well.
* Many finderscopes, as these easily become misaligned with the main scope, I have a simple 1/2" PVC pipe opticsless peephole mounted on my 16" Dobson which makes finding easier. For smaller scopes (my 110 and 80mm) I use no external finder at all: use the telescope itself as finderscope by popping in the eyepiece with the largest TFOV (2.5-3º).
* Sigma Octantis finding tools for polar alignment. I use my polar scope and put the less known +6.9 BQ Octantis (10' off the real Pole) in the center of the field. Even at 600mm (Fullframe) I can track up till four minutes per frame without noticeable trails.
Skypod, very hard to properly water proof, can't view the zenith (without spending more) to small for a 10" reflector. Could go no but they are the main things.
I reckon clouds are the worst. They must be an accessory as every time I take the scope out lately they arrive. If I could find the cord attached to the scope I'd cut it.
Pete
I reckon clouds are the worst. They must be an accessory as every time I take the scope out lately they arrive. If I could find the cord attached to the scope I'd cut it.
Pete
Polar scopes on my HEQ5 and EQ6-R mounts
Never ever used them , never needed to use them and if I did my neck would be in brace for two weeks recovering from neck strain
Totally useless for an older person
Polar scopes on my HEQ5 and EQ6-R mounts
Never ever used them , never needed to use them and if I did my neck would be in brace for two weeks recovering from neck strain
Totally useless for an older person
Is the mount on such a low tripod ? I have a Vixen SP and, coming from N Europe (52 N) where I live, it is a relief that I use it on 34S (Sydney) or even less latitude so that the pole is not that high in the sky.
But I have found a solution for that: use an angle finder for a camera. Lots of cheap ones ton ebay or Aliexpress. And a DIY adapter of 32mm PVC plumbing sockets will attach it to the finderscope.
romp down memory lane .
Thankyou 
