NSW Northern Rivers 2008

[CoombellKid]

Paul,

Having a look at the Orion models they too look to be long nosed. Not
sure if they are cheaper but maybe worth investigating. The other
interesting thing about the Celestrons is you will notice the cross
hairs are made from sewing needles, complete with eyes lol... true
I tell no lie. ; )

regards,CS

[Lismore Bloke (Paul)]

Jeez Rob, A $329 O111 filter to go on the 2" Nagler 20mm.
I definitely couldn't get that combo past the keeper of the coin!!!
The Onion Collimator from Bintel is $69. Seems pretty good.

[Lismore Bloke (Paul)]

Just called the Orion an onion....

[CoombellKid]

Originally Posted by Lismore Bloke

Jeez Rob, A $329 O111 filter to go on the 2" Nagler 20mm.
I definitely couldn't get that combo past the keeper of the coin!!!
The Onion Collimator from Bintel is $69. Seems pretty good.

Firstly Onion Collimator that's a new one.

The astronomiks 2" OIII's used to be $420.00, but I did managed to nab
one in pristine condition (apparently) second hand for $210 including
postage. While I was on a filter run I also ordered an astronomiks 1.25"
H-Beta from bintel this morning.

I had the lend of Glens 1.25" OIII for a couple of months a while ago.
And it sat perfectly in the eye cup of the 20mm t5 Eta Carina was
quite spectacular even with the limited FOV by using it that way. So
a 2" was always on the cards. Might even be able to tease out a few
of the Bok Globs in Eta Carina with that combo in the 16".

regards,CS

[CoombellKid]

Originally Posted by Lismore Bloke

I definitely couldn't get that combo past the keeper of the coin!!!

FWIW, divorce has it's benifits

regards,CS

[Lismore Bloke (Paul)]

I shouldn't complain. Spending money is what she and most other females are good at. I keep her out of shops at all costs. I have to play the part of Scrooge.

While I'm gathering information, what's your opinion on filters for general deep sky use? The UHC seems to be favoured. I may pick up one and possibly one good eyepiece, when I can ... but not until I have had a chance to look through a couple of the better Televue EP's. Tried a filter at Glen's the other night and it certainly increased contrast in the gaseous nebs. My problem here is general skyglow from typical suburban street lights. The ancient "deep sky filter" I got from Astro Optical years ago reduces starlight too much. Never liked it.

[CoombellKid]

Although I have never used one you can get a light pollution filter which
cuts down sky glow and those mercury vapor street lights. But if your
going for a nebula style filter go with a UHC they work on more objects
than most others. My filters are all astronomiks I've had the 1.25" UHC
for a few years so I'm keeping with the same brand, even works on semi
moon lit nights to some extent and rather well. The OIII's work on a
different set of emission lines and you'll see it effects work on fewer
objects (but work well) some objects will give you a different view when
each is applied seperately Eta Carina & Tarantula for instance. The Veil
on the other hand is quite faint unfiltered a lil better with a UHC... and
who turned the lights on! with an OIII. The H-Beta I ordered today is
really limited to the Horsehead, Glen probably knows of others that it
might work on.

So go for a UHC to start with and it'll work as good as any light pollution
filter. The big problem is they cut/vary stellar light so not helpful on
galaxies since the nebulous looking dust disc are made of stellar stuff.
I also find them good for locating small planetaries in a stellar field where
you wobble the filter between your eye and the EP while looking through
at the stars in FOV the stars will waver and the planetary will stay
constant and/or slightly brighter.

regards,CS

Originally Posted by Lismore Bloke

I shouldn't complain. Spending money is what she and most other females are good at. I keep her out of shops at all costs. I have to play the part of Scrooge.

While I'm gathering information, what's your opinion on filters for general deep sky use? The UHC seems to be favoured. I may pick up one and possibly one good eyepiece, when I can ... but not until I have had a chance to look through a couple of the better Televue EP's. Tried a filter at Glen's the other night and it certainly increased contrast in the gaseous nebs. My problem here is general skyglow from typical suburban street lights. The ancient "deep sky filter" I got from Astro Optical years ago reduces starlight too much. Never liked it.

[GrahamL]

I got a 2 " h -beta around x-mass rob but havn't really used it to much
I think its uses are the cocoon ,b33 and the california ,I think there may be some planetaries that don't emit strongly in O111 lines to from memory that it works on ...but I cant find that info for now .

hows the scope shapeing up mate ?

[Lismore Bloke (Paul)]

I thought that a UHC is the best all rounder and I think that's Glen's opinion too. Filter size is a bit of an issue. Bintel's prices on Astronomik UHC in 1 1/4 are $169 but 2" $329. Ouch. Similar diff. for others eg OIII and H-Beta. Makes me drift towards 1 1/4 eyepieces which leaves out the desirable Nagler 20mm. Am holding off on all this until I can actually get to look through some of these.

Had a bit of a look earlier this evening and compared the Andrews 2" cheapie GSO 32mm EP with my TV 32mm widefield. The Televue kicks butt and I know now why people spend $500 on 1 eyepiece (cause that about what that one cost, years ago). The star images are much sharper off axis that anything else I've got, but as I move the field about I can see that the field is far from flat. Reminds of of the space-time denonstration with a heavy globe sitting on a rubber sheet. I'm not an optics expert so I don't know how much of that is due to the mirror and how much is coming from the EP. Enough of me dribbling on ... sky is dark out there and moon setting. Cheers.

[CoombellKid]

Originally Posted by nightstalker

I got a 2 " h -beta around x-mass rob but havn't really used it to much
I think its uses are the cocoon ,b33 and the california ,I think there may be some planetaries that don't emit strongly in O111 lines to from memory that it works on ...but I cant find that info for now .

hows the scope shapeing up mate ?

It will be interesting to try your 2" H-Beta out, I got the 1.25" really only
because the Horsehead is rather small and so use my 14mm XW combo
on it. The Cocoon and California are fairly large probably more suited
to the 20mm t5.

Scope is coming along slowly. Just waiting on the Alt bearing which should
be here at the end of next week. Otherwise I'd almost have it to star
testing stage. Cant really make the rocker box until I get the bearings. Just
working on split blocks at present. Hopefully up and running by next new
moon. You guys want to come out here on the 30th or 31st of this month?

Stained and polyed the mirror box, cut the ground board and stained
and polyed. Tomorrow afternoon I'll attach the feet and wire in the bottom
section of the powered ground board kit. Brought a heavy duty jumpstarter
kit yesterday to power the system. It will give me about 24 hours of
supply plus it yellow and should be fairly easy to see in the dark. I did
test that last night but unfortunately I think the couple of bourbons I
had prior interfered with the test, I mistook it for one of Jake tonka trucks
and then couldn't find it (without a torch) doh!

regards,CS

[CoombellKid]

Paul,

Dont forget when you about to order something, place a wanted ad in
the trade forum. I saved myself $120.00 overnight on the OIII. And
that is how I got the 20mm t5 too for $570.00.

On another note by all means come and try out the filters we have and
bring your scope so you know how they're going to work for you. I have
higher power XW's as well as the 20mm t5, the XW's might change your
mind on higher powered Naglers. The only thing missing from my kit now
is either a 31mm t5 or a 30mm XW. But I am thinking along the lines of
31mm t5 and a 40mm XW I could also add a 7mm XW for planets
in the 16".

But in all reality I think I could probably live with just a 10mm XW and a
20mm t5. One thing about quality premium glass is it's beautiful to use
and pleasent in view _always_. Yes it is expensive but it's also 50% of
your optical train. I would take either of these two over 5 of anything less
in a snap. But in saying that you dont need premium glass to get enjoyment
out of this hobby and thats the beauty of it.

Originally Posted by Lismore Bloke

I thought that a UHC is the best all rounder and I think that's Glen's opinion too. Filter size is a bit of an issue. Bintel's prices on Astronomik UHC in 1 1/4 are $169 but 2" $329. Ouch. Similar diff. for others eg OIII and H-Beta. Makes me drift towards 1 1/4 eyepieces which leaves out the desirable Nagler 20mm. Am holding off on all this until I can actually get to look through some of these.

Had a bit of a look earlier this evening and compared the Andrews 2" cheapie GSO 32mm EP with my TV 32mm widefield. The Televue kicks butt and I know now why people spend $500 on 1 eyepiece (cause that about what that one cost, years ago). The star images are much sharper off axis that anything else I've got, but as I move the field about I can see that the field is far from flat. Reminds of of the space-time denonstration with a heavy globe sitting on a rubber sheet. I'm not an optics expert so I don't know how much of that is due to the mirror and how much is coming from the EP. Enough of me dribbling on ... sky is dark out there and moon setting. Cheers.

regards,CS

[CoombellKid]

Graham,

Did you end up getting those Super Nova search charts I saw you
tendering for in the trade forum? The ones I were after went : (
I'd like to get a SN program going.

regards,CS

[GrahamL]

Mate I sent the seller my details as requested and offered payment
and never heard back ?


hey guys what the large mottled nebula maybe 10 degrees or so north of grus ?

[glenc (Glen)]

Which part of Grus? NGC 7293 is 20 deg north.

[GrahamL]

yeah thats it ,the wife came home and turned the kitchen light on right after I spotted it ending my nights viewing. knew I'd been there before (more than once ) .. thanks glen

[CoombellKid]

Originally Posted by nightstalker

Mate I sent the seller my details as requested and offered payment
and never heard back ?

Bummer, they would of been good to have.

regards,CS

[glenc (Glen)]

I was sitting in my observatory looking at my star atlas yesterday afternoon when a lorikeet put his head in at the top corner where the wheels roll the roof out along the C section. A bit later the same bird came in on the opposite top corner. I waited awhile then he took off when I moved.

[GrahamL]

yeah they are pretty curious birds glen

10 mm xw like rob says paul (and no I don't have one )is about as good as you can get in that fl ..You might be able to live with the widefield for a while until the dustsettles then slip in a new low power eyepiece in time

[Lismore Bloke (Paul)]

Yes, that's basically what I plan to do, hold fire for a while and maybe get one good EP of about 20-22mm later on - whether 2" or smaller barrel is the question. I haven't seen a bad comment about the Pentax range, so it would be between it and the TV Panoptic or Nagler.I know Glen isn't completely sold on the 82 degree field but I haven't looked through either yet.

[GrahamL]

I guess when you have a look through a few paul you'll get a good idea what you like ..between us all you should get a decent look through a few differant makes.

I like my 13 mm naglers wide fov ,but at lower power I'm not so fussy
my 27 panoptic I find is plenty wide enough and my 28 mm pretoria
with its even narrower 55 degree fov gets just as much use .. very handy if you want to get a bright star out of view .

to many choices i reckon