dse 114mm reflector

[sandusky (Des)]

bought used scope but missing view finder and counterweight anyone out there help, also need user manual if one available thanks sandusky.

[renormalised (Carl)]

Hi Des, welcome to IIS

You'd have been better off getting an "el cheapo" Celestron from a camera shop than buying this scope. You're probably going to have to knock up your own counterweight for it as I don't think you can get another specifically for the scope. Any viewfinder from a dedicated telescope seller would be infinitely better than the cheap plastic crud on the scope you bought. Try Bintel. Actually, what you should do is save up for awhile and get yourself a proper telescope. The cheap toy you bought second hand will only be a source of frustration and disappointment for you and you'll most likely trash it at some stage, anyway. A Skywatcher 6" dob (alt-az reflector) from the guys I mentioned would be infinitely better and more usable than the dse scope.

[torana68 (Roger)]

Originally Posted by sandusky

bought used scope but missing view finder and counterweight anyone out there help, also need user manual if one available thanks sandusky.

unfortunately not worth spending money on.

[mswhin63 (Malcolm)]

Hi Des,

You have just met Renoralised, someone with an aquired taste (straight to the point) anyway he is right. I made the same mistake in my first scope selection.

I would look at the classified section of Iceinspace prefeably advertised by someone with a few posts under the belt.

The best way is to ask loads of questions, someone will be able to assist or maybe search for some older thread to get an idea. This is a brilliant place to start.

A popular starter scope is the Dobsonian, be aware for the better side of astro stuff you are going to need something at the very minimum $400.00 to get started.

[Rob_K]

I don't see what the fuss is. A 114x900mm reflector is a perfectly good scope, and while I haven't actually used a DSE scope, I'd imagine it is a re-branded Chinese scope not much different to Celestron's and others. This size is one that will ensure good use, and from personal experience I can tell you that I have spent untold enjoyable nights out under the stars with a cheap 114mm scope. Sometimes I get sick of the 'elitist' replies that newcomers get, always telling them to go for big dobs, better eyepieces etc - spend, spend, spend. Not necessary, and not everyone has the money.

Sandusky's question was simple, and hasn't been answered. Someone out there might have a finder scope & counterweight for you - if you can't locate a finder scope, then mobs like Andrews & Bintel have very cheap red dot finders. These are very easy to use. (Spend, LOL!) You may be able to make up a counterweight to clamp on.

As far as a manual goes, this one should cover all you want to know:
http://www.skywatchertelescope.net/s...AL_EQ1and2.pdf

Good luck with it all -

Cheers -

[mill (Martin)]

You have hit the nail on the head Rob.
I had a meade 114mm reflector on an alt/az as my first scope and had some good views thru it.
It is not about how big the scope is but how you use it and once you know how to use it you can always step up and get a better/bigger but more $$$$ scope.
The only thing to give a miss is a scope with a fixed barlow in the system (like my meade had and made it a pita to collimate ).

[bojan]

For finder, this will be ok:
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/Meade-Telesco...item3f033d99dd

or this:
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/RED-DOT-FINDE...item4152eeb446

or this:
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI....l%3FMyEbayBeta

or this:
http://cgi.ebay.com.au/BSA-Holograph...item483b7e8403

(the last two are very well made, all metal construction)


All of those are way cheaper than Bintel and/or Andrews, and I have them all (or used to have them), they are quite adequate


As for counter-weight, a long time ago I made one from concrete - I used a plastic bottle as a mould and PVC tube in the middle for shaft. The cost: NOTHING (if I don't count couple of hours of my time)

[mswhin63 (Malcolm)]

I looked at the 114 from DSE early in the piece and it is a sort tube (in-built barlow). Des if you can confirm this.

Measure the length of the tube and then see if the focal length is close to the actual length will be a bit more.
If the focal length is more than double the length of the tube then it has a barlow inserted.

[renormalised (Carl)]

The only thing to give a miss is a scope with a fixed barlow in the system

That is precisely what it is. Plus the mirror is almost impossible to collimate properly as they're not the best of mirrors....poorly figured.

That's why, Rob, I wrote what I did. If you're lucky, you may get an acceptable scope but most of the time they're not worth it.

But, it's his scope and I hope it's a good one. He'll just have to learn through experience...like we all did.

[torana68 (Roger)]

Originally Posted by renormalised

That is precisely what it is. Plus the mirror is almost impossible to collimate properly as they're not the best of mirrors....poorly figured.
.

Im with him , its not about size its about quality, DSE are rubbish, best to be honest and try and save the guy blowing his money. I suggest spending the money on 12 months club membership instead of buying parts and use their scopes, money better spent

[mill (Martin)]

Originally Posted by torana68

Im with him , its not about size its about quality, DSE are rubbish, best to be honest and try and save the guy blowing his money. I suggest spending the money on 12 months club membership instead of buying parts and use their scopes, money better spent

Psssttt!!!! The money has already been blown
See original post.
So why not make the most of it or sell the scope ???

[Rob_K]

Originally Posted by renormalised

That is precisely what it is. Plus the mirror is almost impossible to collimate properly as they're not the best of mirrors....poorly figured.

That's why, Rob, I wrote what I did. If you're lucky, you may get an acceptable scope but most of the time they're not worth it.

But, it's his scope and I hope it's a good one. He'll just have to learn through experience...like we all did.

LOL, no good trying to wriggle out of it Carl, you led with your mouth! As far as I can see the DSE 114mm is not a barlowed item, it is 900mm fl. The DSE 127mm is a barlowed unit. How poorly is the mirror figured? Mirror-figuring is a lot more forgiving in these little units, but how bad is it, exactly Carl? How important is precise collimation? I can answer that - very little importance, you're not dealing with a big fast scope here. Unless the collimation is way out on a 114x900, it makes little practical difference to your views. Have a look through one some time. I've looked through cheapie EBay 114x900 reflectors that have given perfectly acceptable views.

The guy's scope may have its problems, who knows, but he doesn't have to be jumped on like he's an idiot for buying it. 114x900 reflectors were standard equipment for amateur stargazers until cheap, mass-produced dobs became available. And if you wanted to see poor mirrors, look to that era - often hand-ground, not always perfectly (!), and inferior coatings. So everyone was wasting their time?

Cheers -

[torana68 (Roger)]

Originally Posted by mill

Psssttt!!!! The money has already been blown
See original post.
So why not make the most of it or sell the scope ???

FURTHER money is what was ment and implied , feel feee to help him spend more on something like this or you could steer him somwehere better a DSE missing parts ? geez.... do you really think its worth the effort? or is this some weird thing with renormalised???

[mill (Martin)]

Not to want to steer off topic,but did i ever mention "renormalised"
And to stay on topic, the OP wanted to know if he could get parts for his scope.
A cheap red dot finder and a self made counter weight would do the trick.

[irwjager (Ivo)]

Originally Posted by sandusky

bought used scope but missing view finder and counterweight anyone out there help, also need user manual if one available thanks sandusky.

Hi Sandusky,

Welcome to IIS! There's a lot you can do and see, even with a 'toy' scope (though I tend to disagree with that discription).

To answer your questions;

As a cheap counterweight solution, I've had great results with regular fitness weights. You can get them in various sizes for a few dollars at BigW or KMart (or any other sports supply store). They fit nicely around most rods. If the center hole is too big, line it with some anti-skid furniture strips.

For a viewfinder, you could potentially get away with not having a viewfinder for a while, if you get yourself a 40mm eyepiece. The effective magnification for a 900mm scope would be about 22x, which is *just* about usable (a viewfinder is usually around 8x magnification). The upshot of using an eyepiece is that you can also use it to get nice views of nebulae, plus spot galaxies and clusters (I rarely use my smaller eyepieces!). Most things are faint, not small, so you'll want one sooner or later.

These suggestions assume that you're on a budget ofcourse...

Hope you too catch the bug!

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by Rob_K

LOL, no good trying to wriggle out of it Carl, you led with your mouth! As far as I can see the DSE 114mm is not a barlowed item, it is 900mm fl. The DSE 127mm is a barlowed unit. How poorly is the mirror figured? Mirror-figuring is a lot more forgiving in these little units, but how bad is it, exactly Carl? How important is precise collimation? I can answer that - very little importance, you're not dealing with a big fast scope here. Unless the collimation is way out on a 114x900, it makes little practical difference to your views. Have a look through one some time. I've looked through cheapie EBay 114x900 reflectors that have given perfectly acceptable views.

The guy's scope may have its problems, who knows, but he doesn't have to be jumped on like he's an idiot for buying it. 114x900 reflectors were standard equipment for amateur stargazers until cheap, mass-produced dobs became available. And if you wanted to see poor mirrors, look to that era - often hand-ground, not always perfectly (!), and inferior coatings. So everyone was wasting their time?

Cheers -

Barlowed or not, Rob, who cares what brand or size it is. If you want to have good views through a scope, regardless of how small its aperture is, you still need to have a reasonably well collimated scope. If you have a mirror that is a heap of trash, whether it's 100mm or 1000mm, it will perform poorly. If the mirror coating looks like something from the 19th Century, then it will perform in that way. Most of these small mirrors aren't even parabolic, they're spherical, because they're cheaper and easier to produce. And most aren't well made...some are acceptable and give OK performance, but that's like 5% of them, if you're lucky. Yeah, they maybe re-branded "Celestron and Skywatcher" scopes, but have a look at their "el cheapies". You know full well yourself that the quality of these scopes is a hit and miss affair and precisely why we try to steer people clear of them.

He wasn't jumped on like an idiot for buying it. He was told in plain and simple terms that these scopes are not the best and if he gets one that is acceptable, then he is lucky. No one told him to go out and buy a Meade or whatever...spend thousands on something he most likely wont want anyway. Just that for a few extra dollars, he could get a much better scope that will last him a lot longer.

However, if he wants to give his scope a bit more beef, then he can get himself a decent finder and even replace the mirror if he wants to, or finds the mirror a dud. Get a new focuser capable of using 1.25" ep's (instead of the 0.965" Huygens or Kellners they come with). There's a lot he can do to make his scope OK, but as I said in my original post (if anyone would care to read it, carefully), he might have to knock up a weight himself and grab a finder from somewhere like Bintel. As far as the manual goes, I haven't seen anywhere to download one from. If you ask around here, someone may have an old one lying around they could scan and send off to him.

Hope you too catch the bug!

If that happens...be prepared to live with an empty wallet for your hobby

Aperture fever kicks in real quick

[noswonky (Peter)]

I'll bet the DSE is better than Galileo's scope.

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by noswonky

I'll bet the DSE is better than Galileo's scope.

So do I.

[pgc hunter]

Originally Posted by Rob_K

I don't see what the fuss is. A 114x900mm reflector is a perfectly good scope, and while I haven't actually used a DSE scope, I'd imagine it is a re-branded Chinese scope not much different to Celestron's and others. This size is one that will ensure good use, and from personal experience I can tell you that I have spent untold enjoyable nights out under the stars with a cheap 114mm scope. Sometimes I get sick of the 'elitist' replies that newcomers get, always telling them to go for big dobs, better eyepieces etc - spend, spend, spend. Not necessary, and not everyone has the money.

Sandusky's question was simple, and hasn't been answered. Someone out there might have a finder scope & counterweight for you - if you can't locate a finder scope, then mobs like Andrews & Bintel have very cheap red dot finders. These are very easy to use. (Spend, LOL!) You may be able to make up a counterweight to clamp on.

As far as a manual goes, this one should cover all you want to know:
http://www.skywatchertelescope.net/s...AL_EQ1and2.pdf

Good luck with it all -

Cheers -

Agree with ya here. I have a Meade 114mm newt and gives perfectly good views. Does well even at 200x, and have enjoyed it for 7 years before I was able to upgrade. Got it when I was 12 and was thrilled to see the Great red spot on Jupiter with it and the cassini division in Saturn's rings. I intend to keep it as a grab n go, the optics are pretty decent.

[pgc hunter]

Originally Posted by irwjager

For a viewfinder, you could potentially get away with not having a viewfinder for a while, if you get yourself a 40mm eyepiece. The effective magnification for a 900mm scope would be about 22x, which is *just* about usable (a viewfinder is usually around 8x magnification). The upshot of using an eyepiece is that you can also use it to get nice views of nebulae, plus spot galaxies and clusters (I rarely use my smaller eyepieces!). Most things are faint, not small, so you'll want one sooner or later.

A typical 40mm plossl used in a 900mm focal length scope will yield a true field of view of only 1.96°. It'll only lead to frustration. That is far too small to be usable as a "finder". For comparison, regular finders usually have about a 6° FOV.

Sandusky, do you still have the finder bracket?