Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - sennessningwilch

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9
1
Light Pollution Topics / Re: Sometimes It's Hopeless
« on: February 09, 2018, 06:36:27 AM »
I'll keep my nose out of that!They get plenty of complaints...noise, dust, traffic etc. typical of a (re)growing business in a small town. That's part of the reason for buying 5 homes and removing them...they also removed a source of complaints! No dummies there!

2
Quote
About the closest thing to this available is 12v motorcycle vests and chaps. There are also insoles available from Cabela's or Bass Pro that have lithium power packs and help keep down the bulk for warmth. Also:https://www.amazon.c...eeping bag suitAnyway, I feel your pain too - it's one thing to be hiking around or walking a dog at -32, totally a different experience standing still focusing and operating telescopes or astrophotography gear.
This sleeping bag suit with zip off booties is what I use. Absolutely great for the price. I've used it down to 17 degrees F and warm.

3
Obviously, the distance between your eyes and the lenses of the eyeglasses make a difference here.

4
Beginners Forum / Re: Celestron 8-24mm zoom vs Paradigm Dual ED 8mm
« on: February 08, 2018, 08:53:18 PM »
Quote
Quote
Maybe I can borrow it and compare it to a couple of other zooms. I have the 8-24mm Vixen LV which was the standard Japanese zoom that was around $200 and sold by about everyone and I also have the Baader Hyperion 8-24 MK 4 which is the new standard zoom..

From what I read here, the Celestron zoom is not all that sharp at the 8mm settings.
Yes, I have read that the Celestron zoom is fuzzy at 8 mm repeatedly in this thread. However, I am wary of that statement, because views through any telescope almost always seem fuzzier at high power than at low power, due to less-than-perfect seeing.

For what it's worth, I also own the 8-24 LV zoom and love it. In fact, it is probably the single eyepiece that I have used most in my smaller telescopes. It is actually lighter and more compact than most long-eye-relief 8-mm eyepieces, and compares pretty well with most 8-mm eyepieces in terms of image quality. I'd say that the zoom's weakest feature is the narrow apparent field of view at the 24-mm end. For that reason, I almost always supplement it with some other eyepiece at the low-power end.

I also own a strange 8-24 zoom scavenged from a Nikon spotting scope, with very similar quality. And the Celestron zoom looks to be a near-replica of these eyepieces, so I would expect it to perform well at 8 mm. But expectations are one thing, and actually testing it another thing entirely. There have been plenty of times when my expectations were wrong, in both directions.

Moreover, this is often considerable variation from one unit to another in budget-priced equipment.
At 8 mm I find the Celestron to be pretty good. Comparable to my 8 mm Plossl which is what I consider a fair comparison for this eyepiece.  At $65 is 1.5 times the price of a brand name Plossl. But it replaces 4-5 of them, at minimum and can do things they can't do.

5
If you are looking at the Edge 11 and have bumped the budget to that level, I would suggest the Edge 8" with TEMPest fans, the Feathertouch focuser upgrade to it with Focus Boss II and the 0.7x reducer. Add to that a quality APO in the 80-102 mm range and tandem mount them. Gives you wide field and deep/small options and you can image with one and guide with the other. You can guide with an 8" SCT and focal reducer. Or you can mount two CCD's/DSLR or a combination and shoot two different perspectives on a target.

6
Why did you choose an alt-azimuth mount rather than a equatorial mount? Are Equatorial mounts becoming obsolete? Thanks to you all.

7
ATM, Optics and DIY Forum / Re: KF optical glass
« on: February 03, 2018, 12:47:17 PM »
It was described in the Meade Catalogs when ED refractors were still made in the US. If you know a source let me know,. it would mate with FPL-51.

8
That light pollution map projected to 2025 seems a bit optimistic; given current global trends, a somewhat likelier version is shown below.
Attached Thumbnails

9
General Astronomy & Observing / Re: Footwear for Winter Observing
« on: February 02, 2018, 09:22:03 PM »
KFRANK thanks for " wore felt boots over which they wore ordinary galoshes or overshoes" as a reminder from years back. One time a hunting friend of my dad showedme his felt boots that were medium grey and laced up, had thin soles and he wore them inside buckle up farm rubber boots when he ice fished and easily kept warm. I haven't seen or heard of boots like that in many years and would like some too.Any idea who makes any type of them now ? Thanks. *BW*

10
Cheapest? Use your existing smartphone to take a picture of the night sky.
From there, there is nothing cheap about this infernal hobby.

11
Quote
dont get tricked by a label "planetary"
best for planetary is a mono or ortho design find the best you can

I agree completely with the first sentence, but only partly with the second.

The best eyepieces for planetary that I've viewed through are the Pentax XO's. IIRC, they are a type of modified Plossl. The Vixen HR's are also good, but limited to only very short focal lengths. I'm not sure what type they are, but I'm sure they're not mono or classic ortho design.

You'd probably need to get a Zeiss Abbe Ortho to better the XO's or HR's.

I've never owned or viewed through a monocentric. But I've heard that they are very sharp and have excellent color rendition.

Mike

12
Ooooh, purty!

13
Beginners Forum / Re: First Good Telescope
« on: January 31, 2018, 12:14:03 PM »
Great to know. I wasn't sure which computerized mounts are compatible with which telescopes. I'll have to research that a bit too.

14
Reflectors Telescopes Forum / Re: What has happened to large DOB resale?
« on: January 31, 2018, 10:30:35 AM »
Oh my goodness! That IS a bargain! The primary mirror alone is worth the price!

15
Quote
Quote

I have a 7mm x-cell lx, and a direct comparison with an ES 6.7 mm showed the Celestron eyepiece to have a "softer" view than the ES. Not startling, but definitely noticeable, and not surprising considering they are in different price classes. I rarely go over 50x with my ST80, and at 80x you are right near where the view really breaks down in that scope. If you really want to push that scope, possibly a higher quality eyepiece might help, IDK. The ST80 is what it is, but it's especially special with a 2" focuser and a 30mm 82 degree eyepiece, lol.

I often consider replacing the stock focuser with a 2". Would make a fun super finder!
While I have considered that as well, I have left it in 1.25" format as a finder. One must remember that it will be a very heavy finder when converted to 2". The largerfocuser will add some weight, as will the 2" diagonal, and then there is the heavy 2" widefield eyepiece. All told it will probably be about 2 pounds heavier than a max-field 1.25" configuration, but of course the available field with 2" would be about 43 to 59% wider depending on the 2" used.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 9