Stargazing I Am Cursed Ack Fi My New Telescope hates me

  • Thread starter Thread starter Saladsamurai
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Telescope
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around troubleshooting issues with a new telescope that is producing fuzzy images of celestial objects, particularly Jupiter. The user has attempted to collimate the telescope but continues to see spider vanes in the eyepiece, indicating potential misalignment or installation errors. Suggestions include checking the alignment of the secondary mirror and ensuring the focuser is correctly installed, as improper installation could prevent focusing. The user is also advised to perform a star test to assess collimation and consider reverting to the original focuser if problems persist. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the importance of proper setup and alignment for optimal telescope performance.
  • #51
chroot said:
Well, light pollution filters and "nebula filters" are two different animals. The typical "nebula filter" is an Oxygen-III filter, but they're expensive and only work on certain nebulae. They also block light of all other frequencies; stars become dim spots. Unless you know exactly where to look, these filters can actually do more harm than good, since you won't be able to star-hop.

You might want to start with a wide-band light pollution filter and just see how you like it. Don't go for a narrow-band filter, because they'll cause you the same problems with star-hopping. Don't expect miracles, but for $50 or so they can be a good tool to have in your eyepiece box.

All that said, you will probably find that the two most useful accessories will be: 1) a Telrad finder and 2) a couple of nice, high quality, versatile eyepieces, e.g. a TeleVue Zoom.

- Warren

Thanks Chroot. What exactly do you use zoom lenses for? I would assume for planetary or lunar viewing...

My scope can accept 2" eyepieces, but as you know, they are hella expensive:bugeye: What are the benefits? A wider field?

And What are the benefits of those super low power ones like 32-60mm?
Are those for deep, deep space?

Thanks for the advice.
Casey
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
  • #52
The zooms are nice because they cover a range of magnifications, are user-friendly, and relatively inexpensive. Honestly, the only zoom eyepiece I can recommend are those from TeleVue. There are many other zoom lenses on the market, but most suck.

You don't necessarily need 2" eyepieces. Depending upon your telescope and your viewing styles, they may not help you at all. Some eyepieces only come in 2" versions to prevent vignetting.

- Warren
 
  • #53
Ditto on the TeleVues - they are good solid performers. I have a nice selection of Plossls, and find no reason to go for the exotic designs, since I have a well-corrected 6" f:8 APO and even the plain vanilla TeleVues work very well, though I have a 4.8mm Nagler for star-splitting on those REALLY steady nights. You might want to go to a few star parties and see how other peoples' EPs perform in your scope before you start dropping $$ on 'em.

One thing - a Barlow lens can double the number of usable focal lengths you can view with. Get a good one, and the view will not be significantly degraded, and you can get higher power views while retaining the longer eye relief of the low-power EPs. Whether a 2X, 2.5X, or 3X, choose carefully and then choose your EPs in such a way as to avoid duplication of powers. Obviously, a 2X Barlow isn't going to do you much good for improving your variety of magnifications if you've already got EPs of 8mm, 16mm, and 32mm. You can make a diagram on graph paper to show what the best EP focal lengths would be for Barlows of various multiplications. Plan before adding to the EP menagerie, and buy quality. You may or may not sell your scope in favor of another, but chances are, your EPs will stay with you. It's best to buy the basic EPs from a really good manufacturer if you can. They are set up to figure, finish, coat, and mount lenses in really exotic $$$ EPs, and even their basic vanilla models will benefit from the high-tech, high-quality attitude that drives the upper end of their product line.
 
  • #54
I just have a 10mm and 25mm that the scope came with (they are Plossls) and I have a 2X Barlow by Meade that I bought for my last scope..oh and a 17.5mm (why?) by Meade that came in the package with the Barlow.

Casey
 
  • #55
We're not saying you must run out and purchase new eyepieces; I'm simply saying that you might get more utility for your $ with a new eyepiece than with a light-pollution filter. Then again, the light pollution filter might do you wonders. If I were you, I'd try to attend a star party in your area -- most people are more than willing to let you try out different bits of kit with your telescope.

The two most important accessories are actually also the cheapest: a good-quality star atlas and a good-quality finder. I personally suggest using star-charting software to print maps for yourself. You can get free charting software like Carte du Ciel, or you can buy commercial programs like The Sky and Starry Night. You can have these programs print maps as deeply as you need (with as many stars as you need) to star-hop anywhere you want to go. You can also put Telrad rings or other features directly on the maps, so you can translate the view in your Telrad to the map very easily.

A basic Telrad finder is about about $15, and I'll be damned if it's not almost universally the most useful accessory for someone new to telescopes.

- Warren
 
  • #56
What should I use tp view things like planetary nebulae (viz. what do you use) like M57, etc...

Casey
 
  • #58
Saladsamurai said:
What should I use tp view things like planetary nebulae (viz. what do you use) like M57, etc...

Casey
Experience will tell you what works best. The problems with faint extend objects generally boil down to one thing - lack of contrast. If you have dark skies, that's a point in your favor. The pop in a low power EP (longest focal length you've got) and locate and view your target. Then go to your next higher power and compare your impression of the object with that of your first view. Is there more detail visible in the higher power? Is the reduction in contrast detrimental to the view in the higher power. After a while, you'll develop a feel for this. Be aware that if one of the EP's does not feature edge-blackened, multicoated lenses, it may give you views with poorer contrast than a more powerful EP with better optics.
 
  • #59
Anyone belong to an Online Astronomy Forum that they like? One where my telescope questions may be more appropiate?

I have tons of them...and I don't the think the questions regarding the skies quite qualify as the kind of "Astronomy" that PF had intended.

Thanks,
Casey
 
  • #60
Astronomy magazine has a forum on their website: www.astronomy.com if you want to take a look at it.
 
  • #62
That would be "the" Telrad. There's only one to my knowledge. Just make sure that you get a type that has a bullseye of concentric rings, rather than a dot in the middle.

- Warren
 
  • #63
chroot said:
That would be "the" Telrad. There's only one to my knowledge. Just make sure that you get a type that has a bullseye of concentric rings, rather than a dot in the middle.

- Warren

I am pretty sure that is what it is (not a dot).
Here's the pic.
 

Attachments

  • telradrings.jpg
    telradrings.jpg
    2.3 KB · Views: 535
  • #64
Yep, that's a Telrad pattern. The rings are 1, 2, and 4 degrees wide, and can be used as a reference against your star charts. You may quickly begin thinking of the sky in terms of Telrad-ring-widths, and it'll be downright easy to gauge angular distances after a while.

- Warren
 

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top