Astronomy: Telescopes, page 2
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times


reply posted on 24-8-2004 @ 07:41 PM by who
Your girlfriend spent some money on you, here is a link that describes what its capable of. www.scopecity.com...


pretty nice, its a 4.5 inch scope. If you go to dark skys on a clear night I think you would be pretty happy with the scope you have. The moon should be pretty good, along with saturn and Jupiter. The only thing that will help you is a nice selection of quality eyepieces, try to avoid cheap ones.


reply posted on 24-8-2004 @ 08:43 PM by cmdrkeenkid
Originally posted by who
What kind of 18" do you have?


It's an Oddessy. They went out of business about a decade ago. You can see some pictures of it here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

outsider:
All the gas giants have rings, with the most visible being those of Saturn. Also, as who stated, your scope is a nice one. The technicalness of it does make it hard for a beginner though. Does your girlfriend know anything about them? Or your other friends? You could always talk to them!

For a beginner scope though I really do recommend a medium sized dobsonian.


reply posted on 25-8-2004 @ 12:25 AM by cmdrkeenkid
Originally posted by Xeven
1. Should I buy bigger Scope?
2. What eyepieces should I buy? I have 25mm and 9 mm.
3. Barlo 2x or should I get the 3x?
4. What Digital camera setup should I get so I can watch realtime on PC?


1.) I'd say no. You've got a pretty nice set up right now as is. An 8 inch scope is a good start, especially for a Schmidt-Cass. Anything larger starts to weigh a lot, and gets pretty cumbersome. I've got a 12 inch Meade Schmidt-Cass and only use it when others are around because I can't set the bugger up by myself.

2.) I'd recommend getting a 40 mm and a 5 mm. TeleVue, University, and Pentax are brands I've had good luck with eyepieces. Meade ones arn't bad at all either though, and would probably be a bit cheaper. The 40 mm would be good for the moon and planets. The 5 mm would be great for splitting apart double stars.

3.) If you're going to get one, I'd say the 2X. I don't think that getting a Barlow lens is really all that necessary for casual observing though.

4.) You're just getting into the hobby, right? So please, please, please, PLEASE do not worry about getting involved with a CCD camera right away. It takes so much fun away from the hobby. Sure, you can do long exposures and see deep sky objects, but looking at an image secondhand on the screen is nothing compared to actually looking at it.

If you want some good software to run the scope through the computer though I'd recommend the software that came with the scope. With my Meade it came with some software, I cannot remember what it's called though. This was about 10 years ago though... Otherwise I'd say get the
MegaStar Sky Atlas

Here's a hint though... When looking at a dim object, look towards the side of it. That'll expose the more light sensitive portion of your eye to the object and you'll see a much clear image, despite not looking directly at it.


reply posted on 25-8-2004 @ 01:12 AM by E_T
Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
2.) I'd recommend getting a 40 mm and a 5 mm. TeleVue, University, and Pentax are brands I've had good luck with eyepieces. Meade ones arn't bad at all either though, and would probably be a bit cheaper.

There are more differences in them than just names:
science.howstuffworks.com...
www.cloudynights.com...

Here's a hint though... When looking at a dim object, look towards the side of it. That'll expose the more light sensitive portion of your eye to the object and you'll see a much clear image, despite not looking directly at it.

It's called "averted seeing" in slang.

And it's not same in which side you look, because when looking to "right" side light hits to "blind spot".
Up and down are generally better directions and right side with right eye/left side with left eye.
Here's very good page:
astronomynv.org...

curious.astro.cornell.edu...
www.noao.edu...



reply posted on 25-8-2004 @ 06:28 PM by Genya
Originally posted by cmdrkeenkid
Genya Hydrogen Alpha filters are pretty awesome... If you get one of those you may as well get a White Light filter . I don't own either, but have gotten to use them with Eastern Michigan University's 10 inch refractor. Both are great, but White Light is much better for viewing sunspots. Ha is better for viewing prominences, spicules, and the likes.


Thanx CKK!

I used to have a 4.5" Thomas Cooke refractor - all brass and antique too! - which was *wonderful* for projection work (I sold it - at Sotherby's!) to fund the SCT... AH! Cash flow is a recurrent nightmare, isn't it?!! (Try putting a daughter through University and you'll find out! ) I tried to emulate
William Baxter of course...

So, I'd quite agree with your comments and obseravations on white light filters CKK: my particualr interest tends towards prominences and flares (as my attempt to view these in the August 1999 total solar eclipse were "washed out"! ) so I rather like the fact that light grasp isn't an issue (whereas resolving power still might be?) but wondered if anybody had experience of Ha filtered telescopes? It would certainly be an awesome project....

And, to be completely speculative, what about Spectrohelioscopes - a long held dream for me....

Clear skies to you CKK!!

EDIT: misplaced quotes!!

[edit on 25-8-2004 by Genya]
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



Newfound "super-Earth"
  Posted 10 days ago with 56 member flags
Enceladus Backlit by Saturn
  Posted 4 days ago with 50 member flags
Toronto teens send Lego man into space: video
  Posted 18 days ago with 28 member flags
Current Potential Habitable Worlds - Update February 2012
  Posted 2 days ago with 26 member flags
Amazing new photo of Earth. The Blue Marble 2012
  Posted 14 days ago with 22 member flags
Stunning close view of Mercury
  Posted 3 days ago with 20 member flags
NASA Probe Captures 1st Video of Moon\'s Far Side
  Posted 11 days ago with 19 member flags