The Astronomy Thread.

I had an eight inch Clestron, long barrel for many years, had to leave it behind when I moved to the states. If I had my time over, I would have bought a short barrel 10" Meade. The 8" was just the wrong height for for me and my ageing back lol

But the old adage of telescopes is the best one you can get is the one you are going to use.
 
lionking said:
Now I'm getting inspired. What's the cost of a good, entry level telescope? (if this is not a naive question).
Click to expand...

that depends on your level of interest. You can see most of the cool clusters with binocs.

basically as much as you want to spend. I like just looking at the stars.
 
Lionking, I believe you are in Melb. I would recommend these guys

http://www.ozscopes.com.au/

Stay away from tasco scopes or virtually anything you find in a department store or camera shop. Particularly stay away from any telescope being sold by the amount of magnification it offers. The real trick to scopes is resolution.

In reality once a scope gets beyond 200 x magnification, sky conditions make it useless. It is better to have a larger scope ticking over at no more than about 48 x mag than to overdrive a smaller scope.

There is a specific calculation that attributes maximum usable magnification to the amount of glass you are using.

Personally if I was starting again, I would begin with binocs, if you get bored the binoculars are good for other things
 
MG1962, well, REALLY high magnification can be useful for planetary work, where there is enough light to make a bright enough image. You just have to be patient and wait for that tenth-second of clear path through the atmosphere when you can briefly see detail. The caveat is that this is how the Canals on Mars originated; Its devilishly hard to remember accurately and record what you see in that instant.
 
BenBurch said:
MG1962, well, REALLY high magnification can be useful for planetary work, where there is enough light to make a bright enough image. You just have to be patient and wait for that tenth-second of clear path through the atmosphere when you can briefly see detail. The caveat is that this is how the Canals on Mars originated; Its devilishly hard to remember accurately and record what you see in that instant.
Click to expand...

Agreed, however, you need a seriously stable mount to do that, and scopes such as the Tasco range simply would not allow you to take advantage of that rare moment, they tend to be the ones who boast 504 x magnification
 
MG1962 said:
Agreed, however, you need a seriously stable mount to do that, and scopes such as the Tasco range simply would not allow you to take advantage of that rare moment, they tend to be the ones who boast 504 x magnification
Click to expand...

Amazingly, you can make do with a really bad mounting if you are very patient!

This fellow did;
 

Attachments

  • first-hevelius_telescope_60ft.jpg
    first-hevelius_telescope_60ft.jpg
    56.9 KB · Views: 1
Was just out with my ETX and full aperture solar filter.

WOW is the sun blank. No features I could discern at all and even without spots there is usually something you can detect that indicates activity.

What I really need (but cannot afford) is one of those very cool Coronado H-alpha filters.
 
Bah! I hate you all! The night sky here is like pea soup. On an average
night I can just about see the moon. Maybe I should build a radio
telescope instead... :(
 
For a good entry level scope I cant recommend dobsonians enough. Affordable for the size, easy to set up and use - especially nice for those just starting.
BTW for those of you using DSLR's for astrophotography - how did you overcome the problem of focus? I use a goto 8" SCT on a wedge with a Canon DSLR and 2" flip mirror and find focus is a big problem. (Might be my 40+ eyes)
 
Humanzee said:
BTW for those of you using DSLR's for astrophotography - how did you overcome the problem of focus?
Click to expand...

I cut 5 cm of my OTA to shift the focal point so as to line up with the sensor.
You need to compensate by 5cm when you use the eyepieces.

A SCT will not like this approach.
You need to have an adapter that will allow you to move the camera either in or out to find focus.

I recommend you look at the IIS link in an earlier post:)
 
Never underestimate normal binoculars for astronomy.
- Many people have them already - instant astronomy, no waiting.
- You can see lots of cool stuff, especially if you're lucky enough to have dark skies
- They're useful for lots of non-astronomy things
- They're super portable
- They don't have to be expensive (but make sure the optics are decent)
- Nice, wide field of view - great for learning your way around the sky
- Eyestrain is minimal over long periods
- When you get a scope you'll probably still want them
- They'll give you a good idea of whether you enjoy the hobby enough to get a scope

Cons:
- You can't see planetary detail
- Can't pull in the faint fuzzies
- Impractical to photograph through (but so are most scopes with cheap mounts)
- Less coolness factor
- What is the first thing that comes to mind when you think of a man with binoculars looking around at midnight? Doubly bad if the "horizon" happens to be over top of your neighbors window. :D

My favorite scope is an 8" Dob. It's very usable, and I mean that in the most positive way. I think that their popularity is well deserved.
 
The dedicated astro-photographers get much better images than I do.
One I like a lot is this 4 a.m. wide field (135mm telephoto lens) of Halley rising in the pre-morning day.
And a serious Celestron farm.
And a hand-made wood scope assembly, using the optics from a Meade 8" Dobsonian, on an equatorial mount.
 

Attachments

  • jrCometHalley.jpg
    jrCometHalley.jpg
    102.3 KB · Views: 3
  • jrWoodEquatorialDobsonian.jpg
    jrWoodEquatorialDobsonian.jpg
    115.4 KB · Views: 3
  • jrCelestrosns.jpg
    jrCelestrosns.jpg
    82.7 KB · Views: 3
Thanks Skwinty for the link, I'll check it out...tho I will likely be very jealous of your southern skies.
It would be interesting to see some astro images made by JREF members if people would care to share.
 
The Moon, Venus and Jupiter, Dec 1, 2008.
Casio point-n-shoot camera.
You don't always need the largest and bestest equipment to get a pleasing shot.
 

Attachments

  • jrMoonVenJupe.jpg
    jrMoonVenJupe.jpg
    129.9 KB · Views: 7
Has anyone logged Comet Lulin yet?

I'm going to start keeping an eye on it as soon as the clouds piss off - should be visible for the rest of the month.
 
Ive got a cheap crappy telescope (cost me $40) that I enjoy playing with from time to time - managed to get a good look at Jupiter and saw one of its moons and have had some great sessions just looking at the moon. Haven't tried to find any nebulae yet but they're next on the list. What are the easiest/clearest ones from NZ this time of year TA?
 
Ginarley said:
Ive got a cheap crappy telescope (cost me $40) that I enjoy playing with from time to time - managed to get a good look at Jupiter and saw one of its moons and have had some great sessions just looking at the moon. Haven't tried to find any nebulae yet but they're next on the list. What are the easiest/clearest ones from NZ this time of year TA?
Click to expand...

Definately M42 in Orion. It is the fuzzy little patch near the belt stars. When the Southern Cross is high in the sky. Have a look for the Jewel Box, and Omega Centari.

If you can pick out the Large and Small Magellenic Clouds with the naked eye. The LMC has a beautiful nebular known as the Tarantula. If it was in our own galaxy it would take up nearly 20 percent of the night sky

If you can spot the smaller of the two clouds. NGC 362 is just slightly north and worth a sticky beak.

Also worth looking for is 47 Tucana, or NGC 104. It is easy to find, but my memory is a little rusty, a quick Google should get you some info
 
Ginarley said:
Ive got a cheap crappy telescope (cost me $40) that I enjoy playing with from time to time - managed to get a good look at Jupiter and saw one of its moons and have had some great sessions just looking at the moon. Haven't tried to find any nebulae yet but they're next on the list. What are the easiest/clearest ones from NZ this time of year TA?
Click to expand...

What MG said.

Plus, to find out exactly what's on view where, go here!

Why is everyone suddenly turning into guppies?
 
MG1962 said:
Definately M42 in Orion. It is the fuzzy little patch near the belt stars. When the Southern Cross is high in the sky. Have a look for the Jewel Box, and Omega Centari.

If you can pick out the Large and Small Magellenic Clouds with the naked eye. The LMC has a beautiful nebular known as the Tarantula. If it was in our own galaxy it would take up nearly 20 percent of the night sky

If you can spot the smaller of the two clouds. NGC 362 is just slightly north and worth a sticky beak.

Also worth looking for is 47 Tucana, or NGC 104. It is easy to find, but my memory is a little rusty, a quick Google should get you some info
Click to expand...

Good list for starters.
M42 is however in the middle of the sword rather than near the belt.
Expect to see huge whitish cloud like wings. This is ionised hydrogen and would appear reddish if your eye's were sensitive to infra red. Shows nicely when photographed.

If you PM me with your e-mail address I will send you a pdf file called "Deepsky Observers Companion" about 700kb pdf.:)
 
Last edited:
MG1962 said:
Definately M42 in Orion. It is the fuzzy little patch near the belt stars. When the Southern Cross is high in the sky. Have a look for the Jewel Box, and Omega Centari.

If you can pick out the Large and Small Magellenic Clouds with the naked eye. The LMC has a beautiful nebular known as the Tarantula. If it was in our own galaxy it would take up nearly 20 percent of the night sky

If you can spot the smaller of the two clouds. NGC 362 is just slightly north and worth a sticky beak.

Also worth looking for is 47 Tucana, or NGC 104. It is easy to find, but my memory is a little rusty, a quick Google should get you some info
Click to expand...

Excellent, thanks for that - next clear night I'll have a go and see what I can find!

The Atheist said:
What MG said.

Plus, to find out exactly what's on view where, go here!

Why is everyone suddenly turning into guppies?
Click to expand...

Cool website :) Check out the aquarium of blood in the community section for the guppies lol.

Skwinty said:
Good list for starters.
M42 is however in the middle of the sword rather than near the belt.
Expect to see huge whitish cloud like wings. This is ionised hydrogen and would appear reddish if your eye's were sensitive to infra red. Shows nicely when photographed.

If you PM me with your e-mail address I will send you a pdf file called "Deepsky Observers Companion" about 700kb pdf.:)
Click to expand...

Done, thanks :)
 
I knew there was an astronomy thread here somewhere.

We had a rare clear and calm morning this morning, so I shook the kids out of bed to get a good look at the Jupiter & Saturn show on right now.

Absolutely stunning!

Jupiter's ring clearly visible and Saturn looking particularly glorious.

Anyone else looking up?
 
The Atheist said:
I knew there was an astronomy thread here somewhere.

We had a rare clear and calm morning this morning, so I shook the kids out of bed to get a good look at the Jupiter & Saturn show on right now.

Absolutely stunning!
Jupiter's ring clearly visible and Saturn looking particularly glorious.

Anyone else looking up?
Click to expand...

Might wanna check your SkyGuide on that one... ;)

Still, it's great to get kids interested in this sort of thing.
 
Must've been the Klingons, then. Looked a lot like a faint ring to everyone here.
 
Jupiter does have a ring (well, rings), but they are not visible to mere humans using ground-based "backyard" telescopes.

It does, however, have spectacular belts! And yes, they can be quite a sight. :)
 
Thanks for drawing my attention to this thread.

I have a 12" Newtonian on a Dobson mount, and as a general rule I make a point of taking it out every night possible. However, the fact that I am not at our summer house every weekend (but almost), and the miserable Danish weather, has only made it possible four nights for the whole of the last season from September to April.

Light pollution has also caused a dent in the pleasure. When I first set a telescope up at the summer house, there were nights where we just were astounded of the beauty of the Milky Way, despite the light pollution from nearby towns, but now the best we can hope for is to be able to see the Milky Way at all, and we do not need a lamp to get around, even if we just come out of the house.

We used to ask the neighbours to switch off their lights, but it no longer makes a difference.

Still, a lot of things can still be seen, and the Moon and planets are always fine to show to guests.

However, it will take many years before Jupiter and Saturn return to our night skies before midnight.

The seeing is usually not so good, and it doesn't pay to use the larger magnification, but once in while there a nights where even my 6 mm eyepiece seems to allow for a closer look, and I am thinking of buying a Barlow in order to see even smaller features on the Moon that one evening every second year!
 
steenkh said:
Still, a lot of things can still be seen, and the Moon and planets are always fine to show to guests.
Click to expand...

I love studying the moon and hope to one day chance on a meteor strike.

Pity about your location - while light pollution sucks as much here, at least we get plenty of nights to use. We don't get anywhere near cold enough to abort viewings in the winter.
 
The Atheist said:
I love studying the moon and hope to one day chance on a meteor strike.
Click to expand...
I have made a PDF with the "Lunar 100" from Sky & Telescope, and I try to locate as many of these sights as possible, but I need lots of time with the telescope to do this, and somehow the Moon is so overwhelming when looking at it live that I have found that many sights are only identified on photos afterwards.

I am strictly a visual astronomer, and I can only photograph with my iPhone, and even so, the photos do not catch the beauty that I see with my eyes, but I must admit that going through the few photos l have taken over the years, that I have missed a lot of interesting things during the live session.



Pity about your location - while light pollution sucks as much here, at least we get plenty of nights to use. We don't get anywhere near cold enough to abort viewings in the winter.
Click to expand...

How cold must it be for you to abort? The coldest nights are the darkest here, although seeing is often better on warmer nights. I believe the coldest I have stayed out is -6° C. My wife aborts at +5°!
 
steenkh said:
How cold must it be for you to abort? The coldest nights are the darkest here, although seeing is often better on warmer nights. I believe the coldest I have stayed out is -6° C. My wife aborts at +5°!
Click to expand...

We don't do negative temperatures. It gets close to zero on frosty nights, but never goes below.
 
The Atheist said:
Must've been the Klingons, then. Looked a lot like a faint ring to everyone here.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify -- did you mean a ring like Saturn or the bands on Jupiter's surface? I suppose the many moons of Jupiter could look like a ring also.

Not trying to be snarky, I'm just trying to picture what you saw. Heck, I may be able to see for myself in the next few days!
 
The Atheist said:
Must've been the Klingons, then. Looked a lot like a faint ring to everyone here.
Click to expand...
I vaguely remember that sometimes the telescope optics (or condensation on them) or slight moisture in the air can cause ring-like aberrations around very bright compact objects. Any possibility that one of these might have been the cause?
 
alfaniner said:
Just to clarify -- did you mean a ring like Saturn or the bands on Jupiter's surface? I suppose the many moons of Jupiter could look like a ring also.

Not trying to be snarky, I'm just trying to picture what you saw. Heck, I may be able to see for myself in the next few days!
Click to expand...

Giordano said:
I vaguely remember that sometimes the telescope optics (or condensation on them) or slight moisture in the air can cause ring-like aberrations around very bright compact objects. Any possibility that one of these might have been the cause?
Click to expand...

Definitely looked like a ring - the bands on the planet are easy.

Possibly a combination of both the above.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom