Posts Made By: Dave Adams

I am thinking of buying one of the new Hyperion 8-24 zoom eyepieces and would mostly use it on a Vixen 130 f/5 reflector. The magnfication range seems like a good match for this scope. I do have a 24 Panoptic and a GTO zoom (22-7mm) but the convenience of leaving one eyepiece in place and the Hyperion being parfocal seems like a nice advantage to fine tune the magnification. The Vixen's short focal length means I will still be able to get nearly 2 deg. with the 50 deg apfov with the hyperion at 24 mm. I really don't like the GTO at low power with it's narrow 38 deg apfov at 22mm and am wondering if I will miss the Panoptics wider field? Any opinions will be appreciated.

Dave Adams

I am sure many have contemplated which scope(s) would make an ideal lineup so I thought I would post to get some opinions about a change I have been thinking of making. I currently have a nice lineup that includes a SV105 (tmb triplet), C8 and a C9.25. I have been thinking of selling all 3 and getting an FS-128 or a TMB130. The SV105 is a great scope and gives wonderful views of the brighter objects and does very well on lunar viewing. It gives very pleasing views of the planets but does not reveal as much detail as the C9.25. The C9.25 is a very nice scope that goes deeper than the SV105 and shows more planet detail but not as asthetically pleasing most of the time compared to the SV105. The C8 is a bit of a smaller version of the C9.25 but doesn't do as well on deep sky or the planets but is easier to setup so I use it a lot. I live in light polluted metro Detroit and observe mostly lunar, planets, open clusters and double stars. I think a 5" apo would be very nice and will welcome any thoughts about consolidating from what I have to either the TMB or Tak 5" apo.
Thanks.

Dave Adams

Hi,

I have an 8" Starbucket (f/5) and have mainly been using a Nagler 22 in it. From what I have read the Nagler 22 is not great for coma or field curvature in fast scopes and I would have to agree. I have never had an f/5 scope before so I don't know how much of what I am seeing is from the eyepiece vs the f/5 mirror. Could anyone recommend an eyepiece that would give better performance away from the center of the field? The stars now look out of focus and elongated away from center. I have been using a Meade 14mm UWA which is much better but would like to be able to use something lower power. I don't want to get a Paracorr because the Starbucket is so light and even the Nagler by itself requires signficant counterweights. Thanks for any advice.

Dave Adams

I was wondering if anyone has use the Sky Scout or Mysky? I was out the other night with a ST80 trying to track down uranus and the area of the sky where I thought it would be located was totally washed out by light pollution. The ST80 has a wide 4 degree fov with a 24 Panoptic and I was wondering if it would work to use either the Mysky or Sky Scout to locate an object like uranus and then try to visually point a widefield scope to that area? I don't know if these devices were intended for this type of use but if this isn't a practical way of using them, then any other feedback on them will be welcomed.

Dave Adams

I think I need to get an extender to get my binoviewer to come to focus. Does anyone know
a good extender that I can put into the drawtube of the telescope and insert my diagonal/binoviewer
into it to get some more out focus travel? I am using a Denk binoviewer/multipurpose OCS in a SV105 refractor.

I am not sure how long I need and a variable extender would be ideal. I know I need at least 2 inches and perhaps as much as 4 inches of additional out travel. Maybe a variable wouldn't have the stability needed to hold the weight of the binoviewer though. Also, dual lock down screws would also be great to keep the binoviewer/diagonal from rotating although the only one I saw (Televue) had one screw. Thanks.

Dave Adams

I was thinking of getting a parallelogram mount or a pair of 90 deg. binoculars and was looking of advice. I have a pair of 16x70 Fujinon and they are great optically. I have mostly been using a pair of Canon 12x36 IS that also are very good and haven't been using the Fuji because of lack of a comfortable to use mount. I currently have a microstar mount but it requires a good amount of contorting to get into position for viewing at many angles.

It seems the experience of sitting in a chair, looking at an area of the sky and then zooming in with binoculars for 2 eye correct image views is distinctively different and enjoyable compared to telescope mono viewing. I have tried a binoviewer lately on my refractor and the one drawback I have noticed is the eyepiece angle and height changes a large amount from zenith to horizon viewing so that getting into a comfortable viewing position can be challenging. The images though through the SV105 and Denk are outstanding on the other hand.

Does anyone know how good the optics are in the 70 mm 90 deg. binoculars from Orion or the Apogee version at 88mm say compared to the Fuji 16x70's? Thanks.

Dave Adams

I bought a Ranger from A-mart recently and it came with a Tiffen Haze-1 filter. The Tiffen website says the following: Haze 1 - Reduces excessive blue haze caused by UV light by absorbing 71% of UV. Great all-around UV control.

The filter fits nicely on the front of the Ranger and wondering if anyone knows if it will degrade astronomical performace? I am thinking it is nice to leave on to keep dust off the main lense but if it is going to degrade performance, I will not use it. I haven't had a clear night yet to check it out. Would it perhaps be more useful for day viewing? Thanks.

Dave Adams

I have a C102 (Vixen) that has an 1.25 focuser and with it's f/10 focal ratio wondering if there is a mid priced eyepiece that will perform nearly as well as a 24 Panoptic? Also, I have the an 8" f/5 starbucket and was wondering if the 24 Panoptic will be good close to the edge of the fov in that fast of a scope? In general, will shorter focal length eyepieces in the same series, like a 13 mm Nagler, show less edge of field problems in a fast scope like the f/5 starbucket than longer focal length eyepieces like the 26mm Nagler? Thanks!

Dave

Hi,

I have two copies of the Pocket Star Atlas and was thinking of marking up double stars and star clusters with a green highlighter with some basic info (mag, seperation for double stars). I was going to mark up one atlas for use with 18x70 binoculars and the other for use with my telescopes (SV105, C8, C9.25). There will be some overlap between the two atlases, especially the brighter star clusters which will be marked up on both atlases. The guide books I am planning to use are the ones I have on hand which are: Binocualar Astronomy, Binocular Highlights, Touring the Universe with Binoculars (software version), Seasonal Star Charts, Small Scope Sampler, and maybe the Night Sky Observers Guide. I started with a binocular double star list from TUBA software and this project is going to take a lot more time than I originally thought. My idea was that it would be nice to have everthing marked up on the PSA but not sure if it is worth all the work. I might break this up into pieces and pick a constellation of the evening and mark it up before a viewing session. I was wondering if anyone has done something similar or have any ideas that might be less work. Thanks!

Dave

My wife ordered an Ipad and am thinking of how it can be used with my discmount and Sky Commander. My favorite star atlas is the Cambridge Double Star Atlas and it is available in digital form for use on an Ipad. I thought this could be good, then read about the ability to connect an Ipad to a Sky Commander either through a wire (SkyWire) or wifi (SkyFi). Has anyone used a similar setup and wondering what software running on the Ipad would be best. I like simple to use things and mostly observe double stars and some open clusters. Would the Cambridge Double Star Atlas add anything over an interactive program? Thanks.

Dave