897 replies to this topic

[CHASLX200]

Not tire weights, these are rectangular weights typically available in most hobby shops.  You can probably zoom in on the bagged weights in my photo and get the name and either find some locally or via Amazon.  Note - tire weights are not happy unless they are rotating at a high rate of speed!

 

Barry Simon

They kinda looked like the tire weights on my Vette.

[BarrySimon615]

You know this whole damage in shipping issue is a reminder why I, and likely many other amateur astronomers hold onto telescopes longer than they normally would in many cases because …………………..

 

1) Scopes are harder to pack and ship well with assurances that nothing adverse will happen in transit

 

2) Scopes are expensive to ship.  Dealers get shipping discounts and probably for the most part are self insured or have "strength" with the shipping companies in the event of damage.  Individuals do not have the clout that dealers have so it costs us more, and it is hard for us to win a dispute in the event of damage.

 

3) Due to the reasons above I typically do not ship telescopes, at least I do not like to.  I have had a few sold in very good and secure cases and then "over-packed" at FedEx.  It makes me nervous and it is expensive for the buyer.  I try to sell telescopes locally where the market is not as good.

 

4) I have sometimes tried to sell, with some success to someone somewhere where I will be going or can go.  I have done several deals where both buyer and seller travel a few hundred miles to meet and exchange scopes for money.

 

I have no problem with packing and shipping smaller items like eyepieces, diagonals, smaller mount components, etc.

 

When I ship a telescope I think of Columbus crossing the Atlantic in 3 small boats...………..

 

Barry Simon

[CHASLX200]

You know this whole damage in shipping issue is a reminder why I, and likely many other amateur astronomers hold onto telescopes longer than they normally would in many cases because …………………..

 

1) Scopes are harder to pack and ship well with assurances that nothing adverse will happen in transit

 

2) Scopes are expensive to ship.  Dealers get shipping discounts and probably for the most part are self insured or have "strength" with the shipping companies in the event of damage.  Individuals do not have the clout that dealers have so it costs us more, and it is hard for us to win a dispute in the event of damage.

 

3) Due to the reasons above I typically do not ship telescopes, at least I do not like to.  I have had a few sold in very good and secure cases and then "over-packed" at FedEx.  It makes me nervous and it is expensive for the buyer.  I try to sell telescopes locally where the market is not as good.

 

4) I have sometimes tried to sell, with some success to someone somewhere where I will be going or can go.  I have done several deals where both buyer and seller travel a few hundred miles to meet and exchange scopes for money.

 

I have no problem with packing and shipping smaller items like eyepieces, diagonals, smaller mount components, etc.

 

When I ship a telescope I think of Columbus crossing the Atlantic in 3 small boats...………..

 

Barry Simon

I do my best not to ship scopes.  I offer a lower price for local buyers or try any trick in the book. I was scared to death to ship my TMB 105/650.  Just not many people into scopes in FL it seems.

[daquad]

The bulk of 6" f/8 achromats be it Celestron, SkyWatcher, Konus, or something else have aluminum tubes, but for some reason.....steel dew shields (instead of aluminum ones).  This slightly more than doubles the weight of the dew shield as compared to aluminum.  Some have solved the problem, and note that it is only a problem if the focuser end of the telescope sits too low for you in some orientations and/or you just do not like the way it looks.

 

So what are the solutions to get the telescope balance point at the cradle to at least evenly divide the tube length 50/50 or to maybe get about 60% of the tube showing on the objective side of the cradle and 40% on the focuser side?

 

1) New dew shield - substitute aluminum for steel, or maybe even a plastic gallon paint bucket (there is a thread that covers this conversion).

 

2) 2" diagonal instead of a 1.25" diagonal adds weight as does the TeleVue brass 2" to 1.25" adapter for the diagonal.

 

3) A third solution is to add weight inside of the rear of the tube so that the tube can be pushed forward in the cradle or rings.  While I was at it I purposely did not put extra weight directly under where the finder and bracket is.  I put extra weight 180 degrees away so that the tube would be balanced in rotation.  

 

Note - the added weights have double stick tape, which is not enough.  I held mine in place with the double stick tape but also used Gorilla Glue, and when that was cured, added JB Weld on top of that.  The grey JB Weld helps to minimize any internal reflections.

 

All of this helped to make the new balance point of the tube closer to the mid point of the tube, and in fact, even a bit closer to the focuser.  This, of course, raises the focuser end achieving a higher location when observing many objects.  While mine does not have the "lighter dew shield fix" pictured.  I did that too with a rolled sheet of Evergreen white modeling plastic sheet and that will result in being able to push the tube another inch or so skyward in the tube cradle.  Incorporate all the fixes and you will be able to push these scopes forward in the rings are cradle about 4 to 5 inches, plus you will get better rotational balance by counter balancing the finder and bracket (#3 above).

 

See the before and after photos.

 

Barry Simon 

My solution is less hassle. requires no disassembly of the focuser from the tube and, I think, more elegant.  Mentioned this several times on different threads.  Add a set of parallax rings with a vixen-style dovetail and a steering handle. 

 

The dovetail serves two purposes.  1) carry the scope by the dovetail in one hand with the lens end cradled in the other -- makes it easy to lift the scope to the rings. 2) can mount a camera or guide scope on the vixen dovetail, if desired.

 

The rings and dovetail add sufficient weight to properly balance he scope.  Mounted the finder shoe on the ring closest to the focuser.

 

Haven't considered the material of the dew cap for my APM 152, but I believe it is aluminum.

 

Dom Q.

 

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by daquad, 27 August 2018 - 06:57 PM.

[JayS_CT]

Have now read all 35 pages of this thread..  First thought is that the sample size is far far too small yet to make any final decisions on this scope. There are questions about which may or may not be early runs, may or may not be subject to further change, which glass, what wave (I'm reading everything from 1/3 to as much as 1/8th).  There's just not enough out there to really determine what's real, what's uncertain, etc.. And yes I know I'm putting aside the shipping issues which are likely being addressed for a moment..
 

The other side of this (and some may relate) is that this thread reminds of some threads about LG OLED sets vs. Samsungs vs. Sony's, etc.. or an audiophile thread on which stylus is the best for rock, jazz, blues, MM (or not), preamps, what's the best surface for a platter, leather? cork?, etc..  The point being is that despite all the tested numbers of this cartridge/stylus or that cartridge/stylus, everyone's hearing is a little different and that someone sitting right next to you listening to the same music won't hear what you hear. It doesn't matter if a stylus is supposed to be better at delivering a frequency or not.. if you can't hear that difference, you just can't hear it.  Clearly there is a difference between a $10 stylus and a $500 stylus but narrow that gap and what some may deem significant, others may say "I don't hear any difference".  No where in those threads, many times, are people talking about the condition of the vinyl, what speakers are used, what amp (or preamp) is being used, etc.. It's a war about one piece in what is a myriad of other things that affect the sounds heard. 
 

Not much different than looking through a scope. We are all different. Our vision (for the most part) is different. Want a huge example? Ask someone who has had cataract surgery what the impact was to their ability to see color again after the surgery.  Whites had been like looking through a yellow filter and I never realized it until after the surgery. Some have sharper vision than others, some have color deficiencies (myself included). Now, let's throw in atmospheric conditions, your own latitude vs. someone else and what that does to planetary viewing, seeing, transparency, etc..  They ALL make the experience different from one person to another.
 

At the equipment level. The EVOStar 150 (as Kevin Legore has repeated stated it) was made to be a very good "affordable" (and in quotes because affordable is different to each of us) 6" Doublet Refractor. It wasn't made to compete with Taks, APs, etc.. heck probably not even made to compete with Esprits. Those that are looking for 98.xxxx Strehl levels before they consider a scope certainly have that right but there comes a point when you have to also ask yourself... "Am I on a mountain top in Chile where I'm going to see a significant difference between a 98+ strehl scope and a 96+ strehl or a (fill in the blank strehl) scope?" OR "I'm in New England and I'd be glad if I could just get a clear night where the humidity isn't so high that the equipment is dripping in dew 5 minutes after being out!!"
 

Last point (sorry if some feel this is a rant or soapbox) .. The SW 150 is a heck of a lot better than a Sears 80mm refractor with the altitude rod on the side that never stayed together and it's not in the class (or price point) of a 6" Tak (or again even an Esprit) ..  BUT my first telescope was one of those 80mm refractors and I loved it.  People reading some of these forums are incredibly happy with their scopes and then they read some of these threads, and what was perhaps an emerging thrill or dream come true is turned into “Did I make a bad mistake” or worse they now forget why they were excited to begin with and all they start to worry about now are speeds and feeds.



That’s NOT what the hobby is about.  It’s not about my scope is bigger, badder, better than your scope.  What it’s about is (or should be?) is positive education and not derailing someone’s dream come true, as I said.

 It's about helping someone feel good about the equipment they have and how to maximize the use of it (remember, it may be all that person can EVER afford). The SW 150 has a place in the line up of scopes.  We know Kevin takes his job (in the USA) very seriously.  I’m sure he conveys what’s here, but I do think CN has, in a lot of ways, become far more negative than it needs to be, or should be.

Let’s try to remember how we felt the first time we looked into the eyepiece of our own scope - no matter how big, what sterhl, whose eyepiece we used, etc..



By the way.. Want to test yourself for your own color vision, try this..  Maybe you’ll wonder if you “missing” something with Alberio now.  :-)  and remember to the person next to you it may look TOTALLY different!!!
 

http://xritephoto.com/cool-tools

Clear Skies!

Edited by JayS_CT, 28 August 2018 - 07:28 PM.

[rockethead26]

I scored 10 age range 65-69 (I think). Overall, pretty good.

[janapier]

...heck probably not even made to compete with Esprits...

Take that as a given, since no company endeavors outcompeting its own products.

[JayS_CT]

I scored 10 age range 65-69 (I think). Overall, pretty good.

That's excellent.  I'm perfect through all the greens, browns, etc.. I lose it in the pink/purple/blues category, so I'm usually around (depends on the day) 35 to 40.  Again, the point is that I'll never know what I'm missing. (although there are glasses now that help restore the spectrum for those affected)..  So, for me, when I look at Alberio, I know it's one golden and one azure blue, but don't know how my "blue" compares to what you see, which was part my point about everyone's vision being different.  Some people may look at Vega and just not see color being off (Hard as that is to imagine)..  They may see the "ghosting" but not the color..  Same with planets..

Edited by JayS_CT, 29 August 2018 - 09:16 AM.

[roadi]

Scored 4 in 50-59 I failed in the pink/orange range!

Is there a program like this one but with low contrast detection instead of colors?

Edited by roadi, 29 August 2018 - 09:41 AM.

[Auburn80]

Scored 4 in 50-59 I failed in the pink/orange range!
Is there a program like this one but with low contrast detection instead of colors?

I see the test as being both. Low, subtle contrast differences within each color presented. Much like seeing detail within the GRS or variation inside the equatorial belts or zones. Jupiter can be a tough object because it is full of low contrast details and demands very good optical performance, both from the telescope and the observer. Practice helps a lot too.

Clark

[emilslomi]

Well, this of course only works with an alt-az mount that allows for two scopes, but it works. For the 140 I need two weights to have the tube divided 60 lens 40 focuser. If does make things more comfy.

 

Cheers, Emil

 

[BillP]

Good looking setup Emil!!

[emilslomi]

Good looking setup Emil!!

Yeah, I like it. Should have posted in the balancing thread that just came up - alas, to late to delete.

 

Color matching is essential. Just try once, and you will see the difference immediately!! Red scope, red eyepieces, red socks, and red nose (easy after after a couple of glasses of red wine). People without a clue  experience will think your setup to be much more pro than that matchless AP standing beside you. I'm really thinking about the 5" blue anodized Meade achro. Goes well with classic jeans, and even the stars match. Soooo tempted ....

 

Cheers, Emil

[YAOG]

Have now read all 35 pages of this thread..  

 

<<SNIPPED>>

By the way.. Want to test yourself for your own color vision, try this..  Maybe you’ll wonder if you “missing” something with Alberio now.  :-)  and remember to the person next to you it may look TOTALLY different!!!
 

http://xritephoto.com/cool-tools

Clear Skies!

 

I posted a link to the X-Rite hue test here weeks ago. I'm a photographer and correct color is critical to professional output on screen and paper. My photo editing system uses wide gammut monitors and is calibrated and characterized weekly and starts with a calibrated target for hue and white balance at capture throughout a session. I visually score perfectly, no errors on the hue test. 

 

Chip

[YAOG]

They kinda looked like the tire weights on my Vette.

Those are tire weights commomly used for mag wheels, they just call them something else for hobby use. 

 

Chip

[Joe1950]

Got a 4, age 60-69. All that Jupiter observing helped.

[jay.i]

[...]

 

By the way.. Want to test yourself for your own color vision, try this..  Maybe you’ll wonder if you “missing” something with Alberio now.  :-)  and remember to the person next to you it may look TOTALLY different!!!
 

http://xritephoto.com/cool-tools

Clear Skies!

Now this is one nifty test! I have a self-calibrated IPS display (using an X-Rite i1Display Pro because I'm a perfectionist or something) and managed to pull a score of 0 (age 20-29) out of my hat... I was honestly surprised. I take pride in my eyesight (which I can tell is very slowly declining, makes me sad) but wow. Thank you for sharing that! I had to "reset" my eyes many times by looking away at something and then looking back. My eyes were starting to get lazy and see the pink hues as the same hue.

 

Before I submitted the below test I noticed a slight hue difference in the bottom row, right at the left, and adjusted the second square to the right by one square. Honestly, I think these hues aren't in perfect order, but the test thinks I'm close enough to call it perfect. It literally said "you have perfect vision!" Yeah right....... maybe just get those floaters outta my eyes and I'll be set!

 

Edited by jay.i, 29 August 2018 - 11:46 AM.

[starzonesteve]

I stunk up the joint with a 15, age 50-59. I'm going to blame it on my monitor's calibration.

[JayS_CT]

I posted a link to the X-Rite hue test here weeks ago. I'm a photographer and correct color is critical to professional output on screen and paper. My photo editing system uses wide gammut monitors and is calibrated and characterized weekly and starts with a calibrated target for hue and white balance at capture throughout a session. I visually score perfectly, no errors on the hue test. 

 

Chip

Chip,

I am a photographer/videographer as well. It's taken years to understand and compensate in my mind knowing where I'm weak.  Like you everything is calibrated and I do rely on tools like X-Rites Passport charts before hand to create profiles I can use in LR for a given shoot. For personal printing, I use the profiles from places like Red River and any of the large paper houses who have tested combinations of printers and paper extensively..  Again the point I was trying to make was that, as humans, what we perceive can be radically different for physical reasons for really any of the senses.  What you see in an eyepiece with perfect color vision is going to be different than what I see, regardless of strehl, etc.. Our eyes are just different.. we know a small percentage of the population actually live in a world of grays, whites and blacks.. (which is all they will ever know, sadly).

Jay S.

Edited by JayS_CT, 29 August 2018 - 11:55 AM.

[JayS_CT]

I stunk up the joint with a 15, age 50-59. I'm going to blame it on my monitor's calibration.

15 is not bad.. really, it just means there are subtleties of shades you can't distinguish. You can see reds, greens, blues, etc..  Kind of an eye opening (no pun intended) test..

[JayS_CT]

Now this is one nifty test! I have a self-calibrated IPS display (using an X-Rite i1Display Pro because I'm a perfectionist or something) and managed to pull a score of 0 (age 20-29) out of my hat... I was honestly surprised. I take pride in my eyesight (which I can tell is very slowly declining, makes me sad) but wow. Thank you for sharing that! I had to "reset" my eyes many times by looking away at something and then looking back. My eyes were starting to get lazy and see the pink hues as the same hue.

 

Before I submitted the below test I noticed a slight hue difference in the bottom row, right at the left, and adjusted the second square to the right by one square. Honestly, I think these hues aren't in perfect order, but the test thinks I'm close enough to call it perfect. It literally said "you have perfect vision!" Yeah right....... maybe just get those floaters outta my eyes and I'll be set!

 

 

Jay,

Floaters can be handled pretty easily if they are to the point of being distracting.  Called a Vitrectomy.  Check with an eye care professional.. VERY easy procedure.. 

[jay.i]

Jay,

Floaters can be handled pretty easily if they are to the point of being distracting.  Called a Vitrectomy.  Check with an eye care professional.. VERY easy procedure.. 

Ha, I don't really know how bad mine are compared to others... I don't want any surgery until they're so bad that I can't ever get a good look at planets below a 1mm exit pupil. I like to push magnification when I can. I thought you couldn't get rid of floaters though...

[JayS_CT]

Scored 4 in 50-59 I failed in the pink/orange range!

Is there a program like this one but with low contrast detection instead of colors?

Zeiss has a multi test. The color is not a extensive.. does do a contrast test..

https://www.zeiss.co...ning-check.html
 

All these tests just keep reenforcing what I was trying to say..  Maybe we need a test of "astronomical" vision before talking about comparisons!  LOL
 

[JayS_CT]

Ha, I don't really know how bad mine are compared to others... I don't want any surgery until they're so bad that I can't ever get a good look at planets below a 1mm exit pupil. I like to push magnification when I can. I thought you couldn't get rid of floaters though...

Check PM..  but for others, floaters (if bad enough or centrally "stuck" as was my case - talk about your secondary obstruction!) the procedure I referenced is pretty routine.

[Joe1950]

Got 100%!

 

Zeiss has a multi test. The color is not a extensive.. does do a contrast test..

https://www.zeiss.co...ning-check.html
 

All these tests just keep reenforcing what I was trying to say..  Maybe we need a test of "astronomical" vision before talking about comparisons!  LOL
 

Always good with color tests, peripheral and color 3d. Hearing high tones, not so good.