231 replies to this topic

[Terra Nova]

 Mike,

 

You don’t need a NV binocular. Just like with eyepieces, a monocular is all you need to get the full benefit of night vision.

 

There is no learning curve. You unscrew the lens on the intensifier. You screw on the adapter. You screw on a filter. You turn on the intensifier. You put the intensifier in the telescope just like an eyepiece. It's less complicated than changing the time on the digital clock in my car.   

 

And one doesn’t need a turnkey system. A Mod 3 intensifier with a $25 C-mount to 1.25” adapter and two filters are all you need. The system offered by Tele Vue is nice but it is not the only game in town.

 

And just like with telescopes, one also doesn’t need the absolute top of the line NV intensifier tube to get most of the NV experience. 

 

For deep sky observing, an Obsession 15” F4.5 Standard (no extras) Dobsonian will run $6,000, with extras it will cost more. And one will need wide field eyepieces and filters, etc. And that scope will need a reasonably dark sky to deliver its best. With the same budget, one could get a Mod 3 intensifier, the extras needed and a 10” Orion Dobsonian. The 10” with the intensifier will show things (like the Horsehead Nebula, etc.) that are just not seen in mild to heavy light pollution and you won’t have to travel to a dark sky and that system will also go deeper and show more details in many objects under a black sky.

 

I wouldn’t recommend an intensifier for someone starting out. Then again, I wouldn’t recommend a 15” Obsession either.

 

But for the experienced observer who likes the "visual experience" and wants to see more, an intensifier is a very strong consideration over getting a larger mirror, and it can actually be a less expensive proposition.

 

Or for those getting up in age and need to downsize but don’t want to give up the light gathering capability of larger aperture, again an intensifier can be a very strong consideration with the added benefit that you will actually see “more” and with "less hassle" in a “smaller telescope” using an intensifier. I think that qualifies as a win/win.

 

Bob 

Still, it’s like one fixed focus 1.25” eyepiece isn’t it? I guess with several barlows of different power and a thread in reducer or two you have more flexibility? What is the field of view? Is it limited like a CCD camera? You mention two filters? Why are filters needed? I thought the point was to enhance existing light. As I said, it’s interesting stuff. Still, it seems like a lot of tinkering with things to have much flexibility and I think the cost is beyond most people’s consideration. One could buy a lot of gas for many dark sky trips. Imonly have to go 25 miles from my house to get pretty dark skies.

[Sarkikos]

It's like FC in a fast fract. I get a bending of vision as i move my head. Same for glasses with a line in them. I can use them to read but not for normal vision.

I see the FC in fast fracts, because I've lost accommodation for focus. 

 

But I got used to progressives within an hour after I first put on a pair.  Looks perfectly normal to me.  Maybe it just takes longer getting used to them for some people. 

 

I bet the trick is to actually wear them them long enough to get used to them, and not flip them on and off.  But people who haven't worn glasses for most of their lives, and acquire presbyopia as they age, aren't used to wearing glasses period.  They don't want to wear glasses all day long.  They want to just flip them on and off.  And any momentary difficulty or discomfort is seen as a good excuse not to wear them all day.  

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 19 October 2021 - 07:52 AM.

[Sarkikos]

 Mike,

 

You don’t need a NV binocular. Just like with eyepieces, a monocular is all you need to get the full benefit of night vision.

 

There is no learning curve. You unscrew the lens on the intensifier. You screw on the adapter. You screw on a filter. You turn on the intensifier. You put the intensifier in the telescope just like an eyepiece. It's less complicated than changing the time on the digital clock in my car.   

 

And one doesn’t need a turnkey system. A Mod 3 intensifier with a $25 C-mount to 1.25” adapter and two filters are all you need. The system offered by Tele Vue is nice but it is not the only game in town.

 

And just like with telescopes, one also doesn’t need the absolute top of the line NV intensifier tube to get most of the NV experience. 

 

For deep sky observing, an Obsession 15” F4.5 Standard (no extras) Dobsonian will run $6,000, with extras it will cost more. And one will need wide field eyepieces and filters, etc. And that scope will need a reasonably dark sky to deliver its best. With the same budget, one could get a Mod 3 intensifier, the extras needed and a 10” Orion Dobsonian. The 10” with the intensifier will show things (like the Horsehead Nebula, etc.) that are just not seen in mild to heavy light pollution and you won’t have to travel to a dark sky and that system will also go deeper and show more details in many objects under a black sky.

 

I wouldn’t recommend an intensifier for someone starting out. Then again, I wouldn’t recommend a 15” Obsession either.

 

But for the experienced observer who likes the "visual experience" and wants to see more, an intensifier is a very strong consideration over getting a larger mirror, and it can actually be a less expensive proposition.

 

Or for those getting up in age and need to downsize but don’t want to give up the light gathering capability of larger aperture, again an intensifier can be a very strong consideration with the added benefit that you will actually see “more” and with "less hassle" in a “smaller telescope” using an intensifier. I think that qualifies as a win/win.

 

Bob 

If / When I get a NVD, I'd probably go monocular.  I posted the cost of a binocular NVD system as an example of the typical higher end amount that people sink into this technology.  I know there are some people that don't want to look through any telescope system unless they can use both eyes.  I am definitely not one of those people.

 

By learning curve, I did not mean learning how to fit together and use an NVD system.  I meant the learning curve involved in figuring out what is available, what is better and why it's better, what to look for in a system, how to finagle a superior sample of the technology from a vendor, which filters to use and when to use them.  IMO, determining what features you want in a big Dob and ordering one from one of the small companies that make big Dobs, would be a much easier proposition.  Most amateur astronomers who have been observing with Dobs for a few years should not have much problem doing that.  But figuring out NVD's?  Not so much.

 

I live in a Bortle 4 area, so I really don't need to travel to a darker site. Thankfully, my hour long or longer road trips to dark sites are over.  

 

I have a 10" f/4.8 Dob which I've observed with for nearly 14 years.  The OTA is great, but the mount is a rigged up job with necessary improvements over a not-so-great mount I bought many years ago for the OTA.  What I'd like to do is have someone make me a better Dob mount or just go ahead and order a decent 14" Dob.  NVD is something I'd get into beyond any of those considerations.

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 19 October 2021 - 10:56 AM.

[bobhen]

Still, it’s like one fixed focus 1.25” eyepiece isn’t it? I guess with several barlows of different power and a thread in reducer or two you have more flexibility? What is the field of view? Is it limited like a CCD camera? You mention two filters? Why are filters needed? I thought the point was to enhance existing light. As I said, it’s interesting stuff. Still, it seems like a lot of tinkering with things to have much flexibility and I think the cost is beyond most people’s consideration. One could buy a lot of gas for many dark sky trips. Imonly have to go 25 miles from my house to get pretty dark skies.

I guess this is turning into a NV thread anyway. I’ll answer your questions.

 

Yes the eyepiece on the intensifier is fixed. However, there are "2 ways" to observe with NV: Prime focus, with no eyepieces in the optical train and afocal, using eyepieces in the optical train “after” the intensifier. Each has advantages.

 

With my three telescopes: a 102mm F5 refractor, a 120mm F7.5 refractor, a C8 and one reducer and one Barlow, I find that is all I need for deep sky observing using an intensifier. I can go as fast as F3.5 to as slow F20 and from a 350mm FL to a 4,000mm FL. There are of course many other choices of scopes and optical trains that can be used depending on what you want to observe.

 

The field of view is around 40-degrees. When most people hear that they cringe. But as "absolutely every" Night Vision observer will tell you, the field is “so rich with stars and objects” that you will “never miss” the wider but “much sparser” view of regular glass. A larger bucket won’t quench your thirst if there’s no water in it.

 

Yes in some ways an intensifier acts like a camera but the views are in "real-time".

 

The filters used are “not visual filters” they are the very strong filters that imagers use. One filter is used for nebula and one for non-nebula objects in mild to heavy light pollution. In a very black sky one can use no filters. The intensifier has so much light boost that one can actually use filters that are designed for imaging! This is the secret! The combination delivers so much added contrast that once completely invisible nebula become visible. Small, distant globulars that were just unresolved smudges now become resolved.

 

There is no tinkering. If when observing deep sky objects you use an OIII or deep sky filter, then changing filters on an intensifier is exactly the same procedure: screw on, screw off. 

 

You will see more at home with an intensifier than you will making those trips. And the simplicity of observing from home like you were observing from the sky at a national park cannot be overstated.

 

Want a quick look at the Flame and Horsehead Nebulas on a 25-degree night? You can do that from your home. You also don’t need to dark-adapt, so on those clear, cold nights, you can go back inside to warm up.

 

The cost is what it is. But many have spent much more and have not seen as much.

 

Many NV users also use handheld lenses with an intensifier for “extremely” wide fields of view for the ultimate, “hassle free” grab-and-go system that cannot be topped. Even the huge expanse of Barnard’s Loop can be observed.

 

Since I got the intensifier, I have not used an eyepiece for 99% of my deep sky observing in over 5-years.

 

Below is an image of one of my optical trains. Most items would also be used for visual observing.

 

From left to right…

1. The refractor optical tube, or any OTA
2. A GSO 2” focuser, or any 2” focuser
3. An Astro-Physics 2” diagonal
4. “Optional”: An Antares 2” .7 reducer
5. The 2” to 1.25 adapter that comes with most 2” diagonals
6. 1.25” filter (Ha or Pass) 6 or 7nm Ha filters are popular, 685 pass filters are popular in heavy light pollution
7. C-mount to 1.25” adapter (screwed on and stays on the nose of the intensifier)
6. The NVD Micro Intensifier

 

Bob

Attached Thumbnails

• 

Edited by bobhen, 19 October 2021 - 03:40 PM.

[Sarkikos]

One of the deal breakers for me when I was researching the Tele Vue TNVC Night Vision, is that it cannot be used for prime focus.  You need to use an eyepiece with the TNVC.  At least this is my understanding.  Which makes sense, since Tele Vue sells eyepieces.    Or maybe this is an incorrect impression I received from posters here on CN?    Buying a turn-key system from Tele Vue sure would make things easier.

 

But I would want a more flexible system that can be used at prime focus and with eyepieces.  Not all DSOs have a large apparent size.  Most do not.  I'd also like to view small galaxies, open clusters, globulars and nebulae. When I've skimmed through the Night Vision Astronomy Quorum, though, the great emphasis seems to be on viewing the super big objects.  Or maybe that's because that's what the most vocal practitioners are interested in?  On the other hand, I would like to view the big stuff, too!

 

Mike

Edited by Sarkikos, 19 October 2021 - 11:23 AM.

[Terra Nova]

Thank you Bob for your detailed and informative answers. It certainly seems like an attractive option for some folks. As for myself, I’ve been cutting things way back and lessening my investment to a sum I am both comfortable and guilt-free with. At the same time, my effort in scaling down is to eliminate frustration and get back to a more hassle free, impromptu, easy observing style which actually gets me outside more, rather than less. I guess I’m just an old fashioned star gazer at heart. I don’t see myself taking a leap in this direction. I think it’s great for those who are so inclined, and perhaps you’ve made a convert or two here.

[bobhen]

One of the deal breakers for me when I was researching the Tele Vue TNVC Night Vision, is that it cannot be used for prime focus.  You need to use an eyepiece with the TNVC.  At least this is my understanding.  Which makes sense, since Tele Vue sells eyepieces.    Or maybe this is an incorrect impression I received from posters here on CN?    Buying a turn-key system from Tele Vue sure would make things easier.

 

But I would want a more flexible system that can be used at prime focus and with eyepieces.  Not all DSOs have a large apparent size.  Most do not.  I'd also like to view small galaxies, open clusters, globulars and nebulae. When I've skimmed through the Night Vision Astronomy Quorum, though, the great emphasis seems to be on viewing the super big objects.  Or maybe that's because that's what the most vocal practitioners are interested in?  On the other hand, I would like to view the big stuff, too!

 

Mike

Mike,

 

Yes, the TV system cannot be used at prime focus. And you are probably right TV still wants to sell eyepieces. But many use the TV system and they love it. The TV system does have its own advantages.

 

It would take exactly 2 phone calls to put together a Mod 3 intensifier system: one call to purchase the intensifier (from a NV retailer) and another to purchase the C-mount to 1.25” adapter and filters (from an astro retailer). It’s not complicated. A Mod 3 system can be used at both prime and afocal focus.

 

Globular clusters are spectacular using NV, as you can see more stars, as are open clusters. Many globular clusters that were previously unresolved will resolve with NV. Dark nebula both large and small, are also really spectacular and easy to see, which was a surprise to me. 

 

Last spring I used my C8 to observer 47 galaxies in a Bortle 8-9 zone, 6 of which I had not observed before in 35-years from this location, even with my 15” Dobsonian. Now, galaxies are very far away and you will not see the detail in real-time as you would with a long exposure image. With galaxies, think of an intensifier as adding aperture (light gathering capability) to your telescope. For example, when using glass, you will see more galaxies with a 20” mirror than you will with a 6” but the details in many galaxies even in the 20 will still be somewhat fleeting. That is kind of what happens with galaxies and night vision. Heck, when I was doing EAA, I found that there are a ton of galaxies that don’t show any details, even with a camera.

 

One of my best views of the planetary nebula M27 was with the C8 working at F7 at 1,400mm FL. The real-time NV view matched the detail in a 10 or 10-plus second EAA exposure. 

 

The great emphasis on large nebula is because most or many of these objects are faint, diffuse and lack the contrast needed  to be seen so they become difficult or impossible to observe visually with just glass. Before NV, many were considered imaging targets only.

 

Bob

[Sarkikos]

My prime telescope for NV would probably be the Bresser 8" f/3.9 Newt.  This is an astrograph with plenty of backfocus.  I could stack a filter wheel with the NVD.  

 

Mike

[YeloSub]

I am by no means an "experienced" observer in my book. But I have to agree that for most of my observations I prefer the dob mount for newts and alt az for widefield refractors...

But I personally love planetary and want a GEM to drive a large Mak or SCT as a dedicated moon/planetary setup at some point when I have space to have it more permanently setup.

Alt az is definitely easier though to get my rump out the door to a actually just observe to sky for all its worth.

Glad we have so many options these days!

Clear skies

Jake

[Mrcloc]

I've been using my new dob (used to use one until about 9 years ago), and that's definitely something I prefer about the Maksutov - the EQ mount it's on. It's manual, but I find tracking a lot easier with it than moving the dob. I always put the tripod in more or less the same spot, so I don't have any setting up to do, just point and shoot, and then track for as long as I'd like to look at whatever it is I'm looking at. I also find it's a little more cumbersome to take the dob apart, move the two parts outside, and then put it back together again - maybe someday I'll have a way of carrying the parts together. What I do like about the dob is that you can quickly hop from object to object if you're not going to be looking for long at only one.

 

That said, I've seen the wires and setup for AP or EV viewing, and it looks like a hassle I won't put up with for long. In fact, I tried an electronic eyepiece in my telescope, and that wiring was enough for me to not do that all the time. It is something I want to do, especially for outreach, but for the 2-3 times a week, carrying the manual scope to viewing location is easier, and something I'm more likely to do.

 

It's also easier to travel with a small scope on an EQ. It's easier to carry in to the tent or other accommodation, and easier to carry out to use. In other words, it's not about fitting it into the packing space, but rather about usability.

[bobhen]

My prime telescope for NV would probably be the Bresser 8" f/3.9 Newt.  This is an astrograph with plenty of backfocus.  I could stack a filter wheel with the NVD.  

 

Mike

I think you would find that all of your listed telescopes ( including the slower C8) would deliver the goods. Your other scopes would just offer different perspectives.

 

With NV, the intensifier adds so much light boost that light gathering (aperture) is not as important as it is with regular observing. With NV, as with EAA/imaging, things like" field of view" and "focal length" become more important, depending on the objects you want to observe.

 

Bob 

[Tom Stock]

 

I didn't know how much of a hassle an 8" SCT on a GEM was until I got the dob. I've never been afraid of work and have the bad back to prove it, but when it is obviously so easy to set up a dob I just have to really, really, really, want to use the SCT, say for planets, as it has tracking, to use the darn thing.

Oh yeah. I can set up my 10" dob and be ALIGNED (push-to and equatorial platform) and observing in less than that it takes to get all the parts of the GEM with 8" SCT in one place to begin assembly.  

 

Even more importantly, when the night is over, I can pack up in seconds instead of the 6 or 7 trips hauling OTA, counterweights, gem head, tripod, cables, batteries, dew shield, eyepieces + diagonals and reducers, etc, back inside.  

[Mountaineer370]

I'm really late to the party here, but going back to the original question, "Is anyone else tired of the hassle," I have always had a strong preference for alt-az mounts.  I'm a visual-only observer.  I understand what RA and Dec are, but moving the telescope in those directions was never simple or intuitive to me.  When I look at a star chart and decide where I want to look, my brain simply works better in terms of up and down, left and right.  And since an observing session means getting everything out of the closet, making multiple trips down the deck stairs, then hauling everything out to the old horse pasture where my views are best, and then bringing everything back in when I'm done, my 60-something body prefers lightweight and simple.

 

I sold my Meade 826 earlier this year because the mount was -- well, a lot of hassle.  I would like to have "Dobified" it, but that was going to be beyond my ability to do personally and beyond my budget to send it out for doing.  It had wonderful optics, but I almost never used it.

My TV-85 and all three of my four-inch refractors ride on alt-az mounts only.  I have a TV Gibraltar that I love, and I also have a UA Unistar Super Deluxe with an Oberwerk tripod that is nice, though a lot heavier and a couple more trips than the Gibraltar.  My super-light TV Tele-Pod mount works fine with the TV-85, so that is my easiest grab-and-go.

 

I'm a little embarrassed to say that I'm so old school that I don't own a smart phone or a tablet, so I don't do Sky Safari or anything like that.  I would like to get a digital setting circle system so I can have push-to, though.  My skies are getting more light-polluted and I feel I could use a little help finding things these days.  I like the idea of a laser pointer, but I'm afraid I live too close to two large airports.  I'm really sorry Tele Vue discontinued the Sky Tour.  I know there are newer DSC systems, and I have been looking at them but haven't taken the plunge yet.

I have never had the number of telescopes and mounts that many of you have, but even so, I'm working on making things even more simple, planning on selling a couple of scopes I probably will never use again, and just getting out and observing more.

 

And Happy (very) Belated Birthday, Terra!

Edited by Mountaineer370, 27 October 2021 - 10:05 PM.

[Defenderslideguitar]

Hi Cheri 

 thanks for popping into this thread   I like this thread and I had missed the whole exchange about intensifiers and nv stuff     Just  read it all to catch up   facinating really.  But back to your point    yes   we love our Gibralter   and the Unistar. Many scopes ride well on them.   I use them often even though I am a big fan of slow mo controls. The smaller three inch scopes ride well on the Twilight and I want a Vixen porta....

While some of my Gems are so good and we are keeping them     the hassle can push one to go alt az on a given night......

 

Just returning from a friend's farm in Maine    I noted your reference to the Horse pasture and draging stuff out there. In that regard    my friend bought some kind of Toro golf cart like with dump back and we loaded some astro gear into it and it was so helpful. I am not doing that where I live but on the farm it was useful....

 

I also jumped on a telepod in the classifieds last spring that was priced nice  and I have not yet tried it. But I wonder what tripod  you use with it?

Edited by Defenderslideguitar, 28 October 2021 - 01:02 PM.

[Mountaineer370]

Hi Cheri 

 thanks for popping into this thread   I like this thread and I had missed the whole exchange about intensifiers and nv stuff     Just  read it all to catch up   facinating really.  But back to your point    yes   we love our Gibralter   and the Unistar. Many scopes ride well on them.   I use them often even though I am a big fan of slow mo controls. The smaller three inch scopes ride well on the Twilight and I want a Vixen porta....

While some of my Gems are so good and we are keeping them     the hassle can push one to go alt az on a given night......

 

Just returning from a friend's farm in Maine    I noted your reference to the Horse pasture and draging stuff out there. In that regard    my friend bought some kind of Toro golf cart like with dump back and we loaded some astro gear into it and it was so helpful. I am not doing that where I live but on the farm it was useful....

 

I also jumped on a telepod in the classifieds last spring that was priced nice  and I have not yet tried it. But I wonder what tripod  you use with it?

Hi Barry.  Yes, I've been away from the Classics forum for too long, hoping to get back into the discussions here and in Refractors.  Funny you should mention a golf cart.  I've been thinking about one lately.    If I'm going out in the pasture with just a refractor and the Gibraltar or Tele-Pod, carrying things out isn't too bad.  If I've planned ahead, most nights, I tell myself the exercise is good for me.  But if I'm going out there with the Meade LX200, everything gets put into the back of an SUV and driven out!

 

When I mentioned my Tele-Pod mount, I was referring to both the mount head and the aluminum tripod Tele Vue sells with them, like this (only mine is an older model):

 

https://www.televue....=200&Tab=_TeleP

 

The Tele Vue specs page suggests the Panoramic for my three-and-a-half-inch TV-85, but for my purposes, the Tele-Pod is more than adequate.  I wouldn't want to try anything larger on it, though.

[LukaszLu]

It seems that during my short absence on the forum, I missed not only some interesting discussions, but most of all Terra's birthday. I make up for it fast. Terra - let me dedicate you my last picture of the Moon. The RAO R-74 really did its best for this occasion - I think it is one of the best photos it has taken. All the best from me and my RAO! Apparently, Mr. Copernicus also joins the wishes :-)

 

 

As for the mounts - I use almost exclusively equatorial mounts and I think it is a huge convenience. The fact that walking away from the eyepiece I know that one turn of the knob is enough to hit the object again is a great relief. I've never been too concerned about polar alignment. I set up a tripod "more or less" and it works perfectly, even for few-minutes lunar or planetary photography. The image of the Moon was taken in this way - I took RAO on the EXOS-2 mount and set it up in seconds even before the stars appeared in the sky...

Edited by LukaszLu, 29 October 2021 - 07:04 AM.

[Terra Nova]

It seems that during my short absence on the forum, I missed not only some interesting discussions, but most of all Terra's birthday. I make up for it fast. Terra - let me dedicate you my last picture of the Moon. The RAO R-74 really did its best for this occasion - I think it is one of the best photos it has taken. All the best from me and my RAO! Apparently, Mr. Copernicus also joins the wishes :-)

 

 

As for the mounts - I use almost exclusively equatorial mounts and I think it is a huge convenience. The fact that walking away from the eyepiece I know that one turn of the knob is enough to hit the object again is a great relief. I've never been too concerned about polar alignment. I set up a tripod "more or less" and it works perfectly, even for few-minutes lunar or planetary photography. The image of the Moon was taken in this way - I took RAO on the EXOS-2 mount and set it up in seconds even before the stars appeared in the sky...

🙏

[CHASLX200]

Killer moon shot. Must be super good optics.

[alnitak22]

Hi Cheri 

 thanks for popping into this thread   I like this thread and I had missed the whole exchange about intensifiers and nv stuff     Just  read it all to catch up   facinating really.  But back to your point    yes   we love our Gibralter   and the Unistar. Many scopes ride well on them.   I use them often even though I am a big fan of slow mo controls. The smaller three inch scopes ride well on the Twilight and I want a Vixen porta....

While some of my Gems are so good and we are keeping them     the hassle can push one to go alt az on a given night......

 

Just returning from a friend's farm in Maine    I noted your reference to the Horse pasture and draging stuff out there. In that regard    my friend bought some kind of Toro golf cart like with dump back and we loaded some astro gear into it and it was so helpful. I am not doing that where I live but on the farm it was useful....

 

I also jumped on a telepod in the classifieds last spring that was priced nice  and I have not yet tried it. But I wonder what tripod  you use with it?

Hi. What scope are you planning on using the Telepod for, and at what power? That will determine what kind of tripod you need. Like Cheri, I have a TV85 for both quick looks and longer sessions. Though I have and like an EQ mount for the TV85, my alt az setup is used more often. It’s a Telepod head on a Bogen 3036 tripod. I think the newer number for this tripod is 475B. I say newer because I’ve had it 20 years! It is very well made, just like the Telepod head and has seen a ton of use. The TV85 is good not only for low power on this combo but is quite steady even at high power for lunar/planetary and doubles. The TV85 weighs a bit over 9 lbs with diagonal and eyepiece so this tripod is perfect. If you have a lighter scope in mind and want to use it mainly as a low power/wide field scope, then a lighter tripod would be fine with the Telepod head. I also have a complete Telepod mount for my TV Ranger and that is light and super easy to deploy. I haven’t weighed the scope and mount but it can’t be even 10 pounds. 

[Defenderslideguitar]

Hello yes    Hassle free Telepod 

    don't have a small tripod for it yet, although  we do have larger tripods   but    I will be using the Telepod and smaller tripod for my Pentax 75 edhf    it is short and light    about 5 ilbs. 

Will become a travel scope with the Telepod and   some type of small compact tripod

While these pics show rings   I have switched it over to my Televue clam shell 

Attached Thumbnails

• 
• 

Edited by Defenderslideguitar, 30 October 2021 - 10:44 AM.

[clamchip]

Something that can add sparkle is a new plan.

This photo of double star observer Sissy Haas and her department scope and simple

mounting has made a double star observer out of me:

https://www.astronom...servations.html

 

I never paid much attention to double stars, only to test seeing or telescopes.

But now I'm having all kinds of fun observing doubles with my 3 inch achromat and

altazimuth. I haven't felt frozen finger tips in years !

 

Robert

[CHASLX200]

I only know of around 3 doubles. Castor the Double D and maybe one other.

[alnitak22]

Hello yes    Hassle free Telepod 

    don't have a small tripod for it yet, although  we do have larger tripods   but    I will be using the Telepod and smaller tripod for my Pentax 75 edhf    it is short and light    about 5 ilbs. 

Will become a travel scope with the Telepod and   some type of small compact tripod

While these pics show rings   I have switched it over to my Televue clam shell 

Great scope! Used one once though it was on a light duty EQ mount. 

[alnitak22]

Something that can add sparkle is a new plan.

This photo of double star observer Sissy Haas and her department scope and simple

mounting has made a double star observer out of me:

https://www.astronom...servations.html

 

I never paid much attention to double stars, only to test seeing or telescopes.

But now I'm having all kinds of fun observing doubles with my 3 inch achromat and

altazimuth. I haven't felt frozen finger tips in years !

 

Robert

Cool picture! I love double star observing with my TV85 and alt az setup. Even in the Ranger there are plenty of colorful ones within reach. Cor Caroli is really a pretty one.

[Terra Nova]

Hello yes    Hassle free Telepod 

    don't have a small tripod for it yet, although  we do have larger tripods   but    I will be using the Telepod and smaller tripod for my Pentax 75 edhf    it is short and light    about 5 ilbs. 

Will become a travel scope with the Telepod and   some type of small compact tripod

While these pics show rings   I have switched it over to my Televue clam shell 

Yes, the TV Telepod or Panoramic mount is a great way to go hassle-free. I put a Vixen clamping saddle on mine years ago to make it even more serviceable as a g&g ride for my small scopes. Here’s my version of the Sissy Haus scope. I did find that the weight of my FC-76 and it’s ability to take very high magnifications put it at the cusp of usability on the Panoramic mount. Of late, I’ve really been enjoying the FC-76 on my Vixen Porta II. I’m in small scope Nirvana!

Attached Thumbnails

• 
•