41 replies to this topic

[UnityLover]

This is a fairly short focal length scope at 600mm so you may struggle to view things that are conducive to high magnification like the planets. It doesn’t mean you can’t view planets, just that they will inevitably be somewhat small. This type of scope shines more with large celestial objects that favor a wide field, like the Orion Nebulla.  Another point is that, not knowing where you are located, I assume you are limited like most of us, to favorable weather. An iPhone app that I use to tell me whether the upcoming evening will be good for stargazing is called “Good to Stargaze” look for it in the App Store. Highly recommended.

 have the same scope, its 650mm. 75X is all you need for the planets. It showed me Jupiters bands and a transit, the black markings on mars (very prominent.), and the cassini division on saturn. A 7-21mm zoom like the svbony one does great for this.

[northernmike]

Thanks everyone for the replies , very usefull!

My scope is suppose to be delivered the 20th but on amazon it also said ''may arrive in three days'' , so i'm very anxious!

My home is located 90 km north of Montreal , and there's a place a bit north of me called Mt Tremblant wich is elevated at 3,200 feet (968M) and there's a

community of astronomers that i look forward to join.

I figure that beeing at that elevation , combined with absence of light pollution will be great.

My place too will be nice , not much light pollution either.

After reading a lot of stuff on the subjet lately and with your help , i decided to wait for any further upgrade , but i think that my shorty will come handy

for my first viewings.

Althought this is my first scope , i wanted to get one for years , but finaly made the move.

First i selected a (used) dobsian 8 inch with pretty decent lens , filters , but i have camper on my pick up and i go fishing in very remoted places and wanted

something decent , but portable. That's why i went for a newtonian. The dobsian was 49 inches high and way to heavy to carry.I'm wondering if it would

have fitted in wy camper door. If i really like astronomy (i'm pretty sure i will) then i'll go for a dobsonian used for my living room.

Hope i made a good choice , only time will tell.

Back in a couple of days to let you know!

Edited by northernmike, 13 September 2023 - 10:53 AM.

[JohnnyBGood]

My nearly identical Meade Polaris 130 has been my favorite and most used telescope, so I think you made a good choice. There's really not much else you need.

 

Having a place to site while observing helps because it's more comfortable and relaxing. Personally, I use a little three-legged folding camping chair. The height isn't adjustable like a fancy observing chair but I find the triangle shape of the chair is helpful for working around the tripod legs without getting tangled up.

 

I've tried lots of things for eyepieces, but where I ended up was using a 26mm Erfle (not much different from the Plossl you have) and a 7-21 zoom along with a 2x shorty Barlow. The Barlow doesn't get used a lot to be honest. If your scope is like most.lf the other 130mm f/5 scopes I think you'll find that that the sweet spot for focus is very small once.you get over 130x, so theb10mm with 2x Barlow will probably be all you need. Before you buy any more eyepieces or Barlows you should use what you have for a while.

 

The only other accessory I'd recommend is a copy of the book Turn Left at Orion (some prefer Nightwatch) to help you find things to see. I've seen the vast majority of the objects in the book with my 130mm scope, and there are plenty of things to see beyond just those in the book. 

[Dave Mitsky]

I don't think that many observers here would be happy observing the planets at 75x.  I usually use a minimum of 150x and sometimes a good deal more, if the seeing is very good.
 

On Monday night, I observed Saturn, which can "take" higher magnifications better than Jupiter, with the Astronomical Society of Harrisburg's Naylor Observatory's 17" classical Cassegrain rather well at 462x.
 

I also used one of the club's Dobs, an old 8" Hardin Deep Space Hunter, later that night.  Jupiter was rather small at 120x, the highest magnification that I used with that telescope.
 

One year at the Winter Star Party in the Florida Keys, where the seeing is legendarily superb, I observed Mars at over 900x.
 

Neptune appears more or less stellar until a magnification of around 200x is employed.

[KWB]

I don't think that many observers here would be happy observing the planets at 75x.  I usually use a minimum of 150x and sometimes a good deal more if the seeing is excellent. 

 

 

When the sky stability is reasonable, even with just an 80mm refractor, 124X is about my minimum satisfaction level for observing Jupiter.

[northernmike]

I don't think that many observers here would be happy observing the planets at 75x.  I usually use a minimum of 150x and sometimes a good deal more, if the seeing is very good.
 

On Monday night, I observed Saturn, which can "take" higher magnifications better than Jupiter, with the Astronomical Society of Harrisburg's Naylor Observatory's 17" classical Cassegrain rather well at 462x.
 

I also used one of the club's Dobs, an old 8" Hardin Deep Space Hunter, later that night.  Jupiter was rather small at 120x, the highest magnification that I used with that telescope.
 

One year at the Winter Star Party in the Florida Keys, where the seeing is legendarily superb, I observed Mars at over 900x.
 

Neptune appears more or less stellar until a magnification of around 200x is employed.

I did some research and found out that there's a maximum magnifying for each telescope. So if mine as an aperture of 5.1 inches , i multiply by 30 ,

so my scope as a maximum of 153 X , is that right? even if i use a very good quality 6mm lens ?

My barlow 2X combined with my 10mm eyepiece would give me 130 X (650 mm divided by 10 and  X 2) ?

Is a 7 to 21mm zoom better than buying a good 6 mm piece? i'm not planning to buy anything else now , knowing my scope first is a good start , like

many said here.

oh , almost forgot! my first wiewings will probably be the moon , so should i get a moon filter or should i wait? if so , any recommandations?

Edited by northernmike, 13 September 2023 - 02:22 PM.

[Tony Flanders]

I did some research and found out that there's a maximum magnifying for each telescope. So if mine as an aperture of 5.1 inches , i multiply by 30 ,
so my scope as a maximum of 153 X , is that right? even if i use a very good quality 6mm lens ?
My barlow 2X combined with my 10mm eyepiece would give me 130 X (650 mm divided by 10 and  X 2) ?

30X per inch of aperture is a very crude rule of thumb, but it's probably just about right in this case. Some people might want to use a little more magnification, some might want to use less. I think that for most people 130X would show almost as much detail as you could see in this scope at any magnification, no matter how high.

The quality of the eyepiece is not an important consideration; a $50 eyepiece will show you at least 95% as much as a $500 eyepiece. The most important variable is the stability of the atmosphere.
 

Is a 7 to 21mm zoom better than buying a good 6 mm piece?
...
oh , almost forgot! my first wiewings will probably be the moon , so should i get a moon filter or should i wait? if so , any recommandations?

The advantage of a zoom is that you can fine-tune the magnification to suit the conditions. But without a Barlow it would give you just 650/7 = 93X, which is pretty low for your scope. And if you are using a Barlow you can use the stock 10-mm eyepiece to get 130X. So maybe you shouldn't buy any new eyepieces at all for the moment.

 

As for Moon filters, why don't you see if the Moon's brightness is a problem for you. Personally, I prefer viewing the Moon without a filter, even in my biggest telescope.

[Dave Mitsky]

I never use a dedicated moon filter or a polarizing filter, even while observing the Moon with a 17" classical Cassegrain.  If I feel the need, I simply turn on a white light to stop down my pupils.  

[UnityLover]

30X per inch of aperture is a very crude rule of thumb, but it's probably just about right in this case. Some people might want to use a little more magnification, some might want to use less. I think that for most people 130X would show almost as much detail as you could see in this scope at any magnification, no matter how high.

The quality of the eyepiece is not an important consideration; a $50 eyepiece will show you at least 95% as much as a $500 eyepiece. The most important variable is the stability of the atmosphere.
 

The advantage of a zoom is that you can fine-tune the magnification to suit the conditions. But without a Barlow it would give you just 650/7 = 93X, which is pretty low for your scope. And if you are using a Barlow you can use the stock 10-mm eyepiece to get 130X. So maybe you shouldn't buy any new eyepieces at all for the moment.

 

As for Moon filters, why don't you see if the Moon's brightness is a problem for you. Personally, I prefer viewing the Moon without a filter, even in my biggest telescope.

Oh its 93x? I observe at 7mm, must've been a mistake on my part.

[Freezout]

I also prefer to observe planets at 130x than 75x, even if 75x can show a crisper view when the seeing is bad. 

 

I observe often the Moon and never use the polarizing Moon filter I bought in the past. Like Tony and Dave say, your eye will get used very fast. If you dedicate your evening to the Moon, you do not even need to keep everything dark around you. Then the brightness of the Moon doesn't hurt.

 

Anyway it looks like you have conditions that a lot of us would be jealous of, next to that mountain and in nice dark skies! Enjoy!

 

Don't forget comfort, one of my best tools is the folding camping tripod chair that my family in law bought me in the past. And also clothes fit for low temperature, but as Quebecois you might have what is required...

[northernmike]

I everyone !

My scope came in last thursday , at the same time i arrived from work. I've put it together quite easely,

Al lot of clouds for my first viewing , didn't bother to polar align it , just familiarize with it. Only a couple of clear spots , but rapidly clouding , wich reminded me

why they chosse such a  name for  this site !

The day after , i had a rough day at work and didn't feel like standing up , but just lay down horizontaly....

But i got the scope out on saturday night , polar aligned it and stared at Polaris for about 20 to 30 min.

Dead center in the middle of my eyepiece for as long as i like! This way , i got to familiarize with my equipement. First , the 25mm eyepiece , then the 10mm,

back to the 25 with the barlow , a finaly the 10mm  + barlow. And to my satisfaction , on the horizon , Saturn started to come up , and for the first time , with

my own eyes , not photographs , i saw the rings , then using the 10mm with barlow , i could faintly see some details . Another surprise was coming up from

the left  (north east i think) and that was Jupiter. With the 2x barlow and the 25mm ,i could clearly see it. And i could also see , 4 bright star with it in my

eyepiece and sundenly shook my head and said to myself , these aren't stars , but Jupiters's moons! Another first for me.

 

Now here is my impression of my kit:

 

1- Like the reviews said (i already knew about it) the EQ2 mount is so-so.I saw a video (small optics) suggesting on putting a hook underneath the tripod tray

and adding weight on the hook to lower the center of gravity. I also tried to keep the  legs lower  and sit on a chair and that hleps too ,

2- Any suggestions please on a new focuser ? the one that comes with the scope is not grade b, but grade c. With the 25mm , it's barely enough , but with

the 10mm, by the time you got it , the object is already out of the view . Something with dual speed that fits 1,25'' would be neat.

3-My Orion eyepieces are at 52 degree of view and i could hardly see on the side with the 10mm , the view is too narrow compared with the 25mm .

I would like to try those that are 68 degree , like the svbony , i looked at the 15 mm ($55 can) since i have a 25 . But if i have to put a few extra dollars for

something far better , i'm open to suggestions.

4- Overall , this is a nice scope . The reviews said that the parabolic miror was quite impressive for that price range and i have to agree . Of course , with any

good things , comes some  ''less good things'' , like the focuser , wich i intend to upgrade in a near future , to make my experience more ''enjoyfull''. For the mount ,

i just have to keep the legs low and try that hook with weights , underneath the tray .For my first scope , i'm very satisfied and I recomend it.

.

Edited by northernmike, 18 September 2023 - 11:04 PM.

[Freezout]

I used to have a 114mm aperture and 900mm focal length newtonian as starter telescope. It had probably a lot of weak points but honestly with today's knowledge I know the most important was the shaky mount. You can have the best focuser, eyepieces, optics, if the field of view is dancing it's useless.

I realize today I could have perfectly keep it and buy a rock solid mount for it. You can probably do the same.  

 

I don't understand your comment about the focuser saying that the object goes out of the field of view (FOV). The object going out of the field of view when changing eyepieces or focusing is due to eyepieces with small FOV or weak mount not holding your telescope properly. 

A nice upgrade if you are already frustrated by these elements could be a heavy mount (EQ not necessary probably) and a quality wide eyepiece.

[therealdmt]

Congratulations on first light with your scope and for yourself, northernmike. Sounds like a really succesful session. And yup, that’s why we call this place ‘Cloudy Nights’

 

Unfortunately, replacing a focuser isn’t the simplest (or least expensive) thing. I’m not saying it can’t be done (people do replace focusers), but you might want to try getting used to it. You’ll get better with practice. If things are shaking too much while you focus, it’s probably the mount/tripod that is the issue anyway.

 

Wider angle (wider apparent field of view) eyepieces can definitely help keep an object in sight longer before having to readjust the position of your telescope, so something like the X-Cel LX series (60°) or even wider is definitely something to consider. For reference, an about 70° apparent field of view (68° is a common size) fills out what can be easily seen looking straight ahead.

 

Nevertheless, I see your scope is on an equatorial (EQ) mount. If you polar align the mount first, you can track your targets by simply turning just one knob (so a very wide field of view needn’t be such a big priority). Practice tracking at lower power first, and eventually tracking at medium and then high power will become easier.

 

Here’s a good video on setting up and using an EQ mount: https://www.youtube....h?v=RFCreX1x4_s

and here’s another with a slicker but even more thorough presentation: https://www.youtube....h?v=Ks3ReGgFhwY

 

Between the two of them, you should be able to get your scope/mount/tripod combination set up to keep a planet or other high magnification target in view by just twisting one knob

[northernmike]

Here’s a good video on setting up and using an EQ mount: https://www.youtube....h?v=RFCreX1x4_s

and here’s another with a slicker but even more thorough presentation: https://www.youtube....h?v=Ks3ReGgFhwY

 

 

I've seen both of them , (actually , i've seen a lot of videos!) and i like Jason from small optics. He elaborates a lot , but has a simple and very

understandable way of telling things. The Svbony 68 degree eyepiece i was talking about earlier was taken from a video by Jason

----https://www.youtube....nel=SmallOptics.

 

Of course , i should be more patient  with my focuser , but it's a plastic one  and i would really like to have a metal one.

Would a 2'' fit on a  space probe 130 st ? if it's single speed but metal , will it improve a lot?

 

 

When i lowered my legs on the EQ mount , it's definitely less shaky , and i'll try the hook and weights underneath the mount's tray  , seems like a good idea.

 

I found out a way to manoeuvrer around my scope so that i don't touch it  when i look in the eyepiece and that's why i want a larger view eyepiece,

the svbony isn't that expensive.

 

I intend to familiarize with it , but i bought this Orion as a portable one for my fishing and camping excursions , but i'm already looking for a 8'' dobsonian

like the Skyline from Orion , probably next winter , i'm not in a hurry , but read pretty good things about that scope. 8 inch aperture and 1200mm of focal lenght

seems like a powerfull scope for serious beginner. It's not that expensive.A lot of people here has 2 or more scopes , so why not , i have the budget and an

appetite for astronomy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm also looking at this , a motor to keep the object in the eyepiece, looks ok for the price. The store is in Montreal , 100km from

my place and the shipping price is ok too.

 

https://maisonastron...on-motor-drive/

Edited by northernmike, 19 September 2023 - 10:41 AM.

[therealdmt]

I've seen both of them , (actually , i've seen a lot of videos!) and i like Jason from small optics. He elaborates a lot , but has a simple and very

understandable way of telling things. The Svbony 68 degree eyepiece i was talking about earlier was taken from a video by Jason

----https://www.youtube....nel=SmallOptics.

Of course , i should be more patient  with my focuser , but it's a plastic one  and i would really like to have a metal one.

Would a 2'' fit on a  space probe 130 st ? if it's single speed but metal , will it improve a lot?

When i lowered my legs on the EQ mount , it's definitely less shaky , and i'll try the weights underneath the mount , seems like a good idea.

I found out a way to manoeuvrer around my scope so that i don't touch it  when i look in the eyepiece and that's why i want a larger view eyepiece,

the svbony isn't that expensive.

I intend to familiarize with it , but i bought this Orion as a portable one for my fishing and camping excursions , but i'm already looking for a 8'' dobsonian

like the Skyline from Orion , probably next winter , i'm not in a hurry , but read pretty good things about that scope. A lot of people here has

2 or more scopes , so why not , i have the budget and an appetite for astronomy.

Yeah, I like that small optics guy, too. His videos are [charmingly] amateurish production-wise, but he’s so sincere about wanting his listeners to understand and he can explain things in simple language. A natural teacher. 
 

About the focuser, other people will be able to help you better than I as I’ve never used it, nor have I tried to replace a focuser. If no one answers you on that here, that’s definitely a topic worthy of starting a new thread on, perhaps over in the ‘Reflectors’ area. But mess around with what you have for a while first — you’ll get better at using your current stuff, and I believe you’ll come to new understandings over the weeks and months ahead. Nevertheless, the scope you have, while useable, is built to a lower price point and will have its issues, so no need to torture yourself if you start seeing that you really want to do things differently.

 

But like one thing is, you’re generally not going to be using 2" eyepieces for planetary anyway. Higher magnification views such as suit planetary observation will require shorter focal length eyepieces, especially with a shorter telescope (650mm focal length) like you have. That means 1.25" eyepieces and maybe a barlow. The 2" eyepieces come in when you want to get wide views of larger objects like, say, the Pleiades or the Andromeda Galaxy, and groups of objects, like say the Leo Trio (of galaxies) or the Double Cluster, or for starhopping (having a wider field of view so that you can actually find an object you’re trying to get to instead of hunting around in the dark with a narrow field of view and missing it even though you were close by) and even just for cruising along in the sky, especially along the Milky Way, and seeing what you might happen to come across.

 

With a 1.25" focuser, the widest field of view you can get is with a 32mm Plossl or with a 24mm 68° eyepiece (Explore Scientific 24mm 68, APM 24mm UFF or the more expensive Televue 24mm Panoptic). The 32mm Plossl is lighter and less expensive (which is nice), but the 24/68s give the same field of view with a bit more magnification. Among other things, more magnification gives a darker background sky, so that’s nice if you have a lot of light pollution to deal with.

 

The Orion Skyline 8" Dob looks like a rebranded GSO, and I can confirm that those are nice telescopes.

 

Anyway, despite almost everything I just wrote  , now’s really more the time to concentrate on getting familiar with your gear and the night sky than with shopping, aside from perhaps a few critical items or unless you find out you really aren’t happy with your equipment, etc.

 

Were you able to get your scope/mount/tripod polar aligned and track an object with just the right ascension knob? Try it with the wide field eyepiece first (a 25 mm Plossl, iirc). Good luck, and if you run into issues, be patient, work through it step by step, and stick with it. And of course the people here are a great resource

[northernmike]

 

Were you able to get your scope/mount/tripod polar aligned and track an object with just the right ascension knob? Try it with the wide field eyepiece first (a 25 mm Plossl, iirc). Good luck, and if you run into issues, be patient, work through it step by step, and stick with it. And of course the people here are a great resource

This is how i got the most out of my kit so far , with the shorty 2x barlow and the 25 mm eyepiece.

So if i want to upgrade with a wide angle , you suggest no lower than 24mm for a start? (I will wait a bit before buying , just want to know)

The eyepieces your refering to are a good choice , but i'll wait for those , i prefer to have them on a 8'' dobsonian and 2''

Is the svobny  a good choice for my scope? i've only found the 20mm 68 degree

[therealdmt]

Your 25mm Plossl gives about 50° apparent field of view (AFOV). Plossls can be in the 48° to 52° range, I believe, but anyway, whatever it is will be very close to 50°. AFOV basically means how wide of a window are you looking out through — a narrow keyhole, a regular window, or some floor-to-ceiling bay window.

 

An approximate calculation of the true field of view (TFOV), which means how big of a section of sky you see, is a two-step calculation as follows:

————

magnification = telescope focal length/eyepiece focal length

 

TFOV = AFOV/magnification 

————

 

Your telescope’s focal length is 650mm. So…

 

650mm/25mm = 26x magnification 

 

and 

 

50°/26x = 1.9° TFOV (not too bad).

 

I’ll go through another, for a 24mm/68°:

 

650mm/24mm = 27x magnification 

68°/27x= 2.5° TFOV 

 

You can see that the magnification is essentially the same (you wouldn’t be able to tell the difference between 26x and 27x with getting into a meticulous comparison), but you do gain quite a bit more field of view.

 

 

And lastly, the Svbony 68° 15mm redline:

650mm/15mm = 43x

68°/43x = 1.6°

Hmm. Well, I’ll say that the Svbony 15mm redline isn’t jumping out at me as a "must have", especially when we consider in a 3rd factor besides focal length and AFOV, the design of the eyepiece (some people just say "quality" here, though that isn’t quite right). Some designs work well enough at larger focal ratios like f/10 and above (what we call "slow" telescopes) but suffer from various issues when used in a telescope with a smaller focal ratio (what we call "fast" scopes) like f/5 and below. Your telescope is f/5, so getting on the fast side. From what I’ve read, the redlines aren’t ideal with faster scopes. Still, they’re usable. So, I’d say if you want that 15mm redline and the price isn’t too precious for you, go for it. I’d think of it as an investment in my eyepiece education more than as a long-term mainstay though. Having it and using it would start to give you a basis for comparison for making your own informed decisions. For example, you’d get to know the magnification involved with a mid-focal length eyepiece like this 15mm and you’d also be able to see for yourself what 68° AFOV gives you compared to the AFOV of a Plossl