Re: Usability Question--Update
|
Thanks, John! ? When we moved to our present house in 2001, the Milky Way was quite prominent.? But the intervening 21 years have not been kind to our sky, as the Seattle area has boomed, and the light pollution with it.? If you know where to look, you can see a faint wisp of the Milky way on a moonless night, but that¡¯s all. ? My viewing scope is a very good scope, and it is fun to take it out once in a while.? I can¡¯t see much in our light-polluted soup, but it¡¯s always fun to see things like Alberio, good globular clusters, M57 and M27.? It does me good to renew my acquaintances with them.? But my finder scope, which is very nice, won¡¯t pick up most (if any) globulars, and certainly won¡¯t show a planetary nebula. ? If I ultimately have to sway eyepieces for a wider FOV ¡°finder,¡± that¡¯s not a tragedy.? But I do want to get this thing working as well as I can.? I¡¯m hoping that Brian¡¯s catch on my mapping error helps. ? Mark ?
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
From: [email protected] < [email protected]> On Behalf Of John Kmetz Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 11:45 PM To: [email protected]Subject: Re: [Losmandy_users_io] Usability Question--Update ? On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 12:03 PM, Mark de Regt wrote: I have two finders:? A 9x50 right angle finder (with illuminated crosshairs), and a Telrad.? Both are aligned perfectly with the eyepiece.? So both are off the same amount as on my eyepiece.? ? I¡¯m not sure why people keep asking about my finder(s); when a faint fuzzy is off the eyepiece FOV, it doesn¡¯t matter what I have for a finder scope, since no finder I¡¯ve ever used will show, e.g., M51. ? Yes, I can keep swapping eyepieces; I have a full range of 82¡ã, high-quality eyepieces.? And I could use the reducer I bought with the scope. But I guess I¡¯m just spoiled by my old Meade scopes which (whether in Alt-Az or polar mode) would have every single object centered on any eyepiece (even on a KAF-401 chip, which is tiny¡ªunder 10 arcminutes diagonal, as I used it on my RCX400)), first time and every time.? As much as they charge for this mount/electronics, it should be able to do as well, IMO. ?
Mark,
You have some nice quality eyepieces there. And a 9x50 finder is pretty good for locating stuff too. I would think that most Messier objects would be visible in that to some degree, depending on sky conditions and local light pollution. But the target should be off less of an angular separation in the FOV than the main scope, which is why everyone has a finder. A lower power finder can also help, and I used to get rid of those straight through finders that came with the scope for a right angle one, which is easier on the eyes and the back. But if you have a finder with a removable eyepiece, an LP filter might help there.?
My last LX200 was circa 2001, and the accuracy wasn't that great for me, though they probably improved their tech by now. But lower power eyepieces and finders should aid your efforts. Before 2000, I had no GoTo, and would find most of the M objects by star hopping, and art that is now getting lost. S&T and Astronomy Magazine used to publish the hopping diagrams every month, bright star to asterism to cluster, etc. until you got to target. Those days were a real challenge.
But your eyepieces plus a large SCT like that should be giving a nice visual experience.
Good luck.
John
?
--
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Losmandy G11G2 on pier; SkyShed design roll-off observatory; ZWO ASI2600MM-P; ZWO ASI071MC; Sky-Watcher Esprit 100 ED; Celestron C925 Edge HD with 0.7XFR, William Optics Zenithstar 61 APO; PHD2, Sequence Generator Pro and PixInsight user
|
