astronomy pics

[crytklmass]

NO TAXES... I like that. allows a larger budget. I was able to locate a local club. But, it's Michigan and getting colder so the meetings are almost over for the year. Isn't that what winter clothing is for......I've been working outside the past 7 years for the R.R. I used to think it was cold outside too. or rainy, or too hot, etc. Bunch of complainers. lol

[markc2]

Originally Posted by gregswaim

Here's a few of pixxx that I took :

NASA would be envious on some of those shots.

[gregswaim]

Originally Posted by markc2

NASA would be envious on some of those shots.

They use the same DayStar filters as I do.

[Vintage Pete]

Greg...can you tell me who makes the scope pictured on this page? It looks like about a 4"; and I like the base/mount.

Why buy a refractor?

Pete

[gregswaim]

Originally Posted by Vintage Pete

Greg...can you tell me who makes the scope pictured on this page? It looks like about a 4"; and I like the base/mount.

Why buy a refractor?

Pete

Hi Pete.
That would be a Takahashi refractor with a Takahashi EQ mount & pier.
I have a Takahashi refractor & EQ mount as well. I use the Takahashi extra long wooden tripod vs the pier. I like to be a bit more mobile & the pier would require a hard flat surface vs regular ground- mine works well on all surfaces so I use some vibration discs when it's set up on my back deck or in the driveway outside of my garage.

Here's my Takahashi TOA 130 the EM-200 USDlll mount with the extra long wooden tripod:

[Vintage Pete]

Originally Posted by gregswaim

Hi Pete.
That would be a Takahashi refractor with a Takahashi EQ mount & pier.
I have a Takahashi refractor & EQ mount as well. I use the Takahashi extra long wooden tripod vs the pier. I like to be a bit more mobile & the pier would require a hard flat surface vs regular ground- mine works well on all surfaces so I use some vibration discs when it's set up on my back deck or in the driveway outside of my garage.

Here's my Takahashi TOA 130 the EM-200 USDlll mount with the extra long wooden tripod:

Thanks Greg,

Nice scope indeed! So does the model number refer to a 130mm objective lens? It looked like maybe a 100mm (approx 4") on the web page,
130mm would be a really sweet refractor.

That's a good point on the wood tripod and versatility...my Celestron C80 (80mm) has a the wood tripod. I guess I'm a sucker for the "observatory look" that the pier mount provides...but you're right, one needs a flat surface with these. Nice pics, some serious gear you have there!

Pete

[gregswaim]

Originally Posted by Vintage Pete

Thanks Greg,

Nice scope indeed! So does the model number refer to a 130mm objective lens? It looked like maybe a 100mm (approx 4") on the web page,
130mm would be a really sweet refractor.

That's a good point on the wood tripod and versatility...my Celestron C80 (80mm) has a the wood tripod. I guess I'm a sucker for the "observatory look" that the pier mount provides...but you're right, one needs a flat surface with these. Nice pics, some serious gear you have there!

Pete

Hi Pete.
Yes, 130mm(5.1") is the aperture of mine. I use this scope for visuals on the the planets & moon. I also take lunar photos with this one as well.
My other scope is a William Optics 110mm(oiled spaced triplet apochromatic lens cell made by TEC for William Optics) refractor that I use only for solar stuff.

[Vintage Pete]

Originally Posted by gregswaim

Hi Pete.
Yes, 130mm(5.1") is the aperture of mine. I use this scope for visuals on the the planets & moon. I also take lunar photos with this one as well.
My other scope is a William Optics 110mm(oiled spaced triplet apochromatic lens cell made by TEC for William Optics) refractor that I use only for solar stuff.

Hi Greg,

I'll bet that 130mm scope is sweet indeed...for that matter I'm sure the 110mm is sweet as well!

Pete

[gregswaim]

Originally Posted by Vintage Pete

Hi Greg,

I'll bet that 130mm scope is sweet indeed...for that matter I'm sure the 110mm is sweet as well!

Pete

Indeed!
Lots of discussions on what's the best aperture for a given location.
In my opinion, very high powers & larger apertures in refractors( 7"- 9") for viewing planets, moon,& sun are best in locations that are coastal warm regions like islands & places like Florida. Water does not hold heat like solid ground so the seeing tends to be much better in these locations.
For solar stuff, large apertures are not required because the sun is so large so a 85mm -115mm is great. Planets need more aperture get the most details. Funny enough, planets are the most difficult to photograph vs the moon & sun.
When I image the sun I'm usually at around 175x, for planets I'm up to around 400-450x. Having apochromatic refractors( ones with special ED optical glass) allows better views because the optics are better corrected allowing up 100x per inch in magnification on many occasions - sometimes more than that.
Everything will depend upon the seeing conditions in your area at the time.

[Vintage Pete]

Originally Posted by gregswaim

Indeed!
Lots of discussions on what's the best aperture for a given location.
In my opinion, very high powers & larger apertures in refractors( 7"- 9") for viewing planets, moon,& sun are best in locations that are coastal warm regions like islands & places like Florida. Water does not hold heat like solid ground so the seeing tends to be much better in these locations.
For solar stuff, large apertures are not required because the sun is so large so a 85mm -115mm is great. Planets need more aperture get the most details. Funny enough, planets are the most difficult to photograph vs the moon & sun.
When I image the sun I'm usually at around 175x, for planets I'm up to around 400-450x. Having apochromatic refractors( ones with special ED optical glass) allows better views because the optics are better corrected allowing up 100x per inch in magnification on many occasions - sometimes more than that.
Everything will depend upon the seeing conditions in your area at the time.

Greg,

Okay, this getting more and more interesting! I live in Florida, and I really enjoy Moon and planetary observations. I haven't gotten into Solar viewing, though I'd like to. My Celestron C80 (80mm) refractor has a 900mm focal length. I have two Plossl ocular eyepieces, 26mm and 7.5mm. So, I have two magnifications; roughly 35X and 120X. I almoset prefer the lower power eyepiece, as the image is far brighter, and the viewing aperture is much larger. I do also enjoy some deeper space observations as well, the pleiades cluster, and the like.

Obviously a 7-9" aperture would be great, but a refractor in this aperture range will be pretty expensive. Putting photography aside, (for the moment) how much benefit do we see when we jump from say, my 80mm Celestron to say, a 130mm aperture scope? I do like the bright sharp images a refractor can provide, while not being too large to store like the larger apertures.

Pete