Viewing

By Douglas Mechaber, published on December 28, 2007
Source: Tom's Guide US | Keywords: , | Themes: Digital Cameras, Digital Entertainment

8. Viewing

Star Test - a Test of Collimation

Because of my fun with the finder alignment, I inadvertently performed a star test as I struggled to center the object while playing with the focus. The finder alignment was off far enough that whatever I saw in the finder wasn’t visible in the telescope field, no matter how hard I tried. OK, so I performed multiple star tests!

The scope collimation was excellent out of the box. A star test is when you defocus on a star, and examine the diffraction rings you see. These diffraction rings are caused by that defocused star around the central obstruction, which is the hole in the middle of the SCT for the eyepiece. These rings should be perfectly uniform and even. In fairness, I was also distracted by a homeless person who repeatedly circled my location on his bicycle. Was he interested in seeing if this scope could show a moon of Mars?

Finding Objects

With fresh batteries, after aligning the NexStar, I was very pleased with the locate feature. I slewed to some of the objects visible, including Mars, and stars near Aldeberan in Taurus. Then I looked at multiple stars in Lyra and Cassiopeia that weren’t visible with binoculars. Actually, it was amazing: there were only a few constellations viewable to the naked eye. Turning the NexStar 6 SE to them, and the bright stars I could see, showed myriad surrounding stars. This was quite neat, considering the light pollution and interminably bad seeing conditions at my location. However, I was able to resolve γ-Andromedae, a spectacular double star, and to see M31 without benefit of any filters. In Cygnus, I saw Albireo (β-Cygni). Finally, in Cassiopeia, I found ή-Cassiopeiae, and I thought I could see the double.

I really wanted to take some pictures with the camera adapter accessory. Those great looking amateur astronomy pictures that you see are usually done with a CCD camera. For astronomy, these devices take up to hundreds of pictures, discarding any one that isn’t sharp, and merge the rest of them to obtain superb sharpness and detail. Because of poor viewing conditions, my pictures were blurry and filled with diffraction spikes. This wasn’t a problem with the telescope, but rather my location.

Comments | Print | Send to a friend

Google Ads

Comments


Deleted profile 12/29/2007 8:45 AM
Hide
-0+
GoTo mounts are for lazy people who don't really understand the essence of observing the sky. It's certainly a fun thing to create if you are an engineer, but if you're considering using one, take my advice and buy a book with pictures of the Messier catalog, it's a lot cheaper. A true amateur astronomer never uses those revolting, despicable, hideous GoTo mounts. Get a real standard equatorial mount. Get a good sky atlas. Get a pair of quality binoculars. Know your sky! That's astronomy...
originalgadgetguy 12/31/2007 8:30 AM
Hide
-0+
originalgadgetguy
A sensitive topic to be sure. But the point of the article was to encourage those who have an interest in astronomy but never bit the bullet. That is, they don't own a scope because they aren't willing to learn all that needs to be done to find stuff. OK, even lazy. And our readers totally grok computers.

Many amateurs started by using a GoTo. IMHO, the more astronomers the better. Talking to denizens of LAAS and reading cloudyskies.com, there is little sense of elitism. All amateurs are welcome, even and esp. those with GoTos.

I didn't have room to talk about the wedges that covert yoke mounts to equatorial mounts, but they exist for many yoke types. That way you can have the best of both worlds.

Finally, one of the books I recommended does just what you suggest: tries to teach the night sky so you can find stuff without using (or even using) a GoTo. Hope this addresses your comments.

Doug
Deleted profile 12/31/2007 9:40 AM
Hide
-0+
I think the guys who say to get a star chart and spend 6 months learning how to find and track things are missing the point and living in the 19th century.

The fact is that these new generations of scopes make astronomy so much more accessible to people who find astronomy interesting but don't have the time or ability to invest. They also make it simple to introduce new people to astronomy by quickly showing them lots of interesting things.

Plus, as a computer geek, there is nothing more fun than plugging your telescope into your laptop, hooking up a camera and driving it around from your computer. Do an easy DIY project like adapting a webcam to use with the scope and you have yourself tons of fun *and* you learn the night sky, you just don't waste months of time trying to figure out how to see anything.
Deleted profile 01/02/2008 5:23 AM
Hide
-0+
I totally agree with smurfdog - you spend more time observing and imaging objects than trying to find them - and most of them are very dim anyways. THe manual method of finding objects is definitely 19th century stuff.
CoreyM72 01/02/2008 6:21 AM
Hide
-0+
CoreyM72
Science is ever changing and self-correcting. To memorize the sky from Earth is one thing and to explore the universe is another. Technology makes Astronomy possible for all who are willing to learn and grow. Why not use both to your advantage.
Deleted profile 01/03/2008 1:19 AM
Hide
-0+
Doug,

I really praise the point of your article. I also love to teach everything I know about the topic to anyone who's interested in the subject, like most amateurs.
Like you said, there's no to little sense of elitism in those groups. But I also know this: Like all the really rewarding things in life, Astronomy requires persistence and solid interest.
I decided to comment your article since I disagree on some things you wrote and that contrast may help people who read it, look at the picture from another angle.

Trying to find Deep Sky Objects or the planets (very easy with little experience and knowledge) in the sky, is where most of the fun is! Having a computer doing it for you is like you own a Porsche and let a chauffeur drive you. The only difference here is that, unlike the chauffeur, the computer has no fun at all!

I didn't find anything interesting on cloudyskies.com, apparently is just a domain for sale. Did you mean www.cloudynights.com?

If your interest is solid, you've got nothing to fear, understanding the sky is a lot easier than most people think.

Diogo.
originalgadgetguy 01/04/2008 7:45 AM
Hide
-0+
originalgadgetguy
Diogo et al,
My bad! Yes of course I meant www.cloudynights.com. It's a great site for advice, and mostly cogent tips on purchasing and use.

I think we can agree that for some, starting with GoTos is a great way of getting into astronomy. Then you can progress to star charts and maps, relying less on the GoTo. I want to encourage people to begin this exciting hobby.

Amateur astronomers are one of the few science disciplines where amatuers can and do make professional level contributions!

And even though I understand how the SkyScout works, it is unbelievable to actually use it and watch it ID an object, or have it guide you to some random star in its database...Awesome product. For me, this really helped me better learn the night sky. It's like using a crutch (or a chaffeur) then weaning yourself away from it and driving yourself. Much less pain, and kick butt fun.

Hope this answers your concerns.
Clear skies!

Doug
Deleted profile 01/25/2008 3:09 AM
Hide
-0+
Doug,

I am a beginner in the field of astronomy and astrophotography and I would like to purchase some equiptment. Im not exactly sure what types of telescopes and astrophotography equiptment would be best for a beginner and it would be great if you could offer me some advice. I have done a lot of research on telescopes preferably under $500 and CCD cameras along with laptops. If you have any advice that would be great! Thanks.

Note You are going to post a comment as anonymous.



Google Ads