Posts Made By: Bill Meyers

Hello, all,
What in your opinion or experience is the minimum aperture necessary for satisfying views of globular clusters and galaxies>
Thanks,
Bill Meyers

Hello, all,
Maybe you can help me with this: I have a 12mm T2 (the problem would be the same if it were a 12 mm T4, by the way) that is one of my favorite and most used eyepieces in my 6" Dob, which has a two inch focuser. I use the 12 mm there as a 2 inch eyepiece. So far so good.
But when I try to use it with the Paracorr in my 11 Starmaster ELT, which is balanced for the Paracorr, problems arise. Tele Vue advocates using the 12mm with the Paracorr only in the 1.25 position (the 12 T2 and T4 are dual eyepieces with both a 2 inch and a 1.25 inch sleeve). But if I instead use the 12 in the 2 inch position with the Paracorr, that is, without an 1.25 inch adapter, the inner sleeve, that is the 1.25 inch sleeve on the 12 mm eyepiece, hits the lens on the Paracorr.That's not good.
If on the other hand, I put the 12 mm into a 1.25 adapter, which is evidently how Tele Vue wishes it done, the 1.25 sleeve doesn't fit very far into the 1.25 adapter for the Paracorr, and I fear that the 12 mm eyepiece will fall out as I handle the socope in the dark.
It has occured to me to buy a 13 mm T6, which is a 1.25 eyepiece, but I like the 12 and would like to avoid spending the money if I could. Also I wonder if the 13 has the immmersive spacewalk feel that the 2" has.
Any suggestions as to what to do will be welcomed and appreciated.
Thanks,
Bill Meyers

Based only on my personal experience, are Carl Zambuto, who no longer sells to individuals, and Richard Wessling, of The Pines Optical Shop, in Milford Ohio,who does sell to individuals.
Wessling does all the work himself, so your mirror gets individual attention. He has made large and small Newtonians, and also Classical Cassegrains, Herschelians, Shiefspieglers, Tri-Schiefspieglers, Yolos, and many unusual and demanding designs, some of them using toric and other aspeheric mirrors. A truly outstanding mirror maker.
I have a Zambuto (in an 11 Starmaster) and two Wessling mirrors, 10 and 6 inches, and all three are outstanding.
Bill Meyers

Get the Celestron, which model of it suits your needs. Aperture is so important, especially in this size range. An 8 inch will put globulars and galaxies within your reach, and they are pretty much out of reach (they can be identified but will show very little structure in the galaxies and little resolution in the globulars).
Bill Meyers

Hi, all,
I think it would be a courtesy, and a time saver for all, if people gave their posts a title that gave an idea of the topic or content of the posts, instead of a greeting or some puzzling or vague phrase.
Also it is not courteous to capitalize titles of posts. Capitalizing the title of a post implies that your thread is more important than the other threads.
Come on, guys, shape up! This is a great forum. Let's keep it that way. Look at what happened to sci.astro.amateur, which used to be the premium forum and now is, in the words of one poster, a train wreck. (end of rant).
Ciao,
Bill Meyers

There are so many good ones. The one I like best is Jan Wisneiwski's web site:
http://www.astrosurf.com/jwisn/index.html

For me, his maps of the constellations are excellent, but best of all is the combination of his CCD photos and the accompanying guide charts.

There are better photos of course, for example at the RCOS web site, but Jan is so much more comprehensive, he even covers many of the Palomar clusters, and having really good accompanying charts is a big plus to me.

Of course, I am a fan of the NSOG approach, which combines descriptons, photos, maps, and sketchs, so I am biased in favor of the combination approach; it seems so convenient, thorough, and even scholarly.

What are your own suggestions and preferences?

Bill Meyers

I went to the Shingletown Star Party in 2004 and found it great, so I
plan to go again this year. Great skies, great fellwoship, lots of
scopes, and much better facilities than most dark sky star parties.
For more information see:
http://www.shingletownstarparty.org/

Cheers,
Bill Meyers

Hello, all,
I have a Starmaster 11 ELT 4.55 with Zambuto and it is great, I love
it. My only problem so far is with balance. I use a Paracorr all the
time, as Rick recommends, and a 31 Nagler or a 20mm Nagler Type 2
(they weigh about the same) and I balance the scope by haning one or
two ankle weights, each weighing 1 lb 7 oz, on the handles of the
mirror box, as Rick recommends. The scope balances fine. All is great
so far.
When I use much lighter eyepieces, such as a 12 Nagler Type 2, or
expecially a 9 or 7 Nagler Type 6, I use a Tele Vue Terminagler brass
2 inch to 1.25 inch adapter, which is heavy. This equalizes the weight
to that of the heavy 2 inch eyepiees without the adapter. All is still
great. The scope is still in perfect balance once the new eyepiece is in.
While I change eyepieces, between any two eyepieces, the trouble
occurs. With one hand I remove the Tele Vue eyepiece (with or without
the adapter, as appropriate), and with my other hand I insert the new
eyepiece, not so easy with Tele Vue underslung eyepiece barrels
without disturbing the scope, but I am getting skillful at this. No
problem at all, except that the scope moves a great deal as soon as an
eyepiece is removed before I can insert one of equal weight.
My solution to this is simple: with my third hand I steady the scope.
The only problem with my simple and elegant solution is that I
discover that I have only two hands.
Any suggestions to keep the scope from moving while changing
eyepieces? (On my old scope, and on my Compact Precision Scope, I have
an altitude lock I use while changing eyepieces, which solves the
problem entirely but the SM has no provision for this.)
How do you people solve this problem?
Thanks,
Bill Meyers

When I view brigh objects such as Jupiter, Saturn, or the moon, in my 11 inch f4.55 Dob, I see, even at high powers such as 161, 181 or 300, a fuzzy spot in the center of the image; the rest of the image is very sharp. If I back my head awsy from the eyepiece, the fuzzy spot gets sharper and sharper and it finally becomes a sharp black image of the secondary.
Has anyone else been bothered by this phenomenon?
Bill Meyeers

In my scope my Nagler 9 gives 161x. (The scope is an 11 f4.55 SM Dob with Paracorr yeilding an effective focal e length of 62.5 inches). I need something higher for the moon and planets. Seeing is not so good here in Ohio. A Nagler 7 would give 208x, which sounds a bit low -- 250 would be perfect I think -- and a 5 Nagler would give 280. Which should I choose?
Thanks for any advice.
Bill Meyers