|
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Mark Forums Read |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|||
I just bought a new 9x50 finderscope to use with my scope. I used to guide it only with a one of those L.E.D finders . I get shocked how easier is to find yourself with the the real finder scope. I cant imagine how is possible for serious observation use only that dot finder. I want to know the preference of other members about finders. |
|
|||
|
For anything serious I also prefer a 50mm finderscope. Illuminated Reticle is a big plus. But for small telescopes the red dots seem to be perfect.
|
|
||||
|
My 16" Dob uses a 50mm finder and a Telrad. The vast majority of the time, I use only the Telrad. I only use the finder if the thing I'm looking for has no good, visible guide stars around it.
My star charts came with a little clear plastic thing that has the Telrad rings printed on it, to scale. The software I use can be set to any number of different finder configurations, one of the standards is a Telrad. On my ETX (first generation) I removed the finder and replaced it with a Telrad-like finder. No dot, but a set pair of concentric circles. The finder on the first generation ETX was basically useless when mounted on the scope. The only scope I don't use a Telrad for is a Goto LX90. I use the finder on that one to set it up and after that, I just use the keypad to tell it what I want to see.
__________________
I'm not evil. An evil person would do the things I think up. |
|
|||
|
Great info! Really informative. It is helpful for me.
__________________ La caisse epargne fr | Caisse epargne caisse d'epargne | www caisse epargne |
|
|||
|
When my Dob is pointed near azimuth, it makes we wish I had a right-angle finder; my straight-through finder is very hard on the neck looking up.
Nick |
|
||||
|
That reminds me, I need to order a new bracket for my finder scope. It broke is is being held by a piece of small rope. Makes for a real pain when it comes to aligning it with the main scope.
__________________
Defining science can be difficult. It’s a method, a way of looking at things. It’s a compendium of facts, knowledge, data. It’s a tool, used to investigate the world and to make sure we don’t let our biases, egos, and wishes get in the way of finding what’s real. Science (and skepticism) boil off the dross and leave the pure nugget of reality. ~Phil Plait |
|
||||
|
I haven't used a finder scope in years. I removed the finderscope when I first got my XT 10 in 2003 and installed a Telrad. I'm definitely a Telrad convert. I did try a 'red-dot' finder from Orion, but it was practically useless because you couldn't see anything through it except the red dot.
|
|
||||
|
On my 10 inch Dob I have both a 60mm finder and a Telrad. Like others, I use the Telrad almost exclusively.
I find the Telrad gets me where I need to be, and I can then star hop using a wide field lens in the main scope easier than using the finder.
__________________
"I'm as accurate as any psychic. And I'm a cartoon!" -- Squidward "Arrrgh, the laws of physics be a harsh mistress!" -- Bender |
|
||||
|
It goes to show how out of it I am since I had to go look up what a Telrad is. Looks very useful. Anyway, when I actually get a chance to use my scope I'm still using a 50mm finderscope on my 4" Newtonian. I think it's a bit heavy for it, but it works well enough for me.
__________________
Earth First! We'll mine the rest later. |
|
||||
|
I use a Stellarvue SV50 spotting scope, which is identical to their 50mm finder scope, as my finder. I'm going to add an illuminated reticule as well. It has very, very good optics, I highly recommend.
__________________
You can't really tell the difference between drunken rambling and sober blogging. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Is Dark Matter for real? | Richard L. | Astronomy | 118 | 30-October-2009 03:29 AM |
| Uncertainty Principlel and Time | sabianq | Against the Mainstream | 11 | 19-July-2008 03:58 AM |
| The REAL Neal Armstrong Conspiracy...? | man on the moon | Off-Topic Babbling | 1 | 06-November-2007 02:25 PM |
| Anyone else do silly (that is, illogical) stuff? | snarkophilus | Off-Topic Babbling | 73 | 14-February-2006 07:47 AM |
| reply to locked topic: real science discovers life on Mars | MAP | Life in Space | 46 | 16-February-2004 11:24 PM |