| |
Main
Date: 27 Aug 2007 19:33:56
From: Jeff Turkstra
Subject: Telrad Finder
|
This my the first time posting to this group, but I am an amateur astronomer
and have recently decided that I should really have a telrad finder on my 8"
dobsonian. I am wondering if anyone has any recommendations on from where I
should purchase one. Does it matter? They all appear to be very similar. I
would, obviously, like to find the "best" one for the cheapest price :-).
Any recommendations are greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance!!!
- Jeff
|
|
| |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 15:02:49
From: palsing
Subject: Re: Telrad Finder
|
I prefer the Rigel QuikFinder. It's light, compact, and doesn't
require you
> to do *quite* as many contortions as some others, which are lower in
> profile... It's also quite inexpenive...
*********
Well, my Telrad is up on the UTA of my 25", and I *never* have to do
any contortions to use it ;-)
\Paul
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 17:46:21
From: Jan Owen
Subject: Re: Telrad Finder
|
"Jeff Turkstra" <jeff@purdue.edu > wrote in message
news:favn0v$lvq$1@mailhub227.itcs.purdue.edu...
> This my the first time posting to this group, but I am an amateur
> astronomer and have recently decided that I should really have a telrad
> finder on my 8" dobsonian. I am wondering if anyone has any
> recommendations on from where I should purchase one. Does it matter? They
> all appear to be very similar. I would, obviously, like to find the "best"
> one for the cheapest price :-). Any recommendations are greatly
> appreciated. Thank you in advance!!!
>
> - Jeff
I think you'll find that everyone has their own favorites, and for various
reasons... Do there's probably not one single *right* answer here... It's
more like what your preferences are, and how much you want to spend...
I prefer the Rigel QuikFinder. It's light, compact, and doesn't require you
to do *quite* as many contortions as some others, which are lower in
profile... It's also quite inexpenive...
Used to be, I swore by optical finders, and would use nothing else... Now,
one by one, I find myself replacing my optical finders on all my scopes
(haven't gotten them ALL changed yet, but still working on it) with Rigel
QuikFinders...
Several of these can be seen in the Jan's Scopes album in my Webshots albums
via the link below my signature...
--
Jan Owen
To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address...
Latitude: 33.6
Longitude: -112.3
http://community.webshots.com/user/janowen21
|
| | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 17:31:09
From: Morris Jones
Subject: Re: Telrad Finder
|
Jan Owen wrote:
> I prefer the Rigel QuikFinder. It's light, compact, and doesn't require you
> to do *quite* as many contortions as some others, which are lower in
> profile... It's also quite inexpenive...
Count me as a dissenting opinion. The Rigel has a shorter optical path
(to be small) and thus has more parallax. I find that the target swims
around too much for me, compared to a Telrad.
William Hamblen wrote:
> I've got both a Telrad and a 9x50 finder on my C8.
That's the magic combination. You can make it even more magic by using
an erecting prism on the finder, so the view matches charts.
With a Telrad, my 12x80 finder with erecting prism, and charts from
Skytools 2, finding stuff is like like fish in a barrel. But admittedly
I don't try to do much from city skies.
Mojo
--
Morris Jones
Monrovia, CA
http://www.whiteoaks.com
Old Town Sidewalk Astronomers: http://www.otastro.org
|
| | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 10:10:49
From: Esmail
Subject: Re: Telrad Finder
|
Jan Owen wrote:
>
> I prefer the Rigel QuikFinder. It's light, compact, and doesn't require you
> to do *quite* as many contortions as some others, which are lower in
> profile... It's also quite inexpenive...
Same here, been quite happy with my RQF
Esmail
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 09:23:36
From: Howard Lester
Subject: Re: Telrad Finder
|
"Esmail" wrote
> Jan Owen wrote:
>>
>> I prefer the Rigel QuikFinder. It's light, compact, and doesn't require
>> you to do *quite* as many contortions as some others, which are lower in
>> profile... It's also quite inexpenive...
>
> Same here, been quite happy with my RQF
Me, too. It's very lightweight and stands tall, thus less a need to be a
contortionist, as Jan says. I do have a 9x50 right angle optical finder
right next to it, too. That helps me see what I can't through the Rigel. The
Rigel gets me in the vicinity (at least because of moderately polluted
skies); the 9x50 helps me center the faint object I'm after.
Howard
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 13:28:49
From: Esmail
Subject: Re: Telrad Finder
|
Howard Lester wrote:
> "Esmail" wrote
>
>> Jan Owen wrote:
>>> I prefer the Rigel QuikFinder. It's light, compact, and doesn't require
>>> you to do *quite* as many contortions as some others, which are lower in
>>> profile... It's also quite inexpenive...
>> Same here, been quite happy with my RQF
>
> Me, too. It's very lightweight and stands tall, thus less a need to be a
> contortionist, as Jan says. I do have a 9x50 right angle optical finder
> right next to it, too. That helps me see what I can't through the Rigel. The
> Rigel gets me in the vicinity (at least because of moderately polluted
> skies); the 9x50 helps me center the faint object I'm after.
Actually, I do have a 9x50 finder as well. I generally use my binoculars to
scout out the area in the sky, the RQF to get me in the vicinity, and the
finder to fine-tune .. and hopefully at the end of that visual excursion
I will find the target in the eyepiece :-) .. a great way to learn the sky.
|
| | |
Date: 28 Aug 2007 06:23:55
From: William Hamblen
Subject: Re: Telrad Finder
|
On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 17:46:21 -0700, "Jan Owen" <janowen1@cox.net >
wrote:
>Used to be, I swore by optical finders, and would use nothing else... Now,
>one by one, I find myself replacing my optical finders on all my scopes
>(haven't gotten them ALL changed yet, but still working on it) with Rigel
>QuikFinders...
I've got both a Telrad and a 9x50 finder on my C8. Sometimes you just
have to use a magnifying finder, especially in town. A C8 is so
stubby it is hard to sight down the side of the optical tube at a star
and a Telrad is useful to at least get started on a star hop.
Bud
--
The night is just the shadow of the Earth.
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 23:52:13
From: Richard Adams
Subject: Re: Telrad Finder
|
On Aug 27, 4:33 pm, "Jeff Turkstra" <j...@purdue.edu > wrote:
> This my the first time posting to this group, but I am an amateur astronomer
> and have recently decided that I should really have a telrad finder on my 8"
> dobsonian. I am wondering if anyone has any recommendations on from where I
> should purchase one. Does it matter? They all appear to be very similar. I
> would, obviously, like to find the "best" one for the cheapest price :-).
> Any recommendations are greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance!!!
>
> - Jeff
Simply find the best price. I picked up a dew shield with mine, but
it appears not to fit well. I think I could handcraft something
better. Do get a second mount if you have a second scope or think you
may get one in the future.
|
| |
Date: 27 Aug 2007 16:46:46
From: Kickin' Ass and Takin' Names
Subject: Re: Telrad Finder
|
On Aug 27, 7:33 pm, "Jeff Turkstra" <j...@purdue.edu > wrote:
> This my the first time posting to this group, but I am an amateur astronomer
> and have recently decided that I should really have a telrad finder on my 8"
> dobsonian. I am wondering if anyone has any recommendations on from where I
> should purchase one. Does it matter? They all appear to be very similar. I
> would, obviously, like to find the "best" one for the cheapest price :-).
> Any recommendations are greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance!!!
>
> - Jeff
A Telrad is a Telrad -- made by the same company, sold by many. No
matter where you buy it, you get the same thing.
|
|
