Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Scopeman

  • Birthday February 14


  • Occupation
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

162 profile views

Scopeman's Achievements



  1. Hi, Has anyone replaced the altitude bolt that comes with the SW EQ^R Pro at all and if so where did you get it from? Cheers, Andy.
  2. Nice set of eyepieces, some used some unused, insured sign for postage extra. Only selling as a set and have priced these at £35/piece totalling £175. They are £49 each new from FLO and would cost you £245 new!
  3. Yes indeed, I had the NEQ6 Pro before this one, just wanted the quieter more accurate belt driven version.
  4. It was slightly off from the factory, apparently it doesn't make any difference
  5. Hi Carole, Got this one from First Light Optics
  6. Yeah, all that is done, it's all level, Dec at 90 degrees, I can see through Polarscope fine, it's just the zero on the glass reticule is not straight up, it's slightly over to one side. I would assume I just turn the RA until the 0 is back up top, do the alignment and then set the mount back to its home position right? Btw, the polar reticule is aligned to the RA axis of the mount, I checked all that and it's fine. I just wasn't sure whether if I moved the RA axis so it read zero on the glass reticule would then affect the alignment whan I set the mount back to its home position or not.
  7. Need some advice on an EQ6R Pro Polarscope reticule on my new mount please. When the mount is all level and set up in the home position, should the '0' on the Polarscope reticule scale be in the 12 O'clock position? My '0' seems to be at the 1 O'clock position? I was told to just undo the RA clamp and adjust it so the '0' is at the 12 O'clock position which is fine but the how does that affect the home position of the mount as the RA is slightly off level? Or do I simply adjust the RA and then once aligned just return it back to its home position? I'm confused, lol HELP!!
  8. Hi all, My new EQ6R Pro arrived the day before yesterday, lovely piece of kit and so quiet too! I already upgraded the saddle to the ADM. Not too enammered with the sprung loaded altitude bolt, so if anyone knows where I get get an upgraded one please let me know? Here's a few pics with the SW102 refractor on it, can't wait to get the Mak 180 on it but as usual the weather took a downturn, lol......
  9. Finally got it sorted on the Ascom front, the new EQ6R Pro is due in the next few days too!
  10. Scopeman

    New Mount

    Hi, Got a new mount coming next week, I am waiting for a EQ6 Pro from RVO for the Mak 180. Just installed Ascom, that was a nightmare, also EQMod to control the mount eventually.
  11. Hi, I do also have thatBaader 2" diagonal too Andy
  12. Thanks, yes does seem odd as the tube baffle inside is still only 1.25", luckily I have a set of Pentax-XL's which work nicely. Downside is I bought a Baader 2" diagonal for it but will now have to use that with the 1.25" adaptor in it. Andy
  13. Big beast, arrived 2 days ago after a 4 month wait, ordered mid January.
  14. Hi, Got my SW Skymax Pro 180 Mak a couple of days ago, been waiting for it since mid January. Been watching loads of stuff on it beforehand and decided to get the SW 2" dual Crayford focuser as per Dions video, didn't need the adaptor as it all comes with a 2" SCT thread on the visual back these days. It might be a 2" SCT thread, and they do supply a 2" diagonal, but the actual aperture is still 1.25"! Now I know it is a planetary/lunar scope and that's what I bought it for, but why put a 2" visual back on it if you only need a narrow field to do lunar/planetary and more to the point why increase it from 1.25" to 2" ? Second issue, when using an Explore Scientific 2" 24mm, 32mm & 40mm to see what happened I was getting an orange ring around the entire edge of the fov? The only 2" that didn't was the 18mm . so why make it 2" if it does this? Also tried the same eps with the original SW 2" visual back and they did the same? Can someone give me a heads up on why or is it simply that these 2" eps are simply too big for the smaller 1.25" visual back aperture and if so why supply a 2" diagonal? Andy
  • Create New...