All Activity

The annual Lyrid Meteor Shower should already be underway. It is expected to peak during the night of 2024 APR 21-22. Its radiant is in the vicinity of the constellations Lyra and Hercules near the bright star Vega. That is the direction toward which the meteor tails point, but the meteors are equally likely to appear anywhere in your sky. The Lyrids are debris from the long period Comet C/1861 G1 Thatcher. The Lyrids typically present about 5 to 20 meteors per hour for sharp eyed observers, although this has varied considerably with 700 per hour seen in 1803. The show begins after Lyra rises, which is in the early evening for mid-latitude northern hemisphere observers, but much later in the southern hemisphere. It will continue through morning twilight. During the shower’s peak, the waxing gibbous Moon may present some interference in the evening but less so before dawn. Descriptions of the shower or perhaps even lucky photos would be welcome additions to this thread.

They all look like pretend implements looking more closely. Probably just as well not to let them near sharp objects (or laser pointers) 🙄

The tube that is pictured sat on the dust cap of the scope needs to be fitted into the focuser and then the eyepiece goes into that. Apologies if you already know that ! Astro newtonians generally can't focus on things closer than a couple of hundred metres away so your test targets need to be a good way away to enable the scope to reach focus.

I won't lie, the 22mm NT4 is nice and sharp edge to edge compared to the 22mm Redline 70. It was enough different to persuade me to retire the Redline to the B-Team case in favor of the NT4 despite the tighter eye relief and slight SAEP in the NT4.

If you look down the tube from the open end, you should see a magnified image of your face like in a shaving mirror when you have your head at the right distance above the end. It's generally around 6 to 10 inches above the end, IIRC. This is just a quick test to see if the mirror can produce any sort of image.

Hi Dweller, Thinking about this again, from your perspective, perhaps I should have added a bit more of the reason for the question, to add context to it. Maybe if I'd done that, things would have turned out differently, as I certainly had no intention to fall out with anyone, especially given our previously good exchanges. 👍 It's because I'm going to get a 200pds, hence wondered what a 5" frac might add. Mark

Hi John I realised I never answered your last question. Indeed, I am fully intending to get a 200pds mounted on an AZEQ6 (which can also be used for dso AP with my 80ed). The final question in my mind, is whether it would be worth getting a 5" frac, to complement the newt. This was the reason behind my post. You probably remember I've mentioned a used sw120ed, which is most likely the direction I'd take, to keep cost down, rather than a new one or a new StellaMira 125.

Thanks Bob This is really useful! Just the sort of comparative information that I was looking for, to add to previous information supplied by others. It does seem as if both scopes are viewed differently, for some Newts beat the frac, for others fracs may show nicer planetary details. It may well come down to beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

@ollypenrice There's a very thin "string of rubies" coming in from the right edge in your image. It's different in your two versions. Is this real signal, or maybe an artefact?

Thanks Nicolàs, much appreciated too.

That's OK. I'm sure others will make their own minds up. I know I was genuinely asking the question as posted. That's what matters, as I know it to be true. 👍

Thanks Jeremy, much appreciated.

Thank you Clarkey, perhaps I should have said blue rather than green but that is by the way. The question that remains is:- how do you get the image panel moved up the physical screen? Chris

I think it best that we agree to disagree and move on. All the best in whatever choice you make 👍

Hi Dweller, Fair point, you have given lots of good advice on my posts. But your post just now, is still repeating, in my opinion, the same attack, but in a different form. Are you saying I wasn't being genuine in my post? Because I can tell you I was. So, when I said the title says it all, it did. So, you can either choose to believe me or not.

This should be reversed, as much as I love my refractor I’m pretty sure that in terms of resolution it cannot reveal more than a larger scope, i don’t care what design. Having said that, my refractor reveals things differently, but that is a whole other thread.

I tried looking at a tree, the sky and a building all blurry, if I took the eyepiece out and look through it should it also still be blurry because it is. Probably dumb questions but I have 0 clue so I really appreciate all the help

Wells is lovely, not so familiar with Shepton Mallet as haven’t been there for years but sure it is nice.

No problem. I have a Bresser 127L (not APO, but a good scope) and a Skywatcher 200p (probably a comparable "level" in the market) , and they're really quite different beasts. To directly answer the question- yes planetary detail. On the very best nights the frac wipes the floor with the newt on Jupiter and Saturn for reasons described here in other posts. On an average night the difference between them is less. Strangely this reverses on lunar views- I'm not sure why, but whilst the frac yields really good lunar views, the newt, with a 4mm ep on a good night is utterly breathtaking. I'm not sure "prettiness" is a thing you can see, but if it were, then the frac wins there too- stars are a little "hairy" in the newt due to the obstruction, even when you don't see the spikes, whereas in the frac they are beautiful orbs. Unfortunately I also see a little chromatic aberration in the frac (it's an achromat), which is absent from the newt, although this is fixed well enough by a semi-apo filter. As others have stated, the greater light grasp of the 8" is balanced by the contrast improvement in the frac: I once ran them side by side on the Pleiades and both gave pretty good views at low magnification on the reflection nebula around that cluster. Marginally, I preferred the aesthetics in the frac that night. However, if the purpose of this is to help with a buying decision, then I need to point out that I use the frac much less than the newt, for 2 simple reasons: - The newt can be set up in a fraction of the time as it sits assembled in my garage and is simply lifted out and plonked on the lawn- it's then ready to go. - The newt is much more comfortable to use- most of the sky can be seen simply by sitting on an adjustable chair next it. With the frac, for objects near the zenith, I'm almost on the floor to get to the eyepiece. HTH

@Flame Nebula I have constructively contributed to many of your posts but this one felt like the title was just click bait when you said the wording was “deliberate” You have subsequently explained what you were trying to do. Perhaps it would have been better to have had a more genuine approach at the start ?

Actually the opposite is true. As aperture increases, airy disk size decreases so stars appear smaller and finer detail can be resolved. This does however assume excellent seeing. You can see this effect in reverse when observing double stars through a small apo refractor. The small aperture gives large airy disk sizes which are easily seen even in average seeing and at more modest powers, so the effect is a very beautiful ‘bullseyes on velvet’ which is very aesthetically pleasing. With a large scope, the airy disks are much smaller and require higher power/better seeing to reveal themselves; often they are masked by poorer seeing so you end up just seeing scruffy stars which aren’t as nice to view, unless the seeing is excellent.

Thanks John, And I have always been interested in your comments. There is a fine line between supplementary question and telling someone what they're thinking or know and that is why I reacted. I do accept there may be some repetition, fair comment. I'm happy with fair comments. 👍

Hi guys and girls Im thinking of maybe getting a high end mount rather than upgrading in a few years time . I've been reading up on the Paramount MYT and the 10 Micron GM1000 both very good mounts one with absolute encoders but £2000 more the other with motor based encoders, not sure I would need the encoders as the mount would be in a permanent location . The only think I'm worried about is building the tpoint and the 10 micron version, also I would like to use with Nina. So I'm interested what you guys think would be the better and easier to use I would be only using it for astrophotography . I would want to get a bigger scope eventually and have seen there is 7 kg load difference between the two so this might be a consideration thanks Dave

A very interesting response Magnus, Since I'm definitely planning to get a 200pds, it is interesting to gather all your experiences with comparison between these scopes. I know they'll be differences of experience, but I'm getting a good idea by gathering them. Thanks