Marian M

Hi Stevie! Unfortunately no other screws on the other side.. I was just looking all around but nothing

I have checked again and the same issue. It seems that something solid/ big is blocking completely the rotation

Hi friends! Quick check- I bought the second dovetail for the Skytee mount, to add the second scope in parallel with the main one. In the way the mount come from TS Optics, the dovetails wouldn't have been aligned. So I have unscrewed the 3 small screws around the round foreground part. Once unscrewed completely , the extreme white round part was spinning just 10-20 degrees but had something inside blocking the movement further. I still need to rotate some other 20 degrees, to be parallel with the first one Any idea what shall I do, what to unscrew, where, to be able to rotate more the foreground part in the picture? Thanks a lot in advance!

Hi again! Coming back with full test from beginning. I have put all pictures together, in one single file, and done all measurements from scratch. Setup used is the same- TS 102/714 APO + Baader T2 prism + 1.25" clicklock + Maxbright 2 + SLV 25mm + below GPCs and either APM 2.7 barlow head or full barlow. Only the first picture has been done without clicklock, otherwise I would have not reached the focus. The GPCs were screwed in a 1.25" to T2 adapter, the adapter in bino head. All measurements have been done on a larger screen (laptop), with a ruler. Pictures- done with a smartphone, from hand, directly through eyepiece. I acknowledge that pictures are not perfect, measurements the same and probably some field curvature leads to some wrong calculations. At least in this setup, the 1.7 GCP seems working more around 1.4 and the 2.6 GPC seems working more around 2.4, through my measurements. APM barlow head seems giving a 2.9 magnification while the full barlow increase by 4. What is strange, but here I presume the field curvature is cutting some of the real size of the image/ ruler distance, is that the APM (head or full barlow) has a smaller magnification while using a more powerful GPC. Without GPC, APM seems working 2.9/ 4 (head only/ full barlow), while with 1.7 GPC- 2.5/ 3.5 and with 2.6 GPC 2.1/ 3.5 Would by happy to receive any thoughts/ share experience on this. Regards, Marian

For 2.6, just checked it now, it seems that both surfaces are concave

Indeed 2.6 😀 Well, it seems that during the weekend some new experiments are to come 😀 What about the 2.6, how should it be placed? thanks a lot!

Hi! Point by point Steve, will do some more testing in the upcoming days and revert here @bosun21 situation is as follows- I can screw the bino directly in T2 prism, T2 in T2-M68 ultrashort adapter and the Apo will be in focus, without any GPC. I have only 6 mm focuser travel, hence the quick changer will not enter, I remember it has around 1.2 cm light path. In order to setup like this, first I have to screw the T2 prism in bino, then the whole ensemble (bino+T2 at once) to screw in the T2 to M68 adapter, which is a little crazy. Physically, there is no other place to screw, rotate, to fix first the T2 prism in the adapter and then the bino to T2 prism. I can screw a little the bino to T2 through bino ring but doesn't seem to be solid screwed, and when I want to unscrew, usually don't have place with the fingers or gets locked. If the DSO is the target, usually I let the bino without any GPC but spend some time to setup the system. If I want some Moon/ planets, I just add the clicklock. I am planning to buy more 1.25 to T2 adapters- for the moment I have only one. For me seems difficult to replace the GPC only in T2 prism, hence I found much easily just to replace the whole adapter, with the GPC screwed up, like in the below picture. Seems easier to replace like this and lower chances to touch the lens with the finger, mostly during the night, outside in the field. Very interesting the point with the GPC and convex part to the sky. Just checked mine (in the picture it is the 1.7x GPC and seems being positioned the other way around. So I should unscrew it from the metal body and put the lens the other way around? Seems not possible in mine to open it but also I did not have the courage to force it. For 2.7 I read that I should not do this. Thanks for this info! Would that affect the image, being placed the other way around? Regards, Marian

Hi friends! I did some testing today with the Baader GPC (1.7 and 2.6) and APM coma corrector ED 2.7x Testing was pretty basic- just took some shots with the smart phone (from my hand, no other device), trying to keep a faraway antenna at the top of the image. Telescope- TS-Optics SD Apo 102mm f/7, MB bino and 25mm SLV. For each of the below antenna, from widest to the narrowest, the configuration is as follows: TS 102/714, Baader T2 prism, MB bino, SLV 25mm (shortest possible light pass) TS 102/714, Baader T2 prism, 1.25 clicklock, MB bino, SLV 25mm + GPC 1.7 (short adapter from T2 to 1.25, with GPC inserted) TS 102/714, Baader T2 prism, 1.25 clicklock, MB bino, SLV 25mm + GPC 2.7 (short adapter from T2 to 1.25, with GPC inserted) TS 102/714, Baader T2 prism, 1.25 clicklock, MB bino, SLV 25mm + GPC 1.7 (short adapter from T2 to 1.25, with GPC inserted) + APM barlow lens only screwed in 1.25 to T2 adapter TS 102/714, Baader T2 prism, 1.25 clicklock, MB bino, SLV 25mm + GPC 1.7 (short adapter from T2 to 1.25, with GPC inserted) + full APM barlow Next I have opened the pictures from the laptop and measured the distance from the top of the antenna to a specific point, with a ruler. Last step, put in an excel and compute on par magnification/ mm. Some errors could occur because of the filed curvature, but the results are interesting The spreadsheet attached as picture shows the measurements. In a nutshell, it seems that in above configuration: 1.7 GPC is adding in fact only 1.3 magnification 2.7 GPC is adding only 2.3 magnification APM barlow lens (only the nose), inserted on 1.25" adapter, with 1.7 GPC in MB, is giving 2.6 magnification (to get 2.6, I have considered in fact the real magnification given by 1.7 GPC, which as appointed above, seems being 1.3 only) APM full barlow with 1.7 GPC (working at 1.3) is giving 3.9 x Was wondering if someone did these measurements and got some results.... O the other hand, Telescope- TS-Optics SD Apo 102mm f/7 can be used very nice without GPC. Use M68 to T2 adapter, screw the Baader prism in MB bino, then screw the whole bino with prism at once in the adapter (a little dangerous 😀), but will enter in focus, in fact around 6mm still free on focuser Clear skies! marian

Thank you all to suggest this!

Here it is the beast 😀!! Finally decided to go with th TS-Optics doublet SD Apo 102mm f/7 and very happy with it! Not too much testing so far but will come soon. The Apo come from TS-Optics extremely well protected and in less than one week (Germany to Romania) after the order was placed. Together with a more "specialist" friend, we have tested it and the collimation is very close to perfection No chance to go out of the city, but we have seen few times the Moon, Jupiter, Saturn and Mars. Some little colors on Jupiter but minimal and could have been induced by the prism used with binoviewer. We have tested the TS Apo with SW 80 ED one time and with 120 ED second time. Both comparisons were done with Maxbright binoviewers : SLV25mm, Lacerta UWAN 17mm, Lacerta UWAN 7mm, Baader prism diagonal for TS apo Morpheus 9mm Baader T2 BBHS prism for the 2 SW All with various GCPs and Barlow combinations: Baader 1.7 GPC, 2.7 GPC, APM 2.7 barlow The differences between the 2 (either SW80/ TS 102 one evening or SW120/ TS 102 another evening) have been minimal in details on Jupiter. Whatever was seen in one instrument, has been seen in the second one. Maybe some minimal details, with some effort, could have been seen at some moments of time. Power used was up to 300 times (one of the nights excellent) but probably the same details as up to 150x- 200x SLVs barlowed are excellent for planets, incredible sharp. For Moon/ DSO SLVs are losing ground against wide field eyepieces. In between I bought also 2 Morpheus 17.5. Fantastic for DSO/ Moon, but a little more difficult than SLV on eye positioning Regards, Marian

Thank you for sharing your thoughts! Once I will decide and acquire, will share my thoughts here. I have seen the Moon through an APO (100EDSW) one single time, power probably around 200x, and was amazed about the purity and contrast of the image Mak127 is indeed phenomenal on Moon, mostly through the bino, but still keep in mind that view through the APO Well, once will do the step, for sure will compare with both 120/600 achro and Mak 127. with the new APO. Let us see my (very personal and subjective) opinion

Dear Joe, dear @bosun21, thanks a lot for your kind and quick revert! All reviews around 102 F7 I have read are positive, and your experience push me towards the same choice Still to think a little by end of the month, when budget should be enough for the acquisition One question - have you tried bino on this scope, without GPC? Theoretically MB2 + T2 should enter in focus (11+4=15cm of optical path), by disassembling the 2" to M68 part of the focuser and replacing with a very short M68 to T2 adapter- on the technical description of the scope is written that there are 16 cm back focus from M68 Regards, Marian

Hi friends! Have succeeded to get the budget for the 102 APO after a long time and just saw a slightly larger aperture- the 115mm triplet Any experience/ idea if would be worth waiting some time for the bigger one or just pull the trigger for the 102 APO; any substantial difference in terms of light gathering and image quality? The APO will be used for visual only, kind of grab and go/ all around (Moon, planets, some DSO), mostly for better quality view vs current 120/600 achro and 127Mak, on either EQ5 or AZEQ6 Also have to acknowledge that TS 152 F5.9 is tempting Thank you!

Thank you Louis!

Thank you again Piero! One last question please, is it worth taking a C8 Edge instead of plain C8 for visual only/ binoviewer/ wide eyepieces? I have seen here some people saying the Edge does not bring value on the table for visual, others saying that for wide eyepieces, is it worth, stars are pinpoints near to the edge

Plenty of trips to car and back but I think it worth the effort 😀 Is the image in a C8 so "soft" vs a refractor?

nope, no garage- living in a block

Dear Piero, dear Michael, First, many many thanks in advance! My interest is today in visual only. I am using the 2 current scopes from the balcony during winter only, on the vegetation is dried, during the summer- less open sky; here is just a picture on the window, between the observations, I am keeping it here; through the window the image is highly affected, so will skip this Aside this, once/ twice per month, depending on the weather/ Moon/ available time, with few local amateurs, we are going in some darker places/ 20 km away, outside the main city, for half of the night/ a night Planning in advance, the scopes will be stored in the back side of the car, for acclimatization As new scopes, was thinking to go up either with a larger achro (above choice no 4) or similar to 120 ST but apo (eg 120 ED SW), in parallel with C8 or Mak 180 (on existing AZEQ6). Sorry I was not clear, out of the 4 scopes above, should stay with 2 only. From the current 2 scopes, I like by far the most the view through the refractor, even if it is just a plain achro, for specific targets or just scan through the dark sky. The small Mak is also unbeatable on Moon/ bino. And as preference, DSO + Moon are the favorites, followed by planets. For Moon I prefer bino, DSO cyclops (current aperture seems small for DSO bino) Did not have the chance to look through a C8 and somehow I am not clear if the view is as pleasant as through the refractor. From many reviews here, it seems that Mak 180 is very apo-like, aside the narrow FOV, but I am a little scared on the weight. On the other side, with similar magnification (120 ST/ APM XWA 13mm vs Mak 127/ 30mm ED), much prefer the refractor view Hope this gives more sense to my research 😇

@StarryEyed / @Piero, thanks a lot for your advice! Have to acknowledge that I am in a bit hurry and no patience to wait a little more for additional budget/ a larger aperture/ better quality After plenty of reading on the 3 choices, better so stay a little on hold: C8/ C8 Edge- easy to handle, good all around, maybe a little soft because of the CO, maybe too restricted FOV for bino, Edge pricey, maybe out of collimation 180 Mak- great for visual, almost APO-like, difficult to handle (no handle/ additional weight for it- was thinking to do something like I already did for the 127 Mak but the weight may increase too much), maybe too restricted FOV for bino SW ED 120- gain in quality only over 120ST TS 152 F5.9 (this is haunting my mind as well 🤔) have to figure out if I can accommodate bino, a little big Mount/ acclimatization should not be a problem Probably what I am not figuring yet out is which one is closest to my life style..

Very excited to come 😀

Hi folks! I am trying to improve my eyepiece set and have read here a lot of good reviews about APM UFF 30mm. Currently i do have a Lacerta ED 30mm and was thinking to sell it and replace with APM UFF 30mm, within a budget of 200- 300 EUR- would be an improvement, does it worth? Didn't succeed to find a head to head comparison between the 2 My current eyepieces are APM XWA 20mm (in back order), APM XWA 13mm, Pentax XW 10mm (just ordered); aside this, 2 Vixen SLV 25mm for bino, plus Lacerta UWAN 7mm and 16mm Current scopes are 120/600 SW achro and Mak 127 but planning to buy in the future APO or/and C8 or/ and Mak 180 Current mount is manual EQ5 and AZEQ6 Thank you!

Finally ask a friend to buy the Pentax XW 10 from USA (the price vs Europe is almost at half), so keep you posted when will arrive/ first impressions 😀

Thanks a lot Ricochet for the quick revert! Just received an offer for a used C11 and now evaluating if I will invest in eyepieces or towards a larger aperture 😀

Thanks a lot Joe!

Thanks a lot for your clear answer! If you allow me, what Pentax are you using mostly for monoviewing instead of Ethos, all range or only the smaller foclas? For binoviewing, are you using the SLV or what would you recommand? I have used SW Goldline but found SLV more comfortable to use, even if the FoV is smaller