refractor2345

Also, I said:

7 hours ago, refractor2345 said:

TBH I think a 6 inch to 8 inch might be the top

Which means (With now corrected first post!) anything up to 6 inch.

Ok, sorry for the contradictory sentences, but what I meant was portable, (It is corrected!) but for a 21 inch refractor user (They exist, I am not one) A 6 inch is portable, and for me it definitely is, (Cause I own a 12 inch dob, solid tube, and the zerochromat are really light weight I hear!) 

2 hours ago, dweller25 said:

Hello @refractor2345
 

I don’t think your first language is English so maybe something is getting lost in translation…..

You started by asking about small 60 to 80mm refractors and then start talking about 6 to 8 inch scopes which are very large refractors, or are you talking about reflectors which is the normal type of scope in this size range.

You need to clarify.

Either way you appear to have a good budget, so you will have a good choice when stock levels improve.

 

 

Uh, yeah I am not perfect in English, but I commented with other stuff on my brain, so missed I commented 60-80mm refractor so, sorry

4 hours ago, Stu said:

I thought you said a small refractor? Have you seen a 6” refractor, let alone an 8”? Not exactly small or even kind of portable.

I can’t comment because it is too broad a question. Widefield is widefield, planetary nebulae are small and tend to require high power and greater resolution ie aperture.

What scopes do you have, or have you had? Why will you mount it on? Is it to use at home or to take to dark sites or even on an aircraft travelling?

Are you genuinely looking to buy something?

I have a 70mm achromat, 66mm apochromat, 80mm apochromat, 150mm apochromat (f/8!), 12 and 16 inch dobsonian, 6 and 8 inch newtonian 

I will observe from home, still doesn't hurt to take to a star party

I didn't understand this:

4 hours ago, Stu said:

Why will you mount it on?

Did you mean, what will you mount it on?

And yes, I am going to buy it.

Umm, I will like high power observing with gobular clusters and planetary nebulae!

Awesome, I love Long focus for this job, you need wide exit pupil to pull out the color, and widefields don't magnify much, so get a narrow telescope, use a widefield eyepiece and boom! I just love the view through it!

2 minutes ago, refractor2345 said:

Hmm, I was wondering if I cold see a planetary nebulae in color, using a let's say a 18 inch dobsonian, with filter of course, what about Abell 21, The Medusa Nebulae or The Butterfly Nebulae (NGC 6302)

More tough, without filter, is it possible? What are your thoughts, and are there any examples through the eyepiece?

Also, if you know, please tell me suitable eyepiece for the job!

As the title, what is your favorite planetary setup?

Hmm, I was wondering if I cold see a planetary nebulae in color, using a let's say a 18 inch dobsonian, with filter of course, what about Abell 21, The Medusa Nebulae or The Butterfly Nebulae (NGC 6302)

More tough, without filter, is it possible? What are your thoughts, and are there any examples through the eyepiece?

13 hours ago, Stu said:

What do you want to use it for, visual, imaging? What targets?

Strict Visual, kind of portable, widefield with planetary nebulae and general deep sky, TBH I think a 6 inch to 8 inch might be the top

13 hours ago, johninderby said:

What budget? Under £500.00 or under £1,000.00 etc.

4 hours ago, John said:

If the OP comes back with a budget of a couple of hundred £ we might have to have a rethink !

 

As I said I'm not considering buying now, but the budget can be anything, ANYTHING, under, 10,000 quid's, yes, you heard me right budgets 10,000 quid's FOR OTA ONLY although I might love to spend less, you know buy some other replacement stuff for my broken filters etc.

Ok, I need some help, I might not buy it now, but will consider it. By far, what is your favorite small refractor(Any size you think is small!) up till now. I won't consider, you know, telescopes that are stopped manufactured, long waiting list ones, so don't comment those!

I will start with mine: A 70/700 achromatic refractor on an AZ2 mount, (Sorry I couldn't get a photo of it, I will when I can)

What's your Refractor Grab n' Go setup?

On 29/12/2021 at 16:06, Peter Drew said:

I share similar feelings but always remind myself as to how thrilled Galileo would have been with one.      🙂

Yeah, I remember reading in a book "No telescope is trash, They are still better than Galileo's telescope

1 hour ago, teoria_del_big_bang said:

Odd isn't it ?
But of course must be True, Amazon would not allow anything but genuine reviews.

Steve

It's just the fact most people haven't saw through a real telescope (6 inch Dobsonian) and they watch moon and they are in the review section "OMG!!!! I love this scope!! It shows moon super clearly!!!" After they actually get to know a real telescope, they will be wondering "Wait....I thought that scope was good..."

11 hours ago, John said:

That advert reminds me of the bad old days of Tasco advertising !

Sky & Telescope produced this fake advert for an article on avoiding these sorts of scopes a couple of years back. Quite funny except when you find a real one that is still trying it on

Woah! Can this telescope match the power of a old celestron/vixen fluorite refractor, for 100 dollars? Jokes aside, I love this ad!

17 minutes ago, Albion said:

''Yeah, providing low cost, high speed internet access to the poor and remote of the world, connecting them so that they can trade and earn money is a tad foolish. Far better to keep giving money to dictators in the hope that some of it passes down to them.''

So, not meaning that don't put satellite into earth's orbit, we don't want to say that we don't want any progress or something, it is, just like I say interfering with our already polluted night sky, Simple measures such as covering them with Black 3.0 and/or place them in higher than 700 kilometers in space can improve things a lot, there will be problems with the thermal management, but we can deal with it can't we we have surely deal with worse situations before.

It is really bad, it mostly interferes with astrophotography, a brilliant picture with a bunch of symmetrical  trails all of satellites, I even found a petition on change.org, That's what I am linking it here

Link: https://www.change.org/p/stop-spacex-starlink-from-spoiling-outer-space-for-humanity

Link 2: https://www.change.org/p/spacex-starlink-stop-the-pollution-of-night-sky

So, after seeing some positive reviews on the Sybony Redline Eyepiece (6mm) is worth for planets is it good, for it's cheap price or it is bad. I will be using my 60mm f/11.56 refractor and 70mm f/10 refractor, so is it a good combination?

22 hours ago, Pixies said:

Mk 1 special:

That is the same for me! Looking at the moon through eyes, making out constellation, the good times!

13 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

I have used the new 8.5mm, 6.5mm, and 4.5mm.

They are not good, with the most internal light scatter I've ever seen in eyepieces.

Additionally, the 4.5mm has serious chromatic aberration.

The older 8.8mm, 6.7mm, and 4.7mm were better eyepieces.

ES does not make "planetary" focal lengths with long eye reliefs.

The post by vlaiv points out a few that might work.

Thanks for the post, I will look into the 6.7mm eyepiece

3 hours ago, Peter Drew said:

I should have made it clear that I didn't make the optics!  The objective was made by someone in Taiwan I think, he offered 150mm, 220mm and 250mm versions.  I bout mine pre-owned but unused for £500!     🙂

WHAT!? 500 quid's for the 220mm? That would be expensive and good at the same time, and considering at least about 10000$ for a factory made made refractor that is cheap!

8 hours ago, Voyager 3 said:

From the reports elsewhere , the newer LER versions don't seem to be as good as the older ES 82° series . 

WARNING: Do you wear glasses ? The LER stands for Long Eye Relief , but only thing - it isn't  . It has just 1 or 2mm more eye relief than the normal 82° version but it is still not suitable for glass wearers . You may have to look at the Morpheus series for comfortable eye relief without giving up much AFOV .

I have myopic eyes, which can be fixed by focusing, but Louis says:

30 minutes ago, Louis D said:

No one really knows why they introduced the 3 new LER eyepieces to replace the older ones they're adjacent to.  Perhaps they had gotten so much feedback about tight eye relief in the older versions that they thought it would be prudent for them to redesign them and issue longer eye relief versions. 

So far, I haven't seen a detailed comparison of each focal length against its older predecessor, just some anecdotal reports.  If you've seen one, could you link to it?

The 3mm LER have higher, well, Long eye relief, or is it just different with each eyepiece?

3 hours ago, vlaiv said:

In that case, 6.7mm will be suitable without barlow as will be 4.7mm

Barlow will be useful with say 11mm ES82 or with above two eyepieces for very special tasks such as double star splitting, but not for general planetary observing.

LER should be long eye relief, but realistically long eye relief is 18mm and above.

Most of 82° line (original) have short eye relief. Even without glasses it takes some getting used to them. 6.5mm one is claimed to have 16.5mm eye relief (from ES website), but I'm skeptical of that - it needs to be confirmed by someone that actually has that eyepiece.

So, which eyepiece, ES, has best eye relief and good for planet? (P.S. No sarcasm intended!)

7 hours ago, Peter Drew said:

Made it myself, couldn't afford to buy one!  Made the mount and observatory for the same reason, total cost under 3K    🙂

Oh, but where did you find the optics? I don't think any company manufactures that yet!

So if you want to know why I want that eyepiece because it seems weird having only a 0.2mm difference and so why would they make it? Also, I didn't know the difference between LER and Non - LER eyepiece, can some one explain that?

8 hours ago, vlaiv said:

what scope will you be using those with?

I feel that EP in 6-7mm range with barlow will give too much magnification in almost any scope. These focal lengths are best suited for F/5-F/10 scopes. With Maks or Cassegrain scopes that are F/12-F/15 and slow refractors - these EPs are starting to push past useful magnification (that will depend on your eyesight as well).

 

It will be a 128mm Refractor F/10, homemade

So, after reading some positive comments on the 6.7mm ES eyepiece (82 degrees) I thought upon the 6.5mm eyepiece (Link below!) And so I thought of hearing your experience with these eyepieces and even better, a straight up comparison! ( P.S. I want it to use it with a Barlow, for planetary viewing, so recommend one to use with this!)

Link : https://explorescientificusa.com/collections/eyepiece/products/82-6-5mm