John

5 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

....At the end just left with price to tell us if any good all other things being equal. 

And feedback from owners / users on forums ?

Sometimes you need to "read between the lines" but I've found that you can build up a reasonable picture if you read (critically) feedback.

Thanks FLO

Are Bresser products not going to be affected in a similar way in due course then ?

Thomas had designed the 130 F/7's shortly before he passed away. He was excited about them as he posted here on the CN forum:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/78282-what-is-a-tmb-a-little-history/?p=1025809

Earlier in that thread he listed the lenses that he designed:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/78282-what-is-a-tmb-a-little-history/?p=1025627

Very sadly, less than a year later, he passed away.

I expect Markus Ludes does know the maker of the 130mm F/7 objectives. He was very helpful when I purchased my 130mm F/9.3 TMB/LZOS even though the last involvement he had with my scope was 10 years previously. Markus was able to supply me with the copies of the original paperwork and tests for my scope - he keeps them all on file apparently. The previous owner of my scope had lost the copies that had been supplied with the scope so I was glad to be able to get another set of them.

28 minutes ago, jetstream said:

There is a strong connection between TMB and Markus Ludes https://astromart.com/forums/astronomy-equipment/equipment-talk/tmbs-designs

"Hi

many of the APM-LZOS Apo's are TMB designed and in production. But the TMB Business does not exist anymore , a reason why the product was renamed into APM-LZOS. Apm has anyway the owner ship on those TMB designs, since we paid TMB the design fees

cheers
Markus Ludes"

Thomas M Back's passing in 2007 at just 50 years of age was a great loss to the refractor world

My TMB/LZOS is a 2006 model so bears the TMB engraving on the bezel. Later changed as Markus says, to APM.

Forecast is still quite clear here for tonight but I think there is a chance that the jetstream might come more into play and mess with the seeing.

3 hours ago, KP82 said:

The lenses in TMB SS scopes were not manufactured by LZOS but instead Canon Optron who also supplies lenses to Tak (uncofirmed). However the reviews I've seen so far are all very positive.

I've seen a lot of discussions lately on the source of the optics for the TMB SS on another forum with no firm conclusion on the source other than that the objectives are excellent. 

I think it is pretty firmly established that Canon Optron provide the objectives for Takahashi and Vixen fluorite refractors. Maybe the non-fluorite Taks as well ?

With LZOS objectives, the objective cell is designed and manufactured by LZOS as well as the objective. Not sure if that is the case with other objective makers.

The TMB SS is a superb scope though, no doubt about that. Tom Trusock was very impressed with it:

https://www.cloudynights.com/articles/cat/cn-reports/telescope-reports/cn-report-tmb-130-signature-series-r1634

1 hour ago, cloudsweeper said:

Encouraging report John!  It was clear here too, but I bottled it 'cos of the cold.  Hope to be back action again quite soon though!  😉

Doug.

The forecast here for tonight is not looking quite so good now. We will see later whether it's worth setting up or not.

3 hours ago, Voyager 3 said:

Did you mean 52 Orionis Jon ? 53 is Saiph at the bottom of Orion ... 

Well spotted - yes I meant 52 Orionis. I usually do 32 and then 52 to see how far I can push the seeing conditions. 52 has a separation which is a wee bit tighter than the theoretical limit for a 100mm scope whereas 32 is doable in reasonable seeing, as it was last night.

10 minutes ago, jetstream said:

Thing is he needs them to see what he wants to see. A 1.25" OIII will work with the 25mm but with a small TFOV.

Not sure what to say!

I agree Gerry.

I just thought I ought to sound a little note of caution.

4 minutes ago, John said:

Sorry - posted in error.

14 minutes ago, Kon said:

Silly question, do I need a 2" or 1.25" filter?

Depending on the type of 1.25 inch - 2 inch adapter you have, you might not be able to use 2 inch filters currently.

I can't recall if the Skywatcher adapter has a 2 inch filter thread machined into it

There is a slight danger here that we are talking you into spending as much as your scope has cost on a filter and your first 2 inch eyepiece

Clouds all around now so I'm packing in - again !

I did manage to catch the galaxy NGC 2903 up at the "head" end of the Lion as his hind quarters became smothered in clouds. That was showing good contrast even in the small refractor so I suspect the Leo Triplet might have been possible, had the clouds kept away.

Nice to end tonights session on a positive, 30 million light years away, note

Lets see what tomorrow evening brings !

3 minutes ago, Second Time Around said:

I agree that the Baader 1.3/2.25x Q Barlow would be a good bet.

However, I found it doesn't work with all eyepieces at 1.3x.  IIRC it needs 15mm of space at the bottom of the barrel, plus enough of the barrel needs to be threaded.

It obviously fits John's 7.2-21.5mm Hyperflex.  I gave my 9-27mm Hyperflex (that the OP has) to my grandkids, and no longer have my Q Barlow so can't test the combination.

Can anyone else help please?

It only works in 1.3x mode with eyepieces with no lens elements within the 1.25 inch barrel. Zooms usually have a sliding set of optics within their barrels so it's no go with those and many other designs with wide fields and / or long eye relief. So I use it as a 2.25x only with my zoom.

Still a good barlow at the price even if it is just used in 2.25x mode in my view

I agree with Gerry about O-III first although most of the advice I see on forums suggests the UHC first.

For quite a while an Astronomik O-III was my only deep sky filter and it did a great job. The UHC enhances what you can already see. The O-III can show you stuff that is otherwise practically invisible.

14 minutes ago, Captain Magenta said:

It's quite simple. It needs to be presented as an optimization problem. The correct number of scopes, obviously, = n+1, where n = no. scopes you own at present.

But also, the correct number of scopes = s-1, where s = no. scopes that would cause your partner to leave you.

Combining these, you get s = n+2. Which means your partner will only leave you if you get 2 more scopes. So there's room for just one more.

Ad infinitum...

I'm on a 3 scope agreement with my other half and have been for some years. I'm on thin ice with the 6 scopes I currently own. She can count rather well !

27 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

Don’t you need a 130 mm wide field scope as well? I’m running the argument thru my head I need a CAT (Mewlon) to complement my wide field scopes.....

Not really. I have the ED120 which is F/7.5

If I'm doing serious deep sky observing the 12 inch dob is as easy to get out as any of the refractors are.

If I have a gap it is probably in the 8 inch aperture area but I'd go for an 8 inch F/6 newt for that I think, if and when I decide to fill that spot.

I use the Baader 2.25x barlow with my Hyperflex 7.2mm - 21.5mm zoom eyepiece and they work very well together to create a 9.55mm - 3.2mm zoom. The Baader 2.25x looks quite basic but has good optical element within it's plain exterior. They are just £39 new but can be picked up used for £25 or so:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/barlows/baader-classic-q-225x-barlow.html

1 hour ago, JeremyS said:

This sort of unexpected session is really where the Tak FC 100 excels, John 👍

Indeed it does Jeremy

I was clouded out for a while and it looked permanent so I bought the Tak in. 45 mins later I had another largish clear patch so I popped the Tak out on the mount again and managed a nice clean split of the 3 components of Beta Monocerotis at 225x straight out of the house. Not sure many scopes could manage that

Picked up The Crab Nebula (M1) at low power as Taurus dropped towards the roofline of our house.

Sirius was a bit too "sparkly" tonight for the 100mm to tease out the Pup star. The close pair in the Tegmine trio was very nearly split though.

Algeiba (Gamma Leonis) was the lovely pair of pale golden orbs as usual.

More cloud drifting about again now. I was hoping to have a go at some Leo galaxies with the little frac but that might not be on.

Pity about the cloud because otherwise the seeing and transparency are quite good. I can see the double cluster in Perseus with the naked eye which is usually a good sign.

That wind is chilling though. -3 is probably -5 or -6 taking that into account. Brrrrr !

10 minutes ago, Captain Magenta said:

There is a TMB 130 in the for sale section at the moment...

If I did not already have a TMB/LZOS 130mm I would have been onto that one 😀

I have got away with two 4 inch refractors but I suspect my other half will not see why two 5.1 inchers are "essential"

Mine currently are:

1.25 inch:

Astronomik O-III

Astronomik H-Beta

Meade 4000 "Nebular Narrowband" which is a UHC

2 inch:

Lumicon O-III

Astronomik UHC

I've tried quite a few others out over the years but as @jetstream / Gerry says, quality pays with these things and I'm happy with the ones that I now have. H-Beta does not get a lot of use but is, so far, the only filter that has shown me the Horsehead Nebula so it's earned it's keep.

Gusty wind and surprise clear skies see me out using my Tak FC100 this evening. Popping in and out of the house to keep warm but some nice views in between the gusts:

Rigel

Sigma Orionis (inc the dimmer 4th star)

Theta Orionis (the Trapezium plus the E & F stars)

Eta Orionis

Alnitak

32 Orionis (clear split)

53 Orionis (touching pair)

M42 + M43

M78

Diversion to Ursa Major / Draco due to cloud in the Orion area:

Mizar

M81 + M82

Cat's Eye Nebula - NGC 6543

Back to Gemini:

M35 and NGC 2158

The Eskimo Nebula, NGC 2392 with central star

All going great until a more substantial amount of this came across from the NE

So time for a warm drink I think

Forecast for tomorrow night is hopeful so all is not lost if tonight does not last much longer.

It's clear here at the moment. Cloud building up to the north though so a short session only I think.

The TAL Apolar 125 is the one that I really would not want to try and collimate. 6 elements in 3 groups !:

The Giro Ercole could handle that load but no slow motions of course.

41 minutes ago, jetstream said:

I think that one technique used by experienced astronomers is to "sort" through scopes to find "good" ones regardless of test reports 😃 or lack of.

I used the technique of buying them from somebody I knew personally, was experienced and that I trusted