John

That's a good point - these are theoretical charts for the lens design. Individual units might vary I guess ?

I've been interested in getting to the bottom of such diagrams for some time so I will follow this thread with interest This is the one for the LZOS 130 F/9 triplet: I think that the number of "crossings" and where they occur is part of the performance picture but how that all adds up I'm rather in the dark about

I managed to see the Pup star with my 12 inch scope at 199x, 265x and 338x a couple of nights back so your range is about right I think. 265x (6mm eyepiece with my dob) does the best job. Last night I did have a try with my ED120 refractor but the seeing here was unsteady - even somewhat easier pairs were tricky

I'd love to be able to understand these charts ! This is the one for the LZOS 130 F/9 triplet for comparison: The 125 ED doublet scope does look really tempting though I recall when the Altair 125 ED doublet came out it caused quite a stir. The Tecnosky is less expensive though but I wonder if otherwise they are the same scope ? I've spoken with Rupert as Astrograph on a couple of things (he used to stock the T-Rex mount and still carries the LZOS / APM refractors) and he seems a really helpful and knowledgeable chap. If you get one, I will really look forward to reading your views on it

It sure will Also worth trying to find without a filter so that the nearby galaxy, Messier 108, can be seen in the same, low power, field of view. I love these "2 for the price of 1" observing opportunities

http://www.ianmorison.com/rich-field-telescopes-and-wide-field-observing/

What happened to the concept that "there is never a silly question on this forum" ? If some more info would be helpful to make suggestions, why not ask some questions ? Maybe the OP is not sure what information to offer up to get some suggestions of upgrade options ?

The double cluster (sometimes known as the "Sword Handle") is a really splendid target even in small apertures and binoculars. I can just about see them with the naked eye here on a decent night but some magnification is what brings out their true nature and beauty. One of my favorites for showing at outreach events - always gets a few gasps

The 8mm BST Starguider is a good eyepiece and should be very sharp, especially in the central area of the field of view. I have compared the 8mm Starguider with my 8mm Tele Vue Ethos in my 12 inch dobsonian at a star party a few years back and I was surprised just how good the much less expensive BST actually did. With the screw up and down eye cup section, the positioning is usually up for non-glasses wearers and down for those who do wear glasses when observing. In your scope the 8mm is giving you 81x magnification which is really just a "medium" magnification with the scope. Might be worth checking the collimation ?

I often use the visiblity, or otherwise, of the 4th star in Sigma as an indicator of whether the E & F Trapezium stars might be visible.

Here is another approach. Here the scope position has been moved using a simple wooden adapter. This moves the centre of gravity of the scope tube downwards to match the centre of the altitude axis: http://www.homebuiltastronomy.com/stool/EasyAltAzMountModification.htm As you can see, you are not the only person to be affected by this sort of issue with this type of mount !

That does help a bit. In this article a spring is used to a similar job to the counter weight on the AZ-3 mount: https://astromart.com/reviews-and-articles/reviews/mounts/alt-azimuth/show/virtual-counterweight-for-az3-mounts Maybe even some stout elastic or a bungee would help if you can find a suitable place to connect each end ?

Fascinating stuff ! That last fact in particular is rather mind bending

It's a fair point but it's also difficult to explain to someone new to the hobby why they should spend £3K on an eyepiece set for the £1K scope that they have just bought Sometimes a journey is the way .....

Sounds like the same sort of issues that you get with the AZ-3 mount. I think they are caused by the centre of gravity of the scope being above that of the altitude axis. With the AZ-3 folks would add a counter weight on a bar to counteract the tendency of the scope to tip backwards when pointing upwards. The AZ-3 modification is detailed here: https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/275499-finally-finished-my-az3-modification/ Maybe you could adapt it for the AZ Pronto ?

I agree Louis. I'll withdraw my recommendation on the 1.25" Stellamira diagonal on that basis. The 2 inch one is OK though. I've owned diagonals in the style that you post above and they are pretty good, especially the 2 inch GSO type. You can get those under a number of different brands, usually, although stock levels are very scarce just now, like many astro items.

I can't see dielectric in that specification Usually dielectric coatings give a reflectivity of 97%-99%. That one claims 90% so I would suspect standard coatings. For the price though the spec is fine. The GSO diagonals that I've used have combined good build quality and good optical performance with a reasonable price eg: ones like this: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/stellamira-1-25-90-di-electric-diagonal.html https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/stellamira-2-90-di-electric-diagonal.html

Nope - I lost it

I would go for the Tele Vue. The Astronomik is very good but for that small price difference I would go the Tele Vue. Apart from Gerry, I have read great reports on the Mk II Tele Vue Bandmate filters from a number of other sources as well. The Mk I Bandmates were very mediocre though - I'm not surprised that they moved to a different manufacturer.

Nice report on a lovely target Baz

Excellent result Jeremy I'll have a go with my ED120 when we get the next clear night - I've still not managed it with that scope, or the FC100-DL. I know that there has been some skepticism expressed in some quarters (not SGL) on reported sightings of Sirius B with relatively small aperture instruments so I hope that is being overcome with these reports

I agree that objective cell design does have an influence on cooling times.

Great report Mark ! I think my mistake last night was to concentrate on things other than galaxies initially, waiting for Leo and Ursa Major to rise to a more favourable altitude. By the time that had happened, my transparency was getting worse so even simple stuff like M51 was far from it's best Glad you got some good results

I was a little concerned about cool down times when I was considering my 130mm F/9.2 triplet. I had read mixed reports. I don't get it too cold here, 5 below is a really cold night here, but the scope does live in a centrally heated room. So far, (I've owned the scope since Summer 2016) I have not noticed any particular issues with cool down times. The scope needs a bit longer than my ED120 but 30-40 minutes at most and it's delivering excellent high power images. My triplet is an air spaced LZOS. Maybe the F/9.2 focal ratio means that the glass thickness of the elements is a little less than the faster versions ?

Did anyone spot my deliberate mistake here ? What I should have said was Procyon B of course. Proxima B is Proxima Centauri B which I have to leave to our southern hemisphere friends to spot Must warm my brain up a bit more before posting .....