John

Yep - I was using 338x to observe the Eskimo last night with my 12 inch dob.

I don't know how it is for you tonight Mark but I'm finding the transparency none to good here. Even the easy galaxies are looking far from their best with my 12 inch dob. I've concentrated on other, brighter targets tonight because of this. The seeing is quite steady though. Hope you have it better for galaxies in Thornbury !

Nice one ! I was looking at that one with my 12 inch dob earlier. The central star is clearly visible. With some averted vision you can see a sort of 2 layered appearance to the nebula with the central star in the brighter core surrounded by a fainter "halo" which I think is supposed to be the hood of the Eskimo's parka ! Using a filter such as an O-III or UHC slightly enhances the 2-layer look but makes the central star harder to see. It is a nice planetary nebula

Tonight is not so blowy but a bit colder. Transparency is not that good tonight but the seeing is steady. Sirius B was showing relatively easily at 198x and up so I've been having a go at Proxima B which is even harder - the B star is just 4.5 arc seconds away from the Proxima A and the brightness difference is massive again - 10,000x difference ! Didn't get a sniff of it even at 600x but I'm not surprised really 😉 Nice views of various other brightish stuff but I have the feeling that it's not a great night for dim galaxies The views of Sirius and and the Pup star were some of the best I've had though

Not yet, anyway:

The link I posted earlier in this thread were Thomas posting on CN and thats what he said.

Do you think it's going to be clear Mark ? The forecast is OK but there seems currently to be quite a lot of large chunks of cloud around.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

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 !

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.

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 !

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

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 !