John

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.

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

I didn't try translating it. I just looked at the pretty pictures Unit to unit variability is an often discussed issue and, in the past, has been used to make the case for buying a premium brand at a premium price. I suspect that production consistency is pretty good from all the manufacturers these days though.

I understand what you mean. In reality though, how likely is that to actually happen in the world of amateur telescopes ?

No moon either

He did another ED120: http://r2.astro-foren.com/index.php/de/10-beitraege/02-ed-optiken-halb-apos-und-frauenhofer-systeme/531-b008-skywatcher-ed-120-900-proseries-halb-apo

He has tested loads of scopes: http://r2.astro-foren.com/index.php/de/ The tests of the Synta ED120's are interesting, eg: http://r2.astro-foren.com/index.php/de/10-beitraege/02-ed-optiken-halb-apos-und-frauenhofer-systeme/530-b007-sky-watcher-ed-120-900-halb-apo

How accurate / useful are the tests that Herr Rohr does considered to be these days ?: http://r2.astro-foren.com/index.php/de/9-beitraege/01-aeltere-berichte-auf-rohr-aiax-de-alles-ueber-apos/21-tmb-130-780-erfolgreiche-restauration-lzos-020

I keep my Quikfinder off the scope when I'm moving the 12 inch dob around and when it's stored. It clips on and off quite easily and seems to hold the alignment with the main scope quite well.

It's usually the other way around with zooms - wider field at the short focal length and narrower at the longer focal lengths

I have a 7.2 - 21.5mm zoom. One like this: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ovl-eyepieces/hyperflex-72mm-215mm-eyepiece.html I often use it with a 2.25x barlow lens to get a high power zoom - 9.55mm - 3.2mm. I also have a range of top quality fixed focal length eyepieces (Pentax and Tele Vue) and the zoom and zoom barlow combination compares surprisingly well to those in terms of optical quality. If I'm being very fussy or have a particularly challenging target I will use a fixed focal length eyepiece but very often the zoom does the job well. The area that the zoom does not compete with is the field of view at the longer focal length end which is rather narrow but this is also the same with most other zooms. I used to be a bit cynical about zoom eyepieces but over the past couple of years they have found a steady place in my eyepiece case and have proved very useful.

I don't use the pulse feature on my Rigel to be honest with you.

You might find that the smaller footprint of the Rigel Quikfinder looks more at home on the thin tube of the Skylux EL which I recall is a long 70mm aperture refractor ? It fits in a similar way to the Telrad - a base that you stick to the scope tube and the finder then clips on and off that. I use one on my 12 inch dobsonian.

You are correct - when focusing on closer targets, the focuser needs to move further outwards.

Yes, I've been caught out like that as well !. At low tracking rates (ie: 1x, 2x etc) the motion is not really obviously visible. Try one of the faster tracking rates (I believe the mount slew at up to 800x) and you should see it moving.

There are some hardy folks on here and I admire the perseverance Not me though. If I get too cold I stop enjoying it. Fortunately my usual observing site is about 1 metre from a nice cozy warm room so I can pop out, do a bit of observing then pop back inside to warm up, have a warm drink and consult the star charts for the next target. Probably an unusual arrangement but it suits me just fine

I think the secondary mirror does have collimation adjustment with these. It is the primary that is fixed.

Yep - these 95mm tube rings look tasty https://www.firstlightoptics.com/tube-rings/more-blue-95mm-tube-mounting-rings.html

That's the kit that I have used for the past few years. It works very well.

Great report Gerry ! I've noted that "finger" a few times this year when observing M42 with my 12 inch dob. Those "scallops" out of the adjacent arc of nebulosity are distinctive as well, when the sky is nice and transparent. So much to explore in this nebula - whole sessions can be spent there !