John

I nearly posted that maxim a while back in this thread. I've been thinking hard over whether things might have changed a little lately making it less relevant, but I don't think they have really

I reckon the 2nd hand market will be awash with gear in the second half of 2021. It will become a buyers market for a while.

I think peoples tolerance of optical issues varies a lot person to person. What one person finds annoying might not bother another observer at all.

From looking at the above photos I reckon the Orion Deluxe 2 inch 2x barlow is made by the same manufacturer that made the Antares 1.6x barlow. They put a longer barrel on it, used the same optic (they look identical as well) and the longer distance between the eyepiece optics and the barlow element creates a 2x amplification.

Having owned a 36mm Baader Aspheric and not found it brilliant even at F/12, I'm a little surprised to read this. The 40mm Aero ED is certainly a much better corrected eyepiece than the Baader Aspheric IMHO.

They used to be imported by the "Skys the Limit" chap Alan I seem to recall. I can see a couple of fungus spots on the objective which detract a bit from the value I guess.

Thanks John. I was wondering what the term "Planetary" meant in terms of optimisation for this purpose.

Thanks John. How do the central obstruction %'s compare in the 6 and 8 inch apertures between the two brands ?

I have a couple of questions on the Bresser dobs, if thats OK ? They do seem to be better appointed than the Skywatcher and GSO dobs, better focusers, altitude bearings and tube rings, that sort of thing. These seem to be a good step above the Skywatcher and GSO offerings. The finders seem to be not quite so good on the Bressers - is that fair ? What about the optical quality of the mirrors, which are, after all, the heart of the telescope ?. I've owned and used a number of Skywatcher newtonians / dobsonians and I have found the optical performance of these consistently pretty good. I've owned a couple of GSO made dobs and the mirrors on those were figured OK but not well over-coated. Is there any evidence that the mirrors that are used in the Bresser dobsonians are of better optical quality than the equivalent Skywatcher instruments ?. I'm sure the over-coatings are good quality but what about the figure and polish ? Just trying to get a comprehensive picture on what the additional costs buy you with the Bressers. Optical quality has always been high on my list of priorities and I can accept small compromises in other things (which can latter be modded) to get this. Thanks

You will need a filter that fits over the front aperture of the scope. Something like this: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/solar-filters/astrozap-baader-solar-filter.html

Interesting feedback Louis. Is the Orion Deluxe 2" Barlow this one ?: The upper barrel section looks very similar to the body of the Mk 1 Antares 1.6x 2 inch barlow, also made in Japan. I wonder if the manufacturer is the same ?. Did you encounter any issues with eye positioning when using the barlows with the ES 82 eyepieces ?. You mention exit pupil but I wasn't sure if you meant it's position in relation to distance from the eye lens or something else. A barlow lens usually pushes out the eye relief to some extent. For me the eye relief with the 12mm ES 92 was too long as standard and it's just about OK with the 17mm. Personally, I would not want the eye position moved further out with these eyepieces. I can appreciate that the glasses wearer might have different preferences though !

I've been reading Ed Ting's reviews for around a decade I think. He and Todd Gross used to be my "go to" websites for information and viewpoints on equipment. Ed ran into some trouble over a review the he did on a piece of optical equipment which was rather negative. It turned out that he had not installed it according to the manufacturer's instructions and the manufacturer challenged him regarding the review. He published a correction but was rather shaken up by the incident so withdrew from posting reviews for a while. It's good to see that he is doing reviews and posting them on the web again.

My scopes are F/5.3, F/6.5, F/7.5, F/9 and F/9.25. My skies are probably not bad for the edge of a large town and with two major cities within 15 miles of me. I've seen the Horsehead Nebula from my back garden when things have been at their best. Most of my faint target observing is with the 12 inch F/5.3 dobsonian. The other scopes are refractors from 100mm to 130mm and I don't often use the 21 Ethos or 31 Nagler with those. The exception is the 31 Nagler in my Vixen ED 102mm F/6.5 refractor when I want to observe the whole of the Veil Nebula. I really liked the Aero ED 40 but I decided to have a bit of a clear out a couple of months back and the 30mm and 40mm Aero ED's were not getting much use so I let them go to new homes.

It's not the eyepiece. My skies have some moderate light pollution so I find that using more magnification helps darken the background sky. I've owned a number of eyepieces of 40mm and even 50mm focal length but always ended up using the shorter FL ones more. I'm a bit of an occularholic though so sometimes get tempted to try longer ones again if one pops up at a good price

If your diagonal is made of plastic, an upgrade may be well worth while. On eypeieces, a BST Starguider 5mm eyepiece is good quality, has longer eye relief than a plossl, a wider field of view and will give you 133x magnification. Seeing the Cassini Division is quite possible with a 102mm scope but it is not easy and the seeing conditions need to be at least moderately good for it to be seen. The low altitude of Saturn currently does not help matters either.

I saw it as well ....... through a telescope Got about 10 minutes before I got clouded out

I should have sold mine for more then !

I didn't measure the AFoV of the Aero ED40 but it sure looked like a 68 degree AFoV to me. I have Pentax XW's, a 24mm Panoptic and a couple of Delos eyepieces with AFoV's around this figure and the Aero ED40 seemed to offer something very similar.

I found the Aero ED 40 a really nice eyepiece even in my F/5.3 12 inch dob. Not perfect but surprisingly well corrected across the field of view for a relatively low cost super wide 2 inch. I recently sold it though because I find that I just don't use that longer focal length under my skies. The 31mm Nagler and the 21mm Ethos work better for me with regards to background sky darkness and DSO contrast. Hugely more expensive though and much heavier eyepieces. For the £60 or so that the Aero ED 40 cost me pre-owned it was a great performer though.

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/562496-masuyama-32mm-85-deg/ https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/585719-31mm-nagler-type-5-vs-32mm-masuyama-85-degree-at-f7/

The Aero ED 35mm is a better corrected eyepiece than either the Superview or the Baader Aspherics IMHO. From the reports, the Superviews are performing as I expected. The Baader Aspheric (I had the 36mm for a while) was a disappointment - I had hoped that it would be better. The Aero ED's are the best of the lower cost super wide eyepieces that I've used. For around £50 pre-owned they are great buys.

If the scope has foil spacers these can cause indentations of sorts around the edge of a de-focussed star image.

I've found that they are within the grasp of a 4 inch but conditions are key with that aperture. 4.7 inches makes them more routine. E is seen more readily than F.

I had about 15 minutes of clearish sky earlier this evening. The views of Mars were very mediocre. The Moon was rather nice though. That was it though. Cloudy since then.

Great stuff Steve I got about 15 minutes cloud free here - just enough for a quick look and Mars and the moon, then that was it. Just as well there was the SGL zoom cast to watch !