John

If the bottom surface of the triplet element is concave then it seems to be very similar to an abbe orthoscopic design. There was a konig design that also used a singlet-triplet configuration but the bottom surface of the triplet in that one was concave. I think the triplet might have been the eye lens in that design but it's a little unclear from this illustration:

A light shroud can help with this and you can add a dew shield to the top of the tube as well.

If you go for the double leg clamps option, which I think the FLO ones have as standard, you loose 10cm of max height with the Uni range: https://www.berlebach.de/en/?bereich=details&id=116 The Berlebach website figure is for the single clamp option.

Anyone observed this comet yet ? According to the "Heavens Above" website and Cartes du Ciel, it is currently a bit brighter than magnitude 8 and in Lepus and soon to be in Orion. It will be just 1.25 degrees from Rigel on the 4th November so easy to find if you can wait until Orion has risen fully.

I'd still like to know if these are the same optically as the Myriad / William Optics 100's. Until the 7mm was announced the focal lengths and the specs seemed very, very similar and the build and finish looks the same apart from the eyepiece top section and eye cup

That's a useful addition to the range. Is there a 5.5 or is it a 5 with the APM XWA's ? Either way, the 7mm is gap that needed filling.

I tend to prefer higher magnifications even when wanting a good sized true field because with the moderate light pollution I have, I get a darker background sky which helps deep sky objects to stand out a little better. So I gravitate towards eyepieces with larger fields of view. I also like wide or very wide fields of view when observing at high power as well because my scopes are on undriven, alt-azimuth mounts. From what I've read the ES70 eyepieces are OK but nothing special but the ES68, 82 and 100 degree eyepieces (which I have owned and used) are really pretty good. The ES92's are superb but rather bulky and heavy. I've not used an ES52 degree eyepiece. My scopes vary from a 12 inch F/5.3 dobsonian to a 100mm F/9 refractor (and a few in between !)

I find NGC 2419 fascinating. Not much to look at but it is a long way away, further than the Magellanic Clouds: I also enjoy comparing M13 with M92 in Hercules. Both lovely of course but M92 has it's own charm. A nice M13 challenge is to get the nearby galaxy NGC 6207 in the same field of view. A nice "two for one" deal https://observing.skyhound.com/archives/jun/NGC_6207.html

I think it might be one of Nigels:

Thanks I don't have a recent image but Tele Vue and Pentax are the mainstay of my eyepiece sets now.

Excellent comment and recommendation

It's been a long time since I owned the 22mm T4 but I seem to recall that it was an easy eyepiece to see the full field with, maybe a touch easier than the 31mm T5 ? Don Pensack might see this and comment - he probably has more recent experience of these two eyepieces than I do. I believe that Don now uses the 22 T4 Nagler rather than the 21mm Ethos because he now finds the eye relief more comfortable and the optical quality comparable.

I heard this a few times about delivery people but I'm glad that it's never happened to me, so far If you bought the eyepiece new it would be worth mentioning it to the vendor. I'm sure they would be interested to learn how the delivery company are treating stuff that they supplied to their valued customers.

I have one of those "artificial stars". Despite being a simple design, it does work pretty well I'm pleased to say

I still have the 31mm Nagler and the 13mm Ethos.

I came across this photo of the eyepiece set that I had back in October 2009. There is a theme there

I've had a couple of the Skywatcher 200mm F/5's in the past (actually mine were branded Celestron and Helios but they were the same thing) and I've been impressed how well they performed. You can get clean and tidy used ones for £130 or so and they deliver a lot of observing potential for not many £'s IMHO.

Mostly I've been sending stuff out lately, clearing the decks, as it were. I did treat myself to this though to partner my 2 inch Lumicon O-III. Looking forward to trying this on the Autumn / Winter nebulae including good old Messier 42 of course

I don't think the larger CO will be a problem for deep sky observing. F/4 is a fast newtonian though. I think coma will be apparent in 68 degree AFoV eyepieces, provided that they are well corrected enough that their astigmatism does not mask it.

Excellent choice Ken Have you used a 31mm Nagler before ? The eye positioning can take a little getting used to but once you have the knack, it's superb. I think my Nagler 31 is the eyepiece that I've owned the longest of all of my current ones - over a decade now.

Thats how I do it as well. I do have a laser collimator and it is collimated but I use that more often for checking the alignment of refractor focusers. My secondary rarely moves so most of the time it's a quick check with the short cheshire, tweak if needed and on we go.

No, it's an Oberwerk I think. These were also supplied with the big Helios 45 / 90 degree observation binoculars and maybe under other brandings as well. Not quite as good as a Berlebach Uni but tall and stable none the less.

The AZ-4 is compatible with EQ3-2 / EQ5 / HEQ5 mount heads and tripods so the extension that fits those will work with the AZ-4. I used to use my Vixen ED102SS F/6.5 on an AZ-4 and it worked very well. The ED80 will be right at home on one:

The views through a really big dob with a quality eyepiece do leave lasting memories I had a similar experience a few years back with a 20 inch and Messier 13 and Messier 51

David Sinden ? Henry Wildey ? Peter Drew ? Rob Miller ? Dudley Fuller ? David Lukehurst ? Edit: maybe better discussed in another thread though ?