John

1 hour ago, Martin63 said:

It is the default one that came with the scope, anything must be better? 

The amount of sky (true field) shown depends on the specifications of the eye piece.

If your goal is to have a sharper view across the field then the upgrade will almost certainly achieve that. If the goal is to also have a wider view then it may not do that, depending on the specifications of your 35mm eyepiece.

2 minutes ago, CraigT82 said:

..... Couldn't believe how obvious and large the shadow transit was when I looked the the EP lining up the shot. I remember the first transit I ever saw and it was so subtle, like a tiny speck of darkness and took ages to tease it out. Last nights was like a smack in the face! 

I felt just the same about last nights shadow transit:

@si@nite Nice image

6 hours ago, robhatherton said:

I’ll tack on to here because I was about to ask this. I was looking about 11 last night with my f7 102ed and really couldn’t get very clear views of mars. I could see hints of detail in the centre but couldn’t discern any polar cap. Beyond about 100x it was starting to look bloated with no more detail.

I don’t think collimation is the problem as stars are pinpoint and doubles split easily and clearly. Was I just looking too early in the evening?

I don't think you were observing too early. Maybe you had some local atmospheric disturbance ?

Last night I was observing Mars from 11:00 pm for a while then again at around 1:00 am when it reappeared from behind a tree with my ED120 again and the views were quite well defined with the S polar cap showing distinctly. 

The seeing was quite steady last night so I found 225x - 300x produced a decent image with the ED120.

I've not tried my Vixen ED102SS which at F/6.5 is closer in spec to your scope. I'll give it a go on Mars and let you know how that does.

12 minutes ago, Martin63 said:

I think I am going to go with the 30mm APM ultra flat 70 degree. The price is right and I want the extra eye relief.

Thank you everyone for the help! 

Will that show you any more sky than your current 35mm 2 inch though ?

21 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

....the eyecup has to touch my nose or eye socket to help hold my eye in the right place.

That is just how I like an eyepiece to be. The ES 92mm 17mm, although an excellent eyepiece, is a bit on the marginal side in this regard - the eye cup is just a touch shorter than I'd ideally like. I'm gradually getting used to it though.

On the Ethos 21, I agree that the new price is crazy now at £800+ and the used prices, when they occasionally come up, are pretty eye watering as well. With my fastest scope being F/5.3 I would probably have happily gone for the APM 20mm 100 if I didn't already have the 21 E.

Perhaps I should sell the 21 E, buy an APM 20 / 100 and bank the difference ?

Nice report Stu

I've been observing Mars tonight with my ED120. I get it at around 11:00 pm before it goes behind a big tree and then from around 12:30 onwards when it comes out from behind said tree.

There some some good detail visible in the steadier moments. Nice to see the planet looking as large as this in the eyepiece !

The 8 inch F/8 must be a wonderful planetary scope

I have the feeling that I could get on better with BV's but I would have to keep on using them and become as familiar with them as I am the single eyepiece.

Eventually I guess the BV's would become 2nd nature.

Superb Garry

I was going to get my TMB 130 out tonight but I was unsure about the forecast so I put the ED120 out instead. The seeing turned out to be excellent on Jupiter, Saturn and Mars so I should have gone all out for the 130 after all

The ED120 did pretty well though.

Still good here. Jupiter has gone behind some trees so Saturn took over in the eyepiece for a while and now I'm on Mars.

Some of the best seeing that I've had for a while on these planets. Mars good at 225x - 300x with my ED120 refractor.

I don't dislike BV's and I really wished that I enjoyed using them. This setup should have been wonderful

130mm triplet refractor that is BV ready so no barlow or transfer lens required to reach focus.

Did you see any photos of the objective before you purchased the scope ?

It threw me as well Andy !

With triplet lenses, my understanding is that the accurate centering of the 3 lens elements is critical as well as the tilt of the objective as a whole.

I have collimated doublet refractors quite a few times but if my 130mm triplet went out of collimation I'm pretty sure that I would seek professional help with that.

I've tried at least 3 pairs of BV's in a number of different scopes over the past few years and didn't get on with them either.

They BV's worked OK and I could merge the images but, for me, I just preferred the "cyclops" views.

I get on fine with normal binoculars (I prefer them over a scope for birding) but I've concluded that BV's in a scope are not going to "do it" for me now.

As to why that is, I really don't know

31 minutes ago, globular said:

I like that idea.  What's the insert made of / what is it @John?

It's not my case. I guess it's similar to camping mat foam with a recess in the darker foam beneath ?

So much for "We checked this scope and it’s normal to have these small particles. You will not got one that is particle free......." 

Glad you have now got what you deserve

There is a noticeable difference in the views between 102mm and 127mm refractors of similar quality. Quite a difference in size as well: 150mm F/8 - 127mm F/9.4 - 102mm F/6.5:

Lovely views here - thanks for the heads up David

Really clear and obvious black shadow - even a small scope will show this

Your dance worked !

Triplets can be sensitive if one of the lens elements gets de-centered, ie: it's optical axis is not exactly in line with the other two.

Quite a tricky thing to diagnose and fix though.

Has it had a knock ?

If it used to perform and now does not, something must have changed

This is quite a neat idea. Large eyepieces laid out horizontally with an insert for smaller eyepieces to be stored vertically:

18 minutes ago, CraigT82 said:

...P.S. this is the observing section, I'm sure one of the lovely mods will move it to imaging for you! 

Have to make do with an unlovely one !

I've left a link in the original posting location so people can find it from both places.

I agree with all of the above !

4mm is simply not the right eyepiece for seeing nebulae and galaxies.

30mm - 20mm eyepieces are much more useful for this task.

Collimation makes little difference where such targets are concerned.

Lack of contrast on the planets. Not being able to get a clear split of double stars under reasonable conditions. Non-concentric diffraction rings on stars either side of focus at high magnification.

You can also check collimation with a cheshire eyepiece and the optical alignment of the focuser and objective with a laser collimator.

On 10/04/2020 at 06:32, daslolo said:

what's the field stop mm on the 16mm?

The figure I found on the CN forum is 21.2mm.

Good advice from Craig

Re; your 1st photo - I suppose that is a shadow on your secondary mirror rather than a felt pen line, which it looks a little like ?