John

I agree. When they are higher in the sky my 12 inch dob has shown spectacular views of Jupiter and Saturn. Similar Jovian details to the ones you describe. Strings of eddies around the GRS, white ovals, that sort of stuff.

I went for the Delos 14mm and 17.3mm because of the FC tales I'd read about with the XW 14mm and 20mm. They play well with the four shorter FL XW's that I have.

I think Siouxie is referring to an 11 inch SCT. I wonder if the results might be better with one of the smaller aperture scopes in her signature ?

Mars looks OK'ish at times with the 90mm achro refractor I popped out tonight. The S polar cap is clear and a range of dark areas when the seeing and the wind gusts steady for a moment and the cloud blobs keep clear. Not staying out for long though.

I've got a scope out but I've not looked through it yet. Quite blustery winds but it sounds as if the seeing is rotten as well.

This review is very relevant: One paragraph in it stood out for me: ".........So my recommendation is that before you venture into the realm of filters to improve your planetary views, first make sure that you are getting detailed views of planets without filters, as the filters will not perform any magic making a poor view all of a sudden good with many details......." I don't think any of these filters are "magic bullets"

I did think about getting a filter or filters for Mars and the planets this year but decided not to in the end. I have used quite a few types in the past and didn't find that they added anything to the observing experience for me. When ever possible I prefer to observe without using a filter and make the best of that.

Try the Pelican with the Penguin - you never know what might happen !

The only X-Cel LX that I've owned was the 25mm. It was pretty decent but, for me, not a "stand out" eyepiece in any way. For a 127 mak I would probably save a few £'s and go for a BST Starguider 25mm instead.

I often use the Hyperflex with a Baader 2.25x barlow which gives a nice high power zoom of 9.5mm - 3.2mm. You would not use much below 6mm with your scope though I reckon.

I was not too happy with my ED120 on the AZ4 even with a 2 inch steel legged tripod. The scope can handle very high magnifications but the mount could not keep up. The AZ4 was entirely happy with my 102mm F/6.5 Vixen ED refractor on it even with the 1.75 inch steel tubed legs. I can't recall ever using an F/9 100mm on the AZ4 so it might be OK with a good set of tripod legs under it.

Thinking further on this, I wonder if the upgrade paths for visual instruments can go down a couple of routes: - better quality views of generally the same targets - the potential to see things that could not be seen be seen before. Both have their attractions and when you have reached as far as you want or can on one route, you can switch to the other one. Both can be very costly ! I've been down both paths and switched between them quite often as well

Nice report ! M101 and M33 are big face on spirals so their surface brightness is much, much lower than the integrated magnitude figure (the ones quoted for them) might suggest. Harder to see than the brighter galaxies such as M81, M82 M51 etc and very easily washed out by any LP in the sky.

That's a good one to get you started in finding a range of targets. Apps like Stellarium and Sky Safari can also be very useful. I use the free PC software version Stellarium and another one called Cartes du Ciel a lot.

For me, yes, because I don't use a mobile or tablet for astronomy. What I've done in this thread is just to summarize what my 35+ years in the hobby have taught me works best for me and the lessons that I draw that I would apply if starting out again. I think that was the question you asked ? Other folks will have been on different journeys and will have different experiences to bring to your thread with different recommendations as you have seen. Some recommend this or that and some are saying that they would not go down that route at all. You are getting a mix of experiences and preferences. I guess the challenge for you is to pick your way through all this to decide what you invest in to get the most satisfying results for yourself, this time around. Sometimes these threads generated almost too much information perhaps (in a very well meaning way course !) You can end up suffering from "paralysis from analysis" which I've seen happen quite a few times in such threads. Good luck in finding your way though

I would go for 1.25 inch eyepieces to get up and running. 2 inch eyepieces will give a wider field of view but to start with a 30mm plossl will do fine for low power observing. The filters I mention enhance the contrast of nebulae. This is a really good one: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/astronomik-filters/astronomik-oiii-filter.html The atlas I recommend is the Sky & Telescope Pocket Sky Atlas: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Telescopes-Pocket-Sinnott-30-Mar-2006-Spiral-bound/dp/B011T83TX6/ref=pd_lpo_14_t_1/259-5840706-6980031?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B011T83TX6&pd_rd_r=d0c23dfe-6f5f-4092-9f66-a1f0244390d2&pd_rd_w=nQfaC&pd_rd_wg=botGv&pf_rd_p=7b8e3b03-1439-4489-abd4-4a138cf4eca6&pf_rd_r=QQS8JG3111R4N8TWMBDT&psc=1&refRID=QQS8JG3111R4N8TWMBDT

Great image ! The seeing here was very good for a change and my 100mm Tak was showing those crinkley edges to the dark areas and the dark curved mass to the north. The south polar cap looked like a bright white button. Nice to see these features imaged

I've had a few decent views of Saturn and Jupiter over the past few months but on the whole the views are not as good as I can recall when these planets have been higher in the sky. I'm not really making observing them a priority this year because I know I've had better in the past. Mars has been pretty good though and this opposition is providing much better views than the last one did even though Mars is a touch smaller this year. It's altitude is much higher this year which makes a lot of difference I think. I've found that my smaller aperture scopes (refractors mainly) have been more effective planetary observing instruments than my 12 inch dobsonian although the dob has shown Mars quite nicely at times. In your case I would not be too quick to blame the scope. A few years back it was said by experienced observers on this forum that the coming years would be a bit lean for planetary observing enthusiasts and I think they were, in the main, correct.

It's great to read reports of folks really pushing their equipment and themselves on really challenging targets I had a look at that area last time out with my 12 inch dob but the transparency was so so and I was not clear that I saw it. There were some suspect hazy patches in the right place though. Time for a re-visit I think

It's a target that keeps on giving as well. Always worth return visits to see what parts of the complex you can see:

Yay !!!!

I've removed, split and cleaned a few doublets up to 152mm. I would not try a triplet though. These were older scopes bought for not a lot. It is a delicate process and great care has to be taken getting the lens elements out of the cell. I used the approach below, once the lens retaining ring was removed. That in itself can be tricky as some manufacturers add a couple of spots of cement to the threads to dissuade people from tampering. The method is to put a good quality optical cloth over a suitable tubular support which is a little smaller than the diameter of the objective. The weight of the cell then allows you to gently push it back evenly from around the objective elements without disturbing them. The rear of the objective is sitting on the optical cloth. Sometimes the lens elements stick together which adds to the complexity. Care has to be taken to note the relative position and orientation of the lens elements (hence the markings) and that the foil spacers or spacing ring are / is not damaged, lost or moved. Replacing the foil spacers has risks as well as their thickness and even spacing around the lens circumference determines the air space between the elements which is critical to the performance of the lens. Once the 4 lens surfaces have been blown, cleaned and then blown again, re-assembly is a carefully performed reverse process. Keeping dust particles out of the lens gap can be challenging during re-assembly. So it can be done but I hesitate to recommend it really. The ones I've done were cheaply bought used scopes. I've always found myself very relieved to get the objective back together and in it's cell again !

Very useful report in this section Gerry

Great report and sketch ! Saw similar views myself earlier. Possibly the best of this martian opposition so far. That "white button" southern polar ice cap is very distinctive isn't it ?

Great report Bill - thanks for the link This passage especially stood out for me: ".........So my recommendation is that before you venture into the realm of filters to improve your planetary views, first make sure that you are getting detailed views of planets without filters, as the filters will not perform any magic making a poor view all of a sudden good with many details......." So no "magic bullets" then.