John

If I was starting again I would try and get a 200mm aperture scope to start with. A dobsonian would be fine because I'm not going to try imaging. An experienced and skilled observer can do a lot with a 100mm aperture scope but when starting out I was not experienced or skilled so the "helping hand" of some decent aperture is very valuable in getting some satisfying views early on. I would also invest in a red dot / illuminated reticule finder such as the Telrad or Rigel Quikfinder to complement (rather than replace) the optical finder that comes with the scope. I would budget to replace the stock eyepieces with decent upgrades such as BST Starguiders, Baader Classic Orthos or Vixen NPL plossls which cost around £50 each. I would buy a cheshire collimation eyepiece rather than a laser collimator and learn how to use the cheshire with the scope. I would also invest in the Sky & Telescope Pocket Sky atlas. If I had any money left I would buy an O-III or UHC filter. Forums such as Stargazers Lounge were not around when I started out but since they are now, I would join and absorb as much as possible from the folks who are following a similar path to where my interests lay

It might be a local effect. I've just been observing Mars and it's colours looked OK to me. Very nice views actually - some of the best so far this opposition.

Not for me either now. I'll see if I can find a working link to this.

Transparency is not too good here tonight so it's not a good "veil night".

15x70 can be hand held for short periods. 20x80 not so much, unless you are very strong

My Lumicon O-III does an amazing job on the Veil when used with my Vixen 102mm ED refractor and the 31mm Nagler. 3.8 degrees - you can get the whole thing in, east, west and the wisps in the middle

These extended deep sky objects are best observed at low magnifications. Not too low or the exit pupil gets too large and any LP issues are made worse. I find 31mm - 21mm 2 inch eyepieces with very wide fields of view work well. My 40mm 2 inch is less effective because I have some LP issues to contend with. In terms of magnifications, 21x - 75x depending on the scope I'm using.

You are going to get much the same effect with an APM 20mm / 100 in your F/7 scope I reckon

Definitely worth a go with the Heritage 130. The first time I ever saw the Veil was with a 100mm f/9 refractor, a 24mm 70 degree eyepiece and the Baader UHC-S filter. That filter is not the best by any means but it did the trick. Full blown UHC's are better and a decent O-III the best on this I've since discovered.

That's what I was hoping for

With binoculars I've only once seen the eastern portion of the Veil with 11x70's on an exceptionally dark night a couple of years ago. I was not using a filter. The nebula appeared as a very faint curved strand. I like to have at least a 1.5 degree true field when observing this target with a scope, preferably more. That is enough to get one segment of the nebula complex into the field of view. It's a biggie ! This is to scale. The Eastern Veil is on the left - it's the brightest portion to observe:

I moved from the 22mm T4 (which I really liked) to the 21mm Ethos via the 20mm T5 Nagler and a 20mm ES 100. I much prefer using the Ethos 21 to either of the Naglers (which are hardly shabby eyepieces of course). The 21E is a bit better than the 20mm ES 100 as well. If for some reason I had to go back to a 20something mm Nagler it would be the 22mm T4 that would get the nod but I hope that I will continue with the 21mm Ethos for a long time yet. "YMMV" though and my Ethos scope is a 12 inch dob rather than a 4 inch frac, which may well make a difference

Looking back over, say, the past 10 years, the vast majority of my best and most inspiring observations and "wow !" moments have come from my largest aperture scopes. There is no escaping that. My refractors (of which I have 5 now !) range from 100mm to 130mm and deliver fabulous views for their aperture and I love using them but I get more anticipation and excitement when my 12 inch dobsonian is out cooling because I know that it can go deeper, further and deliver more detail when the conditions allow. After owning a 12 inch dob that was too heavy (Meade Lightbridge 12 inch) I made it a priority to get that aperture again but in a more managable form and my current Orion Optics based 12 inch on a mount made by @Moonshane does just that. It is no more hassle or time consuming to set up and use than my refractors. With my current circumstances (no observatory and some obstructions and LP around my garden) my 12 inch is the largest aperture that it is practical to own. If those circumstances change I would definitely be after more aperture. It's not a fever though, it's my experiences in the hobby over the past decade that would lead me

I fitted one of those to an ED120 a few years ago. It was a very tight fit into the flange that is the same diameter as the ED80 tube. It needed a lot of coaxing but eventually it did fit and match the screw holes.

The Baader 8-24 zoom is as good as some fixed focal length eyepieces and better than some lower cost ones. It's not quite as good as premium fixed focal length eyepieces though. The Leica ASPH 8.9mm - 17.8mm zoom is better than most fixed focal length eyepieces and at least as good as some of the very best too. Much more expensive than the Baader zoom though but then 3-4 premium fixed focal length eyepieces (eg: Pentax XW's) would cost even more.

These are new to me: http://www.opticalvision.co.uk/binoculars-helios-theatre-opera_glasses/helios-2x40-star-field-binocular.html I wonder how they compare to the Vixen 2.1x42mm ones ?. Big difference in price: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/all-binoculars/vixen-sg21x42-widefield-binoculars.html I've not used this type of instrument myself. I've been tempted to get some for travel use but I've been reluctant to shell out £200+

I had one of the very early Skywatcher ED100's. Blue tube back then. It was an excellent scope. Roger Vine is a very experienced observer and reviewer - see what he says on the ED100 on his "best buys" section (bottom of page): http://www.scopeviews.co.uk/BestBuys2020.htm

Personally I find the 21mm Ethos just as good as the 13mm. I used to have the full run of Ethos for a while. The 4.7mm can be hard to find either used or new - eventually Telescope House had an ex-demo one for £100 below list so I went for that.

Hi and welcome to the forum

Interesting report. I think the smallest aperture that I've seen the Cassini Division with is 70mm. That was the Tele Vue Ranger. I think that was at around 120x as well. My old Tasco 60mm refractor showed the rings very clearly but I never managed to see the Cassini Division with that scope. Mind you I was using that at the outset of my observing so my experience was somewhat lower even if my eyesight was better !

It's close to it's max now. I think it will be 1 arc second larger at opposition on the 13th October so basically the same size in the eyepiece.

Nice review - thanks for posting it I reckon my clone of the Hyperflex 7.2mm - 21.5mm zoom has an AFoV of around 38 degrees at 21.5mm widening out to about 55 degrees at 7.2mm. This is derived by comparing the illuminated field with other eyepieces I have of known (and trusted !) AFoV.

Hi and welcome You have made a good scope purchase. Very portable and easy to get to dark skies

Brings back memories of my old Vixen SP102M - supplied with .965 inch eyepieces and diagonal as standard (quite nice ones though) and I had to get a Vixen 1.25" adapter for the drawtube to "upgrade". Back then I don't think I even realised that 2 inch eyepieces existed - the 1.25 inch ones seemed large compared with the dainty little .965's

Some eyepieces have 2 inch barrels simply because they are large and heavy and the manufacturer feels that they will be held more securely in a 2 inch draw tube or diagonal. Some have hybrid barrels to give you the option to use either size fitting.