John

The Vixen Porta Mini has slow motion controls and the centre of gravity of the scope in a better place:

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p2933_Vixen-MINI-PORTA---Azimutal-Mount-with-tripod---friction-control---slow-movement.html

4 hours ago, Pixies said:

My first 2". AN OVL Aero ED SWA 30mm

Congratulations. Pretty decent 2 inch eyepiece. Quite light as well. I have the 30mm and the 40mm in that series.

58 minutes ago, Alan White said:

I know this change took place and feel its for the worse not the better, it was the deeper angle that was causing me issues the most.
When I tired to discuss with David Nagler at Astrofest he would only keep saying why the undercuts were so great and showing them to me.
I felt customer feedback was not new and was not being taken onboard.
 

Vote with your wallet Alan !

There are other good options out there.

Yes, lots of them, but you need to know exactly where to point the scope to find them.

A good star chart is essential and also making sure that the finder scope is aligned as accurately as possible with the main scope.

41 minutes ago, heliumstar said:

I have some supposedly better eyepieces. They are certainly at least 4x more expensive but I admit of using 18mm, 10mm and 2.25x Barlow BCOs exclusively lately. It seems like that no matter telescope fl these three pieces of equipment provide everything I need. 10mm barlowed gives 4.4mm and I am yet to look through any eyepiece in 4-5mm range that provides sharper and more pleasing view of airy disks when looking at double stars. To my eyes it's better than 4mm and 5mm SLVs and 5mm XW - this one is close if not the same view but is just too big - comfortable though. Not sure what is going on there to be honest.....

I'm finding something similar with my 7.2mm - 21.5mm zoom + Baader 2.25x combination, especially with my refractors. I have not quite reached the point where my top end 1.25" eyepiece collection gets the chop but, you never know .........

Having invested several £thousand in planetary scopes a few years back I guess it would seem churlish not to try a device for £100 or so at some point

I fell into the trap of commenting on the options that the OP is considering

There are other very good  options of course

So it's use an ADC or don't bother then ?

As per the title of this thread - it appears that they are essential for good (serious ?) planetary observing even when the planets are significantly higher in the sky than they are now.

TV have changed the design of their undercuts in the past few years. They have chamfered the lower cutaway edge to reduce the chances of it snagging as the eyepiece is removed.

1 hour ago, Ouroboros said:

Aha! I think I’m being a bit slow in not reading the OP properly. SGL is 14 years old I take it. 

How did it come about, and what is the connection with FLO? 

SGL is a little bit older than that. Helen and I joined around the same time, about 14 years ago. I think the forum had been around for a year or so before that. The earliest member that I can find joined in June 2005. I joined in November of that year. I think back then FLO was pretty much a one-person business working from their house ?

I ought to say that I've been a member of the other forum mentioned above for a similar length of time.

Optically they are both exactly the same, it is just the mount that is different. The aluminum legs do the EQ3-2 mount no favours when trying to handle the long tube of the 150PL.

The dobsonian mount is much steadier and the eyepiece and finder of the scope remain in an accessible position at all times.

The equatorial mount can have motor drives fitted or even a GOTO system but the EQ5 mount on steel tripod legs would be the minimum that I would consider for the 1200mm focal length tube assembly.

My highest power eyepiece is actually 2mm - one end of the 4mm - 2mm zoom. I use that very infrequently with any of my scopes. I suppose I could use my 2.25x barlow lens on it and have a 1.77mm - 0.88mm zoom but somehow I doubt it would be of much use

I've chosen eyepiece but I am a self confessed occularholic

My most used high power eyepieces are in the 6mm - 3.5mm range.

My scopes range in aperture from 90mm to 300mm and in focal length from 630mm to 1590mm so the range of powers that the above eyepieces give is wide - from 100x - 450x. I find that I use 200x - 300x surprisingly often.

I use high powers on planets, the moon, double stars, planetary nebula and sometimes to tease out faint point source targets such as supernovae.

I find having a range of high power eyepiece options is helpful because the magnification that works the best varies due to seeing conditions as well as the needs of the different targets.

With your Skymax 127mm I could see that both the eyepieces that you are considering would prove useful.

If FPL-53 glass has been used for the ED element the chances are that a suitable glass has been selected for the 2nd element as well. FPL-53 glass is very expensive - there would be little point in using an unsuitable element to mate with it.

It is the combination of the two suitable glass types that controls the CA levels rather than just the ED element.

This eyepiece is the same as the Skywatcher UWA 6mm and is also available in many other brands.

It should not be in two or three parts - I have no idea why it is pictured that way. It is always used like this:

While not the best eyepiece they are quite good and should work OK in your 200mm F/6 scope delivering a useful 200x magnification. Great for Mars, the Moon, double stars and Saturn. A little too much for Jupiter usually.

The movement in and out is called focusing and it needs to be done very precisely to get sharp views of objects at 200x magnification.

The blurry views could be because:

- the scope was not precisely focused ?

- the seeing conditions were poor ?

- you were observing through a window ?

- the scope had not cooled down (needs about 20-30 minutes) ?

- the eyepiece was misted up ?

- lack of experience using the scope at high magnifications ?

Collimation of the scope optics is another possible cause but I wonder if the issues above should be considered first before diving into adjusting the collimation ?

Congratulations Helen and many thanks for what you have contributed to the forum as well, both up front and behind the scenes

I remember when we first met - at Anthony's cottage in Chipping Sodbury !

Here's to the next 14 years

1 hour ago, Alan White said:

 

....Funny old lot us Astronomers!

Especially when it's rainy !

One of the best targets for an easy "wow" for new observers is the double cluster in Perseus. It is easy to find, bright and spectacular in any scope or large binoculars. It's a low power object to get both clusters in the single field of view for maximum impact. These clusters are designated NGC 869 and NGC 884 and also Caldwell 14. They don't have Messier numbers.

And this IS how it looks though a small scope:

7 minutes ago, jetstream said:

Not sure if others have the same experience- I find that the differences between eyepieces show up under the best of seeing- at a minimum of Pickering 7....

 

I agree. Also challenging targets.

Are you imaging DSO's or observing them ?

The scope is ideal for imaging DSO's but the aperture will limit observational potential of such targets ?

I must be odd in this respect as well - I don't mind undercuts !

The 25mm BST Starguider almost shows as much sky as the 28mm 2 inch LET eyepiece. In a 1200mm focal length scope the 28mm LET shows a true field of 1.3 degrees whereas the BST Starguider 25mm shows 1.25 degrees.

I suppose the advantage of the BST is that you can get a 1.25" filter (say a UHC or an O-III) for the whole set whereas you will need a 2 inch filter for the 28mm LET. The Starguider 25, although not the best corrected in the series, might still be better corrected than the 28mm LET which I think is a 3 element type design ?

1 hour ago, Deadlake said:

The vixen SD81S is not turning up to September, all sold out. However Vixen SD103S are available, from the YouTube video I’m presume SD103S will behave like the Tak-100 as far as balance, etc...

@Stu has used his Vixen 102 Fluorite on the Zero mount and it worked OK. I think the SD103S is a similar size and weight, perhaps a touch shorter.

I'm heading for a "Game Ray Burst" whatever that is ?

I don't even know who Game Ray is ????