John

According to Don Pensack the Ethos range comprise 2 sequences which have logical magnification steps in most scopes: 21 - 13 - 8 17 - 10 - 6 Then you have the 4.7 and 3.7 Ethos SX At one point I had them all but now I just have the 21-13-8-6 run with the 17mm ES 92 in between the 21 and 13.

About the same here. Lovely again tonight. Tried this self portrait with comet but it came out rather spooky

Glad you have seen it - it is a wonderful sight Tonight I'm using my 102mm refractor at 17x (40mm SWA eyepiece) and it looks really splendid.

The 32mm is the best corrected of the 3 Panaview focal lengths so that is the one that I would go for. As you say, you will need a 2 inch diagonal to use the eyepiece.

When they go out of production their cost will be much higher !

Yes - the 130mm aperture will gather almost 4x as much light as your 70mm scope does and will have nearly twice the resolution. The Heritage 130P is a very popular and capable scope on this forum and is owned by experienced and novice astronomers alike. £189 is quite expensive for the scope. You should be able to find it for £140-£150 if you shop around.

Nice job John. Proportions are now similar to my 12 inch

Just have a go at a basic star test on Polaris at around 250x. Rack though sharp focus and see if the image looks pretty much the same either side as the diffraction rings expand around what should be a fairly central dark secondary shadow.

OO with a .987 strehl but I've had some great views with Skywatcher mirrors as well.

This is a really old thread (9 years) and @lexx has not posted on the forum since then. You might do better to start a new thread on your query and see if there is some other experience on the forum.

I expect you will have seen this Gerry but it's a good article: http://scopeviews.co.uk/FourInchBG2019.htm#_Toc26869850

Discovery scopes had an excellent reputation. Rarely found on this side of the atlantic, sadly.

Used or new prices ?

I do know that the Baader 95 Travel Companion has a very, very long waiting list. So long in fact that Baader are not currently accepting new orders. That sounds rather like the AP's so perhaps AP are involved ?

I find it odd that the mid range BST Starguiders are not working that well in the 300mm F/5 dob. I've used those myself in my 12 inch F/5.3 dob and found them really rather good. The 8mm compared well to my 8mm Ethos for example with sharp stars, nice dark background sky etc, etc. The 25mm is not so good with stars in the outer 30% of the field of view showing astigmatism but the 18mm, 12mm and 8mm were eyepieces that I was quite impressed with in my dob. Dare I suggest that the collimation might be worth a check ?

I don't use one and my views of the planets over the past few nights have been pretty good with my ED120 and a small mak last night. Plenty of detail and no AD effects that I could see. I could see the Cassini Division and the main equatorial cloud belt with the 90mm mak last night plus 4 belts on Jupiter and festoons coming from the S side of the NEB. The ED120 showed quite a bit of detail on Mars and a nicely defined south polar cap. I had no issues with CA around Venus when it was well placed a little while back. If I could borrow one I might give an ADC a go but I'm not exactly unhappy with the planetary views as things are Maybe an ADC addresses more localised observing issues ?

Steve at FLO explained this to me a couple of years ago. It is an interesting piece of information.

Don't know about the 2" XW's. Personally I don't think Ricoh are that bothered by the astro market and consumer demand from it The TOE's do have a great reputation.

I think that has been done quite a few times by our friends in the USA. They are like hens teeth to find pre-owned, even the 2.5mm. I guess the Vixen HR's are the nearest we have today that are at least vaguely obtainable ?

Love that Kerry I find the binocular view of this comet the most engaging I think. Even more than the scope views. It's getting some clouds and other stuff in there that makes the view !

I agree. I often go 24mm (Panoptic) - 14mm (Delos) - 10mm (XW) and skip the Delos 17.3. Nothing wrong with the 17.3 though, it's just how observing seems to go. Likewise with my dob I usually go 21mm Ethos - 13mm and skip the 17mm slot. Thats why I let the Ethos 17mm go - a big investment that was not getting much use ! I have now got a 17mm ES 92 in that slot in the 2 inch set - it's a fine eyepiece but if not used much at least it's a less expensive place filler than the Ethos ! Maybe I'm just not a "17mm person" with the scopes that I have ? Might have to be ruthless - I guess I have about £450 worth of eyepieces not getting much use in that slot but we know how it is - the moment it's gone, something crops up and you wish you had it I'm not good at being ruthless when eyepieces are concerned ......

I reached similar conclusions here eventually. The best "big achromat" experience that I had was with the Bresser 127L which is F/9.4 so not a lot of CA really and pretty well corrected.

Be aware of the size difference and therefore mounting requirements of the ED150. The gold scope is my ED120. An EQ5 is right at it's limit (even with the steel tube legs) of a 150mm F/8. I used a driven CG5 (EQ5 with 2 inch steel tube legs) with the 150mm F/8's that I owned (I've owned 3 or 4 over the years) and that was just about OK. Probably a motorised focuser would have helped keep vibration down more. The get the most from a 150m F/8 refractor something more substantial is needed really such as an HEQ5. The Celestron AVX is a bit more sturdy than the EQ5 and has 2 inch steel tripod legs.

I went with the Delos 17.3 and 14 because of the field curvature that I've seen reported frequently with the 14 and 20mm XW's. I've experienced FC in another Pentax eyepiece (the XF 12) and did not much care for it. Maybe the 14 and 20 XW's don't have as much FC as the XF 12 though ?

As the Delos are 1.25" format eyepieces, you don't need a 2 inch diagonal to get the full field of view from them. Being able to use 2 inch eyepieces does give you wider options though.