John

25 minutes ago, bomberbaz said:

thanks for that John. Seems the most difficult part is the AZ axis which is the part giving the biggest issue although Alt is still very stiff.

No mention of grease though, have you any suggestions on that part per chance?

I've not done the job myself so I can't help with the grease type Steve. Others will not doubt suggest what to use soon though

13 minutes ago, markse68 said:

i had similar but just removed it as I couldn’t be bothered to carry weights around with the scope and with the way my tube is held inside a sort of cradle it’s easier just to shift the tube up or down if balance is too far out to maintain set altitude. 

My dob is in tube rings so could be shifted up and down as well but that would not be enough and also the travel downwards I have is limited because of the way I have the scope setup for my eye height. I have a number of eyepieces that weigh well over 1kg so they do need counterbalancing when the scope is pointing below around 60 degrees. Its become second nature for me now

Whatever works for you though. I just thought I'd post the pic to show one fairly easy way to do it

Great stuff Geoff

Tough targets, that rille and the craterlets, or at least the ones beyond "the big 4". Seeing needs to settle to get those elusive glimpses.

Well worth the effort though and thanks for posting the report

Here is a link to the Skytee II stripdown guide. Mine was done just before I bought it:

Skytee2 strip.docx

If it was bought new, it might be worth checking the warranty situation if you do this ?

That's a great counterweight solution for a steel tubed scope

My Orion Optics 12 inch has an aluminum tube so I've gone for a knife rack, some screws through it to create little shelves in 2 positions along the rack, and a couple of old TAL counter weights of 750g and 1500g.

Gives me lots of "quick change" weight options depending what I have hanging out of the other end and also depending on the angle that the scope is pointing at

2 hours ago, Dippy said:

Good evening Alan, I like reading the subject material of your reviews, but most of the time I find it difficult to understand or follow what you are writing. Would it be possible before posting just edit, add  punctuation and finally trim at least two thirds of the writing. I can understand probably English is not a first language for most of the people, but really it is difficult to understand this really useful review. 

I think posters need to feel free to post in the style that they like.

I have always found Alan's reports clear, interesting, comprehesive and accurate.

We are very lucky to have people prepared to compile and post detailed and independant reviews like this on the forum.

A new report connected with this topic from UCL:

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2020/jun/29/dinosaurs-wiped-out-by-asteroid-not-volcanoes-researchers-say

6 minutes ago, John said:

Sure does - it weighs nearly as much as my ED120 !

 

According to the spec the tube is aluminum. Must be pretty thick stuff ?

An 80mm F/10 doublet is not going to have thick glass elements so much of the weight must be elsewhere. Does it have solid gold baffles ?

2 minutes ago, johninderby said:

Built like a tank definately applies to the StellaMira. It’s one solid scope. 🙂

Sure does - it weighs nearly as much as my ED120 !

A few years back I was loaned a 10mm XW by First light Optics. I compared it with the Nagler T6 9mm that I had then and found the 10mm XW, although having a smaller field of view (of course) was a touch sharper, had less light scatter around bright objects and presented a "whiter" view of bright objects.

I loved the Nagler T6's so I was very interested to find something that was a touch better.

I now own a set of both Delos and XW's and use them one after the other during sessions. For me they are practically identical in performance. The Delos costs £87 more than the XW here in the UK.

45 minutes ago, HollyHound said:

Ok, after a good deal of research on a number of Japanese sites (translated), I've decided to give this mount a go as a potential replacement for the AZ5. @John I'll also be very interested to see how it fares with the StellaMira 80mm f/10... having a tube length of 800mm and with 2" diagonal, 9x50 RACI finder and a Panaview 38mm eyepiece (my largest) fitted, comes in at 6.2kg (the mount is rated to 7kg), it should be a good test!

Just need to be patient now for the delivery from @FLO 😀

Wow ! - I didn't realize that the StellaMira 80mm F/10 was that heavy. My Tak FC100-DL weighs around 4.5kg fully loaded. It's a bit longer though.

I'll be interested to hear how you get on with it

16 minutes ago, Robindonne said:

Wow this is dedication😅

The scope and eyepieces are in the ones at the back. All the others are Dave's sandwiches

When I last owned a Baader 8-24 zoom (I think I've owned 3 over the years !) I generally liked it and was expecting the narrower AFoV at the long FL end of course. What I found slightly annoying was that the field stop edge was rather fuzzy and ill-defined at the longer focal lengths as well. It's a small thing but I do prefer a sharp field stop in my eyepieces.

I guess with a zoom the field stop is moving with the lens elements so to expect it to be razor sharp right across the range of FL's is a big ask

Antares ?:

28 minutes ago, steveex2003 said:

Can I ask? Is that frac a very long FL? Having looked through it is it, for want of a better phrase, worth it over a reflector with twice the aperture and considerably less in stature? (if the FR's are roughly similar)
Or, Is my question directly scalable to the more modest fracs & dobs many here have? 

It is not my scope  it was just photo of a 12 inch refractor that I found to illustrate my point about the difference in practicality between a 12 inch dobsonian (which is my scope) and a refractor of the same aperture.

There are not many 12 inch refractors around outside of observatories.

The 12 inch refractor is F/12.2 and was for sale a while back (might still be available ?) in the USA. Here is a movie all about it:

6 minutes ago, Dippy said:

Thanks John, would you mind if I ask to see a photo of the counterweights you mentioned on the magnet? 

I'll send a photo via PM when I get a chance - I don't want to sidetrack this thread.

2 minutes ago, Dippy said:

John, is that a kitchen knife magnet at the bottom of your 12” Dobsonian telescope ? What kind of weights and what size you add to it to balance the tube?

Yes it is. I use two old iron counterweights of around 1kg and 2kg.

Thanks Stu. I'll watch out for your feedback on it. Tube length makes or breaks these lighter mounts so I'll be especially interested on how the Vixen fares.

Don't know why I'm interested - I already have 3 very good alt-az mounts. Must be a bit obsessed with the things !

One of my favourite areas of the Moon

I snapped this a while back with my old mobile phone:

When you started out, if anyone had told you that you might spend as much on eyepieces as you had the 16 inch scope you would have thought "no way !" but you can see how it's easily possible to do that

Keep away from the Ethos's, that's my advice

7 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

I see FLO is now stocking this mount. 

I wonder how it compares to the AYO VAMO traveler in terms of load support. The Zero mount does have the advantage of slo-mo's. 

I wonder how it would handle my Tak FC100-DL 🤔

3 hours ago, Skyline said:

Or buy a SW100ED, much cheaper with good colour correction. Often come up s/h.

I was thinking of the OP's interest in the deep sky. The light grasp of the 100mm might leave him feeling short changed on DSO's compared with his current ST120.

Put an ED120 and a 127 Triplet side by side and the latter seems a lot larger and heavier. The ED120 often manages to show less CA than the lower cost triplets as well. This comparison is worth a read - the Astro Tech 127 is the same as the Meade and ES 127 triplets I believe:

https://astromart.com/reviews-and-articles/reviews/telescopes/refractors/show/orion-120ed-vs-astro-tech-127edt

The price is rising !

We started with a circa £1K scope 

I have a Skywatcher ED120 and it is a fine scope. Compares well with my much, much more expensive Takahashi 100 fluorite doublet and TMB/LZOS 130 triplet.

You can get the ED120's in nice pre-owned condition for £600-£700.

4 hours ago, DAVE AMENDALL said:

Thanks for the input which must be pretty accurate. My views of deep sky objects from so called Bortle 5  my back garden are quite good except for galaxy spiral arms which prove elusive. Three miles down the road Whatton and Orston rural villages show dramatic improvement. Probably Bortle 4 there...Dave

Sounds similar to my skies, which are listed by "Clear Outside" as Bortle 5.

I get a few nights when it's closer to 4 but it depends which direction you look in !

Some interesting data:

This paper attempts to quantify the risks:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0019103516307126