John

I found that I needed that beta version to get it to run.

The ED doublets I've owned and used have all been a step up from achromatic doublets, obviously in terms of CA control but also in terms of SA correction and therefore high power definition.

It seems to me that when the more expensive glass is used the manufacturers take a little more care with figuring and polishing.

12 minutes ago, Beardy30 said:

So would you opt for the 5se over the 127 ..only £200 between them ?

I'm only commenting on the optical tube but, personally I feel that the C5's are a bit more versitle than the 127 mak-cassegrains (which I've also owned) but there is not a lot in it.

But I can't tell you if the versatility is worth £200 to you.

10 minutes ago, Beardy30 said:

I’m not a fan of the dob personally - to big for me and I love the goto sky align system on the Celestron 

Fair enough - it was just an example. I don't think the 25mm would justify the £400 in all honesty.

I've had a few 5 inch Celestron SCT's and found them pretty capable little scopes. Not into GOTO myself so I don't have any opinions on that.

Thanks Alan.

Good to know they are there even if they are beyond most of us.

Mag 14.7 is as faint as I've got with my 12 inch scope from home so I may have a shout at the mag 14.9 one if a really good night comes along. At least it is in a relatively bright galaxy !

8 minutes ago, Beardy30 said:

Think that’s the issue for me is the 6se worth £400 more to give me that wow factor over the 127 each time I’m observing in my garden ..yet to be convinced ! 

The additional 25mm of aperture is the difference. £400 would very nearly buy you a new 10 inch dobsonian which would massively outperform both these scopes on all objects visually.

Worth bearing in mind.

54 minutes ago, Stu said:

.... training your eye to see the detail that’s there I guess.

I think that is an often overlooked part of observing Stu.

Great piece Stu - thanks for that

I'm motivated to spend more time with my Tak 100 and Lunt HW over the coming weeks and months now.

Oops !!!!

I've just realised that I had the above images orientated to show the refractor / mak-cessegrain / schmidt-cassegrain view (using a diagonal). Here is the newtonian view:

The Pup star is further away from Sirius A than you expect. The gap is around 10 arc seconds so around the same as Rigel and it's companion star but the position angle is different and the brightness difference massively different. Its not like observing any other binary pair to be honest. 

Even with my 12 inch scope I've not had an observation where the Pup star was clear for prolonged periods. It pops in and out of view but consistently and in the same place.

I've often tried to find an image or sketch of the pair that resemble the view through the eyepiece and it's quite hard. I came across this ultra-high magnification image recently that was acquired on 20 Jan this year so the position angle is current. I've oriented the view to match the Newtonian and I've enlarged the central portion of my sketch done in Feb 2019 for comparison. 

As you can see, typically, even with the best seeing and optical systems, the glare from Sirius A extends at least 5-8 arc seconds around the star so Sirius B is seen peeking though this.

I expect people are actually seeing the Pup star from time to time but not quite recognising it for what it is

20-01-2020 image (not mine):

My sketch:

It is a lovely target

Seeing and transparency rather poor here tonight. Only the brighter stars showing and the seeing is not supporting high powers with my Tak FC100DL. Even Porrima is hard work !

I'm waiting for the moon to put in an appearance but I'm not expecting a great show under these conditions.

Glad it's better where you are Stu.

Its rather faint and getting fainter now I think. Fainter than M81 and M82 (harder to see than those at least) and somewhat smaller. You scope should show it but it wont be obvious and higher magnification will help to tease it out of the background sky. I found around 80x helped when I last observed it with my 12 inch dob. A small, indistinct misty patch with a slightly condensed centre.

Its breaking up apparently but I guess it could still do something unexpected ?

https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-news/comet-atlas-will-it-become-a-naked-eye-object/

7 hours ago, timwetherell said:

It was very beautiful wasn't it! my preferred view was binoculars too, telescope was a bit too 'zoomed in'

Perhaps a quick re-work of this fine piece Tim ?

The optics of the Skywatcher dobs are excellent. I've owned the 200P and the 250PX and observed with a few of the 300's (solid and flex tube) and the optical performance was consistently good.

Its a very useful concept:

Moon still hidden behind trees for me here. I reckon another hour until I see it

Luckily I don't have to get up early tomorrow.

The seeing is very steady again judging by the appearance of tight binary stars though the scope.

If you use the freeware planetarium software Stellarium you can see what the sky looks like from many locations other than the Earth.

This is a view from the Moons surface:

Well done for getting Tegmine with the ED120 Ade

I got it again tonight with the 130mm triplet. Seeing good again and even a barmy 600x showed a well defined triple system of stars.

I found these rather quirky facts about traveling times to Tegmine on the web:

15 minutes ago, Barry-W-Fenner said:

Anyone had chance to see tonight's moon. I'm looking at it from upstairs in the little 76p as it is still very low.  What a sight, an orange /yellow orb in the sky!

Baz

It's yet not above the conifers / houses that are also in that direction for me.

I have my 130mm refractor out waiting for it though

One thing that the Skywatcher mak-cassegrains do have is pretty decent optics. I've owned a 180 and a 127 for a short time but they both put up very nice, sharp and contrasty views. Another 127 (blue tube) that I observed through at an SGL star party a few years back showed Saturn wonderfully well

Did they make the tube diameter larger to accommodate the larger primary ?

Big revamp if they did - primary and meniscus cells would need re-design I guess.

I know that Neil English had one of the original gold tube 180's and referred to it as his 170 mak-cassegrain in his reports on it. Perhaps the revisions to effective aperture were made when the colour scheme changed ?

14 minutes ago, Dave1 said:

 That's only true of the 127 mm Skywatcher maks. The Skywatcher 150 mm and 180 mm maks designed were updated in 2016. The 150 mm Skywatcher now has a primary mirror which is 166 mm. The Skywatcher 180 mm mak has a primary which is 199 mm .

 

Good. Can't really see why they put the design out with undersized mirrors in the first place. Its not as if it was an innovative new design 

4 here. No binoviewers involved. 5 if one makes do with a birding scope. 6 if I got my old 60mm refractor out of the loft. Quite a few more if binoculars can be pressed into use

I guess it is 200mm of aperture vs 121mm (the mak-casses work a little under their quoted aperture).

27 minutes ago, JOC said:

All the Morpheii have the ability to seat into a 2" focusser.  Novice question, is this just for convenience or is there any advantage to seating them into a 2" focusser - I guess they are possibly more stable, but I can't see how it can affect the view if the final barrel is only 1.25"

They are 1.25 inch eyepieces despite the 2 inch section of barrel. You need quite a bit of outwards focuser travel to use them with the 2 inch section inserted.

BTW - the "W" is Cassiopeia. Cygnus is a Summer constellation and looks like this: