John

No light is the best way to preserve night vision. That's what I've found when observing the more challenging objects. 

Some of the red light torches that I've seen at star parties and other events are far too bright. When you are full dark adapted even an illuminated watch face is rather glaring !

5 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

For me, yes, 44x is low enough as a low power.  I don't need for my refractor to duplicate a binoculars power or field size.

IF you seek a really wide field and really low power, then perhaps it makes sense, but I really see very little reason even then to have a magnification below about 5X/inch (5mm exit pupil)

That would be a 23mm eyepiece.  Yes, the image is brighter at low power, but star clusters will be poorly resolved, and galaxies really small so unless you really enjoy the "context" view,  I wouldn't bother.

The largest eyepiece I use with my 4" refractor is an 18.2mm yielding 39x.  My most-used eyepiece is an 11mm (65x) or a 7mm (102x).

 

I tend to prefer more magnification than 40x as well - hence the value of my Ethos 21. 43x and 2.3 degrees of true field with my ED120.

Sometimes it is nice to go lower though and I do enjoy the "context" views

1 hour ago, Merlin66 said:

Isn’t that the definition of a Rich field telescope????

 

You don't see that term used much these days !

I find the 8mm Ethos fantastic for observing globular clusters. With my 12 dob (199x) the views of the brighter globs can be similar to the images of them.

I'm sure the 9mm APM will deliver similar glorious globular views for you

I find I skip happily from 31 to 21 and then to 13mm or sometimes even straight to 8mm with my 12 inch dob. That's why the 17mm Ethos didn't get much use. I still have the ES 92 / 17mm but I expect that I'll move that on in due course. Great eyepiece but like the 17mm Ethos, not used enough to justify having it.

I don't use the 31mm anywhere near as much as the 21mm Ethos really. My skies have a bit of light pollution so the higher magnification gives a darker background sky.

Its good to actually try these things out if you can. What suits one person might not suit another

Interesting report of some fine eyepieces

I'm happy with my Ethos's now. I have tried a few other 100 degree eyepieces and many others but not the APM / Lunts. It's possible that they have the same optics as the Myriad 100's though in which case I have tried them

I also tried the Leica ASPH zoom for a while but, unlike some, I didn't really take to that, nice though it was.

It took me about 6 months to decide that I slightly preferred the Pentax XW 5mm and 3.5mm to the Ethos SX 4.7 and 3.7 so I've not held onto all the Ethos's that I've had. Also tried the 17mm for a while but found it a focal length that I didn't use much.

I do the vast majority of my observing at home though. If I braved the wilds as much as you do I guess I might think about a lower cost "field set" to avoid risking the pricier ones.

Glad you have a set which you are happy with now

Another one in this series if you are interested - Have we already found aliens ?. What should we do if we ever find them ?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/m000g4z3

Interesting BBC radio cast on this topic

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000gcvs

This is where Cartes du Ciel puts C/2019 Y4 Atlas. It was spot on last night:

26 minutes ago, joe aguiar said:

that's a good pic but for those that cant tell a 120mm f/7.5 is also not really small either if there was the sw 80mm ed next to the 120 u then can see  the 120 is medium size. On the pic it show kinda small next to the 150.  But don't think the 120 on a mount is small either.

Joe

Thats why I used the word "possibly" with regard to the ED120. Quite likely it is too large.

As I now see that the balcony being referred to is just 1x3 metres I think maybe a maksutov-cassegrain or schmidt-cassegrain on a pedestal mount would be more suitable ?

The ED120 is a superb telescope. I have had one for a few years and thought it was good but more recent purchases of a couple of much, much more expensive refractors have demonstrated to me just how good my Skywatcher ED120 is 

I think your most important priority is to get a setup that you can use easily and conveniently in your circumstances. That might be an ED100 or possibly an ED120. I agree that the ED150 is probably not practical. Here are the ED120 and the ED150 side by side so you can see the difference:

2 hours ago, Stu said:

Neil said he got it in his 80mm so should be easy pickings in the 8", provided your skies are reasonable.

It depends on the sky and maybe the observer experience I think Stu. I didn't find C/2019 Y4 Atlas easy with my 102 refractor - pretty hard in fact. The 12 inch dob made it stand out somewhat better of course.

Neither this or Panstarrs are striking objects IMHO. Rather modest and small. I can understand why newcomers to observing would struggle to find and see them.

Turned out nicely in the end. Saw two of the comets plus lots of galaxies in Leo and Ursa Major. Lovely to be looking through the eyepiece at things millions of light years away and taking my mind off current affairs. Ended with a nice view of Messier 13 as Hercules rose into the sky

Well done @BlueStinger

It's a nice clear night currently in North Somerset. Doing some galaxy hopping here around Leo and Ursa Major with my 12 inch scope.

Currently rather more cloud here than I'd hoped for. Hopefully clearing as the evening progresses ?

1 hour ago, John said:

C/2019 Y4 (ATLAS) should be around 3.5 degrees from M81 and M82 tonight according to Cartes du Ciel. It looks as if we might get some clear skies later tonight. I fancy some wide field views to try and fit these three in the same FoV

I'd better get my Vixen 102 F/6.5 refractor ready for action ....

 

Comet hunting setup. 4.1 degree true field

Filters and Venus are covered in this recent thread. Might be worth a read:

Sometimes thin cloud provides an excellent natural filtration service  

C/2019 Y4 (ATLAS) should be around 3.5 degrees from M81 and M82 tonight according to Cartes du Ciel. It looks as if we might get some clear skies later tonight. I fancy some wide field views to try and fit these three in the same FoV

I'd better get my Vixen 102 F/6.5 refractor ready for action ....

Large true fields are nice for observing extended objects as Stu says. To get that you either go to lower magnifications or to wider apparent field of view, or a combination of both.

With my ED120 refractor I use a 40mm SWA eyepiece (2 inch format) which shows 3 degrees of sky at 22.5x and is great for the sort of targets that Stu illustrates. Your current 1.5 degrees from your 18mm eyepiece will show lots of deep sky objects as well of course but wont fit the larger ones into a single field.

23 minutes ago, Dave1 said:

Thanks John, its great that you edited it, but I have my board settings set black on white, so now I can't see what I typed. 🤣 

It's good stuff, I can assure you

Thanks. A lot of what you posted was invisible because the text shifted to black on dark grey. I've edited the post to change that text to white on black.

1 hour ago, Stu said:

Ah yes, so it does. Do you know what year that was made John?

 

May 2001 it said in the instruction manual.

I don't think you are being over fussy at all. If you buy a new scope it should be immaculate. I've only bought a couple new over the years and they arrived mint and spotless.

Brandons seem to be "marmite" eyepieces from the varied reports I've read on them. Do they work better with some scope types than others ?

lovely looking pump though ......