John

After 3 years of considering non-GOTO, manual alt-az mounts for my 130mm F/9.2 triplet I've concluded that there is a gap in the market currently between the Ercole / Skytee II class mounts and the really heavy duty ones such as the Maxload.

Mounts such as the Bray Tablet and the Giro XXL are long out of production now but sort of filled that niche. The KK T-Rex would certainly do the job but is as rare as hens teeth as well as being out of production as well. The TTS Panther mount is superb but priced in the £thousands. The AYO Master is probably up to the job but again with a very hefty price tag.

The Ercole will carry the scope but it might not be steady enough at higher magnifications for you.

My nearest scope to the TEC 140 is my TMB/LZOS 130 F/9.25 triplet. I find the Skytee II a touch more stable than the Ercole with that scope.

I have considered a Losmandy AZ8 but I'm not convinced that it will offer any additional stability. The next steps up in terms of stability start to get expensive such as the APM Maxload AZ mount:

https://www.apm-telescopes.de/en/mounts--tripods/alt-azimuth-mounts/apm-azmaxload-mount-twin-view-version.html

Which Matthew has also reviewed here:

http://alpha-lyrae.co.uk/2016/02/27/apm-azmaxload-mount-review/

Some great images being posted here but I think this thread was originally about visual observing in light polluted skies ?

How does your Ercole handle that scope without a counterweight Stu ?

My Ercole is pretty stable but the motion of the axes are noticably smoother when I use a counterbalance weight on the opposite side, even for the "flyweight" Vixen ED102SS.

Just now, Ally8446 said:

No John, no corrector. That's precisely the reason I went for F/6.3 + I'm over 6' tall. 

I had my 12 inch F/5.3 mounting designed for observing while standing - I'm 6' tall.

Are you going to use a coma corrector in an F/6.3 dob ?. I don't find that I need one with my F/5.3.

20 / 21mm is the longest FL 100 degree eyepiece you can get in the 2 inch fitting. Unless you are planning to go to a 3 inch focusser

The ES 30mm might be the answer, unless you want to shell out on the mighty "Terminagler" 31mm ?

Otherwise I would say your eyepiece run is quite good when you take the barlow into account:

24mm, 14mm, 12mm, 10mm, 7mm, 5mm

If I'm going to "pack" the focal lengths it's at the shorter ones so I'd probably squeeze a 6mm in there.

3 hours ago, StarryEyed said:

....It's fiddly to set up a pain to use (and) over priced.....

Just mere details .......

I like the black finish of the focuser and finder mount on my 1st run FC-100DL. Pity they just made 100 of them.

The finder on those is a 5x24mm I seem to recall. It's not an achromat lens and it may even be stopped down to a smaller aperture by an aperture ring just behined the finder objective lens.

That said it should at least come to some sort of focus. I think the eyepiece end can be screwed in and out to reach focus on those finders ?. Rather like the one I've pictured below.

Thanks for posting Dominic - I enjoyed reading it

Thanks John - very interesting

I've eaten samphire but I didn't know that it could also be used to make better quality glass.

Removing the caps is always a good idea to let warm air escape from the tube easier.

Pointing the mak towards the ground will help ensure that warm air escapes through the rear port. A mirror diagonal can be left in place but a prism diagonal should be removed to aid warm air escape. I do this with refractors as well.

The newtonian should be pointed with the large aperture pointing towards the sky but not necessarily vertical to avoid the chances of anything dropping down the tube and onto the mirror.

Nice report Stu of a classic and versatile refractor

I have similar feelings when I use my Vixen ED102SS F/6.5. I don't use it as much as it deserves but I could not bear to part with it.

I don't mind a little CA actually (my TV Ranger is not an apo by any means) but I do like a well figured objective and TV and Vixen certainly have those.

40 minutes ago, pregulla said:

Same focal length and AFoV doesn't nesessarily mean they are the same design....

No, but having looked at and through some of them I think a number of them are the same units.

I agree that the Meade QX 26mm is a worse performer though - why they supplied it as the stock eyepiece with Meade Lightbridge dobsonians is beyond me. As well as the poor edge correction the QX 26mm needs so much outwards focuser movement that you can barely get it to focus with those scopes

1 hour ago, NGC 1502 said:

 

John is correct with his USSR answer. I also have those 8x30s purchased in 1984.  If you check the serial number the first two numbers tell you the year of manufacture.   Great bins, just the job for casual birdwatching as they only take up a corner of a backpack.   And although 8x30 bins are not generally recommended for astronomy don’t rule them out for that.

From my large town location it’s surprising what modest bins can show, M13,92,31,15,44,39, Double Cluster, wide doubles like Nu Draco and Double Double ( the 2 main components not 4 !! ) etc etc are all easy and of course the magnificent M45 Pleiades.  Being easy to handhold helps of course.

Ed.

Mine are 1986. I don't think the design changed much in a couple of decades.

Unfortunately the popular media at not too reliable when it comes to reports of this type.

I think the brightest this comet has ever got is magnitude 8 suring the 2012 outburst. It was thought to have broken into pieces at that time so it is an interesting comet but not quite in the way that the Mirror reports.

Very mixed here. Heavy clouds one minute, some quite big clear gaps the next. I'm just messing around with my 70mm travel scope and picking off what is showing in the gaps. I'm glad I have this very portable scope otherwise I don't think I'd get any observing in tonight.

I think you are referring to Comet 168P/Hergenrother.

Here is the info that Theskylive website has on this one:

https://theskylive.com/168p-info

It seems to be in Perseus currently and is magnitude 13 currently according to the above info although another website has it at mag 11:

https://in-the-sky.org/data/object.php?id=0168p

I have a pair of those. Made in USSR (so that dates them) by Komz. Very nice quality binoculars and very close performance to my Zeiss Jenoptem 8x30s. I believe the same factory also uses the BPC and "Baigish" brand names for their products.

There are a few manufacturers in China and Taiwan that produce a lot of equipment. Some of it has brand names on it and some is sold "unbranded". Usually the unbranded items cost less than the branded ones but can be good value because you still get the same level of performance.

I have seen the 38, 32 and 26mm SWA eyepieces (like your picture) for sale under many different brandings and I've owned the 38mm, 32mm and 26mm SWAs in their unbranded form. The 32mm is the best performing one of the 3 in my opinion.

They are pretty good if your scope is F/8 or slower but show quite a bit of edge of field astigmatism in faster scopes.

Like you, I suspect that these are the same eyepieces as the Skywatcher Panaviews but with a slightly different finish.

 I think the reality is that telescopes with decent aperture (ie: over 8 inches) are quite heavy and awkward to move around. Workarounds can be found but if you have to use a number of stairs or a long walk over rough / uneven terrain they will always pose a challenge. This is magnified if you have an injury of course.

Do you want this new scope to be lighter than the Skyliner 150P reflector was ?

Looks like its a "kit tinkering" evening here now

7 hours ago, Raph-in-the-sky said:

And one more question: Am I right in assuming that any of these EPs will be better than my 8-24mm Celestron Zoom ?

Not necessarily. The Celestron 8-24mm zoom will probably be as good or better than the "66" eyepieces and the PL's. Plus the variable focal length is very useful for finding the "goldilocks" magnification for the conditions and target. A very useful tool I reckon.

It's clouded over here now - that sort of barred high level stuff that does not bring rain but does mean that you can't do astronomy