John

On 14/06/2018 at 10:24, marcus_z said:

No, I don't think I need one. For planets I just use the tube as orientation. For deep sky I might just use the lowest magnification eyepiece as a finder. A Panoptic 41 gives a 4.6 degree TFOV and 14x Magnification. That is almost like a finder, but with much better aberration control and eye relief. But I'm not 100% sure about the low mag eyepieces which I should use for travel...

 

I'm thinking about a Masuyama 45mm, which gives a 6mm pupil and should work good with filters. Maybe a 16mm Nagler for open clusters, but then I don't know which eyepiece to take between the two...

You might find a finder useful when going for the fainter planets and binary stars. I know that I do despite having some very wide angle eyepieces. I use a 6x30 RACI on my refractors and it's very useful.

On the subject of 40mm eyepieces in the 2 inch fitting, the Skywatcher Aero ED 40mm is a good combination of good performance and relatively lightweight for a 2" eyepiece. Same optics as the now out of production TMB Paragons. There are other clones out there under other brands too.

1 hour ago, JeremyS said:

This morning two further components of my travel kit arrived: a Neewer carbon fibre tripod and a TS-Optics Altazimuth Travel Mount.

I went for the Neewer because it is so light and low cost. It will be interesting to see how in performs in reality. The TS head is a lovely piece of kit.

Lovely looking stuff !

I'm on the lookout for a really light but sturdy tripod for my travel scope so I will be interested to see how the Newer does for you. What model is it by the way ?

Interesting. Are they capped inside the baggies ?

I really liked the Fujiyama HD orthos that I've owned / used. The only exceptions were the 4mm and the 25mm. Nothing wrong with the qualitly of either but with the 4mm the eye lens and eye relief has got really tiny and, I found, hard to find and hold in the dark with my manually driven scopes and with the 25mm the eye relief means "hovering" eye off the top of the eyepiece which allows stray light to interfere with contrast and is not as relaxing as I'd like. The others though, I could happilly live with

My travel / outreach / whatever set. Note the careful arrangement !

Contents: BST Starguider 25mm, Orbinar 7.2mm - 21.5mm zoom, Japanese 4mm HD ortho, Baader Q-Turret 2.25x barlow, Svbony UHC filter plus a couple of other bits and bobs.

Looks lovely Derek

Maybe the looks are deceiving but it looks quite a bit longer than the stock or Moonlite alternatives. Is the scope tube shorter than normal ?

14 hours ago, stuy said:

...  Apparently they are concentrating there efforts on military programs....

Similarly with LZOS I understand.

On 08/06/2018 at 19:07, DRT said:

This arrived today from eBay - an APM UW 80º 2" 30mm to provide low power as part of the set I posted about yesterday...

I'll be interested to hear what you think as well Derek

I used to own one of the Japanese Widescan III's  that these are based on:

Superb scope Stuy

I have very fond memories of my Intes MN61. If another one came along at the right time I'd be very tempted !

15 minutes ago, DRT said:

Thanks, Neil. I'm in two minds where to go on the high mag end of this lot as both Lunt and Pentax have 5mm and 3.5mm in those ranges. I think I need to use all of my legendary willpower to avoid jumping in before testing the ones I've just bought  

 

If it is of any interest Derek, I had the Ethos SX 3.7mm and 4.7mm for nearly a year and frequently compared them with the views that my 5mm and 3.5mm Pentax XW's gave. Despite my love of the Ethos range, I eventually concluded that the XW's were just a touch sharper and showed less light scatter. As 110 degrees was not essential for me at such high powers, I let the Ethos SX's go to new homes. It was a tough decision because the Ethos SX 4.7 is a hard one to get on the used market (it almost never comes up) but in the end I found I was reaching for the XW's before the Ethos SX's each time for challenging targets so that swung the decision for me.

57 minutes ago, Andy1978 said:

Necro post - Arise old thread!

I have just ordered the BST 5, 8,15 & 25mm eyepieces, I can't wait for them to turn up tomorrow so I can pop them in my 200p - tomorrow's cloudy night is on me guys sorry

Welcome to the forum Andy

Hope you enjoy the BST's. I've compared them to some much more expensive eyepieces and they generally compare well.

Just a Universal Astronomics Dwarfstar mount head today. Lighter than the pan/tilt head I'm currently using with my TV Ranger so thats 250 grams less to take to Australia later this year

19 minutes ago, Timebandit said:

 

Yep . And John is not joking about that 3.5 XW.

A high stack up it certainty is. Don't even think of putting a Barlow on it ?

 

Barlowing a tall eyepiece can give you secondary benefits

23 minutes ago, iPeace said:

Nice one! My own 5mm is back-ordered, 7mm and 3.5mm should arrive tomorrow.

If you think the 5mm XW is tall one, wait until you see the 3.5mm !

57 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

Since the Ethos comes in 21mm, 17mm, 13mm, 10mm, 8mm, 6mm, 4.7mm, and 3.7mm

while the APM/Lunt HDC XWAs come in 20mm, 13mm, 9mm, 5mm, and 3.5mm. it would appear there is only one focal length in common.

Some enterprising soul needs to acquire a complete set of each and do in-depth comparisons for us all (and don't suggest I do it--I don't get enough observing time in as it is!).

I did compare the Myriads with Ethos and Pentax XW equivalents (I didn't have the 3.7 or 4.7 Ethos SX at that time). Maybe not detailed enough but the best that I could manage . I did try the WO XWA 9mm but though it to be identical to the Myriad 9mm. The question is, are the Myriads related to the APM/Lunt HDC XWA's in any way ?

Anyway here is my little piece on the Myriads:

I have a 15mm T2 spacer between the eyepiece holder and the diagonal body for the same reason. The barrel on the Nagler zoom is longer than on most other eyepieces. "Better safe than sorry"  

24 minutes ago, iPeace said:

That's what they all say - and now, I'm inclined to agree...

...I'm likely to get a Baader T2 BBHS mirror (or prism; haven't decided) for similar reasons. I also use Baader T2 Amici prisms, and the T2 connectivity means I can put a 2" nose on them to fit the TV or FT focusers and put a bit of spacing (T2 spacer rings) on the eyepiece side to help reach focus. I had done the latter to prevent long-nosed eyepieces from hitting the prism; only discovered the focus benefit when I tried a 1.25" TV Everbrite diagonal in the Borg 71FL and it wouldn't reach focus...apparently the Borg's 2" FTF doesn't have a long enough drawtube to use a 'regular' 1.25" diagonal! I did have a 2" 35mm extension tube in the spares box, so this works with the Tak prism as well, but the OCD banshee is screaming for a neater solution. I can always use the Tak prism in the TV-60; that's native 1.25" only.

I'm quite happy with this. It's reasonably neat, performs well and it's solid. I can switch the eyepiece holder for a 2" if I want to use that format but in practice I rarely use 2" EP's with the Tak:

TMB/LZOS 130mm F/9.2 triplet on the Vixen GP DX and Berlebach Uni 28.

Lovely gear, lovely location Stuy

Is that at the Mountain Centre at Libanus ?

30 minutes ago, alacant said:

You won't be able to see it,.....

 

I can't and I don't image so thats OK. I seem to do pretty well on DSO's with my scope, visually

With Orion Optics, you can specify a different diameter secondary if thats what you want.

12 hours ago, alacant said:

IIRC, not enough to get all the light reflected from the primary at the focal plane of a dslr. Not an issue if you're visual or don't mind vignetting.

Cheers and clear skies.

 

My 300mm OO F/5.3 has a 63mm MA secondary (21% of the primary diameter). I'm stricly visual but I don't get any vignetting even with the Ethos 21 and Nagler 31 eyepieces

The scope was used successfully for imaging by a previous owner - this chap:

http://kevwildgoose.co.uk/

18 minutes ago, Gerry Casa Christiana said:

Also the bresser has a 74mm secondary does that introduce any probkems? 

 

Thats quite large for an F/5 250mm

Orion Optics use a 63mm one with their 250mm F/4.8.

13 minutes ago, 25585 said:

However users of the OE clamshell clamp, with its single bolt lock might wish to consider your suggestion as a secondary fastening, which 2 (or more) rings provides. 

What evidence or experience, either personal or from third party experience is there to back up this suggestion ?

There is no evidence of the Takahashi clamps / lock bolts being problematical, deficient, not up to the task, failing or poorly manufactured as far as I am aware

If you just don't like the ergonomics or aesthetics of the accessory then thats your choice of course but thats a bit different from veiled suggestions that they are inadequate, I feel.

You should be able to get a pre-owned Orion Optics 10" F/4.8 for well under that price. You can nearly afford a new one - the VX10 with a 1/10th wave mirror upgrade costs £955.20. Delivery to Italy might push that up a bit. The Orion Optics newtonians weigh a bit less than the Chinese made ones.

2 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

Rings when Tak offer a superb, beautiful, matching and superior clamshell? And the rings are red for goodness sake. What would possess anyone with a modicum of good taste to put red rings on a beautiful, elegant, white, blue and silver Tak tube assembly? It would be like putting Micra wheels on a Porche. 

Have to agree Mike.