John

How far is the objective down the dew shield with the F/7.4 Tak FC100's ? On my DL the the front surface of the objective is only about 4 inches down the shield. I've not had dewing issues so far with it but it has crossed my mind that it could happen.

I suspect it's alsways going to be a case that these 2 are incredibly closely matched. My DL stayed inside last night though - the 12" dob was delivering superb Jovian views AND showing 8 or 9 Markarian's chain galaxies to boot

And turn it around perhaps ? The Telrad finder is mounted backwards in your photo Jim - easy mistake to make though

Hi Jim, I see you are Bristol based ? If you can get along to Bristol Astro Society sometime you will be able to get some hands on help. A number of members there have the same or very similar scopes to yours plus the Soceity has a couple as well Here is the website if this is of any interest: http://www.bristolastrosoc.org.uk/www/ We meet on Fridays and try and have observing sessions on Saturdays, weather permitting, which it often does not !

As posted by Peter Drew, the planets are not well placed now and for a few years yet. I'm having to work harder to get good views of them than I did in past years and that is despite my scopes and eyepieces being better now than I've ever owned. I sometimes wonder if, equipment wise, I've "peaked" a little late !

The optics in spotters contain lots of prisms and quite a few have cemented objective lenses rather than the air spaced ones that most astro scopes use. Neither of these factors give an optimum experience with used for astronomical viewing. I do have a decent quality spotter but I only use it for the occasional glimpse of the moon. An astro alt-azimuth mount may be the answer for you - they are more straightforward than equatorial mounts and their motions are a simple "up-down-left-right".

When I've used my Lunt 1.25" herschel wedge with my Tak DL the detail shown has been impressive. I think good lens figuring pays dividends day and night

Yes, it was around that. I've seen a couple of Uranian moons with my 12" dob but they are another magnitude fainter again (closer to 14th mag actually) so beyond the 130.

Thanks Jules So far, I think spotting Neptune's moon Triton, splitting Sirius and a lovely split of the close pair of the triple star Tegmine (Zeta Cancri) are the highlights. Much more to come I hope

My 130 F/9.2 is number 40. Since 2006 they will have made 114 in total when production finishes this year, I'm told by Markus Ludes of APM. It's a visual scope primarily though, with that focal ratio.

Does the 152 / 1200 have a LZOS objective lens Sara ? Superb looking setup, whatever

Quite nice Alan A good interim set before you really splash out on the good stuff !

The aircraft vomit filter seems to work OK Mike I've not viewed Mercury with a scope for a while but spotted it easily enough with binoculars a few nights back.

Refractors with a capital "R" there Rusted

I've owned 1 good Bresser scope in recent years - a older type 127mm F/9.3 achromat which I believe was made by the same manufacturer who made the Meade AR5. The scopes are identical as I found when I purchased a mint AR5 a year or so later. The AR5 was a mediocre performer though wheras the older Bresser branded one was very good indeed. Many, many years ago I owned a superb scope with the Bresser branding on it - it was made by Vixen in Japan and was a re-badged version of their superb SP102M refractor. Different league to the Bresser stuff of today I suspect.

Neither operate at quite the full aperture stated (probably more like 120mm and 140mm respectively) because of the optical design used but the additional aperture will always provide a brighter image of DSO's and a little more resolution at the expense of a little more cool down time for the larger aperture. Whether the additional cost is justified is a personal decision of course.

I'd go Skywatcher as well - just read the reviews of their maks over the years and from folks like Neil English who really know what they are talking about

Very efficient Mike, and the results speak for themselves

Should be very good for DSO's I would think I believe that the Maxvisions were originally destined to be Meade 5000's but Meade cancelled the order or something like that so they are sold under other branding. Not sure whether the ES 68's are the same or not With your SW 200P dob the eyepiece will show you nearly 1.6 true degrees of sky which is a nice wide chunk.

I found this on the difference between a barlow and a telextender / Powermate. At least it explains why a Powermate / telextender is no good for barlowed lased colimation - it does not disperse the laser beam !

Don't worry, I quite often buy things just because I fancy trying it for myself. Thats how I've managed to have 30+ scopes pass through my hands over past decade Similarly with eyepieces, a bit worse in fact !

They are really neat little scopes

I don't do much solar viewing but I'm running an outreach session at a local school next week so I thought I'd better check that my rig works OK. The PST belongs to my astro society, the rest is my own:

I've also had the Maxvision 24 / 68 and I think I'd prefer that over the X-Cel LX as well. I'm not saying that the X-Cel LX's are bad at all, they are pretty nice in fact but the ES 24 / 68 and the Maxvision 24 / 68 are just a bit better IMHO There is a lot of competition in the ~25mm eyepiece niche. Picking between the Maxvision 24 / 68 and the ES 24 / 68 is a matter of build quality and ergonomics I think, more than optical performance.

I've owned both and have no hesitation in saying that the ES 24mm 68 is the better eyepiece both in performance, ergonomics and build quality. I recently moved from the ES 24 / 48 to a 24mm Tele Vue Panoptic and I can't really tell the difference between the two in all honesty. The ES 24 / 68 maxes out the true field in the 1.25" size as well, which the X-Cell LX does not quite match. I can't advise on whether the difference in performance is worth the extra price. I would be to me but I'm not you