John

The Kellner usually has a field of view of around 45 degrees. You can get them a bit wider but the correction goes downhill off axis quite quickly. They work best in scopes of F/10 or slower. Plossls are generally better corrected up to 50 degrees and work better in faster scopes than Kellners do.

The erecting eyepiece will have an additional lens set in the barrel to flip the image around to match the view that our eyes see. They don't work well for astronomy purposes.

The Celestron Omni plossls are OK in quality terms. About the same as the Skywatcher SP plossls. The Vixen NPL plossls are better quality I think but they cost a little more as well.

The field of view of an eyepiece is determined by the diameter of the field stop rather than by the diameter of the lenses. You can have a very wide field stop but if the optical design of the eyepiece is not well corrected off axis the outer parts of the field will not be particularly nice to look at !

Omg!!!! Those moonrakers are absolutely stunning!!!! Holy sweet mother of pearl. I must have one some day. What an elegant beauty! 

Mark from Moonraker took some of his scopes to the NEAF this year in the US:

I think if they had a "best in show" award he would have won it !

Thanks for the info. Talking of Barlows, what are the disadvantages of using the higher-powered types; if I used a x3 instead of a x5, would I lose sharpness and definition on certain objects?

You would run into the magnification limits put on us by viewing conditions / scope type.

Barlow lenses are not "magic bullets" - the constraints on what is useful magnification still apply I'm afraid

Excellent reports, a pleasure to read, apart from the pangs of jealosy as Mark reports

Interesting that you say a number of times about more details appearing the longer you view the object. I've always found this in planetary observing and I'm now finding it with deep sky observing too. "The more you look, the more you see" - definitely

I'm also finding that using quite high magnification allows me to see deeper and fainter with deep sky objects.

What tripod is that if you don't mind me asking? Looks sturdy, and i'm curious on the wood leg ones. 

It's very similar to the ones that Oberwerk use for their really large binoculars but I've modified it to take the Giro Mount.

Prior to this I used the mount on a CG5 tripod with the 2" steel tubed legs. The wooden tripod is lighter, taller and at least as sturdy. It looks better too, perhaps, but that is subjective of course.

Here are some more pics of my two fracs. The Skywatcher ED120 F/7.5 now has a Moonlite CF2 Tri-knob focuser fitted and the Vixen ED102SS F/6.5 now has an older Moonlite CF2 Dual-knob and some CNC tube rings.

Both scopes are ED doublets and used purely for visual observing.

Docters history is intertwined with Zeiss,but there seems to be only one eyepiece made by them unless anyone knows otherwise. I've heard nothing but praise from experienced observers but they do have a hefty price tag.

Just one in the range as far as I'm aware.

They are costly but ergonomically it is practical to binoview them wheras the Ethos 13mm (which they are most often compared with) are just a bit too wide despite Tele Vue slimming the Ethos a few mm following the initial production run. Anyone got a "fat" Ethos 13mm ?.

A pair of Docters - nice

Very nice and very neat Steve

I think Moonraker scopes are beautifully put together but, for my taste, are overly flamboyant. A bit too much like a 1960's sci-fi film prop perhaps ?.

Any scope that shares a cover pic with Simon Cowell promoting the X-Factor has dropped a few credbility posts with me I'm afraid

Good luck to Mark for spotting a niche in the market though and I'm sure his scopes will continue to be in demand.

I do like the look of those WO Megrez scopes but I can't really justify one with already owning a TV Pronto - unless of course someone tells me it is essential to test them side by side?

You have a distinct gap in the 90mm aperture region Derek

And 80mm come to that ....

Very nice

I used to have one just like it when WO first bought them out.

Nice job

The good thing about these old synta scopes is that they are pretty tough. A bit of TLC can turn a rather shabby one into a lovely instrument, as you have proved

Lovely scope Chris

Looks like the pillar / pier doubles as a bird table too

Some great eyepiece choices there Peter

I'd love to try a Nav HW someday.

The only Speers-Waler eyepiece I've owned was the 24mm which had a 67 degree field of view. It was quite good in the F/10 scope I had at the time but showed plenty of edge distortion when I got an F/6.5 scope. It was quite inexpensive though.

I wonder if the lenses of your SW 7.5 need a clean - did the previous owner smoke for example ?.

The shorter focal length SW's have good reputations generally although Antares changed the specs of them quite often, ie: there were also 7mm and 7.4mm's in the series and some had 70 degree AFoV's wheras others had 82 degrees.

They tend to need more inwards focuser movement than other eyepiece types which can cause issues if you don't have that amount of travel available with your focuser. Otherwise it should be a sound buy for £65 I'd have thought

The name comes from Glen Speers who founded and owns Antares and the 2nd part is Wide Angle Long Eye Relief although not all of them had particularly long eye relief !

hehe Sorry about that John, I ammended my post once I'd remembered you'd actually owned the scope

Can I ask how you found the 152L equivalent John? I'm thinking about buying it for DSO's or maybe even the ES AR152 f/6.5? If it's a bit pants I might just up my frac apperture an inch and get the 127L.

No problem Chris - I've owned quite a lot of scopes

I found the AR152L decent but quite a bit heavier than the Synta / Skywatcher 150mm F/8's. I used a Chromacor with mine which removed most of the CA and corrected the SA that these scopes seem often to have.

If I went for a low cost 6" achro again I think it would be a Synta / Skywatcher F/8 - I never really warmed to the AR6 for some reason. I prefer the Bresser 127L over both the AR6 and the Skywatcher Evostar 120 that I had around that time.

I'd not go for an achro faster than F/8 even for deep sky observing because of the CA.

All good fun though

...The AR127L looks like a wonderful amount of refractor for the money, you should check out some of the reviews John, it's reviewed very well which makes it even better value

I've owned a Bresser 127L and a Meade AR5 Chris. They are identical apart from the branding and I suspect the optics of the new Bresser 127L's are the same.

The Bresser was very nice but the Meade had very mediocre optics

I had a Meade AR6 for a while as well which I think is pretty much the same scope as the Bresser 152L.

It looks like Bresser have updated their focusers John, they literally look hexagonal now which is interesting.

It won't be like a Moonlite of course, but it would be interesting to see if it's much of an improvement over the agriculteral ones this type of scope used to ship with? It would be a big bonus if its liveable

Derek - Good result with the Moonlite!

Oooh heres a link showing the updated Bresser focuser:

http://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/Bresser-Messier-AR-152L-1200-Hex-Focus-Optical-Tube-Assembly-4852120.html

I've been looking at those on the Telescope House website. Although this is a refractor thread, the new Bresser 8" dob looks interesting. The use of tube rings to attach the alt bearings makes it easy to switch to an EQ mount for the scope at a later date. Smart design.

The 127L refractor with the new hex focuser looks decidedly good value at £250.

Gotta love the classic "volcano top" orthos

Quite a range of pieces there !

Nice to see the Speers-WALER's - very nice eyepieces but rather uncommon over here.

Ah yes, I'd forgotten the TAL. I assume you would use the Vixen instead given the choice?

Would be fun to have a '4" Shootout' sometime.

The Vixen is the best 4" refractor I've owned or used Stu. Despite being F/6.5 it's CA control matches the ED100 that preceeded it and it's overall optical figure is excellent. I'm going to put a Moonlite on it next week to smarten it up a little

I guess I'd have to move to a Tak or TV 4" to get any improvement and even then I suspect it would be slight.

Back on the Bresser 127 tack, look what someone in Germany did with a pair of them :

I've always liked the look of the 102 f11 scopes, beautifully proportioned and they look like a proper scope. The reality though is that it wouldn't give me anything the Tak doesn't so I just have to remain strong!!

Thats the problem I have - I can't think of how to explain to my other half why I need a long 102mm refractor as well as my shorter Vixen ED102 !. I suspect the "but it looks really nice" excuse won't do the trick

That said I've got a TAL 100R standing next to me at the moment .... gathering dust ....

Nice looking pair of fracs Derek

I strongly suspect that the Moonlite will exceed the stock focuser of the Bresser by some margin, if the Bresser one is like the one I had on my Bresser 127L and Meade AR5 (which I believe are the same scope). They are functional and thats about it.

I've not tried one of the 102mm F/11 achros as yet. They always look rather elegant in their proportions

I had a TAL 100 RT refractor delivered to my work address many years ago. Back then the TAL's came in large wooden crates and this one had come all the way from the TAL factory in Siberia - it still had it's factory seals intact.

My colleages said they thought it was a small coffin when it was delivered !

I ought to add that I did this because myself and my family were on an extended holiday in the USA at the time, rather than any subterfuge