RobertI

Worthy of its own thread methinks.....

Yes, I’ve been really happy with them, very easy to use, nice FOV, and great with my F10 and F8 scopes. The 21mm was not so good with my F5 and F6 scopes but tend to use the 10mm in those scopes. Good to hear of others using the FTRs, not many folk seem to. @John, do you think it’s worth spending the extra on the Explore Scientific barlow, or is the achromatic Baader barlow good enough for use with all my (relatively modest) eyepieces?

That’s really helpful and illuminating, thanks John. It’s also the cheapest option so I can’t really go wrong! I’ll probably press the button tomorrow unless someone can come up with another convincing argument in the meantime. I understand what you’re saying about the fine tuning rings, I guess I‘ve used them a lot because I am too tight to buy some more glass!

Looking for some help and advice as I just dont have enough eyepiece experience..... I want to be able to take my various scopes upto higher powers for lunar, planetary and particularly doubles. Budget is around the £100 mark, but could stretch a bit further if necessary. As you can see from my sig my smallest e/p is the BST 5mm, which as it happens is not a fab eyepiece anyway (it produces a slightly 'misty' image despite cleaning, wasn't always like this, not sure what happened). For doubles I was hoping to be able to get a range of focal lengths if possible, so the options I have been considering are: A barlow such as the Baader Classic 2.25x (£39) or the Explore Scientific 3x (£86) - this would give a nice range of FLs with my 5mm BST and 10mm Hyperion (I have the fine tuning rings which turn it into 6mm, 7mm or 8.4mm, but also makes the eyepiece much longer!) A 5mm Hyperion - with the fine tuning rings it will give me (2.6mm, 3.2mm and 4.0mm) Another eyepiece suited to lunar/planetary/doubles. The OVL Nirvana-ES UWA-82º 4mm (£69) has previously been recommended. I feel I would also need another eyepiece for the 'mega-magnifications' that can sometimes be applied for resolving tight doubles. Perhaps the Celestron X-Cel LX 2.3mm (£66)? The appeal of option 1 is that I could also use my 8-24 zoom e/p as a 2.7-8.0 zoom, which sounds really useful for doubles/planetary, but possibly not giving very good views in practice?? Option 2 is nice and flexible, I have been very happy with the Hyperions and regularly use the fine turing rings. Option 3 is possibly the most expensive and least flexible, but possibly providing the best views. I also enjoy using two scopes during a session to compare views of the same object and it's nice to have the variety of eyepiece FLs to I get both scopes to the same magnification - possibly another tick in the box for option 1? Really not sure where to go, any advice really appreciated! Rob

You’re so right about things capitulating more easily once you’ve found them - the Veil is a great example for me. I now have OIII and UHC filters which should really help with the Crescent, plus slowly darkening skies. Really looking forward to unearthing it’s glories!

Nice report and video. Amazing what 72mm can do!

Having been agonising whether to buy an Astronomik UHC or OIII filter, these two came up for sale from a fellow member for the price a new one. Looking forward to using them.

Well done on creating some new converts, I'm sure your enthusiasm helped. Sorry to hear about your bad news.

Great report John, glad you enjoyed some 'eyeballing' and hope you do some more. Like you, I don't know that much about the moon and have promised myself on several occasions to do more given how often it's there. If you've not come across it, the Lunar 100 is a good list for getting to know the moon, there are plenty of resources out there about it. I'm glad you enjoyed the experience of doubles. I really love observing doubles, although not an expert, I am learning all the time, and it's something that can be done even when the moon's out. I bought the 150PL Newtonian specifically for doubles and it's working brilliantly. I tend to get bamboozled by colours with doubles. Often a brightly coloured primary can make the the secondary seem to have colour when it doesn't have any. I've never really managed to see the difference between white and blue stars, epsecially fainter stars. Shades of red are much easier to discern. Carbon stars are fun to find and observe. I sympathise with your contortions, I remember cursing the last time I had my 100mm refractor out! I guess that's where a really tall tripod pays dividends. I must admit, I have found that my Newtonians are the most comfortable observing experiences, with the eyepiece always easy to access when standing, even when pointing near the zenith. And with slow motion extension cables hovering at waist height it's easy to control the mount. It's the best setup I have found to date. I look forward to your next report! Rob

Looks good, I can now read it! Thanks.

Hi John, I can't see any of your text - I think you might have used a white font or something (I am using the 'default' SGL theme)? Rob

Reasonably dark here, last night at around midnight I could see the milky way and was observing some DSO's with my 6" Newt - managed to see the Veil with a UHCE filter. I'm at 52° N.

Thanks Stu, yes summer solstice is not the best time to observe faint nebs! I was pleased to finally locate it though - will motivate me to get out more in future. Good point about exit pupil, the 21mm is the widest practical eyepiece I have (I tried my 40mm Plossl - unusable - the eye relief was about 3 feet from the scope!) which gives exit pupil of 2.6mm and 60x. My C8 with reducer would give 3.3 and a similar mag. So I think I might need a longer FL eyepiece (in addition to darker skies and filters). Open to suggestions!

Inspired by your success I had a go at this one with the 150PL tonight. Sadly conditions were just not right, with the star jumping all over the place and no sign of a secondary. I was also limited to 240x - I need more magnification for these tight doubles. So I ended up looking at some nebulae instead. One for another time.

My nemesis? I am talking about the Crescent nebula. I have tried to find this a number of times, although my efforts have been fairly ill prepared. In theory it is easy to find, being one third of the way from gamma Cygni to Eta Cygni and there is a prominent 'triangle of stars' to help find it. However I have never found said triangle or any sign of the nebula. So tonight, on a less than ideal luminous summer night, I ventured forth, with my 150PL and a 21mm Hyperion sporting a Astronomik UHCE filter - not the best filter for the job as it's designed for scopes of 5" or less but it does improve contrast signficiantly and it's all I have! Using my marvellous ES 8x50 straight though correct image finder, I located the area and tried to find the elusive Crescent. Again no sign of the triangle of stars, and after 20 minutes of looking and scanning, with observing hood in place, no luck. So I sought help from the internet and found a finder chart from Skyhound website. Comparing the chart with the eyepiece view I was gobsmacked to see the identical pattern of stars in the eyepiece - they were also in same orientation as the chart!! So I knew I was in the right place, now to see if I could see any trace. After a good half hour of staring, swapping eyes, moving the scope back and forth to increase visibility, I can confidently say that I could see.....part of it! I've indicated in yellow in the finder chart below the area I could see. I felt there were hints of the lower curve too. I am hopeful that with my 8" SCT, darker skies and a UHC or OIII filter (both of which I'll have in the next week or so) I'll be able to see more of the Crescent. A little project for the coming weeks and months. I finished the session with a look at the Eastern Veil - frankly a piece of cake compared to the Crescent! The Veil was still pretty faint though and I have had much clearer views before - this just confirmed that conditions were really not ideal for seeking out the Cresent. I'd be interested to hear other people's experiences with the Crescent.