Drkneb

Hi Gus, regarding the images, they aren't Hubble images but ones take with more most equipment and might assist in detecting some detail. However, their print quality is lower than I would want it, so I'll see how useful they are in the field. I agree the charts are quirky but I like their layout so far, it's like observing with charts from someone's planning book. Can anyone tell me if the 100 additional Deep Sky Objects are listed by #_ as in this 4th edition? I find that confusing. Like the California Nebula is something like #24 or something...there is an index but this seems overly complicated. Hi Franklin, yes I agree the layout, while unique, is nice and there is lots of info. from an experienced observer. Too bad they didn't spiral bound it and give those objects their NGC/IC designations. Thanks Rob, glad you enjoyed the show, I recognize your Spidey icon Chris

A first look that I hope this helps people get an idea of the size and content of this updated book. Unboxing Video of the Observer's Sky Atlas 4th Edition My observing buddy Tim kept an old paperback copy of of the Observer's Sky Atlas jammed in the top of his eyepiece case. I thought this was an unecesarily addition to an alrady clunky case but when we'd get out on a work night unexpectedly when there was little time to plan a session he'd pull this book out and flip through it picking interesting targets. I was resistant since the targets aren't ones I'd necessarily pick, but now that I've purchased my own copy I get the sense that this is the point. We are bing taken on a bit of a guided tour. It contains the Messier and the Caldwell targets but then there is a list of 100 other targets the author curated plus many other NGC's for a total of 500 objects, though I've not counted them myself, but all observered by the author through his binoculars and 6-inch telescope. It is a bit idiosyncratic in the layout as it feels like one has obtained a copy of another observer's planning book for what they wish to see in the night sky. Charts are a bit haphazzad with full constellations then large non-geometrical contoured zoomed in sections for telscopes and binoculars as if someone just drew an area around a target then plopped in that bit from a larger star atlas. Yet this seems to work and I look forward to trying it in the field. Chris

I've long wanted this eyepiece for the 92-degree field which supposedly has enough eye relief for glasses wearers but found it a bit difficult to conceptualize the size and the price was steep. So during the ongoing Explore Scientific Sale I picked one up. As luck would have it the sky cleared Friday night and I've had first light despite an 8+ day moon in the sky. The eyepiece has some weight, but the bulk is low down the barrel so this helps mitigate the mass a little. We had a look at M13, M3 and some star fields through my Tak 100mm DC and the Tak 78. The field is sharp and easy to take it all in even with eyeglasses on and I didn't need to turn my head with the 44x presenting these globulars with just a hint of resolution. Oddly I found the eyepiece reminiscent of the Edmund 28mm RKE as the image just appeared to float in front of me. Another oddity was that my observing partner didn't need to adjust the focus which we've had to do essentially any other eyepiece we've ever used together for the past 12 years. The view reminds me of a binocular view where the image scale makes the field appear larger. Unboxing Video of the Explore Scientific 17mm 92 Degree Eyepiece Clear skies, Chris