johninderby

4 minutes ago, Neil H said:

That's what I thought it was thanks John 

Can you imagine the eyestrain, headaches etc. caused by using binoviewers  with zooms set at different focal lengths. 😵‍

13 minutes ago, Pixies said:

 

Yes that’s the newer one. Just shows how peoples eyesight varies. 

6 minutes ago, Neil H said:

John why click stop??

So you can set both zooms to exactly the same setting. Without the clickstops would be hard to have both zooms set the same or you would have to fiddle around to try and get them the same.

2 minutes ago, wookie1965 said:

I didn't know you could use a zoom in a bino viewer 

If the zooms have click stops then yes they can be used in binoviewers.

1 minute ago, Stu1smartcookie said:

Yes and that’s a very good point, convenience. I can get three Nirvanas for 250 or the zoom for 223 I reckon I am looking towards the zoom at present , a night of YouTube awaits though lol

Hyperflex and Nirvanas. 🤔

Was that the old flat top Nirvana or the newer one with the conventional rubber eyecup? 

Not had any blackout problems with my 16mm Nirvana.

Reminds me of the old joke about guitar players. They spend half their time playing out of tune and the other half tuning. 😁

That’s the greatest weakness of the SCT design at least in the medium and bigger apertures. Keeping one in perfect collimation all the time is the problem.

BTW will the APM wonder zoom every be released? Allways seems to get delayed.

You just have to accept that every scope is a compromise and no one scope does ot all so it’s more about finding the best comprimise rather than the perfect scope. Also explains why most have more than one scope. 😁

I found the Hyperflex zoom to be about 80% to 90% as good as the Baader zoom. The Svbony zooms are also very good.

The Nirvanas are a best buy. Not as good as a Nagler but not that far off either. Would rather have the set of Nirvanas than the Baader zoom.

That would indicate a problem with the focuser not being squarely mounted.. The wooden part the focuser is mounted to may be slightly out.So perhaps a bit of shimming is called for. 

An article by Damien Peach that might be of interest. 

An examination of the effects of optical aberrations, obstruction and seeing on real Planetary images.

http://www.damianpeach.com/simulation.htm

Used an area calculator and came up with the same answer of  15,029

3 minutes ago, HollyHound said:

And significantly heavier too, I suspect 😬

I did ask Steve about a 10” solid tube CC. With the carbon tube wouldn’t be much heavier than the 8”.

He said it would be possible if there was enough demand. 🤔

The Svbony 1.25” diagonal is pretty good despote it’s bargain price.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Diagonal-Adapter-Refracting-Telescope-Eyepiece/dp/B07GPMX7BN

The StellaMira diagonal is a bit better.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/stellamira-1-25-90-di-electric-diagonal.html

And better still.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/william-optics-125-dura-bright-dielectric-diagonal.html

Or if you  would prefer a prism.

https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/baader-prism-diagonal-t-2-90-with-focusing-eyepiece-holder-and-125-nosepiece.html

Yes find the CC edges out the mak and SCT in on axis sharpness.

The optics in the CC seem to be better finished. Will take higher mag as well.

27 minutes ago, Louis D said:

 

The difficulty of trying to get absolute sharpness with SCTs is probably why other designs are more popular for high power visual work.

And that’s the reason I went from the C8 to the CC8” . So sharp on axis.

One other thing to note with the CC design is that it has a fixed primary so no mirror flop. 

As much as I love my CC8” can’t help wonder what the CC10” would be like. 🤔 

32 minutes ago, HollyHound said:

I (briefly) had this very scope from @johninderby before selling it back and I can confirm, the collimation was spot on when it was delivered and (I presume) the same when returned... excellent scope and the only reason I let it go back was because I got a Mewlon 180 (another superb scope) 👍

Yes collimation is still perfect. 👍🏻

Would be intesting to compare the Mewlon 180 with the Tecnosky 125. 🤔

#12 piano wire is 0.7mm and comes in a 1m length. Strong stiff and doesn’t kink like copper.

Violin E string is 0.54mm

You don’t want to go too fine otherwise the crosshairs can be hard to see.

The Skymax127 AZ-GTi is very popular and just over £500.00. The AZ-GTi mount is pretty good and can be used in EQ mode with the addition of a wedge.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/telescopes-in-stock/sky-watcher-skymax-127-az-gti.html

5 minutes ago, Sunshine said:

That stellalyra sure is a nice looking piece of kit isn't it!

Yup and fits nicely into my scope lineup.  Hope the OP finds a scope that will suit them but there are so many nice scopes out there now can be a confusing choice.

I’ve found the CC6” holds collimation as well as a mak. Never had to touch the collimation since I got it.

You should not disregard the increased resolution of a bigger aperture plus the ability to take higher magnification. My CC6” on a report tripod can be carried outside single handed. Fitted a carry handle to the OTA.

Thought about a 4” frac but bought a 5” APO instead. Lot heavier than the CC6” though and requires a solid mount. Not exactly grab’n’go. but a wonderful scope.🙂. 

Piano wire is very good and comes in lots of thicknesses so just pick a fine one. You can get it on Amazon or eBay and normaly comes in 1m lengths. Or a local music shop of course.

I’ve had an ST102 and while it was fine for low power wide field use trying to use higher magnification wasn’t nice due to CA and other aberations. 

One of the other scopes is far better suited for AP due to their excellent quality optics that will allow higher magnification and lack of CA.

BTW it shoild be The history of telescopes since Thomas Harriot in 1609 to James Webb. Thomas Harriot was the first person to use a telescope for astronomical observation not Galileo.