DirkSteele

The APM MS 16x70 ED bins are reported to be excellent but it is quite a step in price from your current Sky Master.

https://www.apm-telescopes.net/en/apm-ed-apo-16x70-magnesium-series-binoculars

22 hours ago, JeremyS said:

I seem to remember someone on here saying these aren’t too shabby, so thought I’d try

The Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch!

and snap!  It spent a lot of time in the fc-100 during my session in Oldcroft (see observing reports) and I was rather impressed for its first light.  I am really looking forward to using it with my FS-60.  Almost a 7-degree field at 11.5x.  That would be class leading for 10x50 bins but I will have 15% more power and 44% more light gathering...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Deep-Sky-Companions-Stephen-James-OMeara-dp-1107018374/dp/1107018374/ref=dp_ob_title_bk

Stephen James O'Meara is a very skilled observer and he sketched all the Messier objects using a 4" scope from dark sites which gives a decent indication of what will be seen. 

That might be tougher than you realise.  How objectionable is chromatic aberration to you?  Given the planets are one of your key targets, Jupiter and Venus in particular will cause achromatic refractors some issues with false colour.  I would argue that you really need at least a 4" scope to give satisfactory views of the planets and DSOs but that budget for refractor, mount and tripod likely excludes apo refractors of that aperture class.

If you do not worry too much about false colour (and some astronomers really are not that bothered by it) then we can certainly make some recommendations that meet budget.

You mention transport and no collimation.  Have you considered a 5" Maksutov?  Will perform well on the planets and has the aperture for DSOs, but the limiting factor will be the 1500mm focal length and ability to really only use 1.25" eyepieces meaning max field of 1-degree.  Now that is enough for all but the largest DSOs so that is not too bad.  The other disadvantage would be a longer cool down time that refractor before it performs at its best.

Something like this:  https://www.firstlightoptics.com/slt-series/celestron-nexstar-127-slt.html

Decent optics and computer controlled which means easier to locate objects and will track them for you and in budget.

Oh and I did ask….. £16,500 😉

Which is less than I expected given the age but having done some research that seems to be around the going rate for this book.

I had a business dinner in South Kensington the other night which meant it was an easy walk back to my home in Chelsea.  However, it resulted in me walking past some shops I have not come across before including a “Rare Book” shop.  Not normally my thing, but I have a radar for all things astronomy and despite it being dark, something in the window caught my eye just for a second which stopped me in my tracks and I had to investigate.  I am glad I did.  It was an astronomy book from 1485 (yes not a typo) open showing the constellations of Sagittarius and Capricornus with accompanying text in Latin. 

This is a rather significant book.  From Wikipedia (I have bolded certain parts of the text):

The editio princeps of De astronomia was published in 1475 by Augustinus Carnerius. Less than a decade later, in 1482, Erhard Ratdolt published an edition of De astronomia, which carried the full title Clarissimi Viri Hyginii Poeticon Astronomicon Opus Vtilissimum. For this print, Ratdolt commissioned a series of woodcuts depicting the constellations to accompany Hyginus's text.  As with many other star atlases that would follow it, the positions of various stars are indicated overlaid on the image of each constellation. However, the relative positions of the stars in the woodcuts bear little resemblance to the descriptions given by Hyginus in the text or the actual positions of the stars in the sky.

As a result of the inaccuracy of the depicted star positions and the fact that the constellations are not shown with any context, the De astronomia is not particularly useful as a guide to the night sky. However, the illustrations commissioned by Ratdolt served as a template for future sky atlas renderings of the constellation figures. The text, by contrast, is an important source, and occasionally the only source, for some of the more obscure Greek myths.

So not only is it an important source for some of the Greek myths related to the night sky but the pictures are the first prints of the constellations and have served as the template for classical representation of the constellations for the grand star atlases of the 17th and 18th century (and even Sky Safari! So 21st century is covered too)

Oh and if you have to ask, you cannot afford it…..

20 minutes ago, PeterC65 said:

An interesting read, both the targets you chose and what you managed to observe.

I live about a mile from where you stayed, and the Forest of Dean Astronomy Group meets just the other side of that line of conifers in one of your pictures.

 

Thanks. I thought it was a pretty good location. You are lucky to live there.

Been a while since I have written up a stargazing session like this but 5 hours of almost cloudless skies and in a Bortle 4 as opposed to Bortle 9 inspired me to write up the notes. 
 

It’s another long one (aren’t they always with me?) so grab your favourite hot beverage and follow the link.

http://alpha-lyrae.co.uk/2024/02/25/stargazing-in-oldcroft-in-gloucestershire/
 

41 minutes ago, Stu said:In terms of performance, they follow theory in my view ie you can see the differences between 60, 76 and 100. I think the 100 definitely shows more detail on planets and the Moon, and splits tighter doubles. The 76DCU or Q are fantastic for their aperture, but I don’t think the Q addition enable it to beat the 100.

Agreed. Even a “perfect” 3” scope which one might argue the 76Q comes close to achieving will not outperform a 100mm scope that has been executed to the usual Takahashi quality, I.e excellent. That 24mm increase at this aperture makes a heck of a difference.

Yep, with a few scopes including my LZOS 130 f9.2 and the LZOS 115 f/7.  It has been getting "easier" over the last few years as the secondary reaches max separation from the primary.  20 years ago it was quite a bit harder and will be again in 20 years so grab the pup while you can!  I think on night of exceptional seeing it should be possible with 100mm.

12 minutes ago, The60mmKid said:

I've read your review several times over the years with great interest. (I'm a fan of your reviews, in general!) I'm curious whether you still feel the same on the following point or whether your perspective has changed any since writing the review: 

"While I have been unable to convince myself that the scope actually sharpened up performance on the planets and double stars, from the already impressive base FC-76, the last residual false colour seen on the most challenging of objects is eliminated, and the truly flat field, even to my accommodative eyes, means large open clusters and the Moon really do impress... Even though the CQ module is “only” £301, which is cheap for Takahashi, I am not sure I would recommend purchasing the module if it is only for use with the FC-76 DCU as I did not see enough additional benefit to really justify the expense."

The way I read your comments is, "The extender does improve things, but not significantly enough for me to recommend it." Your assessment, along with Roger Vine's (which is more explicitly in favor of the extender) are ones I keep mulling over.

That is a really interesting question.  I am not sure I have changed my mind, but I have to confess I have not used the 76Q many times as it just adds to the stuff you need to take away and it has become my defacto travel scope when going abroad.  The Q module tends to sit in the FS-60.  Perhaps I need to give it some more tries and see if my mind changes.  I read Roger's review as well (I like his stuff too) and noted he was a little more positive.  Certainly your interpretation of my comment was what I intended to say.

Preaching to the choir on this!  Reviewed it both base unit and with the CQ module and it is fab.  Great travel scope which has been to Africa many times including my honeymoon (understanding wife!)

The Q review on my site.

http://alpha-lyrae.co.uk/2018/12/07/takahashi-fc-76q-review/

The orginal review on my site before Astronomy Now were short a review and I reworked it.

http://alpha-lyrae.co.uk/2017/03/12/takahashi-fc-76-dcu-review/

And it means you can do this with it......

12 minutes ago, Stu said:

It was a home built job, by some one who seems fairly competent. Loosely based on an Obsession type design I think.

Impressive! Wish I had those woodworking skills. Sadly, my dad (who is rather good at such things) failed to pass on those genes to me.

Looks like a nice scope, not withstanding the friction issues which can no doubt be solved. Who is the manufacturer? 

I suspect it is also luck of the postcode lottery (no not the actual lottery) as well. I still receive multiple deliveries a week in central London. My parents in Hampshire are lucky if they get two a week.

Frustrating as it can be, patience for a few days at least is a virtue. Sadly, it’s not the era of Postman Pat anymore and daily deliveries. Heck back in the 80s as a kid I remember we had a second delivery in the afternoon!

Nothing puts me off as I live in central London so short of perhaps Tokyo or Beijing I live in the worst place in the world to pursue astronomy. Buy I do it anyway.

What the Bortle scale does for me is provide a quick check on what I can expect when I travel and as such whether it is worth packing a scope. Though saying that, I almost always a take a scope anyway.

Certainly, when I finally leave the big smog for a more rural location, the Bortle scale will help me eliminate a few places as if I make the move I want some significant incremental gain on sky darkness.

Superb drawing! Looks like seeing was pretty good that night, as was your ability to capture it on paper.

They often follow thrilling stargazing sessions and just continue the theme of reality several hours earlier. The most recent was after a 5 hour session out of London a few weeks ago.

Never tire of a good rainbow.  I recall one insomina plagued night when I was studying physics at university and I stumbled across an open university program on the physics of rainbows and it got pretty complex on the maths.  I love that complex physics can give rise to beautiful phenomena.  It is one of the reasons I stargaze.

edit: looked back through my photos and found one from March 2022 which was pretty intense but still did not do justice to the visual spectacle.

There is a reason why I have 9 telescopes! And lots of eyepieces, tripods and mounts. But I know deep down I do not need anything else (though I am thinking about a nice pair of complementary binoculars) so other than the 31mm Nagler and 13mm Ethos I purchased at AstroFest I do not see myself participating in the “what did the postman bring?” thread again this year.

Doesn’t stop me reading all the great reviews of equipment on here and elsewhere and daydreaming though… 😉

5 minutes ago, Deadlake said:

You much does the TMB 115 weigh?

The 105 mm with a FT3545  is  around 7 kg, however compacts to 495 mm long...

I took it out to Albury cricket ground last night and although the moon was out managed to see some nebulosity around Orion, with no filter and a APM 100 mm UFF in.

To be honest it's all about how much mount can be transported, the scope choice then flows from that.

In my old form with the sliding drawtube and 2" Feathertouch is was about 6.4kg I think which was about the same as my 2" FT 105.  I now have a 3" on the back and the weight is a little higher.  But call it 7kg, Ercole is 3kg (needs a counterweight at this weight to be super smooth so add 5kg plus bar), Gitzo Series 5 is 2.8kg and then finder and diagonal etc and mid teens kg.  Hence good to know what one considers grab and go (I think this).

Its quite tricky.  One you move to 5" inches as an optical designer you start to have to make choices.  Keep chromatic aberration controlled means with a doublet a longer focal length and hence longer scope which is heavier because there is more of it (plus a greater moment arm meaning more robust mounting solution) or move to triplet which adds more heavy glass and bigger lens cell which increases weight but allows the focal length to remain shorter so less tube weight and perhaps a lower moment of inertia.

I guess there is also the question of what you consider grab and go.? I also have the LZOS 115 and have taken that all over the place but including mount (plus perhaps counterweights), tripod, finder and eyepieces etc, I am still getting up into the mid-teens or more in kg which many might not consider truly grab and go.  Conversely, my Tak FC-100DC on a Gitzo Carbon Fibre tripod and Sightron Alt Az mount is staying under 6kg and I can carry around with one hand.

As it is, I cannot think of much else available that has not already been mentioned.

The general limit is a battery with 100 Watt Hours capacity but airlines can decide to permit spares up to 101-160 Watt Hours.

Your 12v 7Ah is 84 Watt Hour so should be fine to take.

Should have added, needs to be carry on packed, not checked luggage.

2 minutes ago, The60mmKid said:

Oh, and it's a good way to pass the (considerable) time between observing sessions. It's healthier than buying lots of unneeded astronomy equipment and getting in online arguments, which feels like more of a  CloudyNights thing to do.

One of the main reasons I am not a member over there. Incredible depth of knowledge, but far too much emotion in many threads.

The general sense of community. I have always enjoyed talking about Astronomy and sharing the night sky with as many people as possible is something I am very passionate about which is why I do plenty of outreach including in the past sponsoring a travelling astrodome from my old university when it lost some of its funding several years ago whose mandate was to visit all the local schools (money well spent as far as I was concerned).

Here you can leverage off the knowledge base and just share in the love for the hobby that we all have.