DirkSteele

Nice write up and photos. Makes me want to do the same.

I think it is fantastic that someone is trying to push what is possible in optical technology forward (though I think we are probably spending the $1mn to get 1/10th of second lap time improvement like in F1 here) but I fear for the prospects of the company here as even idiots like me who spend way too much money on scopes won't spend 20k on a 4" scope. Still, if they want me to review one, I am more than happy to put it through its paces.

Opposite actually. Only has the 2” Feathertouch on it so the heavy lens pulls it forwards so need the scope far back in the tube rings to balance it. But balance it does when I do that.

Probably not adding much having read all the replies but I would be big advocate for a 5” scope when you already own a 4”. The increase in light grasp is as much as 70% which is very noticeable on DSOs at the eyepiece and the extra resolution on planets and double stars is also obvious. Given average seeing conditions, 5” will often show all that can be seen on the planets. It is however, amazing how quickly the scope seems to scale up with that extra 25-30mm of aperture. Even a lighter weight doublet will be that much longer such that moment of inertia becomes a factor meaning a more robust mounting solution is desirable. The below image exaggerates things a little as the 105/650 has a long sliding draw tube to keep transportation length down but compare it to my 130/1200 (both set to transportation length). On to the mount. My Tele Optic Ercole is more than up to the task of 2 4” class refactors, both triplets which with finders, diagonals and eyepieces was probably c.16kg. But it started to struggle (above 200x magnification) with my 130/1200 which is around 12kg with the same accessories.

Up until my early 30s I was able to see a couple of Jupiter’s moons naked eye so if they were not in the field with Jupiter (they would look like stars at 100x mag) then almost certainly your aim was off. To align your finder aim the scope at a distant terrestrial object like a telephone pole or building and then use the alignment screws on the finder bracket to adjust the finder so it shows you the same object as you see in the main scope. Centre it on the crosshairs. It is possible the scope will need to be collimated but we can get to that once you are definitely pointing where you think you are pointing.

A great age to start stargazing. I gave a 30 minute unprepared presentation about the solar system to my class when I was 8 as I was obsessed with the topic and knew far more about the planets than I do now over 35 years later but this was the age when I started using my dad’s binoculars to look at the night sky and I never stopped.

I hear stories like this so often with eBay. Unfortunately you have sold to a thief. Honestly, if I were selling something on eBay, I would film the whole packing and posting to prove it was dispatched as described so I had concrete evidence when this happens.

Just to be clear they are not 10x and 20x eyepeices. The 10 and 20 refers to their focal lengths in mm. To calculate the magnification they will produce in your scope, you divide the focal length of the telescope (in this case 650mm) by the eyepiece focal length so you will have 32.5x and 65x with the two supplied eyepieces. If the scope is well collimated, the 65x will show some modest detail but you will need a shorter focal length eyepiece to get the magnification up a bit more to really start getting a satisfying view of the planets. A barlow is one option but it will only "create" 3 eyepeices as the 20mm becomes 10mm (assuming 2x barlow) and the 10mm becomes 5mm. Do not buy a really cheap one as it may have plastic lenses and perform very poorly but that is not to say you need to spend a fortune either. The alternative is to buy a shorter eyepiece. Something around 4 to 5mm would be a decent choice.

One of the first articles I wrote for my website back in 2013 was "Prettest Colour contrasted double stars." I had been on a bit of a double star kick that year and in particular the ones that show different colours so I collated my top 35. Table of that list is on the link. http://alpha-lyrae.co.uk/2013/11/13/prettiest-colour-contrasted-double-stars/ Makes me want to go back over the list as I have not visited a great many of those in many years.

Welcome back though its not quite you without your Worzel Gummidge profile pic!

The focused image is when it is at is smallest. Stars will still look like points of light regardless of magnifcation used as they are too distant to be resolved in telescopes. Planets are also in focus when the image is smallest. If you want a larger image of Jupiter for example, you need to use a high power (shorter focal length eyepiece). But once again the focused image is when it is at its smallest. As you move away from focus, the spider vanes and secondary mirror shadow will become visible. As Stu mentioned in his post, you will see defraction spikes around stars and planets which is perfectly normally for a Newtonian scope.

I believe the fork mounted C8 sold for $795 back in 1974 so goodness knows how much the C14 was!

As others have said, ensure your finder is accurately aligned with your telescope as a first step. One technique I think makes star hopping easier is use an app like SkySafari which allows you to define fields of view. In the image below, I have the field of my Takahashi 6x30 finder, 24mm Panoptic in my Takahashi FS-60 and a 7mm Nagler Type 6 in the same scope. Now start your star hop on a bright star which should be easy to find and use those available fields to plan your hop such that your next target on the path to your intended target is in the field or a nudge while keeping the start point somewhere in the field even if it is the very edge. In the example below, I have centred on Eta Herculis with the finder. The second image shows me placing that same star at the top edge of the finder and that puts M13 almost in the centre of the field of the 24mm and even just in the field of the 7mm. Just keep the jumps small until your skill level improves and you will meander your way to objects of interest relatively easily.

I need to leave this thread. All those photos of the big Dobs are stirring something inside me. Repeat after me, mirrors are for shaving! Mirrors are for shaving! Phew, think my wife might kill me if another scope shows up. Especially a monster Dob.

Yep that is about right. LZOS lens cells are built like tanks and the 3.5” Feathertouch is also a chunk of metal which probably accounts for a good amount of the difference.

That price for the 185 is unbelievable. Unless they have used low grade glass with lots of inclusions and bubbles, and the finish is rough then it an absolute bargain. I paid £22k for my LZOS 180 f/7 back in 2013! I would caution that a scope of this size does need a permanent home to get the most out of it, though it is portable. I took it to Astro Camp once.

Are the pricces on the FLO site just placeholders or is that 185 the bargain of the century (assuming they did not make the lens from the bottom of coke bottles)?

It’s been a while since I have used mine. Makes me want to pull the little guy out and give him a session under the stars.

Nah, I am still young (ish) and want to play the field! 😉

I did wonder if there was risk of material flaking and ending up on the optics but never looked into to see if that was the case with Vanta.

Always found it annoying that Vantablack cannot be purchased by individuals but I am surprised some high end telescope companies have not looked into it. No baffles so narrower tubes meaning less weight is no bad thing. Perhaps this might be a good substitute. Certainly the flat black in scopes today when viewed at acute angles is at best grey.

Wish they would expand the scale of the longitudinal aberration plots. I know they have zero crossings and are basically straight lines across the aperture, but it would be useful (for the geek in me at least) to see the variation in wavelength focus. Still I saw one plot which had a scale of 7mm on the x-axis and all the lines just looked straight (but definitely were not based on the telescope model) so they are not the worst for it. Pretty sure even a singlet wouldn't need a 7mm axis for its aberration plot! Loving the catalogue pics. Any chance they feature some of the big custom order FCTs?

There is a gap with the DC but if you kept a diagonal in place there would be little room for the scope to move. Should work well with the DZ.

Woo! 4 in a row(see three posts above). Is there a prize for that?. 😜 My Takahashi FC-100 continues to require extra bits and bobs. This time a bag to transport it around. Selected the Oklop 100/900 refactor bag. Should serve my needs well. Already use a larger version with my APM LZOS 130/1200. Placed order at 12:45pm this past Friday. Received an email almost exactly an hour later stating the order was complete with a Royal Mail tracking number. Arrived the next day before lunchtime. Great!

Yet more stuff for my recently acquired Takahashi FC-100DC. Now he needs a home so I picked up the Oklop 100/900 case from FLO. I already use a larger case with my APM LZOS 130/1200 so I know this will serve my needs well.