SpookyKatt

Very sorry to hear rhis, I met him while selling him a scope and he was a lovely man. My condolences to his family. Kathleen

I think Losmandy were initially going to offer a spring loaded worm upgrade kit but because their solution relies on some machining to the mount they must have went off the idea. They said in a youtube stream (I asked a question re it) that they will sell the bits to do the spring loaded modification but it would be up to the purchaser to figure it out how to fit it.

Love that colour combination.

Great video Curtis, many thanks for linking it and the battery review. I am really liking the idea of a lighter battery I have to confess. Must say I never knew you could get a little dummy load like you had to test the batteries with and I think that is a genius device (as I am not sure as to actual health of my batteries) so I will have to look into getting one of those. kathleen

Hi Trevor, Well I owned both 100R's for a few years, I just checked and the newer one I owned for at least 4 years and the older one closer to 11 years i think, although it spent the last few years forgotten in its box as I was spending more and more time trying to get my imaging working in between the clouds. I did indeed use the Tal Plossls with the scope and quite liked them if I am honest, I had a Tal 30mm erfle as well I think it was but i didn't get on with that I must confess. i also used the Tal barlow's, both the x2 and a x3, they both worked well but the x3 was a little much as I recall. It might have worked better on a different mount to further reduce vibrations etc so I mainly used the x2. To be honest if you use longer screws you can use other diagonals with the scope, but i didn't feel the need to as I thought the Tal diagonal was good. A few of the Tal scopes had a flange fitting for the diaganol, perhaps it is a bit of a safety feature so if the screws slightly loosen the diagnol won't just fall out, more rotate round. i'm sure the metal must contract quite abit on those cold siberian nights. I used to have some pictures of this but don't know where they are at the moment but yes there were gaps round the baffles making stray light possible, especially on bright targets. This was one of the differences though I really noticed between the two scopes. As I said the older scope had a better build quality and you could really see it looking at the baffles, they let in very little light round the baffles and they were much better made and fitted. The newer model, not so much. I actually took the lens cell and focuser off and put some flocking on the inside to cut down on the stray light effects before the first baffle and after the last baffle I think it was. The scopes were just finished different though, I'm kind of feeling a little sad now I let that older model go, but I am sure its getting much more use now. Kathleen

I've had two Tal 100R's in the past, both with their wooden tripods, they were nice scopes and while its been a while since I owned them I have to say they always impressed me optically. One 100R was the older variety with an obvious purple coated lens and metal dewshield (and complete in its large coffin like box) whereas the second had slightly more greenish optics as I recall and a plastic dewshield. They both performed similarily though and both gave very pleasing views albeit with some obvious achrochromatic fringing on bright targets like jupiter and the moon. Whilst they both had the usual industrial build quality the older one actually seemed to have a better more refined build quality, whereas the newer model felt a bit more like it came off a production line. There are a few frustrating things about the older 100R's in my opinion, while I thought the diaganol was good and loved the fact that you can colimate it, the travel was always I felt a limitation (true in the 200K as well) and the flange fitting was a bit annoying but it was a scope of its time I guess. Ironically travel can also be an issue with the mount when using the slow motion controls. On the whole though there's really something quite nice about using a long refractor like a Tal 100R on its tripod, sometimes I'd still like to have one sitting about so that I can quickly look at the moon. They certainly have their own personality and they don't feel like a clone telescope thats for sure, I am sure you will enjoy yours when it arrives. Kathleen

Hi cristian, I'm not aware of anyone fitting an autofocuser to a Tal but I am sure there are a number of ways to do it depending on the focuser presuming your talking about a non stock focuser. It might be worth stating if its an F8.5 or the older F10 model your going to fit the autofocuser to ? You can fit a 2" focuser to the 200K, I don't think the 200K will fully illuminate the 2" exit though but it certainly makes the scope alot nicer to use. I fitted a JMI focuser to mine using a similar backplate and really enjoyed the views with a better focuser and 2" eyepieces but had to move the secondary forward towards the primary and recollimate the scope in order to move the focus point back to be able to use the new focuser. If you have a short focuser it will mean there is less adjusting to do but obviously if you use bigger 2" secondary's you will need to ensure you have moved the focus enough for them all to work. I had to have move my secondary several times and retest it to get it all to work which took me a while. In the end I reverted mine but that said it can certainly be done and it does make the scope alot nice to use. kathleen

I think the kaleidoscope-shaped pattern you are seeing is the 1600 microlensing issue. Kathleen

There is also Andy Ellis at : http://astronomiser.co.uk/

Thanks for posting, I wasn't aware of that capability but its useful to know. Kathleen

perfect fit.

Hows your plan to fit the dec motor coming along Alan ? Have you got a way forward on doing that ?

Why remake it, why not just sand down what you have and re bond them and give it a final refining sanding ? I mean its nearly there as is, why not just adjust them and stick them together, I mean this is just a spacer after all.

Alan's obviously more qualified to offer advice but that doesn't look good, have you tried to undo the philips star screw to remove the clutch lever just to make sure that the screw can be tightened in the threaded hole on its own, as the video alost makes it look like the threaded hole is too big for the bolt.

Yeah I think there's always a bit of a gap between the setting circle and front dial, its certainly a bit disappointing how it flops forward when the lock knob is slackened but I was never convinced how usuable the EQ5 setting circles are anyway. So you must be getting near completion with the project now Alan, are there many things that you have left to do with the mount bar fitting your motor drive ? Kathleen