bingevader

The OVL 7mm is lovely.

You've missed the Williams Optics SPL 6mm which is also lovely.

How does the 32mm Skywatcher SWA compare to the 32mm Panaview, Robin?

Or a barlow?

18 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

I too had a 4mm Nirvana. It was one of the older style bodies with the flat top around the eye lens. I sold it because I didn't like the flat top, but the optics were very impressive. I remember watching Saturn drift into the field at one edge, traverse the field, and drift clean off the edge at the other side. There was no distortion and it was perfectly sharp from edge to edge. 

Happy to report that the optics seem to have remained impressive. Haven't tried with Saturn yet, but have been very pleased with the edge to edge sharpness at f6.

I have the 4mm OVL, it's a very fine eyepiece and the 82° FOV gives plenty of drift time.

You could turn the 200pds into a dob by making a rocker box?

I tend to use this wonderful resource for inspiration.

If someone has said they've seen something, if it's reasonable for my setup and the conditions are right, then I will have a go.

Here's mine, fits over the outside of the small hole.

A nice snug fit and then you can tape it on too, just to be sure.

I tape the end cap on too!

5 hours ago, Barry-W-Fenner said:

I have tried to understand this thread, but ultimately, it has given me a major brain fart...

 

Baz

Me too for the AP stuff!

My very layman understanding from a purely visual perspective is that the f number describes how "bendy" the primary is, whether it be a lens or mirror.

A low f number means that the light has been "bent" more by the primary in order to reach the secondary or eyepiece (such as in short Newtonians with very large mirrors).

A bendier mirror or lens requires more manufacture and so is more expensive.

Light from the outside of the mirror/lens will travel a different distance to the secondary or eyepiece than light from the centre of the mirror/lens and so requires more correction by the eyepiece to focus all the light.

That's why lower f number 'scopes need better corrected and so more expensive eyepieces.

We live not too far from the coast and the weather can be a bit unpredictable.

There's a reasonably sized town 6 miles away and the difference between the two can be astounding at times.

Yes, your coastal site should have much better uninterrupted views out to sea, but if that is to the North, it's not necessarily an advantage.

I'm not a meteorologist, but an on shore breeze in winter is likely to be warmer and wetter than the surrounding land.

We have the odd bit of sea mist or fog too that rolls in all of a sudden and puts a halt to any stargazing!

Put it this way, I wouldn't set off with out knowing what the weather was going to be like, but then I suppose that goes for the inland site too!

If it comes with a price reduction, I've no problem with a bump.

If no one has picked it up the first time, you probably should get that message anyway.

2 hours ago, Stu said:

Thanks for these, note that there are some good stickies in the Observing - Lunar section which are worth looking at.

https://stargazerslounge.com/forum/30-observing-lunar/

There we go, I knew I'd posted it somewhere before.

By Michael Bird.

8 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

You're showing your age with the "Tufty Badge" Ben. I haven't heard that mentioned since Noah was a lad.

Thanks, will wear it with pride.

9 hours ago, Helen said:

Sounds like this might be your next project Ben 😋 @bingevader

 https://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/celestial-objects-to-watch/the-lunar-100/

Hoping to get out with the children in school tonight, I'll certainly have a list of the prominent objects along the terminator.

I have a couple of pdfs that I've posted before from ages ago!

Can't remember whose they are or I'd give them the credit

Lunar 100 object list and notes.pdf Lunar 100 Object List.pdf

Had another half hour of clear sky after tea, before the cloud rolled in.

It was windy here too and not the steadiest of skies, but well worth it.

Big thumbs up for the 4mm OVL (in the 200p) again, having roughly a minutes drift time and clear from edge to edge makes a big difference.

Not steady enough for the 2x barlow, but had to be done anyway!

Enjoyed seeing Rupes Recta too and just the suggestion of detail on the floor of Vallis Alpes.

Enjoying the Heads-Up now I know what I'm looking for, thanks paulastro.

Popping in and out whilst cooking tea!

Is there a SGL Tufty badge for getting all the craters Stu?!

I like the little marble run of craters to the South East (on your map Stu!) of Copernicus.

Ah, der, thanks.

Excuse my ignorance, but is that the double star in Cancer?

7 hours ago, Helen said:

My porta is currently on loan to Ben's school.

Oooh, sorry Helen!

I'll get a move on with the dob base!

I do my preliminary, "chat", it makes little difference.

I think it's about being physically connected to the 'scope.

Apparently, experiential learning is all about being hands-on.

Out with the school children last night.

What a convenient set up!

Little tweak of the zoom, little tweak of the the focus and away you go! 

Doesn't stop them leaning on the 'scopes or knocking the tripods though.

Only a brief, half hour, chance last night, but very promising.

It's a good sold bit of kit and as I said above, smooth in action.

I didn't have anything to hand that was a direct comparison, so used the 25mm and 8mm TV plossls!

The conditions weren't great with twinkling stars that wouldn't come to focus in any EP so this will need further playing with.

However, the views of M42 were lovely.

The nebula fitted it with room to spare at 21.5mm, but obviously not as much room as the lower power TV plossl.

At 7.2mm however, it had a wider field of view than the 8mm plossl.

The image was favourably comparable and objects remained in focus across the field of view.

I only compared the extremes, but I do have a 15mm plossl that I could use to look at the middle in future.

The zoom isn't parfocal between focal lengths, but I assume this is to be expected because of the design.

I couldn't fit the whole of the Double Cluster in at 21.5mm which is a shame, but not unexpected.

M36, M37 and M38 looked suitably impressive.

Very much a first glance before the clouds rolled in and on a poor night, but very pleased so far.

It must be word of mouth then, because I've searched around a bit and can't find many "bad things"!

Anyway, we ordered and have received an Opticstar 7.2-21.5mm zoom and 2x barlow.

The zoom looks decent enough and the action of the zoom itself is smooth and easy.

I'll let you know what the views are like when we get the chance!

And, if seeing is good and transparency is good! Woohoo!

13 minutes ago, Stu said:

optimise your chances of getting good views.

The chance would be a fine thing!

I've stopped worrying too much about all this.

Although "worrying" is probably too strong a word.

I can't do anyhting about my back garden and weather here has been so bad that I just take what I am given and then ponder the conditions after!

If I waited for the perfect night I'd miss out on a lot of stargazing.

I suppose the only way you can improve the viewing conditions is to move!

Or find a site that has more favourable conditions near by?