bomberbaz

Yes it is, I own it. Where abouts in lancashire are you?

How old are you, are you reasonably fit and healthy. If the answers are under 60, yes to both the other two then get the 200p. A 200 aperture telescope gathers close to four (4) times more light then a 130. The light gathereing capacity of a scope is one of the key things to consider when buying one. The more light you gather and everything else being equal, the more you see, it's that simple. I am 50+ (sadly nearer the 60 than 50) and have no problems transporting a 250 dobsonian and mount around. Both the tube and base fit easily into a standard family sized car. The 200 dobsonian is simple to use and would provide you all you need for a long time until aperture fever strikes in the future. PS. Aperture fever doesn't get everyone and is simply a mythical astronomy joke.

That is a lovely picture there Michael. Excellent definition on the larger planet. On Wednesday I got up real close to Venus, the crescent was magnificently defined, looked so amazing but there was some false colour around the edges caused by the fact it was so low in the sky. Refractions etc. But that picture takes me back. Nice work Steve

Already have zoom, great idea this. I am doing more of the eeva aspect along with some wide angle camera only shots but I plan attending. Can still pick up some useful tips.

1.5 Louis, according to televue's chart I should be needing the dioptrix right down to a 7mm eyepiece but that isn't the case. Perhaps some additional checking needs doing on brighter objects, so will try again when the moon is up and around for viewing.

Yes on wednesday I was trying out my 12.5mm Nikon with and without dioptrix to see if I really needed it on a 2.5mm exit pupil and found I definately didn't. The difference was hardly noticeable and certainly didn't detract from the views. M39 being a perfect object to assess this. What I did prefer was getting my eye that few mm further in to drink in that immersive 102 degree fov. Don't get me wrong, dioptrix viewing is much easier and more comfortable than using glass imho, just prefer to not use if I can get away with it. Overall though I have worked out dioptrix over glasses difference is 3-4 mm gain, so still fantastic bit of kit. Steve

OK I have pushed the button for a APM 24mm. Read a lot of reports on various forums and got a lot of mixed review information on both this and the TV panoptic 24mm but when you cut through it the end results appear the same. It appears to me that the panoptic has the edge in some areas but not all. In the areas it does perform better it is only just, barely discernible by many and certainly not enough to persuade that it's more than double the price tag of the APM is worth me paying. Hopefully a star party in the future will allow me to compare results. @rwilkey the itch has been scratched 👍

Don, I notice the APM has a lip when the eyeguard is removed. What is the diameter of the top with guard removed please? I am wondering if it is the same size at a panoptic 24mm and therefore compatible with a dioptrix! Steve

First attempt at sketching last night, not brilliant I know but not bad for a first effort. I actually spent quite a bit of time on Bode's as it was northerly and least area of skyglow pollution. I was definately getting hints of structure and was trying to show that in the sketch. I have never tried pushing the magnification so much before and was really surprised as to how well it took the high magnification, usually used to use up to about a hundred. Need to polish up my stars though, these are all stigmatised 😄

Interesting answers and explains a lot too. I know of a place which on the face of it should be pretty rubbish but actually gives better results than it should. Mainly due to the fact most of the bad LP is northern, the southern aspect is clear. I mean really it should be obvious and I did expect last nights viewing to be affected by the LP, but not as badly as it turned out. It was gone midnight and above me the skies were super dark, inky black and I was struggling to spot some known stars as there were so many others, not bad considering there is no true astronomical twilight for my latitude at the moment. However if I looked south it turned to dark blue, lightening to what almost felt like civil twilight by the horizon. Hence my nights viewing was cut short as half my list was in the south section. I am guessing an SQM-L pointed towards the southern skyglow would have given a pretty low reading and to be fair, it is that which I find the most important given that is where most of the DSO's are best viewed.

Ok so that's reasonably straight forward then. I have read the bortle scale chart before, so not completely niave. However, does the sqm reading take account of skyglow from nearby towns and can this adversly affect the reading. That is to say in my own example, you have a lot of skyglow lp from the south but next to nothing from the north. This lowers the reading to the detriment of the northern views which are actually far superiour to your southern options. Hope thaat makes sense.

Ok so last night I went to a place which wasn't the best for viewing. The south was wiped out by skyglow. Overall SQM was 20.90. Lovely skies at zenith, pants lower down especially south. Now a little further on from last night (10 minutes drive) I have found a spot that is 5 miles deeper, offset by a few miles to the side of the LP and has a SQM of 21.10. I intend recce-ing this place. Smack in the middle of know where, no known localised LP and well sheltered but with great aspects. I know the place (roughly speaking) and think it would be a far better option. Anyhow, SQM is something I could do to get my head around more. Seems it starts high up the scale anyway (18+ in central manchester) and goes up in the smallest increments the darker it gets. Can anybody though explain in simple terms the SQM readings and how they work please? Steve

sounds like your night went similar to mine Nick, except your viewing options seemed better prepared. Good effort.

Only just really picked up on this Don and did a google search on the APM. If this is the same eyepiece APM then it's coming in at a significant circa 50% saving on a tele vue panoptic. I realise it isn't quite as good but at half price one must certainly consider ones options.

Ok quick review. I knew the new place I was looking at would be affected by "southern" skyglow from towns a few miles away but even I was surprised how obvious it was. I know of much darker places but this was 20 minutes and given the current situation still ongoing, thought that travel reasonable. My other nearest decent dark site is more than double that so thought I would try out this new place and be sensible. So the good. Got a cracking view of mercury, managed to resolve it in the dob although there was a lot of false colour as it was low on horizon. Got my best ever of Venus, again a little false colour but the crescent was superbly defined. The scopes push to is still doing a sterling job, I shall miss it when I sell it. I confirmed I don't need glasses or dioptrix below a 3mm exit pupil, despite what my prescription and televue say. I have had a mini revelation on viewing galaxies after trying out much more magnification than I would normally have. Thanks @Don Pensack for the tip. Actually had the Nikon 12.5 with a powermate, thats x190 and the view was still strong with good structure, I think the view was better at 140 with the 17mm nikon barlowed. That's x14 per inch aperture. Mind you this was viewing M81 which was northern facing where skyglow was minimal. Oh forgot, M13 was fantastic once it got very high up and away from the skyglow, best view I have had in years. The bad was the dam awful skyglow, anything south facing was washed out and if low completely unable to be seen. Not making a list of doubles and other clusters to keep me going a little longer after running out of options, a list compiled mostly of galaxies in a place I already suspected would be affected by LP was not my best idea. Also not making a stronger list looking northerly. I had checked a light pollution map so knew this would be the best option, as is born out in comments above. Still one day I will learn, hah! I actually really enjoyed tonight despite the LP issue. I learned and confirmed a few things that will help me to continue to enjoy this hobby going forward. On a personal basis I could hear all sorts of wildlife through the night, bats kept flying around my head and I really felt a sense of peace & contentment. It was good to be out and think tonight did my wellbeing a power of good. Steve

Totally agreed, don't remember ever seeing the hubble being nudged to track 🤣🤣

thought i had one don, just checked and its the nagler 6 adaptor, thankfully they are not that expensive.

Nice report that there, I was almost in the obs with you.

I use a dioptrix Louis so wouldn't be a problem. As for balance, all my glass is very weighty anyway, (see sig) so the scope is setup to use eyepiece plus a coma corrector or for high power when CC isn't needed I use eyepiece plus powermate. Overall weight is roughly the same.

Sounds feasible to me vlaiv, just slightly strange thing to notice. Your brain can play a lot of tricks on you at times, this was probably one of those times.

I have just come in from viewing, going to give it a break for a while. I have just experienced what I can best describe as what appeared to be a hot pixelisation of my view of the sun. Lots of tiny light specs flashing for micro seconds as I was viewing, very curious. Has anybody else ever had such an experience? If so, what is the cause. I am currently assuming doing too much at the eyepiece but don't know that for sure. Steve

I am on a gorgeous prom at the minute, at the top as I look at it, stretches a good way round too. There is activity on the edge all around but the one I am looking at is by far the best. It is made up of three distinct elements that grow stronger right to left. The left hand one is the best I have seen this year so far. Also a nice bit if surface detail too just below the above proms although I couldn't get it to show up in white light.

Cheers Robin. If one came along at the right price I would be very tempted. I am very good at talking myself into buying eyepieces.

Thanks for the comment @Don Pensack, I had already decided after reading other reports that these were not worth following up on further but again you confirm that the decision is the right one. 15x per inch though, that's way higher than I had been using, I have only been in the 7-10x bracket. Seems as though I shall be using the powermate a little more going forwards. Steve

When I posted this I was having some whimsical ideas regarding my eyepiece collection. I have for a while been thinking about adding a 24mm panoptic despite owning a 26mm nagler. I do like a good collection of glass for my dob, the fast focal ratio kind of demands it but wasn't sure about the ES glass however @Don Pensackhas answered my query and I shall not pursue them further. I shall stick with my collection as it is for now. BTW I shall never part with my Nikons, I love them far too much. Steve