pystab

Good point about dark adaptation, but I still have to look at the chart at some point. Besides, my back garden is overlooked by street lights so I never have any night vision to lose! Should I find myself somewhere actually dark, I'd dim and redden the phone screen, and switch it off anyway once the object to view's found. I like the flip-up frames idea, and cheap off-the-shelf glasses would make damaging them less of an issue. I'd still prefer to do without glasses altogether though.

I need reading glasses to see close up, but my distance vision is fine. At the scope, I'd only use the glasses to read a star chart on a phone while star-hopping. (I'm visual only, without a goto mount.) However, the glasses-on-glasses-off hokey-cokey is very irritating, and I feel the glasses are vulnerable to getting crushed or scratched in the dark, even on a lanyard. A related topic has come up on CloudyNights recently (https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/793604-presbyopia-and-contact-lenses/) where the prevailing opinion seems to be that people just put up with their glasses (or contact lenses - no thanks!) in various ways. My current solution is to mount a cheap Fresnel lens with the phone on the scope: The lens magnifies the phone's image and (more to the point) moves it further away, though it also superimposes its groove pattern and prismatic colours onto the image. The star diagonal and RACI finder (mounted on the tube rings) face the same way, so I only need to move my head from side to side. The lens and the phone holder come off for storage, while the metal bar and clip stay attached. I have yet to try the setup in dewy conditions. I'd like to know what other solutions may exist for this problem!

There is an iOS Skysafari 7 Plus. I recall it was available sometime after 7 Pro. Indeed that (plus the discount) led me to get 7 Pro before 7 Plus appeared, even though I'd been quite content with 6 Plus. But no regrets, if only because the Pro Moon map is much better!

Here's an observing list for locating features in the Lunar 100 using the SkySafari smartphone app. (This seems as good a place as any to put it.) I assembled it because I couldn't find an existing one, so maybe someone else will find it useful. I used SkySafari 7 Pro; it also appears to work on SkySafari 6 Plus, though the Plus version's lunar map isn't as good and I didn't spend much time testing it. SS doesn't have all the features on the L100, so in many cases I had to pick other features nearby. It's really just an aid to location. The pdf file identifies which SS features I used. Health warning: this has been a desktop exercise, unsupported by any observations of my own! Tim. Lunar 100.skylist key to Lunar 100 observing list.pdf

That may not quite be the case. I bought a DC from Ian King 2 weeks ago. As an alternative to the Tak clamshell (there was a price difference) he supplied 95 mm tube rings with it that don't look like anything on the Parallax website. Check out the chunky knobs! He described them as CNC rings made in the UK, though it's always possible I wasn't paying attention. There's no manufacturer's name or logo on them. They seem fine to me - they hold the tube nicely, and they're easy to loosen and tighten when balancing. (Photo inserted, but never tried uploading one before so who knows if I got it right...)

Thanks for the details, Marcus. I think I would be concerned about being at the limit of the mount's capacity. Dave, I'm sure my frustration with using the GP's clamps will dissipate with experience, but I'm not there yet ...

F15Rules: Thanks for asking As planned I have been using my GPE with an old long-focus 4" achromat the last few months, though not as much as I'd wanted to because of poor weather in the autumn. My aim was practice, having been away from amateur astronomy for many years. I have learned that the GP on a HAL130 tripod is a solid, competent little mount, quite capable of carrying the achro without distracting vibrations, due either to touching the scope (eg to change focus) or to the wind. It seems to be a long way from its capacity limit. And the whisper-quiet motor drive (my first ever) is a real boon, even if just for tracking. However, I'm not yet convinced it's a "pleasure to use", which was the original aim that led to my question about the Advanced Polaris. Hunting around in the dark for axis clamps and/or motor clutches (so that I can point the scope at a new object) is a real irritation IMO, even after memorising where on the mount they are. I suspect the AP may be better for this - I understand you can push it where you want or turn the slo-mo knobs, and when you let go the clock drive just takes over, no hunting for clamps or clutches. marcus_z, any comments? AFAIK, you are the only Advanced Polaris user on this forum! No photo I'm afraid. It just looks like a green GP mount... My only mod is to replace the 8x D cell battery pack with a pair of USB power banks (the type used to top up your phone while out and about) connected in series - smaller, lighter, and rechargable. Oh, and some velcro to stick the handset onto one of the tripod legs. Tim.

Oh well never mind. My question has been overtaken by events. I have just ordered a new (unused / unsold stock) Vixen GPE mount for GBP 214 delivered, assuming it's just as good as a GP2. This is sooner than I had planned, but I wanted to take advantage of the opportunity. At least I'll be able to use it straight away to get the most out of my old achromat. No motors, but hopefully some will come up second-hand by the time I'm in a position to get a Tak. Thanks for your help. I think this will be a better fit to my requirements than an AP, and will leave me spare funds for eyepieces etc.

OK, with all your help I think I'm getting close... Now that I'm looking at the GP family of mounts: what's the practical difference between the GP2 (newer, white) and the GPE (older, green) heads? The specs are the same, and from what I've read in this and other forums the only difference seems to be the colour! Is one easier to use and maintain, better quality, easier to add motors and clutches to or fit to a tripod?

Mike: Thank you for your photo of what I want Dave: Now I'm sorry I missed the GP you sold. My achro experience (nice scope spoiled by its mount) has taught me not to overlook the quality of the mount. Various of you have done a good job of saying the GP is a pleasure to use, which is a feature I'm after that I suspect an EQ5 can't provide. You've convinced me that I can get this feature at better value than an AP. I do need to wait for a GP to become available though. I searched the ABS archive and found two mounts described as "Great Polaris" advertised for sale in the past year. Where else might I find one? (I have seen the "for sale" page here.) I might also ask elsewhere for opinions of the AP though - I would like to hear from an owner...

OK, so a used GP is sounding better and better, if "clone" add-ons are compatible. Though a pair of Vixen's own MT-1 motors, slo mo clutches and a controller come to EUR 427 new according to the teleskop-express website. Alien_Photons' comments on the EQ5 are rather telling - I can't see myself falling in love with that mount. I take nightfisher's point and I'm aware that all my impressions are second hand, but for me the joy of owning and using something excellent (any Tak or Ethos owners here? ) tips the balance against the joy of having bagged a bargain. Anyway it is just as well I have plenty of time to wait for a GP to become available, if I do decide to go that way. (I won't need goto or other fancy electronics, just basic tracking and panning.) Chris - that's right, the Advanced Polaris with RA drive is GBP 1149, plus another 500 or so for the dec drive and Vixen's tripod, at FLO. So double your plausible amount as you thought. Vixen UK have a review of the mount on their website, apparently from Sky at Night magazine though I have failed to find it on the magazine's own website. Perhaps it's subscribers only: https://www.vixenoptics.co.uk/PDFs/Product Reviews/Sky_at_Night_AP-SM_Mount_Nov15.pdf The conclusion (my precis) is that it beautifully designed but expensive; a solid choice if portability is a priority.

7 kg payload should be enough for me - you have the GPDX if I can have the straight GP Like EQ5 with beautiful engineering sounds good to me. (Presumably the altitude bolts aren't made of butter-metal then.) But they don't make the GP any more, right? Would new EQ components (like motor drives) be compatible with an old GP, should a GP come up for sale with the wrong or missing bits?

Well that clinches it Chris, it won't be the EQ3! I'm not keen on a few seconds for the vibrations to die down. And an EQ5 would be useful for my old achro too, in the meantime before the money for the Tak materialises. Still pondering the Vixen mount though... Nice scopes btw - sorry that I was looking more at the mount and tripod!

As Stu suggests, I shouldn't be surprised that no actual owners of the mount have appeared to relate their experiences, there'll be so few around. (There are plenty of scope and eyepiece perfectionists around, willing to pay a pretty premium for that last 5% of the experience; where are the mount perfectionists?) But I was also hoping to hear from non-owners, especially with suggestions for alternatives, so many thanks for your replies. I will be in a position to afford an Advanced Polaris, but would far rather spend a lot less on a mount and maybe buy some nice glass with the difference. Chris' suggestion of an EQ3 does make me a little nervous about stability. Is it up to the job? I realise I'm sensitised to this problem: my only functioning scope is a 1970's f/16 3" achromat that has been with me since childhood, and at high powers its rather-inadequate equatorial mount and tripod might as well be made out of knicker elastic. I've read that long-focus refractors are planet-killers, but this one makes planets look pretty lively to me... Chris, triton1 and Alien_Photon's EQ5 suggestion (from what I've read a CG5 is a noisy EQ5, right? looks more comfortable. I guess I really should be thinking of getting one, with an upgraded tripod as suggested. And if I'm not happy with it I suppose I could always put the old achromat on it! But - I confess to being fascinated by the Advanced Polaris. It sounds like the ideal (other than in cost), designed and constructed with real attention to detail and quality, and an emphasis on ease of use and especially portability. Reports from actual users, though rare (eg the link and video in Stu's post), are very positive. I imagine myself in 5 years' time, the pain of paying for one having faded, with a scope-and-mount-for-life that remains a genuine pleasure to use. There are no owners around to say how much the mount does (or does not) live up to this expectation. Instead, you've convinced me that an EQ5 or similar would be a competent mount; can you also convince me it would be a pleasure to use?

What - no replies at all? Really?? OP.