GavStar

I would love to show you the views through a white phosphor NV monocular attached to, say, a 4 inch refractor. It sure feels like the real thing to me. ?

Yes there is some sophisticated technology within the NV monocular ?. What matters to me are the end results and the ‘feeling’ in use of being just like an eyepiece. I guess that was what I was trying to convey (not very well ?)

I think one issue in this discussion is that there are so few people (particularly in the U.K.) that have actually looked through a top quality white phosphor manual gain NV eyepiece (and it is an eyepiece!). Those that have looked through one are stunned at how similar the experience is to a standard glass eyepiece (apart from you can see so much more). There are no wires, no computer screens, just a glass lens with plenty of eye relief to look through. The stars, nebulae, galaxies etc are white in colour, very sharp and very natural looking. As I mentioned earlier in this thread, when I took mine to a London astro meet a couple of months ago, no one suspected it was anything other than a normal glass eyepiece until they were told. The actual experience with NV is virtually identical to just using an eyepiece. It is very different to video astronomy.

Ok I guess we are just not going to reach agreement on this point. All the NV users are saying quite clearly that they would like to post on the main topic boards. If we label the posts clearly as NV, other posters can ignore it if they wish. I have reflected a good deal on this topic and hope I have expressed my opinion clearly and politely. But at the end of the day it’s up to you to decide.

Ok, good questions. ? I think it’s very likely that NV astronomy is going to remain being very rare in the UK (it’s very rare in the US and it’s far cheaper and easier to get there!). So I think consideration of a separate SGL NV forum is not appropriate for many years due to so few users... On the idealogical issue, I have two observations: firstly my NV eyepiece sits along side my glass eyepieces since for all practical purposes they operate and feel like the same thing to me. This points me towards wanting to post about both types of observing in the normal observing sections. Second point, which sorry I have mentioned a few times already, both Alan and Mark would not have found out about NV if I had only have posted about NV in the EAa section. NV is so niche that the reality is for most people you just accidentally bump into it somehow and I really believe SGL should try to maximise the chances of this by allowing NV posts in standard sections. I was lucky, someone in my local astro club had a NV monocular already - most people won’t have that opportunity...

Please could @Steve or @Grant clarify this comment? Does this mean that posts about night vision are still fine in the general observing and equipment sections (suitably labelled)? Or does this mean that nv users can post on the general sections but only on sessions where only standard glass eyepieces are used?

From a purist definition, yes. But from a practical, in use, perspective, no - it’s completely different. (And from a practical ‘how it feels’ perspective NV is very very similar to viewing through normal glass eyepieces. This was shown very clearly by my recent outreach experience in Regent’s Park - the people looking through the NV eyepiece had no idea it wasn’t just a normal glass eyepiece!)

I don’t understand the point you are making. @Highburymarkhas eloquently expressed the concerns that us (only 4) night vision (NV) users have, ie 1) half of us would never have heard of NV if it had only been discussed in the EAA/ video astronomy section, so would have missed out on getting this additional eyepiece tool in the box. Allowing night vision discussion in the main observing/equipment sections allows better communication for people who may be interested (but don’t know it yet ?) 2) there’s only 4 of us so nowhere near enough to have a separate section 3) NV is a very different approach from a practical perspective to EAa/video astronomy. There is very little overlap in terms of what each type can learn/discuss with the other. This is clearly shown on cloudynights where NV and EAa are grouped in the same section and there is no discussion between the two groups so it may as well be two different sections. (However CN is very happy for NV posts to be made in the general observing or equipment sections if we wish).

I do really like my 100mm f7.4 doublet. But as an airline travel scope I prefer my 95mm f5.9 Triplet which is much easier for carry on, virtually the same aperture so good for planetary and has a nice wide field.

We don’t want NV to have a separate section, just to be able to post in the ‘standard’ visual and equipment sections (with suitable title labelling as was agreed by the mods only a couple of weeks ago!). Are we ok to still do this? We believe what we do is much more like (in terms of experience rather than technology) normal glass observing than EAA.

Excellent point @Highburymark. 3 NV observers on SGL have now commented that this change would be to the detriment of NV discussion on SGL (and @PeterW was very diplomatic ?). I really think SGL admin should reconsider.

I have to admit I’m very disappointed with this development. I’m a visual observer not a EEVA observer. I hope my NV posts over the past 15 months have always been very clear about the equipment I’ve been using. I also hope that they brought this new approach a far greater audience by having the posts in the normal observing sections. I think having a separate EEVA section ‘hides’ away these new techniques and makes it more difficult for general users to find out about them. As you say, there has been a fair bit of discussion and conflict. It’s a shame that as a group we can’t embrace new approaches and change. It does make me feel unwelcome on SGL. I don’t think I will be posting much on SGL in the future as a result. ?

A 55mm plossl, 40mm plossl, 27mm panoptic and 4mm delite - what more could you want/need?? ??

Another thumbs up for the adm clamp upgrade ?

Where’s the 30mm and 40mm (and 14mm but that’s the dodgy one), Mike? ? On topic, I have some Pentax XW (3.5, 5, 7, 10, 20 and 30) and Delos (4.5, 6, and 8 ) and they are both equivalent in view quality and comfort (ie excellent). I also have the 3 and 4 delite (don’t want to miss any gaps ?) and have been very impressed with these as well.

Looks very nice - mine is still negotiating uk customs! @alanjgreen have you got a safety screw on your Borg dovetail bar?

Just got my Panther Mount sorted for 3 scope setup...looking forward to giving these a go together

I’ve had my az gti mount for 18 months and it’s worked great. However in the past month the synscan WiFi stopped being shown (just got the esp one which doesn’t work). Since I normally use the handset controller I wasn’t in a rush to sort it out but wanted to be able to use it for solar and for quick WiFi setup as well. I got a WiFi dongle today and have managed to get the WiFi firmware downloader to run. So far I’ve reached 75%, 66%, 5%, 96% (!!!), 80%, 11% before the update failed. Hopefully it will eventually update but certainly I’d suggest if your az gti Mount is working fine then I’d not bother with a firmware update. It’s a frustrating process to say the least ? Update: just completed the update after about the 10th attempt - hurrah! Just tried the mount and I have my WiFi and solar tracking back - success!!

Yes I really like my TV85. It was my first refractor and I’ve had some great observing sessions with it such as some lovely views of Mars’ polar ice cap last year in Tenerife. It’s very well suited for travelling abroad with. One of my aims this year is to do more lunar observing, rather than just concentrate on DSOs. I think the 85mm to 95mm size is a sweet spot for grab and go refractors having enough aperture to show good planetary/lunar detail whilst also giving nice wide field views and being easy to mount on something like an az gti. Over the next few months I’m hoping to do a quadruple test of the tv85 versus the Takahashi FC100DF, 92mm Astro Physics Stowaway and 95mm Baader travel companion. Maybe some of my fellow Walton Astro club members can also have a compare and give their opinion? My tv85 will have a glass and aperture disadvantage against these, but I have a feeling it will hold up well. The moon and tight doubles will be my test objects.

It looks very nice. I think you also have an Altair edf 72mm which seems very similar to the Primaluce (apart from the primaluce has fpl51 glass compared to the fpl53 of the Altair) I also own the Altair 72mm so wondered what the Primaluce advantages are compared to the Altair?

Yes I have. Much preferred the Astronomik uhc. The DGM had a red double star effect I really didn’t like. Further comments in this thread

Gerry, I can’t even imagine what -36c feels like ❄️ ❄️ ❄️

Agreed Stu cheaper doublet is better option for visual observing. That’s of course the one I meant all along ?

I do like the look of these scopes, I just think the extra 8mm would be useful as a travel scope. I’d go for an az gti or vixen porta 2 Mount. https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p3881_TS-Optics-Photoline-80mm-f-6-FPL53-Triplet-Apo-2-5--RPA-Zahnstangen-Auszug.html

Lovely Nicos! Your initial thoughts??