paulastro

Ditto Mike's and Paul's comments. There's an excellent write up on this range of refractors in Neil English's book on Choosing and Using Refractors.

Chaz, the 393 dovetail attached to the dovetail with the rings on the scope as mentioned in my last post, just slides along the mount and locks into place with the lever on the mount. In effect the two dovetails bolted together act as a single dovetail with the scope and rings on top. Of course, by sliding the scope through the rings you get even more adjustment options. I hope all this makes some sense !?

Ade, I probably find it much easier to balance than you do because both of the above scopes come with rings. Both scopes dovetails have suitable holes that you can fasten to the 393's dovetail with the supplied bolts than come with the mount - all very compatable.

Below is a pic of my 393 with my SW 72ED, and it handles it very well. In fact I've not bothered to use another mount for it since I first put the 72ED in it to try it out. It also balances well when using my Baader Maxbright binoviewer with a couple of eyepieces. As Ade says the axis can be tightened very securely, but you don't need too much tension when the scope is balanced. This is extremely easy as the Manfrottos own 'dovetail' is several inches long and can smoothly be slid along and locked in position securely using a small lever on the mount - this takes only seconds and is very easy. The fact that the axis tighten well if necessarily means it can be locked in position while you put on a binovoviewer for instance before you rebalance it. The mount will nearly reach the zenith with my 72ED, the forks are about five to six inches deep which is what limits it. Having said that, I can easily adjust one leg of my photo tripod the head is on if I need to reach the zenith, though I haven't needed to very often. I love this mount and for a smallish scope it is truly excellent, having said that I have also used it with my Astro-Tech 102ED on it which is quite a substantial scope. Excellent at low to medium power with this scope, and ok for higher powers too if it's not too windy. I've also added a pic with the Astro Tech 102ED on the 393.

Mike, I hope you don't think it's a bit of a liberty, but as I know you I just tinkered for a minute with your image, and come up with the one below, I have put your original alongside for comparison. Re a phone holder, you are welcome to try out my Celestron NexYZ some time.

It nearly brought tears to my eyes when I saw the fungus on the lens, what a tragic loss. Great scope as it was before its neglect, a better bet would have been to spend the money on a new SW 100ED.

Mmm, 'Mike.Hezzlewood the imager', it does have a certain ring about it. I never thought I'd ever see the day! Could I have your crayons and drawing pads if you have no use for them any more please? . Seriously my friend, I do hope you will still find the time to post more of your fabulous drawings, when you have finished your imaging sessions of course!

Thanks Stu. I'd planned to observe it when I got home from work around 10 pm, alas cloud stopped play - or to be more accurate - match postponed!

Many thanks Chris, that's very kind of you.

Many thanks, I'm not credited with good taste very often . Yes, I really have lost count of how many of the 120ED/Equinox scopes I have owned - if I've learnt anything since I started using telescopes then this one should go no-where, in my lifetime at least .

Actually Mike, I don't believe it either! I was being polite so as not to offend anyone who uses four inches or smaller telescopes (even 3.9 inch telescopes ). I've always been of the view that for deep sky a little more aperture is needed to give me the views I want to of the deep sky objects I want to look at in the detail I want to see. Some very bright examples of their class are fine (Orion Neb, M27 et al) and open clusters are particularly good subjects. Globulars, they just don't cut it for me in four inches or less. Please note that I've used the words 'I' and 'me' a lot, This is because it's only my opinion. Everyone else will have their own opinion as to if what telescope is best for the objects they particularly want to observe and their observing site, which is exactly how it should be. No-one can decide for anyone else, we should (and do) all make our individual judgements. Also, as you know, I did get a lot of joy from the telescope - and not only on the Moon and planets. But, as I said previously, with my observing conditions the 102 did not make me want to rush out with it on many occasions when there were no planets or the Moon on show only to look at deep sky. If I lived at Kelling my deep sky sojourns would be much more frequent. PS If I could have afforded to I would have kept the Astro-Tech as well when I bought the 120ED

Many thanks Leon. I won't be getting any 2inch eyepieces though - no need for any, there are plenty of lighter 1.25 inch eyepieces with ample eye relief and field for my purposes and better quality in some cases. Both these refractors have two inch fittings. The Morpheus is both 2 inch and 1.25 fittings by the way.

Rob. Oops that last post was for Grumpy Martian Rob, sorry. I saw a used 72ED come up either here or on astrobuysell in the last few days for about £100 off the new pirice, almost a gift in my view, a lovely little scope. If you get round to looking for one in the future there may be more used ones around, I've only seen a couple that I can remember.

Many thanks Grumpy Martian. I find the aluminium tripod fine for the 120, though is isn't a SW one, it's an ancient Vixen tripod which is more sturdy. having said that, I've used my AZ4 on a SW aluminium tripod in the past with heavier telescopes and that was fine as well. Clearly it will be less steady the higher the tripod is set, but this can be offset by using an aluminium tray, but I don't bother to use one. It would be better if you could find someone who is using the aluminium tripod though, we all vary in what degree of sturdiness we think is ok - I wouldn't describe it as vibration free, particularly if it's windy. I used to have the sturdier pipe tripod available with the AZ4 and it is probably a bit more sturdy. I didn't like it though as it was heavy to pick up and mover around with mount and telescope on board, and I also used to pinch my fingers between the tripod legs when I picked it up - very painful!

I may have just hit a home run now I have the SW 120ED and the SW 72ED, I can't envisage a better pair of scopes for my own requirements. I was very happy with my Astro Tech 102ED and 72ED, at least until a couple of weeks ago when the SW 120ED came up for sale at a good price. In my home sky conditions, though giving fantastic views of wide field and the brighter deep sky optics, I found I never really got out the 102 very often just for deep sky - when the Moon and any planets were not available. It just didn't quite cut it for me. At Kelling in the Autumn, the 102 was great for fainter objects, alas not in the real world where I observe most of the time. For my eyes, I need more than four inches aperture to bring out the best in globular clusters for instance, though others (with younger eyes!) could well disagree. I would also admit I have had a long term relationship with both varieties of the 120, the 120ED and the Equinox version. Over the last 20 years I've owned several of each, and really loved them all. They have always been sold as at various times because I have needed to use other options for different reasons, for instance when I wanted a dble stack solar setup which I loved and miss also. Like many people I've never had the buying power to simply keep adding to my telescope collection. I always thought I'd end up with one of the 120s - and this time it just might be permanent for a variety of reasons - after 50 years using telescopes I'm now less able and willing to own larger/heavier scopes and any that I can't get up and running fairly quickly. Of couse, I'm not suggesting other people will have the same requirements as myself - we all have our interests, observing needs and budgets. In the pics I took, the 120ED in on an AZ4 (in the observatory the 120ED goes on an Ercole Mount) and the 72ED on a Manfrotto 393 mount and a sturdy photographic tripod.