jetstream

The Leica Asph is very sharp for sure, its too bad that the zooms (my 3 anyway) fall short in the transmission dept IMHO.

Is the TV plossl really a plossl? or is it a symmetric? I ask because there might be a difference in spot size and technical performance. Piero, have you considered the Zeiss ZAOII 10mm? for the level of performance you like this might be a needed step IMHO.

Your images are very good Rodd- some better than others just like everyone else's. Hey, just a thought- do you belong to the "in crowd" here? Some get more responses (perhaps?) than others regardless of observational or image quality-well maybe I'm wrong.😀 probably am...

I see your perspective Adam and respect it for sure. For me the first image isn;t just about the Bubble- Rodd nailed the area surrounding it with draping dust and those pillars... fantastic. My reference is for the whole image, not any single part of it, for me its the whole package and the razor sharpness and brightness of the Bubble itself than wins me over.

No man, they are both great images! I look at images from the perspective of what "grabs" me and holds me- not technical perfection. After you mentioned noise (I presume) I found some in the dust pillars- I enjoy imaging the Aurora and have very limited ability but did learn where noise etc can hide. The whole package of the first image is an attention grabber IMHO. If the first image was in a magazine you would "win" I believe. I look at these images more as art than technically perfect representations. You did not waste 27hrs- but you may have found out what pleases some people more than others. Mind you others may like the second one better!

Ok, I see what you mean, I think. But.. As a non imager and just looking at the image presented here, non full resolution- it is fantastic. If I open up full res and at full mag I see some things. However, for most of us just looking at it, without trying to pick it apart- it is the winner, IMHO. Clearly. Sometimes I think imagers forget most image viewers are not imagers! lol!

No, just the image presented here- I'll check it out.

The top image is stunning and for me wins hands down. My opinion does not diminish the second images excellence however- great work Rodd!

The 41 Pan is most likely better than the 42 LVW IMHO.

I just read the the Panoptic was designed for fast newts (newts in general) and for use with a Paracorr. There may be field curvature issues in some scope types ie fast refractors but not all seem to notice it. I'm looking at the 27mm Pan for my 24" with a Paracorr II. Obviously the 41mm Pan might be different as it seems this fl suits refractors and SCT's.

excellent!

One limiting factor for f7ish refractors (or others) is the lack of Ethos quality hyperwide eyepieces in the 35mm-40mm range IMHO. There is a noticeable increase in contrast when using Ethos over Nagler/ES eyepieces, at least to my eyes. This is in respect to nebula.

Yeah, I was sure fasting dancin when I told the wife the 24" was ready to be picked up

None of us needs to justify our telescopes or projects IMHO- this looks like a fantastic telescope in the making.

This cell also looks excellent, I'm wondering if all the nylon tips are supposed to contact the mirror, I see one, maybe two that aren't but they could be for something else? I had an OOUK that had some tips not contacting. Bresser put some thought into this scope IMHO.

This scope looks excellent- the bearings in particular and the focuser looks vg too. Nice scope

I hope you get this sorted out Mark! my motives are insideous though.... as I'm in the same boat lol! 😀 What distortion? just coma or other stuff?

Maybe thats why you didn't find the Leica zoom/VIP better than your Ethos!

Does f4.8 show more coma than f5.3 using the 21E John?

Lets ask an experienced observer- @John- I think you have used f4.7-f4.8 dobs and you own an f5.3. What is the difference with the 21E (or others) coma wise in these? The f4.8 comes in at 2.4 waves and the f5.3 at 1.9 waves for a difference of .5 waves.

F5 10" Manufacturer Type FocalLength FieldStop Field ExitPupil TrueFOV MagX PerInch Res MagLimit Etendue ComaAtEdge TeleVue Nagler 5 31mm 42mm 82deg 6.2mm 1.90deg 41x 4x/inch 5.9" 14.5 2317 cm^2deg^2 2.5 WavesRMS Nikon NAV 17mm 30.1mm 102deg 3.4mm 1.36deg 75x 7x/inch 3.2" 15.4 1190 cm^2deg^2 1.8 WavesRMS Clave Plossl 6mm 5.3mm 48deg 1.2mm 0.24deg 212x 21x/inch 1.1" 15.8 37 cm^2deg^2 0 .3 WavesRMS " F4.7 10" "Manufacturer Type FocalLength FieldStop Field ExitPupil TrueFOV MagX PerInch Res MagLimit Etendue ComaAtEdge TeleVue Nagler 5 31mm 42mm 82deg 6.60mm 2.02deg 39x 4x/inch 6.2" 14.4 2622 cm^2deg^2 2.9 WavesRMS Nikon NAV 17mm 30.1mm 102deg 3.62mm 1.44deg 70x 7x/inch 3.4" 15.3 1347 cm^2deg^2 2 WavesRMS Clave Plossl 6mm 5.3mm 48deg 1.28mm 0.25deg 199x 20x/inch 1.2" 15.8 42 cm^2deg^2 0.4 WavesRMS "

Mel comes through again... punch the numbers in and it will tell you the coma in rms waves, very interesting. Just go to "eyepieces" and the calculator will come up. http://www.bbastrodesigns.com/NewtDesigner.html#is aperture king

That sounds fantastic, and if you could exist comfortably go for it! Why do the campgrounds shut down early? Is it cold there? Scotland sounds VG.

It was very good tonight under avg transparency! about the filters- older Astronomiks might be a bit wider than the new ones but they are still good. My 24" is really responding to the tight older Lumicon OIII I have on the Veil.