jetstream

Very true- but having a filter that "rattles" ( a bit loose in its cell) and figuring out the energy from the solar disk size can prevent this. My 120ED has no issues with this filter (with my diags). I chose KG3 because the nature of the KG3 allows it to filter IR regardless of coating. If the KG3 breaks I'll know it immediately vs a coating failure with the other types which may go un-noticed. The reflective filters shoot light out the objective... I guess its all about choices-to each their own. Edit- I use this filter for keeping IR from reaching my eye as well as protect the Quark or wedge...

BTW I use this filter for solar use. Mr Smie did calculate if it was safe based on the f ratio (solar disk size) at the distance inside the tubes using my diagonals. It is an absorptive IR filter (KG3) vs a reflective (Baader UV/IR). http://beloptik.de/en/left/if-uv-ir-cut-on-kg3-infrared-blocking-filter/

People can do whatever they want- its a free country (ies) so to speak. I personally like the metallic ITF features better (ie they block more light when they fail).

Whatever we do here we must not ever consider removing the "little silver" filter (ITF) from the bottom of the Quark. I believe the goal of a true front mounted ERF and a "mini ERF" (UV/IR,35nm Baader 2") is to keep heat (energy) from the Quarks filters. https://www.andovercorp.com/products/bandpass-filters/standard/600-699nm/

The Quarks filters let deep red-656.3 nm through (in "steps down to it") so the wide Baader 35nm Ha filter will not cause a color difference. Be very careful when considering and using filters ahead of your diagonal for solar.

Piero, congrats for a fine purchase! Great scope!

Yes its stability as a unit would be nice to know as would other tripod options if we want to enhance stability if its needed. It is quite possible it will work well as is though.

Thanks! The grand daughter wants to be able to have a scope that "finds" things but loves the Heritage. This mount just might be the ticket!

I wonder if this mount would work well with the Heritage 130?

Really good... I need more time though- there is a nice little 5 galaxy cluster in UMA where one of them is a nice test of things, they are NGC 3998,NGC 3990,NGC3972,NGC 3982 and the tricky NGC 3977. I'll try the 21E vs the Lunt on this set but the trees are in the way atm lol!

I actually would send you it - but it is one of my deepest eyepieces so I still have an icy grip on it lol! I'm glad you like the Lunt, we are very fortunate to have such a good selection of optics these days.

Well I think it is Skywatcher that is sneaking up the quality on things really- their mirrors are getting some VG reviews these days and I respect David Shen/Synta for bringing astronomy within reach of many. These Synta 100 deg eyepieces might be an indication of more things to come.

There is no question the Ethos is top notch but for an eyepiece to even come close to its performance is an achievement and the Lunt exceeds this achievement IMHO. I personally love low power Hyperwides, now I just need an excellent 25mm 100deg... maybe we can all email Markus with some hopes and dreams lol!

Maybe a look through the 24" John? I might be ready by then lol!

I would like to see this someday- there is so much history where you are, I'm envious!

Hi John! were you on holiday? The Lunt works very well for me and I have no idea about their optics vs the Myriads. These days I sit back and wait for reports (for years if needed) and see what filters through about certain ones. A few things surfaced- "deeper" and "more contrast than ES" grabbed my attention. Every Ethos has bested my ES- but the ES are really good don't get me wrong. Another thing I watch is who uses things... I know for a fact that some people will not use some equipment if it is sub par- regardless of cost. At first I looked at the Lunt's coatings and thought-"oh yeah, they look just like ES/Naglers..." but the 20mm sure does work! I often wonder, but don't know, if certain vendors can cherry pick the best of the lot with glass- pretty sure SV rejects a bunch of Chinese lenses and keeps the good ones for their scopes as an example. Thing is where do the rejected lenses go? (or what scopes are they put in?...)

Everyone has there own ideas about some things and the effect of CO is one of them. My thoughts are based on what my eyes tell me which mirrors what a very experienced "mentor" has told me about these scopes. I have no where near the knowledge or experience of this person so I'm just tagging along so to speak. If the CO% is not an issue then there is no sense discussing it. I'm very interested in the performance of your f3 newt and how it performs with the 20mm Lunt HDC.

The 8" f4 should be VG for this- what is the secondary size? I got the 200mm f3.8 down to 31.5% with 63mm secondary and it illuminates just fine visually. I sucked the focus in though, reducing "L", if you know what I mean. The 75mm it came with was too much for my liking. That 13" f3 will be excellent if the optics are good- you will get a nice CO% on that one. This is roughly what an 82mm sec will give at 25% CO-from Mels program. "Off-Axis Illum. Light Loss 0.00 mm 100.0% 0.00 mag 2.00 mm 100.0% 0.00 mag 4.00 mm 100.0% 0.00 mag 6.00 mm 100.0% 0.00 mag 8.00 mm 99.87% 0.00 mag 10.0 mm 98.27% 0.01 mag 12.0 mm 96.05% 0.04 mag 14.0 mm 93.56% 0.07 mag 16.0 mm 90.91% 0.10 mag 18.0 mm 88.18% 0.13 mag 20.0 mm 85.38% 0.17 mag 22.0 mm 82.55% 0.20 mag 24.0 mm 79.70% 0.24 mag 26.0 mm 76.84% 0.28 mag"

What scope do you have now Peter?

Congrats for the purchase and yes the 24" is a tad slow for large nebs, but at this size it is just not the tool for them anyway. I'm dialing in my 200mm f3.8 and this shows the big nebs extremely well. The 24" will be VG for the Veil, Crescent, Triffid and much more- actually some of these will unbelievably good. The fact is that most f4 or sub f f4's run a SIP's or paracorr that ups the ratio f4.5ish anyway- and I plan no paracorr. edt: Peter while I may not use a paracorr I'm planning for one- ie around the 30ES - f4.5 CC'd will give an f5.2 (more if we include the CO) for a usable exit pupil of 5.8 with this EP. These days I plan scopes around my favorite eye pieces and exit pupil sweet spot.

I'm very interested in your thoughts on this, actually on how deep the 9mm will go. If there is a 10mm BCO available to compare it to it would be nice.

Whew! I know there are brand loyalties out there but I'm only loyal to my eyeballs and what they show lol! Last night gave a unique set of circumstances -very high transparency and superb seeing, the little 90mm SV APO gave an excellent view of Saturn- all the way up to 262x with the HR2 2.4mm, man I never thought this scope could do this so well!

I wonder if everyones still talkin' to me? Oh well, not much sense doing a review/comparison if I don't report what I see.

Tonight gave a window of opportunity to compare the Lunt 20mm HDC to the 21E on some nebs in very transparent skies with 21.7 mag darkness. So the stage is set... 15" cooled and collimated dob, an OIII and a UHC (Lumicon). The Veil was a tie between them as was Pickering Wisp with all of the features in the borrowed image easily visible in both eyepieces. It was a tie here really but the 20mm HDC did best the 21E on "E" on the map, whereas the 21E did a tiny bit better on the core of the Wisp. The NAN was a tie but the 21E gave a hair more contrast on the closely detached patch just of the tip of the Gulf. The Pelican a tie. Over to NGC 6888-the Crescent and here the Lunt bested the 21E no question, the brightest section of the neb was that much brighter in the Lunt, with no filter and both filters.They both gave a nicely filled "brain" look to the interior- a tie on this part. I'm not sure which direction to go here first... I'll go up to LBN 208 I guess. In this whole area the Lunt excelled- not that the 21E is a slouch, both offered VG views of the area, but I preferred the Lunt. Once you start seeing these nebs around the Sadr area they really do blend together- from the Crescent to SH2-108 to IC1318E with LDN 889 cutting in between, with IC1318D on the other side. This whole area was better in the Lunt, IMHO. The views around Sadr are rewarding and when beginning, confusing. I must say that on the "Butterfly section of IC1318 (E, LDN 889,D) the Lunt was the clear winner. After tonight's somewhat shocking results, I can say that on nebs I prefer the Lunt to the Ethos! Most was a tie, but where the Lunt was better, it was clearly better. Much more comparisons need to be done, next time galaxies I think. This was a great night to observe! ps everything I listed, I saw and very well...