jetstream

Given equal optics a 4" scope will show more detail (planets, moon) than an 80mm scope, seeing considered. Many consider the 4" APO the " goldilocks" scope and with good reason as it can provide excellent views through many conditions that might limit larger scopes IMHO. With regard to WL solar, aperture rules IMHO but seeing and thermals will hurt relatively minor aperture increases ie 100mm vs 120mm. Under top conditions the 120mm is king- however- there is more time the extra aperture hurts than helps (my thoughts). Day in and day out a 100mm frac is the best option for WL solar, giving incredible views. The Quark likes a short FL scope but around f7... this really needs a separate thread to discuss and there are many advanced Ha imagers and viewers here that could offer excellent advice on observing in Ha. Many good refractors out there and the consistency of many are solid. It appears Tak owners demand performance with little to no sample to sample variation- what I see through mine, you will see through yours, conditions considered. To me a Tak is just a scope, its not magic but it does deliver excellent views of everything, from Barnards Loop to the planets. Some AP and Tec owners might considered a Tak a bit lower on the food chain... but who cares. Good views are good views, regardless of the name on the telescope. Gerry

Hi Neil! 😀

Not sure about DeLites but I do know that the Delos are great on faint DSO and are also very sharp and with excellent contrast.

Oddly enough I enjoy the mind blowing views of brighter objects in my 24" better than threshold objects. A threshold object for the 24" looks the same as a threshold object in any other scope IMHO. The Veil in the 24" under dark skies is hard to describe, but I'll try- mind blowing!

If you can get to dark skies at least once under good conditions and view the Milky Way/DSO then youll see what I mean. In light polluted skies night vision can be very useful. Now waiting from the NV crowd to tell me how its just not for LP skies.... and they are right.

I wasnt meaning to sound discouraging- just giving a realistic view of the Bortle scale and expectations. Bortle 5 says you can see hints of zodiacal light? By all means seek out DSO at all times, its a great sport.

Forget the Bortle scale- judge sky darkness by the appearance of the Milky Way, if you cant see it at all forget DSO viewing, with the exception of a few objects like the filtered Ring neb and view instead star clusters etc.IMHO

Any word on how the new APM zoom really performs, sharpness, f ratio friendliness, scatter etc? Hopefully the fact that the apparent field is narrower than advertised doesnt taint opinions before its real performance is evaluated.

Hi Mark, this Leica sure looks good distortion wise 👍

Back to Holger, thanks to YKSE for relating this info many years ago. http://www.holgermerlitz.de/globe/distortion.html

What type of distortion are we talking about? TV uses pincushion distortion and a whole pile of it in some of their eyepieces, very noticeable. The Docter 12.5mm is pretty much orthoscopic except for a bit of barrel distortion right at the edge. All of the eyepieces I tested (a pile of them) showed a variety of distortion including "moustache" distortion. I wonder how many have tested for distortion or know about the effect? Some say pincushion is "astro" friendly distortion and some say "barrel" is for daytime use... I like a minimum of distortion- I really dislike watching the moon "turn into an egg" from "astro friendly" pincushion in a widefield eyepiece. So what type of distortion does the APM zoom actually have? Is there a lot of it? If it does have barrel distortion does it induce the "globe effect" when panning?

I wouldnt write this zoom off yet- anyone tried it here? is it a sharp lunar/planetary eyepiece? hows the transmission? contrast on DSO? All eyepieces have distortion, including many orthos I have tested...

This is horrible and scary, very sorry to hear of this. What I like about dogs is that these criminals will know of the animal when they case out the place and will normally go to an easier target, well thats my thinking anyway. I walk my dog all over, I'm in a remote place, but lots of people see me with Nico and know about him. Neighbour has a guard dog too and between us not many come down our road, just cabin owners etc. I cant believe whats happening all over.Sickening.

The "mad monk" John Dobson really hit a home run with the design of his scope- it seems like you "bond" with a dob, feel part of it when observing- at least I do.

He is actually lol! He knows my neighbours and likes them all, however he likes to "interview" newcomers to the yard and is very good at it 😀

Even the sight of my buddy is a deterrent eventhough he is friendly. These dogs notice anything different in the yard and let you know immediately, as a pup he would growl and snarl if we parked the cars in different spots lol! Hes a 100 lbs now and looks intimidating.

Im curious how dark your skies are- contrary to some beliefs aperture can make a nice difference in lighter skies on certain objects and massive ones in darker skies. If it were me there would no question about the decision- the 8" dob (or bigger) would be the first choice. It might be possible to add encoders down the road to have push to capability. If this is desired maybe a Bresser style dob would be easier to add the encoders and I like the bearing system on them better than other styles. I wonder if Explore Scientific has this style of dob? Yes just looked it up, same thing but shows not available. If I were buying a dob this one would be at the top of the list, maybe @johninderby can add some thoughts on these dobs?

This works.

The Binotron 27s focus in any scope including my dobs. The 15" sees the most use of them and on the moon and planets. Yes, the binoviewers can de collimate a dob through focuser flex, but knowing how far racked out you can go will mitigate the issue, same goes for using light eyepieces. I really prefer low power binoviewing on the moon and the planets see a modest 250-300x on them when high up. I still prefer mono viewing for some things.

The 10mm BCO will pull away from many other eyepieces under the right conditions ie cooled, collimated accurately and great seeing. Honestly the 10mm BCO hangs right in there with my Docter 12.5mm UWA for sharpness and contrast. The 10mm BCO goes deeper than the Docter however. The BCO is a Zeiss design and some say it is not a "true" ortho. The field is opened up to 50 deg and will show some small distortion with ortho purists quick to point this out. Years ago I tested many orthos with some also showing hints of distortion.... Just for reference balancing distortion is a function of eyepiece design- TV chooses pincushion distortion over barrel distortion- Many Televue enthusiasts dislike the Docter 12.5mm UWA for this reason as it shows a small bit of it at the edges, squeezing stars together a tiny amount. In my large dobs I use a 10mm Delos a lot and when wanting to confirm very faint objects I use the 10mm BCO as it shows a tiny, but real amount deeper than the Delos.

This is not true- a top quality OIII works well in small scopes, just have to play with the mag.IMHO.

The 10mm Baader Classic ortho is an excellent eyepiece, very sharp, deep and with excellent contrast. A bit low on mag with your 10" dob on the planets but this eyepiece barlows extremely well.

I used a 12.5mm Tak ortho in the H130.

Sorry Stu I went for a bit- planning a snowmobile adventure into a remote lake for Sunday. Binoviewers will hinder if not obliterate the chance of seeing the HH.IMHO.

@Stu Havnt been following this thread, but we are wondering if binoviewers can help M42? They can, but filter use is a no go for me- too dim, re: the "false exit pupil " deal. If everything is right when observing truly bright objects like M42, it can "enhance the look" of it, or give it a different appearance. However you can dial in mono to give a better look to it and with colour in it. I dont remember seeing the lower loop with binos though. Filters destroy the Flame nebula and I never use one. The H130 showed the segments the other night nicely no filter. @Deadlake Even though I've seen IC434 with my 90mm frac under 21.9mag skies with super transparency, I'm not going to comment on seeing the Horse Head in small scopes because I have nothing constructive to say.