jetstream

Me too, espc when it saves a very expensive eyepiece from crashing to the ground.

I have the 18mm BCO,10mm and 6mm. The 6mm is my least favourite. If it were me I'd barlow the excellent 10mm BCO. It might be interesting to see if there is any difference in seeing faint objects between the 9mm Meade and the 10BCO.

For a bit of a reference my TSA120 will go 375x mag + under Pickering 8 and the 15" over 700x. The TSA 120 goes much more but I'm limited by my lowest focal length EP, 2.4mm. For a start a nice 7mm-8mm eyepiece will give you a very useable 150x to 170x mag in your XT8. Your scope will support much higher mag if well collimated and under good seeing. Vixen SLV?- nice eye relief with excellent optics?

http://www.damianpeach.com/pickering.htm

Your 1650mm fl scope will give 412x mag with a 4mm eyepiece. This is quite a bit for Jupiter even with good seeing, reasonable on Saturn and Mars under vg seeing. The 350mm of aperture can be affected by sub par seeing a fair bit. In general I use about 150x mag as a default for the planets regardless of seeing and aperture. If I cant observe using this mag I pack it in.

Just a note on the eyepiece selection for the filter- as a general guideline if we take the focal length of the eyepiece and divide it by the 8" Edges f ratio (f10) we get a number- and this number should be between 4 and 5 to allow an OIII or UHC filter to work. Not sure if you knew this. The ES 14 100 is a VG eyepiece and will be useful for high power DSO- have you seen the Eskimo nebula? I use a Vixen 42mm LVW but the 40mm ES 68 or the big TV 41mm Pan would work nicely with an OIII in your scope. Once set up eyepiece and filter wise I would point your scope at the Veil nebula in Cygnus from a dark site.

If you can see the Milky Way you will easily see spiral arms in M51 and possibly M101 if you are dark adapted. I'm up north of you in NW Ontario and find the eyepiece selection is crucial for seeing galaxies and nebula. The f10 Edge 8" will need something like a 42mm eyepiece to work properly with the excellent new Astronomik OIII or the Televue version of it, which is my preferred OIII. You are right on the money with the 31mm eyepiece for seeing galaxies in your scope, with a bit higher mag being good at times as well. The thing is- if skies are not dark seeing these objects will be unrewarding and difficult. Can you see the Milky Way and if so the southern large split in it?

How is your seeing ie steady skies?

How dark are your skies?

Very nice glass...

I think the star is listed at 14.7-14.8 and might be variable a bit. When the effects of the bright nebulosity are taken into account I've seen "visual" magnitudes almost at 16 mag. from @SimonfromSussex 2016 thread and quoting Omeara" "Stephen O’Meara in his deep-sky companions “The Messier Objects” says: “many veteran skywatchers have estimated it be as bright as 14th magnitude (putting it within the range of a good 4-inch telescope under a dark sky). Yet Burnham notes that the star was fainter than a 16th magnitude when he looked at it in 1959 through the 40-inch reflector at Lowell Observatory" I feel that this star is much fainter than 14 mag and fainter visually than 14.8 mag. I have to wait for it to appear in the 15", in the 24" its there all the time. I also feel that seeing it with a 15" scope is an accomplishment- not to say that a bit smaller aperture won't work, but my 10" does not show it. I hope to hear about the Morpheus performance on this and if it shows it in a 16" scope or so then its right up there with Delos IMHO. https://observing.skyhound.com/archives/jul/M_57.html

You might be shocked at the lunar views this scope will give! Do you collimate with a chesire? If you ever need to get it recoated I'd only consider Ostahowski-and he likes to coat his own mirrors. He has a great coating service for others as well, but as we all know some mirrors can have issues getting re coated. His will not. My 15" with his mirrors is a super performer on everything.

I find that the bright nebulosity in M57 makes the central star harder than the listed magnitude of 14.8. If aperture is a detriment due to seeing sensitivity, it I'm not sure why my 24" has such an easy time with it at higher mags than the 15". So-does the Morpheus show the central star in M57 using the 12.5"?- where from LA?

In theory this is correct but I notice that there is a sweet spot as far as mag goes and higher is not necessarily better. In my own un scientific, hillbilly testing I use the central star in M57 with my 15" for example. Yes, my scope is equalized and very well collimated. Not picking on TV here but an example of transmission for me is the 3-6 NZ- no central star compared to a "good" 5mm ortho. I agree that to truly evaluate transmission exacting methods should be used but I also believe that less than perfect methods reveal much as well. I also know that differences in transmission can be small and on paper might not be able to account for the observations...but...

Excellent info John and it seems as if the lens is made in Germany. The article speaks highly of both the LZOS 100/ 800mm and also the TSA 102. If my TSA 120 is any indication of all Taks triplets they are right up there. But then there are those pesky 130mm APO triplets- one like you have and also the Tak TOA 130... that are supposed to be a step up again. I can't fathom how the views could be better than the TSA 120 but I'm open to it. Possibly colour rendition? The TSA 120 has a very neutral cool tone- I wanted this scope to excel on Saturn believe it or not and am not disappointed to say the least. Whatever the case, anyone using a Morpheus eyepiece wont be lacking IMHO. I'd like to hear how deep they go-anyone?

Thanks John, actually I havn't but will read it shortly.

Maybe they should make some Pentax XO design eyepieces- are they patented?

post # 56...

Terry O had an association with Discovery that greatly benefited the purchasers of these scopes. The association ended at some point I think and so did at least part of the reputation of these scopes. Don't get rid of this scope.....

I must re frame this comment- there might be APM inspired LZOS lensed scopes out there around this aperture that compete.

My next comment could hinge on a question: does Astro Physics make their own lenses from crystals they grow themselves? If so there might be a possibility if not then I doubt any association but don't know. There is a bit of a performance difference between these 2 fine top scopes possibly.

I have been told by an astronomer whose opinion I highly respect that this scope is at the very top of the food chain... the only contender I would think out there is the TSA102 but this is a total guess. Baaders former association with Zeiss has greatly benefited the astro community. Everyone wants top optics, but not the price tag- this 95mm Baader APO is an example of a no holds barred top quality optic- that has a limited market. How many would buy a Baader Classic ortho at $800.00 USD each? Espc when the 10mm BCO comes very close at a hundred bucks... What Baader is trying to do in general is provide the best possible optics at an affordable price IMHO. The Baader Morpheus is a great example of quality at a price point that will sell.

Years ago I bought a Baader prism diag that was said to have a true Zeiss prism. If performance is any indication I believe it. I would tend to think that Zeiss had some input on Baaders coatings, which I find to be superb. The Morpheus ,BCO benefits greatly from these I think.

I sure wish there was a 5mm Vixen HR.... totally satisfied with these.

To mount the 8" or 10" newt you need a massive mount like my AZEQ6- works great but is a beast. Depending on your budget there are options... A C8, C9.25 or better yet a Takahashi Mewlon 180 or 210. What do you like to observe? There are 100mm-120mm refractors out there that offer fine lunar/planetary views.