Roy Challen

An interesting read, thanks Michael. Definitely agree with it being an absolute bargain. Is there any other eyepiece that does so much, for so little? Probably not.

I got a brief look in this morning, lots of sunspots visible, a couple of small proms, but didn't see any flaring.

Top of my list would be a really, really bright X-class solar flare, I guess that's just a matter of time. Best so far: middling M-class. Will this year be the year?

A really, really bright comet Hale-Bopp style, would be next, followed by a really, really bright supernova - Betelgeuse, I'm looking at you!

Lunar occultation of Jupiter or Saturn, or if it is even possible, a Jupiterian occultation of Saturn?

Or a Shoemaker Levy 9 size event, preferably on Jupiter!

Actually, let's combine No2 and No6! Now that would be something!

On 11/04/2024 at 15:21, josefk said:

how about solar transits of Venus and Mercury? I've never seen one and won't be able to see a transit of Venus now in my lifetime. Mercury transits next in 2032.

 

I feel for you. I took the day off for the 2004 Venus transit,  watched the whole thing, got loads of photos. That is a career highlight for me, not the only one but still right at the top.

I've never used Hyperions, but the fine tuning rings sound like a great idea. Why don't other manufacturers use them? Patents?

What a fabulous instrument! I agree with a plossl and zoom being the only necessary eyepieces, that's all I bother with in my very similar, but not quite as beautiful, achro.

I imagine once you've collimated it, Izar will be stunning. My scope shows it extremely well at x208.

17 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

I was not referring to the threads on the back of the scope.  I was referring to the "visual back", the piece that threads onto the scope, into which the diagonal inserts.

On its outer end are 10mm of thread that do nothing other than to force the inserted diagonal to be 10mm farther from the back of the scope.

The thumbscrew that holds the diagonal is closer to the scope, in the solid, un-threaded, portion of the visual back.

Removing the 10mm of threaded section on the visual back, which was intended to be used with some obscure camera adapter,  allows the diagonal to move in toward the scope,

which shortens the focal length of the scope and yields a wider true field with every eyepiece.

The Baader adapter to which you refer, I believe, threads directly to the scope and replaces the visual back that comes with the scope.

The Baader adapter I had fits between the visual back and diagonal - see image below. The scope in the image is a 90mm but I believe the visual back is the same for the 127mm as well. I might be wrong on that though.

I have no experience with Lunt scopes, I have a Daystar Solarscout. By far my favourite eyepiece in this is the Baader 32mm plossl, but I also liked the Vixen 30mm NPL - it just has more reflections than the Baader. I've also used a Televue 25mm plossl (didn't get on with it), Meade 26mm Series 4k plossl ( not that great but useable), Baader 18mm BCO  (good in good seeing), and an ES 16mm 68° (good in good seeing).

Hope that helps 

On 24/03/2024 at 18:36, Don Pensack said:

 

The visual back that holds the diagonal has 10mm of useless thread on its outer end. 

I agree with everything in your post except this. Baader sell an inexpensive compression ring adapter that screws directly on to this thread, making a much nicer way of holding the diagonal. Looks nicer too!

I live in a large town centre, so pretty much any DSO is invisible to me. However, I go to Kazakhstan regularly and on one visit a few years ago, we went to a place that is truly remote. Such places ought to be Bortle 0. The Milky Way looks like thick cloud, you cannot clearly see constellations for the stars, and DSOs are no longer faint fuzzies! I saw the dust lane in M82 through 12x50 bins, with ease. Unforgettable.

Can you believe it? Mention Starfire and one appears on ABS, a 152mm no less! I need to ban myself from looking.

9 hours ago, paulastro said:

Not necessarily, users of other makes and apertures of scope just don't feel the need to go on about them all the time. 

Personally, I'd prefer to have something with more aperture that was more useful for deep sky as well as planets and double stars 😊.

 

 

 

 

Agreed, much as I do love my Tak, it would be the first go in a forced cull.

So on that note, I'd keep the Skylight and get an adapter made up for the Solarscout's quark enabling me to use it in the Skylight.😀 

Actually, now that I've thought about it, that's a great idea. More resolution, more focal length, less telescopes😁

3 hours ago, Mr Spock said:

Back to the original question, I have what I need already 

I think this thread isn't so much about need as want!😉

+1 for the 10mm BCO

Depends on what you mean by budget. If I were 'allowed' to buy what I have funds for (aka life savings) the result would be very different from what I have...but I'm not saying I'm unhappy with what I have.

On the dream list though: Tak frac 100-150mm, anything with LZOS lens, Zeiss APQ of any size. Wouldn't say no to AP Starfire either, or a Traveller, or...even a large Russian Mak. Any one of these would be perfect even if I only got to use it once a year in perfect conditions on my favourite targets.

Daystar Solarscout, it's my most used scope and likely to remain so.

15 hours ago, LondonNeil said:

Seems I'm going to try the hyperflex,  the 8e version though,  I just grabbed the one Andrew had in the classifieds 

Ought to be pretty good. I didn't know what the difference was between the 7E and the 8E, but the clue is in the name - 7E has seven elements in four groups, the 8E has eight in five groups.

Just three refractors here;

Takahashi FS60-CB, 76mm f/16+ Skylight achro, and my Daystar Solarscout which gets used the most. I don't think I need anything else...😉

I have had two Hyperflex 7-21mm zooms, and personally, I think they are excellent value for money. Yes, they're a bit narrow, but that doesn't bother me at all. The eye relief is good (I currently don't wear glasses), and they perform well even at f/5.9

That's great! I was expecting something barely visible and without colour.

For what it's worth, the tuning knob was turned fully anticlockwise.

Just now, Albir phil said:

I'll get it out and see what I can get with my DSLR,

Give it a go! At the end of the day, it is ine of the cheapest Ha scopes available (at least it was 3 years ago). As mentioned, I have not had any experience with any other Ha scopes, so mine may also be disappointing to someone else...but I'm happy with it.

1 minute ago, Albir phil said:

Thanks for reply, as I said I have same scope probably like you for 3 years.i haven't used it much, a bit disappointed with it, but having seen your image I'll get it out and spend more time with it.Think I may have been a bit unfair to it.🤔

I wouldn't take a phone image through a Ha scope as any sign of quality. The view through it is far superior. For a start, the sun appears deep orange, not pink. But the level of detail and contrast through the eyepiece is totally different.

The image is a crayon scribble compared to a Leonardo da Vinci masterpiece!

4 hours ago, Albir phil said:

Hi I have the same scope what's your opinion on it 🤔

I've had it for three years now, and it has been my most used scope by far. If I were allowed just one scope, the Daystar would be it.

There has been a lot of talk of the variable quality of the quark that goes into it, but as far as I am concerned, mine is good. I haven't looked through any others, or any other Ha scope for that matter, so nothing to compare it to.

As an entry point to hydrogen alpha observating, I have no hesitation in recommending it.

14 minutes ago, Louis D said:

I took a hard pass on a 127 Mak at a good price on an EQ mount with counterweights a decade ago.  I could barely lift it one handed due to the weight and top-heaviness of it.  I need to be able to pick up and move my mount and scope around the yard to dodge obstructions, so this weight and bulk issue was a non-starter for me.

My EQ setup is about 18-19kg so needs both hands to lift, as I also need to move around the garden occasionally. But actually setting up and tracking is just as quick as alt-az. I was being slightly tongue in cheek, hence the smiley face😉.

It's worth it as it allows high power tracking while using orthos, or other narrow field designs, even in strong winds.