chops

As you both point out, I’ve yet to understand what defines this as a cohesive structure, rather than an improbable, albeit pleasant, coincidence. However UCLAN’s Alexia Lopez is also quoted thus: “Lots of people are excited but, having said that, you do get this attitude in cosmology that you don’t generally find elsewhere in science,” and “Good science should be about pushing back and testing our fundamental assumptions but there are clearly people who want to protect the Standard Model.”. (Source: FT) Fighting talk. I like it. Joining the Hercules Borealis Corona Wall (10Bn LY) and Great Arc (3Bn LY) we shall wait to see the detail in her peer reviewed scientific paper, presumably out 2025 at the glacial pace academia appears forced to follow.

Thanks Vlaiv, I’d not heard of Laniakea before. What you’re suggesting suggests it’s more a phenomena caused by humans projecting our desire to perceive order - in the same way as pareidolia (seeing faces) works, and our construct of asterisms of stars as artificial shapes (plough, Orion the hunter etc), albeit on a cosmic scale. However, to my eye, the Laniakea and component superclusters have little to no symmetry, when compared with the diagram of the galaxy ‘big ring’ above. Presumably their science is rigorous above to exclude the likelihood that the arrangement is chance, and it has been therefore determined without doubt that the ring is in fact that - something with the order that we so desperately seek.

Caught a passing article about a ring of galaxies which defies the the Standard Model of cosmology - very interested in the perspective of SGL’s hive mind of cosmologists, physicists and astronomers. The BBC article referenced a PHD student at the University of Lancaster, who identifies large scale structures such as galaxy alignments . However the latest body shouldn’t exist, because it appears to break the standard model’s theoretical limit on the size of a body in the universe - 1.2 billion light years, and its standard distribution of matter. The ‘Big Ring’ of galaxies is 1.3Bn light years diameter, and suggests a less even distribution. The ring sits in Bootes, close to the region of Alkaid, the outermost star of the plough / Ursa Major, and M101 Pinwheel Galaxy (image from UofLanc below). It’s well beyond my Ken what holds bodies such as this in place, gravitational forces one assumes. … Probably should read the article now (link below) but likely someone else here already understands the concepts and can help describe in laymen’s terms for us simpletons% https://www.uclan.ac.uk/news/big-ring-in-the-sky pic from Uni of Lancs article

I read this weekend of one of APM's 6x30s having a 9.3 degree FOV, plus TS-Optics seems to have a very similar model. I'm unsure whether FLO sell 6x30s but they're also on sale at a German retailer to the UK for 167EUR. Nikon 8x30 also have a 8.8 degree FoV, so very wide AFOV (mag x True FoV) of 70 degrees if I've understood correctly (?). Plus there's the Helios 2x40 Star Field 2x with Angular Field of View: 24° (Actual Field of View: 445m@1000m) at FLO, although they sell other Hawkes, including the 8x32 (129m at 1000 metres /7.35°TFOV / 58.8° AFOV ) it doesn't include the 7x32 So, price / performance from the list below and I'd go Hawke every time Nikon EII 8x30 = 70.4° (are these still available new - some on Amazon for £630?) Opticron Savannah 8x30 7.51° = 60° (£109 FLO) Hawke Endurance ED 8x32 = 58.8° (£239 at FLO ) Hawke Endurance ED marine 7x32 = 58.1° (£240-250 similar sites - not yet on FLO's site) APM and TS optics 6x30s = 55.8° (£170) Helios 2x40 Star Field 24° = 48° (£89 at FLO) Hope this helps you too

A few from Cornwall, where the skies this winter have rarely been clear and consequently exposures rather on the short side. Additionally I’ve had a couple of technical problems but, for now, variously unprocessed or processed on the iPhone: M1, NGC2244, M78, M42, moon, whirlpool galaxy, western veil nebula, andromeda galaxy, pleiades. clear skies!

Much has been written about the Hawkes, and I own their Sapphire 8x25 (which rivals, but doesn't match the venerable 90s Swarovski Habicht 10x25B). The Hawkes are wonderful for the price and so, when I recently spotted a display cabinet full of 'em in a Penzance's Perfect Photos, tried a few and settled on these 7x32 for £260, as something high quality, transportable, slightly different and very easy to handhold on target. These binoculars are great for daytime and night: the usual bino of choice for astro is well... frankly, whatever's closest. But, if planning a session, typically a Helios Stellar II 10x50 (hand / chest or monopod mounted), Opticron Adventurer T WP 10x50, or Helios Apollo 15x70 (parallelogram mount). Also owned and reviewed (then gifted) the Budget Helios Naturesport Plus, Weathermaster III and Fieldmaster here. Yes, binoviewers in the scopes too. Compared with all of these, they're lighter and smaller and more robust. With the exception of the Apollo 15x70, they're better quality and with a better image too. They're also easy to hold for an extended period, being close to the body. They have foldable objective lens caps, included eyepiece caps, floating (or normal) neckstrap, and a solid semi rigid carry case. I expect they'll last a lifetime. One reason to buy them was the utility of a more widefield bino. I've seen people with 2x (and wanted a 4x or 5x, but these aren't easily available), hence the purchase of their excellent Endurance 7x32 'Marine' (which will also be useful for their stated watery purpose), with BAK-4 roof prism, nice large, heavily knurled focus adjuster atop for cold fingers, and a good solid dioptre adjuster. They're waterproof (IP67) too and feel robust and solid (weighing 545g). Quoted as Field of View 8.3° / Apparent Field of View 58° (435ft @1000yds / 145m @1000yds) it's plenty wide. Certainly enough to get all of Orion's belt, and his sword in too. Easily. Sweeping through the milky way and through star clusters is superb. The Hercules double cluster's sparkling, Auriga's M36 and M36 clusters are great. Could have sworn I could see IC405 (Flaming Star nebula) , something I didn't expect to see. They have limited Coma, great contrast and resolution. Great colour, no fringing. Cons? Planets are miniscule, the moon is small and the inter pupil distance needs to be set accurately for me (i.e. the hinge to adjust distance for eye position) as exit pupil (4.6mm) and eye relief (17mm) feels startingly large, so perhaps getting harder as eyes age. but easier than others with specs (don't usually bother). Not as sharp to the edge as more expensive models, but really very good for the price. Link here to manufacturer site: HAWKE UK | Endurance ED Marine 7x32 Binocular (hawkeoptics.com) Comprehensive (non astro) review here: Hawke Endurance ED Marine 7x32 Binoculars Review (bestbinocularsreviews.com) Field of View from astronomy.tools

This reply may resurrect a rather old thread, but I’ve owned the Helios Stellar II 10x50 for a while and, whilst they’re great, I recently bought some lighter Opticron Adventurer T WP 10x50 on the back of the master of binos, Steve Tonkin (@binocularsky) reviews. The Stellar II has significantly higher contrast, a brighter and generally much more pleasant and immersive viewing than the Opticron. They are, however, heavier to handhold and mine has a sloppy right hand diopter / focussing adjuster which has always felt wrong, perhaps collimation problem too. Even with these downsides, they’re far better. The Opticron are significantly smaller, lighter and far easier to carry (see image), as well as being far cheaper. They’re superb value, even if not giving such high quality, crisp, views as the Helios. However - for the best views, a pair of Helios Apollo 15x70 on a parallelogram mount cannot be beaten. For portability, a high quality 10x25. Afraid no easy answer but, in the middle of all of these for price and performance, the Stellar II 10x50 are great. I once reviewed some of Helios’ £50-£80 binos in depth Cheaper 10x50 Helios Astro binocular review and the Naturesport Plus (£79 at the time) beat the others easily. However these Opticron Adenturer T WP at £84 are better than the Helios Naturesport and, for £84 from FLO, a bargain. I just wish I’d bitten the bullet years ago and bought the higher end Helios Lightquest 10x50. If anything like the Apollo 15x70 they’ll be amazing.

I found the eyepiece extenders made a big difference to the scope’s usability; they were recommended by HighburyMark when I wrote my first (very positive) impressions of the SS60. I hope something helps you here - I find it a cracking, inexpensive, Ha scope.

Rusted, thank you so much for your input. I’ll take everything on board and give that a bash - plus try running my previous results through ImPPG to see what’s there too. Fingers crossed for some autumn sunshine. clesr skies to you.

Many thanks Kitsunegari, I’ll read a little more about those cameras - I’ve been so impressed with the 183MC for general imaging (planetary, solar, dso) when compared with a digital SLR, I’ve no doubt I’ll pretty soon want something more specialised and it sounds as though a monochrome like the 290 and 174 is the way forward. I’ve some way to go to improve results including increasing frame rate further - I took some poor lunar video this weekend and a faster monochrome capture would be far superior too, presumably easier to stack fewer of the better captures.

I remain impressed with the Daystar Scout SS60. I've also finally tried to bring out some detail from the images. Daystar Solar Scout SS60, ASI183MC. Sharpcap - 1000 frames at 4ms with 350 gain. (.ser format, RGB24 colourspace). Probably overprocessed in Photoshop - because I don't know what I'm doing: HDR toning, levels, unsharp mask and increase brightness and contrast. Many not be technically good, but I'm happy wioth the results so far. Any pointers gratefully accepted.

Thanks Geoff, I couldn’t achieve focus with the 1.6x Barlow adapter supplied, so I shall have another try with other lens options, although the joy of having the entire disc in view will have been lost, it’d be much better than nothing for sure.

Here's a summary of some lessons I've learned, following an earlier topic in which two experienced members kindly gave some of their hard earned advice (the topic's linked here and called "Disc and prominence - Daystar Scout SS60-DS 17th March 2021 from Cornwall, UK (plus a request for your help please"): I've a reasonable amount of dark / night time astronomy and limited experience with a decent astrophoto camera (but only within the past few months moved to the ASI183MC from an SLR), so some of the below may be obvious to anyone with a modicum of experience, plus of course has parallels with dark astrophotography, but I thought worth noting here in case it's of help to you too. Timing - mid morning's good: when the sun's not yet created a heat haze in the atmosphere, but is still high enough above the horizon not to have too much atmosphere's to look through (just like night time astrophotgraphy). Seeing makes a big difference - just as at night, look out for high haze and turbulence Focus remains important, but finding it is easier than at night Use Firecap or Sharpcap, instead of ASI Studio Don't use AVI video: using .SER files correlated with better results for me (and plain still captures didn't yield the best results either) Keep exposures short (with this setup showing most of the disk, but not quite all, mine typically 35-40ms for surface and 70-90ms to give more prominence detail) Set Gain low (I leave at zero / 0 for now) I set Gamma at 50, but don't know what others use I've yet to determine the best video length - experienced people talk of 1000 frames, but I think I've used about 500 so far, over about 30-60 seconds of capture). Wish I'd captuured the screen, to show you. Be selective - use a small portion of your video frames. I've been using 10%-25% when seeing is good, experienced members have recommended <10% for better quality Autostakkert select Surface mode (because the whole disc doesn't quite fit in with this camera / scope combination). If a new camera / setup allows whole disc it'll be approximate polar alignment is OK for videos, don't let the disc drift to the edge of the fram When getting Autostakkert alignment, set AP size to 104 or 200 I need to learn GIMP. Use Colour > Levels (to stretch, in a similar way to DSO work) is useful, as is the Brightness / Contrast settings plus, as here, crudely joining two images of proms and surface layers. In the interim, the iPhone adjustments can give a pleasing result - here I've increased saturation and contrast more easily than I find in Photoshop or GIMP. I've yet to work out how to debayer properly, to get rid of the square artefacts. Result attached: a very crude two layer (not blended, just placed) with the background image exposed for prominences, the top layer plonked on with surface detail. Minimal processing in GIMP and iPhone. Also the prominences were a little overexposed, but I wanted to yank out some of the shapes quickly and easily. Other results with lower exposures, pushed harder, have yielded better prominence detail overall. What can you add to this list, to help others?

I find a binoviewer a revelation and viewing much more natural - night or day, but it's too uncomfortable for sustained use when the erecting prism can't be used, so these will be tempting when I can justify it in future. However some of the reviews on Cloudy nights aren't wholly complimentary, hence trying a Orion Premium Linear Binoviewer on the Daystar Scout SS60 first would be rather good. Fingers crossed star parties can start up again this year.

Goodness, a zero backfocus Binoviewer... thanks @catburglar - it looks like an amazingly useful bit of kit... would love to turn the Dobson into a binoview too... but ... I've *only just* bought the WO binoviewer.. so don't feel I can justify £430 ... you first! Please do post up if anyone owns the Orion Premium Linear BinoViewer for Telescopes