Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

stargazine_ep8_banner.thumb.jpg.7fc4114c7705b14c0786cf342cea1f9c.jpg

mikeDnight

Members
  • Content Count

    3,622
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    16

mikeDnight last won the day on April 28

mikeDnight had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

8,068 Excellent

About mikeDnight

  • Rank
    White Dwarf

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Interests
    Lunar & planetary , binary stars & comets.
    Visual astronomy in general and an advocate of sketching as an aid to observing.
    I also have a passion for refractors and optics in general, and have a deep interest in the history of amateur astronomy, the astronomers and their scopes and observatories.
  • Location
    East Lanc's
  1. No, I didn't miss your post Louis! My issue is that no matter what is attached to the back end, the 127mm Mak can not use a 2" format to the full. A 2" eyepiece with a near full size field lens has its field lens effectively stopped down by the much smaller baffling. It can't use the full aperture of its field lens.
  2. Am I missing something? It seems to me that unless the internal diameter of the baffle tube is a full 2", there's little point in using 2" eyepieces. All the 127mm Mak's I've used have had a much narrower baffle tube. And supposing the baffle on a 127mm Mak was a full 2" internal diameter, it would eat up a significant amount of useable surface area on the primary; bearing in mind that the thickness of the baffle tube, and its retaining ring also intrude into the surface area. A 127mm Mak is a terrific scope, but its not a wide field instrument, and it seems to me at least, that trying to use it as such would have detrimental effects. Using a 2" back on a scope with a baffle tube less than 2" would surely cause vignetting?
  3. And yet, unlike mirror diagonals, they have virtually no scatter effect and so produce better defined and more contrasty views.
  4. If you use an eyepiece, not to mention a coma corrector, in a reflector, then you might as well consider a refractor. Prisms are better anyway in F7 and above.
  5. The 127ED is a great scope but it will take 45 minutes to cool when taken out from a warm house on a winter night. The 120ED will take around 15 minutes. Also, the 127 is a bit of a beast and needs a solid mount, but visually it is excellent. I've attached a pic of a friend of mine with his 127ED to give an idea of the physical size. My friend tried to talk me into doing a swap for my 120ED after he used his scope alongside mine, but I didn't bite. The 120ED was much more manageable and just as colour free when in focus.
  6. But Richard uses that big silly reflector thingy. Too bright! Our Tak's will see right through it, trust me!
  7. Even if you changed to a SW 120ED F7.5 doublet apo, you will gain a great deal in performance over both your achromats, both in colour correction and in magnification range. The 120ED is an amazing visual scope.
  8. Nice try Steve, but try as you might, those legs are not quite as appealing as the girl from the Celestron adverts of the 1980's!
  9. That's great! The same day I was lounging back in a deckchair around mid afternoon, admiring a simple naked eye view of the Moon, and wondering who else on earth would be nutty enough to do the same thing in such a bright sky. It's a beautiful pic'!
  10. Any amount of light red or otherwise is damaging to true dark adaption, however, unless the observer knows exactly the target it is often unavoidable to check charts of one form or another. The difference between electronic and paper charts is largely academic as to see a chart well, the lighting needs to be bright enough to read coordinates and numerical designations. I think all that can be done to compensate for loss of dark adaption, is to observe the target for an extended period (20 minutes or more) after the red light has been switched off. That way a measure of dark adaption can be regained.
  11. Personally I'd wait. Astroshop Eu are good people. You may find the scope arrives earlier than stated, plus it will be a lesson to the overly expensive shop which might prompt them to reconsider their prices. That's a big difference in price, and your patience will eventually pay off. I doubt you'll have much of a delay because of the virus. UPS are pretty reliable too!
  12. It could be the darkness of the sky background that balances so nicely with the magnification and field of view that makes it a magical focal length. The darkness of the sky background has a massive impact on contrast of DSO's, and peppered star fields. I loved my 20mm Nagler when used in a 4" or 5" refractor of F8 or less. The Orion Nebula was at its most spectacular around the focal length in such scopes, with different levels of black nebulosity giving a real 3D impression as brighter nebulosity explodes from behind the blackness. The 17.5mm Morpheus is well worth adding to the list of potential contenders,
  13. You might consider trying a barlow lens which will double the focal length of your scope, and double the magnification of any eyepiece. The 2X Skywatcher Delux barlow is very good and not expensive. Doubling the magnification though will greatly increase the vibration of your mount. Mars will increase in size and get better placed as the year goes on, but your wobbly mount may be what lets you down. An AZ4 or EQ5 mount would hold your scope much steadier.
  14. I've not tried this but I'm very interested in your results, especially regarding on axis sharpness. Who knows, you may have found yourself a profitable side line rehashing old eyepieces! ☺
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.