mikeDnight

You have quite a price range to play with. With that in mind id suggest you buy a Takahashi FC100DZ. State of the art optics in a short, light tube with retractable dew shield. If I were to buy a portable refractor today, and I could afford it, the DZ would be my number one choice. Pentax XW's would probably be my eyepiece choice, or Baader Morpheus. I'd stay with all 1.25" eyepieces and would use a 1.25" Tak prism.

No, the 120ED handles all eyepieces well in my experience, and I can't think of a single instance when I had a disappointing view because of the eyepiece. I'm not sure what you consider to be "lesser eyepieces"? For me a lesser eyepiece would have to be a very cheaply made, low quality eyepiece right at the bottom of the barrel. I find that most eyepieces today are of reasonably good quality, even the less expensive ones, and the ED will give pleasing results through them all, from plossl's and orthoscopics right through to the superdooper ultra wides. Although at F7.5 you don't really need the highly corrected wide angle eyepieces to control the edge of field. I used Naglers, Ethos and later Pentax XW's on my 120ED all to great effect. My preference is the XW as it was cooler, and to my eye, purer than the Televue offerings. The 31mm Nagler was in a class of its own though! The Morpheus are simply gorgeous eyepieces at a fraction of the price of either the TV's or XW's, yet they are outstanding in both construction and performance. I'd stick with the Morpheus! As John mentioned, you might want to consider some short focal length eyepieces, possibly in the 5mm to 2.5mm range. I found the 5mm and 3.5mm XW's to be invaluable. Orthoscopics are great but you may find eye releif a problem in the shorter focal lengths, in which case I'd suggest using a longer focal length ortho or Plossl along with a 2X barlow.

For a near 5" top class apo refractor, £980.00 is not a bad price. I know its a lot of money, but it will last you a lifetime and it will never deteriorate. You're right about the eyepiece, it is a 31mm Nagler, and the mount is a Hercules Helix altazimuth fork, sadly nolonger made. The tripod I'd a SW tubular steel version. The views were simply awesome! I say "were" because I eventually sold it to fund another refractor, but the 120ED is very dear to my heart.

Id spend the lot on three Baader Morpheus, starting with the stunning 17.5mm. So, perhaps my choice would be 17.5mm, 9mm & 6mm.

"A tub of putty and a pot of paint, makes a joiner what he ain't!"

I really hope you get it. The ED120 is one of the best doublet refractors out there. I've had three of them over the years, one 120 ED Pro with black diamond livery, and two Equinox 120 ED's which are identical to the EON. Personally I wouldn't worry too much about haggling, I'd just pay the money and run. It's an exquisite telescope that can stand alongside high end refractors with its head held high. It's very Takahashi in its image quality and will give stunning rich field views at low power, while on a good night with a steady atmosphere, you'll get 300X and more on the Moon and double stars.

Here are the latest occupants of my wooden eyepiece case. Gone are the Televue Plossl's, replaced by pairs of pseudo masuyama's, a single 17.5mm Morpheus and my set of Vixen HR's. There's still room for two more Morpheus - Morpheus's - Morphii, and then I think I'll have my perfect set - possibly!?? Still the same wooden case though, which I still like as much today as I did when I bought it from Hobbycraft in 2017.

I have experience with the Nirvana and they are very nice performers. It seems you're looking for a wide field eyepiece for planetary observing, but perhaps using a longer focal length good quality orthoscopic or Plossl along with a 2X barlow could be a better option. You'd retain the eye relief while you'd be using an eyepiece that's corrected well on axis for planets. Modern barlows are excellent and dont impede the performance of an eyepiece, and many planetary observers use them to great effect.

Fantastic scope Stu. I'm truly envious! After saving for a FL 102 in 2003 OO failed to deliver. Televue had just started importing them into the US and drained the UK market. Vixen offered a great package back then with their world class fluorite FL 102 on a GP with RA drive, aluminium tripod and two LV eyepieces for just £2,200.00. I never did get the Vixen I longed for, and I ain't forgiving America or Orion Optics, or Televue for that matter. Beautiful scope!!

I think going for one good refractor as your only scope can be quite liberating, and even increase your time at the eyepiece. If you don't mind a trip to the Practical Astronomy Show at Kettering on March 21st, you could get to grips with many different refractors, ask questions and get answers. You could also pick up a bargain in the process. Last year it was refractor heaven!

Could it be lateral colour you're noticing caused by the ultrawide angle eyepieces? If you can try a pair of orthoscopics in your binoviewer, you may be able to see if its the eyepieces causing the colour you're seeing rather than the prism. Just a thought!

I think they are amazing. Even the rediculously short 1.6mm giving an equally rediculous 463X on my 100mm refractor is quite amazing and very comfortable to use. Ive never used Zeiss Orthoscopics but quite a few people view them as a modern day Zeiss, so I'm happy to go along with their expert opinions. I'm determined never to sell my HR's and so I've given them their own little case. Here's the set all tucked up in bed.

Ive not used the 31mm aspheric but i have used the 32mm Omni and didnt rate it much to be honest. I think i gave it to my grandson for use in his 70mm refractor. Its an ok eyepiece but not what id call good. You might consider a 35mm Baader Eudiascopic, which is just a bit special with its 'jump out of the eyepiece star fields effect.'

I too had a 4mm Nirvana. It was one of the older style bodies with the flat top around the eye lens. I sold it because I didn't like the flat top, but the optics were very impressive. I remember watching Saturn drift into the field at one edge, traverse the field, and drift clean off the edge at the other side. There was no distortion and it was perfectly sharp from edge to edge.

Outstanding, and an inspiration!

Wives can be wonderful can't they!?

What a brilliant thing to do! I really hope this brings out of the woodwork those who have a secret passion for double stars, and yet love to image. And you've got the flame in your image just as an extra treat. I don't image, but I could see myself getting interested in this!

Im not an imager Frank and have no real in depth understanding of the for's and against's from an imagers point of view. All I really know is that ED apo's produce some of the most amazing images. They also make amazing visual instruments too, so that when you can't be bothered lugging a big scope around in the freezing cold of winter, or you just fancy a quick ten minutes visual observing before bed, the ED will give you a great time with very memorable views.

And some people image using some stunningly sharp refractors, and then for some inexplicable reason, add diffraction spikes to the stars????? There's nowt as funny as folk!

Of course there are always exceptions to the rule, or rather rough guide. It is true that a 100mm telescope will reach its resolution limit at 200X, but its not always possible to see all the detail in that image if the scale of the image is too small. With the advances in telescope design, glass types and eyepiece design, some high end telescopes will deliver 100X to 120X per inch of aperture on nights of steady seeing; so some top end 100mm refractors are capable of showing a detailed image at powers in excess of 400X depending on the target under scrutiny.

I saw part of it unfortunately, after my wife called me in to "listen to this moron". And yes, he was an Amoeba. You simply can't reason with the unreasonable.

The one that stood in the corner of your observatory?

May be you should review the forums on this site and on Cloudy Nights to get a feel for the advantages of one scope over another. Refractors, reflectors and catadioptrics - each have qualities that are peculiar to the design, and each have their drawbacks. Refractors generally deliver the sharpest views and good ones can take very high magnifications, as well as giving superb wide field views. They can make a perfect lifetime telescope. Reflectors have the advantage of greater light grasp and so can go deeper. If you want to chase faint objects then a 6" to 12" reflector may be right for you. SCT's and MCT's offer large apertures with short physical length, but there's a price to pay. They take significantly longer to reach thermal stability. SCT's in particular have softer star images than any of the other options, but they make great imaging instruments, which is what they were initially designed for. The Maksutov is much closer to a refractor in performance but without the wide field capability. Although many observers choose the larger aperture and light grasp of a Newtonian reflector as their first choice, many also choose the high definition and laser etched views of a refractor as their first choice. Yet others prefer the catadioptrics such as the Schmidt and Maksutov Cassegrains. Any of the above are preferable to no telescope, but not all suit the needs or observing preferences of any one individual. They are a personal preference after much careful thought. The best thing to do would be to try each design at a astro society or star party.

So you'll be selling your Vixen pier then i presume?