mikeDnight

Your scope will play happily at 220X and over on a night with good seeing, so I'd say grab yourself a 4mm.

What telescope are you using? A 3 to 6 zoom may be nice if you want to stay with TeleVue. Or a 3 to 8mm SvBony Zoom if you don't want to be ridiculed for paying TV prices.

I reckon there are a lot of "eyepiece sucker's" here and around the world. Make of that statement what you will! 😆

It's a slippery slope selling your stuff. You should remind her that boys come with toys, and if she doesn't like it she can move out. I'm sure she'll understand! 😂

Have you ever heard the saying - "A tub of putty & a pot of paint, makes a Joiner what he ain't"? Well this little pot of modelling paint could make that SW finder bracket what it ain't, a Tak blue finder bracket. And if you dismantle the ends of the finder and spray the tube white, even JeremyS will talk to you. 😆

I've no experience with this particular ED James, but I've plenty with other ED's and various Star Travel's. I'd be confident in saying the 125ED will be in an entirely different league to the Star Travel, with better figured optics, and could be used for everything, where as the ST is really only an RFT. The 125 should be essentially free of any major CA visually. I remember my first view through a SW 120ED DS Pro and if I hadn't already seen the scope, I'd have said it was virtually Takahashi quality in its visual performance, so I'd guess the 125ED to be very similar. Mount wise I'd guess an AZ4, Sky Tee 'll, or eq5 would be ideal.

It should only take 15 or 20 mins for the Tak to cool enough for testing.

Do you know of anyone reasonably local, perhaps someone in your astro society with an FC100D Neil? May be even another 4" ED brand that you could use alongside your Tak on the same star, under the same conditions; then you can assess performance more easily. If you aim your scope at Polaris and check the diffraction pattern is concentric, ensuring your scope is cool, you can be confident its collimated. Also, the diffraction rings should be near identical either side of focus. It's unlikely there's an issue with the lens itself as it was produced to a very high spec by Canon Optron.

I think with only £2000, I'd buy a 120ED and an AZ4, SvBony 3 to 8mm zoom and a 30mm Ultraflat.

I'm a Dob fan! The big one's - temporarily at least - attract the crowds at star parties, which leaves me alone with my refractor. Until some Wandering Walter with too much curiosity finds me hiding in the dark; then after one look through the refractor gives me away and loudly invites his friends to look through "the best scope here!" And my quiet observing is over for the night.

I like observing because I find it both relaxing, and exciting at the same time. Each observing session is full of adventure, not to mention the amazing company I also have from time to time, both human and otherwise.

Human!

Anyone else fed-up with these postmen leaving rubbish in your porch?

I think its referring to the starlight from so many starlit nights that illuminates his mind and heart with so many happy memories. Now back to this incendiary refractor v reflector comment!

Oh good! I'll phone you later with the list I've made!! Chat soon!

For a passionate lens licker with a handle fetish, you have a cold, steely heart Jeremy. Mine is much more like a squishy marshmallow!

It just wouldn't have been the same if Peltier's book was titled - Observational Notes, Experience's & Computations of an Astronomer. Yawn!!! 🥱😴

I think I could be tempted to exchange it with F15Rules (Dave) for his rusty - sorry - trusty old EM mount. 😂

That's because you're an astronomer Jeremy. A person that does science! I don't do anything of any real scientific value, so I'm a star hopper and dolloper, doodling the things I see and generally have no project in mind other than to sight see and have an enjoyable time. I have discovered many things for myself over the years, even though others may have seen them before, but to me they were new. I've also seen things I wasn't supposed to see, such as albedo features on Mars while Mars was sub 5 arc seconds. I've had more knowledgeable men than me, especially from America, email me to say "You can't see that in a 4" scope!" I thank them for their concern and carry on observing the apparently impossible. So I'm quite happy being called a Stargazer, after all, Peltier thought himself a Stargazer, and he was both a scientist and an astro tourist, and in a far different league to myself.

The postman brought me something this afternoon, a Vixen APZ. And although I haven't used it in anger as yet, it certainly appears to be very nice both mechanically and aesthetically. The instruction manual says "This Way Up!" in Japanese.

If funds were endless, id probably have a large Ash Dome with a 250mm Takahashi Triplet Fluorite Apochromat on one of those giant Tak equatorials. I'd also like a big country house to go with it, large grounds, and an observatory lackey to act as an aid.

I completely agree about Denning's book. It's probably my favourite too, and despite scientific understanding moving on, every word he writes regarding telescopes and observing is still holds firm. It's almost inspired!

The DZ uses a different mating element and offers better colour correction than even the DL, though I doubt anyone would notice the difference visually. I think the DZ is primarily aimed at the imager, although it's a remarkable visual scope too. It also appears to be the replacement for the TSA102 which has now been discontinued. The sliding dew shield seems pretty pointless to me, as it only has 80mm of travel and I don't care much for it. Optically, scope itself is pretty awesome, but so is the DC, DF, & DL. I wouldn't lose too much sleep over which performs better visually! I had a DC before buying a DZ, and the DC has proved to be my most used scope, showing me more than any other, simply because I used it on virtually every clear night throughout the five years I had it. The biggest real difference between the DC and the DZ, and one that you would definitely notice, is that the DZ is around a £1000 more expensive.

I'd be inclined to buy a new bearing. May be members of a local astro group could help you repair it. Or just sell the binoculars separate to the mount. I'm sure you'd get a few take-aways from the proceeds! May be post a pic here then you could get feedback?

If you divide 116 by the aperture you'll find the theoretical resolution of two equally bright stars. In your case 116/70 =1.7 arc seconds, approximately. Seeing conditions may prevent this on poor nights.