mikeDnight

I'd rather trust the old stuff than the new! I have no interest in computers for astronomy or mounts that dont have a manual option, but RA and DEC drives, or just RA drive suits me fine. I've seen so many modern, more complex scope electronics pause problems, while the trusty Vixen motors just keep going and going and.......! I suppose if some people like gadgetry then that's part of what makes them tick, but I find it incredibly stressful, which kind of defeats what its all about for me. I'm just a lazy sky tourist who enjoys reading charts and going on the occasional astro mystery tour.

I really love this Vixen tripod Dave. It's got an exceptionally wide spread and is surprisingly solid and vibration free. It makes the cheap Chinese clones look pathetic by comparison. I like wooden tripods but the Vixen AL 1.5 is just too good to part with. So it seems that the only issues i'll have to contend with is the local seeing, and of course this Tak lens! And that WHITE counterweight!! It plays havoc with my OCD!

One for each eye! The 1.5m tripod came with my first GP now in the observatory. This deal was only for the mount head, and to my surprise a WHITE counterweight. ?

A few days ago I parted with this classic Vixen Polaris, at first it was a long term loan. Then after further discussion with paulastro, we decided to do a trade. Paul wanted the Polaris as a quality Altaz for his 4" ED. For my part I received this in exchange! A beautiful Vixen GP. This is my second Vixen GP, the first is permanently housed on a steel pier in my observatory and now this second GP is my solid grab and go mount. I prefer equatorial when sketching! Personally i feel these classic mounts are some of the finest portable mounts ever made. It's a tragedy Vixen stopped making them, but fortunately they are greatly undervalued by the majority and so come up second hand quite cheap.

I genuinely love the SW ED's in all their guises, after all I've owned five of them, including three 120's. They are superb! B-uuut, would the greater aperture of the 120 offer that all important edge in definition, over the superlative figure of the Canon Optron lens of the Tak??? I think the best way to find out is for BillP to loan us both (long term of course), his Zeiss Abbey's and let us battle it out! I'm sure Bill won't mind, he's still got plenty of other toys to play with!

Yes, but how much better would Bill's kindly donated Zeiss Abbey Ortho's be in my Tak than in .........Oops! Mind that step!!

The Baader helical focuser on the Baader 1.25" prism is a great way to get micro-focus capability at a fraction of the cost of a Tak micro-focuser. The only drawback arrises if you later choose to use a binoviewer, as the viewer would rotate with the focuser. The Baader prism is excellent!

If you ever do have an abberation Bill, and decide to offer your material possessions to the poor, then please keep me in mind!

Are you talking yourself into buying a set Dave? I find it interesting how some people seem to love the eye lens in the longer focal lengths being set down inside the eyepiece body while others, myself included, hate it that way. I'm sure the Tak ortho's are excellent, but for them to be better optically than the Fujiyama's and not as good as the TMB Super Monocentric's seems to me to be a very fine line to straddle. Perhaps the chunkier engineered body and the fact that they are relatively expensive compared to other ortho's, and they are made for Takahashi, has some psychological impact? That's not to say i wouldnt mind owning a set! What puts me off buying pricey Tak's for mono use is that I've seen the TMB Super Mono's consistently beaten by a mile, by cheap as chips, 365 Astronomy 16.8mm Abbe Orthoscopics and a revelation binoviewer, with X2 SW delux barlow. What a game changer! I think the only mono eyepieces I have a mild craving for are the Astro Physics Planetaries. By "mild craving" I mean I'd sell my wife and kids for a set!

You need to invest in one of these!

TV Plossls 25mm, 2X 15mm, 13, 2X11mm, 7.4mm. 35mm Baader Eudiascopic, 18mm Ultima, X2 SV Barlow. 9mm Baader Genuine Ortho, 2X 16.8mm Super Abbe Ortho's Vixen LV's 20mm, 2X 15mm, 2.5mm Nirvana 4mm 82°

I agree in principle, but some 100mm's are better than other 100mm's! Synthetic dilithium, (sorry) fluorite crystal, has greater light throughput than any other ED glass and so images are brighter. And those with a better figure will give better images and performance. Then there's the human factor with all its emotional drawbacks! LL&P!

You're the psychologist Paul! So does this mean that everyone who discusses the attributes of their instruments in the hope of encouraging others on a Scopes/Whole setups forum is a miserable bunny, or perhaps has mental issues? I'm the sanest person I know!

Computers and wild imagination!

I'm sure I'm a psychologists nightmare!!

SCT owners should be prosecuted under the cruelty to photons act, which doesn't actually exist, but should do! After travelling hundreds of thousands or even millions of light years, only to end up bellyflopping onto a Schmidt corrector plate; its just so sad!!

I'm just messing!

Ah but although they may not be obvious on all stars, they are still present, smearing the image even on extended objects like the moon and planets. Coupled with coma, spider diffraction along with secondary obstruction, light scatter and tube currents all play a part in softening the view through a reflector. Then there's the difficulty of obtaining surface accuracy of a mirror which needs to be at least four times more accurate than that of any one surface of a doublet refractor. Oh and refractors offer brighter images inch for inch over the reflector, and if the refractor uses fluorite, then there's even greater light throughput. All this is true, but I still value reflectors for their light gathering and greater resolution capabilities.

That 8.5" refractor would be well loved with me Peter, if you ever feel its getting a bit lonely up in the wilds! I'll begin cleaning out its 19 foot long observatory at the bottom of my garden that's been waiting in anticipation.

That may be true Olly, but you could follow the example set by some of the better imagers, who use multi thousand pound refractors for that perfect star image, then add diffraction spikes to the image later for a touch of class!

May be Hawksy has a point. What use is a small aperture on dso's, especially from town?! Obviously refractors with their limited aperture and high prices are rubbish! Anyone want to buy my Tacky-Hashi?

All telescopes are refractors! Its just that those with quality lenses at the front are the best! Hawks is simply in denial! ?

A hot knife cuts foam perfectly, just don't let the wife catch you! Great scope by the way!

If you bought it you might never feel quite comfortable with it, knowing the lens is chipped. At £200 to start, you're over half way to a beautiful Star Wave 102mm F11. I know which I'd choose, but you know your budget. Even a SW 100ED could be found second hand for around £400.