mikeDnight

Whoever grabbed that one has got a jewel!

Of course the HR's, made of unobtanium, are the best because I have the set. I've had the 3.5XW and thought it was optically outstanding, but it is a chunk compared to the others. I haven't used the TOE's yet but would only be interested in the 4mm as it would fit nicely into my power range. I have to say however that the HR's are so comfortable to use, even the 1.6mm, I can't ever see me parting with them. I would say that as far as on axis sharpness goes, the 3.4mm HR has an obvious edge over the 3.5mm XW. In fact the HR's remain pin sharp right across the field of view, even at 1000X.

My most used scope is my FC100DZ and prior to that my FC100DC. Effortless to set up and awesome optic's, which make the FC100 my favourite scope. That being said however, I enjoy both my Genesis SDF for its jaw dropping wide fields, and my 150mm Edmund achromat for its resolution, but neither can match the quality of the FC. Edit: I almost forgot about my recently acquired 60mm Carton Comet seeker. With a binoviewer it too makes an impressive lunar scope believe it or not, and its about as grab and go as grab and go gets. It's a lovely scope for rekindling the joy I first felt from 40+ years ago.

I'd go for a TSA120 in a heart beat. Then if funds allowed, a cheap binoviewer, 2X 32mm, 2x 25mm, 2X 15mm TV Plossl's, and a 2X SW Delux barlow. In time I'd very likely sell my other scopes as they'd rarely ever get used.

My GP gave me some advice many years ago, - "If at all possible, keep yourself out of the hands of surgeons!" I'd suggest that if you can get along with your present condition you should do so as long as you can. My wife has had both lenses replaced and she's been fine, but one eye now needs a second replacement after 8years. My mother was blinded in both eyes by an incompetent eye surgeon. Things may have improved since then but there's always a real risk. The question is, is it worth the risk?

Thanks Jeremy. Yes, using the 6" is really quite nice and I am enjoying playing with it much more than I thought I would. Of course I still love my little Tak.

Another clear night with average transparency for my site, so I thought I'd try and sketch the Whirlpool and Sunflower as they were close to the zenith. The seeing was steady but there was some low mist and high fast moving cloud.

There's always the Sun, and Venus if youre brave enough, that can satisfy our astro lust during the day. ☀️ I found by marking my drawtube while the scope is focused at infinity using a low power eyepiece, I can easily find Venus in daylight when using the same eyepiece. It's safer when the planet is following the Sun, but as long as you remain aware you stand the risk of poaching your eyeball if the Sun drifts into the field, you should be safe.

You're very kind. Thanks!

It was very windy for most of the day yesterday, but as it got late the wind died down and the sky looked quite transparent. Normally my observing site is steady but misty, so it was a treat to see the milkyway easily. So I decided to go out with sketch pad in hand and not come back in again until I had made at least one drawing. I'm not really that adventurous when it comes to deep sky, so I decided to look at a few lollipops, lollipops being easy dso's that are guaranteed to please. My weapon tonight was my 6" F10 refractor, and so after rolling back the roof of my observatory, I aimed the scope at lollipop number 1 which was the glorious M13. Using a 35mm Panoptic M13 appeared as a bright ball of individual stars tightly packed together and set among a starry background. There's something very satisfying about such low power views, low power in the case of the 6" being 43X, with a 2° field. Changing the 35mm Panoptic for a 17.5mm Morpheus revealed M13 as an explosion of stars with star littered tendrils extending from its tightly packed core and reaching outwards in an almost loose spiral fashion. Moving to a 9mm Morpheus and M13 was shown to have meaningful depth, almost 3D as it filled the field of view. My next stop was in Canes Venatici and M94, another mouthwatering lollipop. M94 is a face on spiral galaxy with a bright core that easily catches the attention when it comes into the field. It's also very easy to find as its so close to the star Cor Caroli. At first glance M94 looks like a misty disc of light with a bright core that appears a little like an out of focus star. I decided that this would be my sketch object for this evening, but to get more than just a general impression of a misty patch I'd need to spend time on this target. Again I changed from the 35mm Panoptic to the 17.5mm Morpheus so as to darken the sky background and improve contrast. Over time the initial circular haze of nebulosity revealed itself to be oval, and it hinted at being much wider spread than I drew in the accompanying sketch. Was this an illusion? Also at times, there was a hint of a spiral arm as well as mottling, though I couldn't quite pin down the mottling. After again changing the eyepiece, this time for a 6.5mm Morpheus giving 231X and studying the galaxy using averted vision for quite some time, I noticed the core itself was mottled, but again pining such detail down to a specific point is virtually impossible with a 6". May be others with larger apertures and greater resolution would dare to have a go at catching this detail? Below is my sketch of spiral galaxy Messier 94 using a 6" F10 refractor, magnification X231, Seeing ll Antoniadi, Transparency 3, (mirror diagonal view). You can zoom in on the core to see the impression the core gave in the eyepiece.

If you remove the spacer between the scope and focuser, you can still reach focus in mono mode providing you use the black extension tubes supplied with the DC.

Like toothache im sure! 🦷

Looks fantastic, and it would be right up my street but for two things. First, it isn't actually up my street, and second, I'd need your wallet Jeremy. Actually it's a gift at the asking price, and to think that Starlight Nights was written there makes it all the more appealing. It's a shame that his 6" comet seeker and the amazing 12" Clarke refractor aren't still there. I named my observatory after Peltier's home - Brookhaven. How sad is that!?

I'll never understand why Tak don't simply shorten the scope tubes and lengthen the drawtubes, as doing so would solve the focus problem everyone seems to have with their scopes. They can't be unaware of the problem given all the feedback they must receive directly or indirectly, which means they are either thick, or don't care. As for the Revelation binoviewer, I don't rely on the diopter adjustment as I've found the engineering isn't upto the task and throws the eyepieces out of alignment. But as Stu suggests, I keep everything screwed virtually fully in and focus, in my case, the right eye using the rack and pinion, then retract the left eyepiece very slightly until I have sharp focus and lock it I place. Although I have matching pairs of eyepieces from 35mm down to 7.5mm, I rarely use anything shorter than 15mm in the binoviewer. As I use a 2X barlow attached to the nose of the bv, the amplification of around 4X is more than enough to give a very comfortable image scale with good eye relief for lunar and planetary observing. I've also found the amplification is a little more than 4X when using the body of the barlow rather than screwing the barlow lens into the bv nose. For powers higher than 320X in my 100mm DZ and for double star observing I prefer using single eyepieces rather than a binoviewer.

That's awesome Paul! I really need to dust off my box brownie and soot up my objective with candle smoke.

That's gorgeous Stuy. I'd be pretty content with that in my observatory. No carry handle?

Same as the 24" Clarke at Mars Hill. It has been stopped down at times to ease the CA, but it was made to fit the pre existing dome and not the dome made to fit the telescope. CA or not, I'd swap the 24" Clarke for my DZ too. Do you think my owner will notice the difference? I can hear her now, - "How did you smuggle that into the garden?" Me - "Oh, that's been there for ages. I won it in a raffle at Kettering". 🥊

I haven't seen through the 28" but I've no doubt it will be absolutely stunning both on and off axis. How it performs visually off axis will largely be determined by the quality of the eyepiece used. Being made by Grubb, it would have been state of the art at its making and will still perform as a world class refractor. I'd swap my Tak DZ in a heartbeat in exchange for the 28" if it had a carry handle.😅

I'd avoid goto like the plague on a £600 budget. Buy a star atlas and learn to star hop, - it's easier than you might think, and that way you'll never be tied down by the need for power supplies or batteries. It's difficult to pin down one particular type of telescope as each has it's own advantages and disadvantages. Probably a StarTravel refractor around 102 or 120mm would be a good scope for admiring star fields and nebulae etc, or if the Moon and planets are more your thing, a longer focal length refractor around 102mm may give a lifetime of enjoyment. However, a 130mm to 150mm reflector would equally be a serious scope choice. And if you want to keep things compact, a 125mm Maksutov would be a worthy contender. A simple AZ4 or AZ5, or an EQ5 mount would be good choices.

Absolutely brilliant! I remember that Sky At Night special from its first showing, a time when Sky At Night was something I looked forward to. Patrick of course was awesome as a presenter, and never to be matched. I must have seen it since as everything in it is still fresh in my mind. It makes me wonder if Voyager l l had made a fly-by of Pluto, would it ever have been demoted as a planet? Thanks for that blast from the past.

Same here but using the 6" refractor at X171 so perhaps not a great challenge, but i know where to look. The seeing improved later in the evening as the moon got higher. May be now this feature has been brought to our attention, more observers will see it, which wouldn't be surprising. William Herschel noted " When our particular attention is once drawn to an object, we see things at first sight that would otherwise have escaped our notice."

That's Posh!

Gorgeous pic's Paul! And not a Tak in sight!!

I think that all my scopes may fall into the "small" category, with my largest aperture being only 6", and all are refractors. Over the last few years I've tried to find a benefit to having larger aperture reflectors, but never really enjoyed observing with them the way I'd hoped I would. They would nearly always stand idle while a small refractor would be my prefered weapon of choice. I prefer the better definition of refractors over the resolution gain and light grasp of the reflectors.