mikeDnight

That's gorgeous Graham! Isn't it funny how many amateurs look straight past the stars in their search for a fuzzy patch at the limit of visibility and miss all the breathtaking beauty of rich star fields. Of course stars are in fact deep sky objects well worth our attention. Thanks for posting!

They do have a habit of just turning up unexpectedly, or as has happened, been the winning prize to a £1 raffle ticket, which can for one time only appease the wrath of our better halves. Hope you have some good hiking boots Dave, as the terrain gets slippery from here on. Seriously nice scope though!

As it was raining I decided to swap mounts in my observatory. It was just a temporary thing but after doing it I rather like the feel of this Tak Teegul altaz now it's on my pier. I haven't had chance to use it in anger yet but its got me excited. All i need are some clear skies.

Often manufacturers use long exposure images on their packaging, which can be misleading to say the least. But, despite being only 4.5" aperture, visually you should be able to see all the Messier objects, hundreds of double stars, and be able to track comets. The problem for someone starting out in astronomy is that, like any hobby, it takes time to acquire observing experience. Seeing is a skill that will develop over time, and it would be helpful if you were able to observe from a dark site, or where you're shielded from surrounding lights. Dark adaption is essential for observing nebulae, galaxies, and comets, and you'll see much more through the eyepiece away from street lights. The Moon and planets are another matter altogether, where often the best views are obtained on mildly misty nights when the air is dead steady. Learning to allow your eye to naturally scan an object is important, and that applies to both deep sky and lunar & planetary targets. Staring directly at the object will cause the more intricate detail to disappear. Then there's the problem of choosing the right eyepiece type, focal length, magnification and field of view to frame the object. It's a real Pandora's box, which I'll let someone else deal with. ☺

Hi Emjay, Perhaps you could try removing the prism diagonal and looking straight through the telescope. In the past I've seen a number of diagonals produce double images. It's also worth mentioning, that if your scope is the same as the one in the picture posted above, the diagonal will produce a fine bright spike on stars, which is due to it being an erecting diagonal. Mostly, astronomers use 90° mirror or prism diagonals which give a mirror image, but with no image artefacts. As mentioned above, its best to observe outside and not through a window.

What wonderful images Stu. Not a hint of colour along the lunar limb which is definitely better than my SW72ED, but the images of M42 and the Trapezium are awesome. 🏆

Yes! But I'm old!! I don't use them for planets which is what I'm mainly interested in, but I used setting circles on my GM8 regularly to find fuzzies. There's a misconception that smaller setting circles are useless, but if polar alignment is accurate, even those on a GP or EQ5 can be reasonably accurate. The mounts who's circles I've used were all accurately and permanently aligned.

Since this pic was taken, there's been a 9mm added to the Morpheus line-up, which completes my Morpheus set, as I don't want the 14mm. Most of the others are all pseudo Masuyama's such as Ultrascopic, Parks Gold, Eudiascopic and Ultima pairs for binoviewing. And a pair of 16.8mm Super Abbe Ortho's. The pseudo Masuyamas are 2X 35mm, 2X 25mm, 2X 18mm, 2X 12.5mm, 2X 10mm & 2X 7.5mm. Singles are 20mm Ultrascopic, 5mm Ultrascopic & 3.8mm Parks Gold. Then theres my high power set of Vixen HR's.

Is the scope thermally stable, and are the seeing conditions reasonably stable? If so, and with all other things being equal, it sounds like spherical abberation, which is a little unusual for a Tak. It's possible the lens is warmer than the cell holding it, which may cause this issue. I had a similar problem with a TV NP101 IS some years ago, where one side of focus took forever before it reasonably matched the other. And even then it never matched the Tak symmetry.

Well you can ignore my previous panic post Pixies. I'm glad this old classic found its way into your hands. It looks beautiful!

I'm a bit late in the day for this thread, and haven't read all the posts yet, but I can assure you the tripod isn't junk. Although light weight, the Vixen tripods are all metal and seriously solid. I need to read everything now just to make sure the tripod still survives. 🇯🇵

I'll let you know Paul, after you've brought your refractor round for cleaning. I now have a secret weapon against lens grime. All I need to do is sprinkle gravy granules on your objective and Rhubarb my sweet, delicate little bull terrier will do the rest.

Hi John, I've used the Calocloth along with solvent free Calo spray for quite a few years for cleaning my FC lens and eyepieces. I find them both excellent. I bought mine from my local optician, but they aren't only for spectacles, as on the info they are mainly used for expensive camera lenses etc. I spray onto the cloth, not the lens so as not to get the fluid spray between the elements.

I'd prefere the 120 TSA. My personal experience with various Tak's, I found there's a very noticeable jump from 4" to 5", but not such a big jump from 5" to 6". I haven't used a TOA but I spent years using a FS128. As far as lunar and planetary observing goes, I genuinely doubt you'll notice very much of a difference given only a 10mm difference. When I moved from my FS128 to my FS152, I noticed little difference in the amount of detail seen. In other words, from my perspective, the increased aperture and mass of the scope, plus having to move from a GM8 to a G11just wasn't worth the extra effort. I did try an EQ6 but the 152 was hopelessly under mounted. I suspect a TOA130 would need a G11 to do it justice. FS128 on Losmandy GM8. Undermounted FS152. Kind of sapped my joy because of its weight.

Great pic's Paul. And and an exciting, nail biting adventure too.

I always thought that scopes of identical design, F ratio and glass types yet different apertures, would give the same level of CA, but that the one with larger aperture would show more obvious CA because of the brighter image.

Are you able to construct a small ror observatory, with the walls high enough to block surrounding lights? The first image was a ror observatory built by my late friend Phil out of a metal shed. While the last two images show my own ror obs'y. Acts as a great light shield.

It sounds like the title of a book I'd like to read John - The Scurrying Astronomer. I find myself doing a fair bit of scurrying, especially in the colder months. That's in part due to having to observe through sucker holes in the clouds, and of course because of my lack of enthusiasm for cold and windy weather. Having said that, if while I'm out something grabs my attention, I'll often then lose track of time and temperature, and thoroughly enjoy myself. Just being able to grab my tripod and scope in one go, or if in my observatory, close the roof and bring the tube back into the house, makes everything much easier than having to make several journeys back and forth as I used to do. I do find myself more enthusiastic as the milder spring months approach, and the Moon high in the sky. The Moon was something I used to avoid, but over the last decade or so I've fallen more and more in love with it.

I agree with John, that the SW 120ED, despite being a fine scope, is now outclassed by the cheaper, larger aperture & better built Technosky 125.

Nothing wrong with that if you enjoy it. In 1983 George Alcock discovered his last comet - Iras Iraki Alcock - using a pair of binoculars, while looking through double glazing. And just recently I've been casually sweeping the north eastern sky with my 72ED at 12X while looking through double glazing. The star images at such low power aren't too bad at all.

So do you think youre going to stick at the hobby then?

I think too many clear nights make you soft. Being tested through endurance due to seemingly perpetual cloud isn't a bad thing. View it as a refining process that proves you're the real deal. ☔🔭

I had a good friend who, although he tended to be more interested in telescopes than observing, retained his enthusiasm until he popped his clogs at age 81. But he would still observe with me in my observatory whenever it was clear, right till the end. Then I have another friend and observing buddy, paulastro, who although not quite as old as Methuselah, is so enthusiastic its painful. I feel certain he'll be the sort of observer who'll die at the eyepiece. In fact I think he almost did on one occasion after falling asleep while observing in seriously sub zero temperatures.

Absolutely!!! My refractors have always been too precious for me to leave them to fungal growth that would inevitably attack the lenses. The same applies to eyepieces. I built my observatory so as to create a relatively dark observing area that's dry even in snowy or wet weather, and keeps me out of the biting icey winter breezes. It also gives me a clean environment to spread out charts and make eyepiece sketches etc. The mount is permanently polar aligned and stands on a steel pier, but my refractor and eyepieces come back into the house with me at the end of every observing session. The observatory also gives me the ability to have electricity for lighting and heating when needed. A 4" to 6" refractor takes up very little room in the house. In 42 years of being together my wife has never complained about my scopes being kept in the house. In fact she's never really complained about anything pertaining to my hobbies. She even suggested I build my observatory and then funded it. This Losmandy mount was permanently attached to its pier and left outside. I covered it along with its electronics under a canvas garden chair cover when not in use, and it never got wet. The 5" apo always came back into the house. My best pal worried I was getting too cold in the winter months, and wanted to cover the materials cost for a run off roof observatory. Who am I to argue?!

I wouldn't have an issue with covering a mount, or leaving it in a shed, but I'd never leave a refractor outside in a shed, or in an observatory. A StarTravel 102 is a small bodied scope and would take up virtually no room in the house where it will be dry and safe.