mikeDnight

Nice original Polaris equatorial/Altazimuth mount too! ☺

I owned a 102mm F13 Vixen Polaris achromat back in the mid 80's. It was an amazing scope from what I remember of it, and beautiful too! The V indicates Vixen eyepieces. The attached image is of a Polaris refractor belonging to an astronomer in the US. He has brought it back to life after finding it in a scrap pile at his local astro society. It beggars belief that a scope like that could ever be discarded by true lovers of this hobby.

I've not given Saturn much attention for a number of years due to its low angle, but I've found a one-off sketch I made just to give my DZ a run on the planet. The sketch is just a sketch and not a detailed drawing, as there was little point, but Cassini's division was a doddle despite the mediocre conditions.

As tempting and pleasant as it would be it isn't worth the risk. Covid hasn't gone anywhere, and being fully vaccinated doesn't stop you catching it or spreading it; at best it may give you a fighting chance of surviving it. 😷

Horizontal and in a case or padded bag keeps it safe. Or, keep it on a spare mount where it can't get damaged.

I imagine that to be so Alan. For a scope like an FS128 or 200mm Newtonian, the GP is rock solid. The DX is overkill for my little refractor, although it would be perfect for mounting the tube of the 250mm F6 Dob. The OO Dob plays havoc with my back when observing, but with rotating rings on the DX it should be a dream.

All's well Dave. I've just run out of steam for a while.😊

Not yet Alan. My humble GP is still in the observatory. I sold the DX to a friend, but it may well be on its way back to me soon, so it could well find itself into the obs'y.

Just in time for the Starling migration. 😲

I bought a couple of pieces of natural fluorite a few years ago, and to test just how water affected the crystals, I placed them in a jar of water for a month. When I took them out of the water there appeared to be absolutely no discernible change to the crystals, which were each around 20mm in diameter. I was quite disappointed really as I'd expected them to have easily sheared or turned to mush. Over 41 years I've owned 15 refractors, four of which were true fluorite doublets between 152mm to 100mm, and rather disappointingly never damaged a single one of them through cleaning, or through using them in moist conditions. I feel like I've let everyone down!

I'd imagine the better star image of the Tak is due to it having better spherical correction rather than colour correction. Spherical correction is far more important for planetary observing than colour correction, so I'd personally go for the scope that showed the least spherical abberation. Doublet or triplet is irrelevant to me - its all down to the quality of the figure and polish. It wouldn't surprise me if the 125mm had better spherical correction than the 115mm triplet.

A 125mm ED will have a significant jump in planetary resolution over the 100mm, but the DZ is no slouch when it comes to delivering great lunar & planetary views. The 125 will give the 100mm DZ a run for its money I'm certain, but the level of colour correction and spherical correction of the Tak does give it a special place in the 4" line-up. Personally i think a good 5" refractor sits in a real sweet spot for planetary, however with a binoviewer, the 100mm can pull out some ultra fine detail that would be very close to that of the 5".

It is Jeremy! I bought it as a Takahashi Teegul Altaz a couple of months ago, but the long arm allowed for some vibration. I decided to lose the arm and couple the altitude axis directly onto the Azimuth axis. This wasn't of my own originality, as many in the U.S made this improvement, known as a Teegul/Lapides mount after the designer of the adaptation. The mount is now rock solid on the Vixen tripod. Many people use this mount attached to a camera tripod, but I doubt such a tripod would be upto the job of holding the DZ steady enough. The motions are the smoothest I've ever experienced on any Altaz and magically doesn't seem to display any amount of sticktion. The axe's move flawlessly and firmly at the touch of a finger, but the mount also has perfect slow motion controls for higher power viewing.

Ready and waiting for viewing the partial solar eclipse on June 10, but the cloud's had other idea's. 😭

I'd imagine that would be a match made in heaven Steve. John's amazing dual set-up above makes my heart skip a beat!

The experience will doubtless leave your daughter with some very happy memories, but your enthusiasm could have ignited a flame that might cost you dearly in years to come.

I would say the Starwave is an excellent achromat that should give wonderful views of a target like M13. Dark adaption is important though, especially with scopes of limited light grasp. I'll often observe using a blackout blanket over my head and eyepiece, which greatly improves the view when observing from town. Of course local seeing and sky transparency can make a big difference for the good or bad, but the beauty of a refractor should really become evident on stellar targets such as open and globular clusters when observing from a reasonably dark site. Even the Skywatcher 6" F8 & F5 achromats can put on quite a show, and the Starwave is almost certainly significantly better corrected for spherical abberation than those. No need for an apo on deep sky in my view. I'd love a 6" Starwave. Perhaps one day!

Well I'm going to disagree with the relative views of M13 as seen through various apertures. If a telescope gave such a poor view of M13 as depicted by the alleged 6" telescope image, I'd take a hammer to that telescope as its not fit for purpose. The image of M13 that claims to be the view through a 12.5" reflector is how I see M13 in my 100mm apo refractor when reasonably well dark adapted, except that in the refractor the stars are way sharper. And a 6" refractor is a formidable instrument on M13 and many other deep sky targets. Even some of the brighter galaxies can be extremely beautiful in a 6" refractor, so unless there's a desire to go deep in search of targets on the border of visibility, I much prefer a 6" refractor over a 10" reflector as a visual deep sky instrument.

Nearer completion, and with the smaller 2016 globe for comparison.

It certainly looks like the slow motion flexi cables are what you need. You can get them from FLO. Skywatcher slow motion cables should fit ok.

I've currently got the 17.5mm & 12.5mm Morpheus, and more will sneak their way into my eyepiece collection over time. I really like their comfort and sharpness, and their AF is just about perfect. I know its been said the Morpheus aren't as well made as some of the more expensive brands such as Pentax and Televue, but I think they are every bit as well made. It's just that the Morpheus have been designed to be as lightweight as possible, and they don't have those devilish undercuts, so they're even better.

Technically the prism won't display light scatter in the same way that a mirror diagonal will. Having said that, I've never been bothered, or even noticed much light scatter from a quality mirror diagonal. Perhaps it's more academic than a major real world issue? May be the prism would have the edge at high magnifications?

Yes, I think its very good. Certainly good enough for visual observing! With my DC I used a Tak MEF-3 micro focuser, but with the DZ I haven't felt the need to add one. I may fit a Moreblue micro focuser sometime in the future as they are cheaper than the MEF-3, but I don't need one. I have a Baader helical focuser on my BBHS prism which is good for fine focusing on double stars at high power, but its not really necessary. The pic shows the helical focuser attached to the prism. The extender Q I sold, as the DZ doesn't really need it.

Yes, I can with the eyepieces I use at least. My binoviewer pairs range from 35mm to 7.5mm and using the Tak 1.25" prism, all reach focus. The 35mm pair are as close to max inward focus as they can get but they do focus. With the Baader BBHS prism and helical micro focuser the don't, Having said that, I don't often use the 35mm's in the binoviewer. I generally use my binoviewer with a 2X Ultima SV barlow along with 25mm Parks or 18mm Ultima's for lunar & planetary observing.

I'm glad the info is of some help. The DZ is physically a little longer when extended than the DC/DF as it has an FL of 800mm rather than 740mm, but it isn't really that noticeable to me, where as the DL at 900mm made me stretch to reach my slow motion controls on my GP. I admit my back appreciates the smaller arc in movement of the DC/DF & DZ as comfort in use is a big thing for me. I can sit or stand at the eyepiece without getting in any strange positions, which helps with concentration while observing. I've attached a pic of my DC and DZ showing their relative positions on the mount, so as you can see, there's not a great deal in it. And DC & DZ as Altaz grab & go. Both very easy to handle!