mikeDnight

That's fantastic Kerry. Practicing from photographs is a great way to get to grips with the varying techniques needed. I find the Moon to be the most difficult subject to draw, as there's too much detail, even in a small scope, and I really struggle to know when to stop before I ruin things. Even simple features soon become an overwhelming challenge at times. I really look forward to your finished sketch based on your sketches at the eyepiece. 👍

Very nice images Paul, and it certainly was a great view through the eyepiece. I almost didn't bother looking as the moon was approaching the high tree line to my west, and usually the seeing suffers. Last night though, the seeing, though having a gentle wobble, allowed some seriously nice detail to be seen. I was using my 25mm Ultrascopic's and 18mm Ultima's in my binoviewer, with a 2X barlow, so a similar power to yourself I presume. For me, the highlight of the evening was Messier A & B and its environs. I can't remember seeing such detailed undulation in the surrounding terrain before, which was so well presented in the refractor. Your image hints at it but as is often the case, the actual view was glorious. When you phoned me I was counting the traffic crossing O'Neil's bridge, but you made me lose count once you started renaming lunar features for fun.

Hi Nicola, I'm not sure why you'd have that focusing problem. I know my Tak prism has a shorter light path than my Baader Zeiss 1.25" BBHS prism, and I had little difficulty with my FC100DC attaining focus. A 2" diagonal might be problematic with some eyepieces. If Jeremy or others with experience of your scope can't advise, you could e-mail FLO to see if they can help.

I think its a bit of a fine balancing act. Last night my 5mm Ultrascopic showed dark and light albedo features almost immediately, but at only 160X in the 100mm F8 and a sub 6 arc second disc, the image scale was too small to give any meaningful detail. Even at 200X the image scale was much smaller than id prefer, but going above that power just amplified the poor seeing. If id have caught it just before it crossed the meridian, which is a sweet spot from my site, I may have been able to use my Vixen HR's, but my seeing goes down hill fast as things approach my South west. Unfortunately even our FC 100's only work well when the seeing allows. 2022 should be a good apparition, but I'm not wishing it to roll on, as I'm fast approaching my use by date.

I believe it was the Solis Lacus region on view, if you can call it a view. The disc is tiny and the seeing was turbulent, yet in steadier moments, subtle dark features appeared close to the southern limb. The planet's tilt is lessening and so Solis isn't as obvious.

I managed to pick out a little of the detail, but by the time id finished playing compulsory snakes and ladders with my grandson, Mars was wel, past the meridian and in turbulent air. I believe we're looking roughly at the Solis Lacus region, but with the tilt lessening were not seeing it full on as before.

That's beautiful! I had to play Snakes & Ladders with my grandson after tea, and so by the time id made it into the observatory, the moon had set behind the trees opposite the house.

It looks nice! How are the stars across the field of view? I bought a 60mm finder for my Equinox 120 some years ago but only the centre of the field was useable, so I sent it back. It's put me off ever since.

I just stumbled across the current price of an NP101 IS (£4,449), which means TV have hiked their price for this scope by more than £1,300 in 12 years. As a visual scope, Televue will have you believe that the NP101 IS is good at everything, including lunar and planetary performer, but mine had the stuffing knocked out of it by the same aperture, much cheaper Vixen's, Tak's and SW ED's, and so I sold it after owning it for less than a year. So has this just happened or has it been a gradual stealth attack?

Another vote here for a binoviewer. It's the single most impressive and worthwhile game changing accessory in my possession. For £500 you'd be able to sneak a couple of 18mm quality plossl or ortho's in there too perhaps.

That's true! If you could go back just 20 years, the main top end players were Takahashi, Vixen, TMB, Astro Physics & Televue. All of those are still in play with new ones joining their ranks such as TEC. The performance gap between high end scopes such as those listed and the rest was wide. Skywatcher hit the market around that time with their ED's, and that was a real game changer. Anyone looking for apo performance on a restricted budget now had the chance of bridging the gap, and getting a scope that was optically fast approaching that of the Tak & Vixen fluorite's. Since then of course, many other beautiful doublet and triplet apo's have appeared on the scene, perhaps with even better quality control, bridging that gap even further. So today the situation is that those top players are still top players, but if you were to have, let's say a 4" Technosky alongside a 4" Takahashi, it might take a keen eyed observer to see the difference in the image at the eyepiece. And its also undoubtedly true to say, that an observer using those two scopes in a compare, he would very soon forget which one he was looking through.

Two 25mm and two 18mm ortho's, a 2X barlow and a binoviewer will give juicer views of the Moon & planets. On their own or with the barlow, the ortho's will give wonderful transparent views of DSO's. Limited by apparent field but on axis they are mouthwatering.

No idea why three identical posts appeared??? Mods may wish to remove two! Sorry!

Here are a few eyepieces befitting a Takahashi. They are mainly Pseudo Masuyama's, based I believe in the Zeiss Astroplanoccular, and similar to the Takahashi LE series, although I like these more than the LE's as they are great right across the range. The LE's have a few lemons by design. My Vixen High Resolution eyepieces are really nice, and although they too are no longer in production, Takahashi still offer their amazing high resolution TOE eyepieces.

Ahh, so she's listening then!?

More Blue make a quick release finder shoe for Tak scopes at a fraction of the Tak price. They also offer a fine focuser far cheaper too. Have a look on FLO's web site!

The Q's are seriously beautiful things, but in all honesty you really don't need one. Your scope will take power until it runs out of exit pupil just as it stands. Tak orthoscopics, or perhaps a Tak 4mm TOE would be nice. A barlow lens is a handy bit of kit, and most are very high quality, so you don't have to spend a lot.

The Nag zoom is a great eyepiece in many ways, but you'll have a much better observing experience if you use longer focal length eyepieces and a GPC or a barlow lens. With a barlow attached to the nose of your binoviewer you'll get fabulous lunar and planetary views without having to go below 15mm. And you really do not need expensive eyepieces. Simple orthoscopic's or plossl's will be every bit as sharp as a supermonocentric. Much more comfortable too!

The Tak diagonal holds a binoviewer without any issue, but its Achilles heel is the savage, unnecessary, and hated undercuts on Televue eyepieces.

Your sketch of M81 & 82, including the impressive star field that you've drawn is a delight to look at. A sketch like that gives an observer looking for the first time, a real idea what he or she is going to see visually. I like what you said about "a reason to go back..." it's amazing that no matter how many times you sketch the same object, you always seem to see something you missed previously. And you build a terrific record of sketches to look back on. When you do return to M82, you might like to study it by itself using averted vision, as it really is an impressive galaxy. I'd be very interested to see your future sketches. Spend some time on it and you won't be disappointed - honest! ☺ You've got some great times ahead, as you're going to see so much more with a pencil in your hand; and you've got many excellent visual observers on SGL that you learn from and emulate. Welcome to a great club!

Can't say I've ever actually seen the horse head for certain, but I have seen IC434 in a 100mm refractor. It was the most difficult DSO I think I've ever detected, and was only visible with averted vision after a lengthy study, with my surroundings being fully blacked out. I felt there was an indication of the notch of black nebulosity that may have been the HH, but couldn't truthfully say if that's what it was. Looking at the sketch below with averted vision will give some indication of the eyepiece view in such a small scope. The first hint of IC434 appeared as a shard of nebulosity protruding from the star shown in the sketch and pointing towards Alnitak. The lengthy black nebula was very prominent once the shard came into view, which helped to highlight the dimmer bright nebula. The HH, if that's what it was, was an almost indistinguishable, formless notch protruding into IC434. The Flame was much much easier in the 100mm than IC434.

You'd be welcome anytime Doug. ☺

It's an easy issue to resolve (pun intended). Simply leave a telescope outside to acclimatise for an hour or two on a winters night, then place any short focal length eyepiece straight out of a warm house into the focuser and aim your scope at a planet. It doesn't have to be a complex multi element affair, even a simple Mono or orthoscopic will do. The view will boil and agitate until the eyepiece reaches thermal equilibrium.

There's an unboxing and first impressions video of the Technosky 102ED on Utube that's worth watching. The lunar surface is exquisite, with only a fine colour fringe to the lunar limb. Not sure what camera or eyepiece he was using, but the CA could be introduced or added to by either, especially if it was a phone camera. Visually, the CA wouldn't be anywhere near as evident.

I'd imagine having the roof sections in a vertical position could be problematic if there's a strong breeze, and the canvas sheet would be both noisy and would act like a sail if there's a wind. When I built my observatory back in April 2011, I decided I'd build the walls high enough to shield me from near by street lighting, which meant giving up some sky nearer the horizon. As my seeing tends to go off below 30° I was happy to give it up. And of course if I ever wanted to get to the horizon, I could always use my scope on a tripod. I decided to make the roof a ROR on an angle iron H frame. It's worked flawlessly now for ten years. The pier was constructed out of sheet steel by a local metal worker and I'd hurried in postcrete to the depth of around 20". It is super solid, and cost me a whopping £35.