mikeDnight

Hmm. Referring back to Wilkins notes above, he refers to Barker being the first to trace this diamond shaped feature, yet looking back at the snippet posted at the start, it appears the rectangular form is where it is. So Stu was right! Still, I saw Barkers quadrangle and as a bonus, spent ages studying the neighbouring diamond noted by wilkins, and marked as X on wilkins chart. That was more of a challenge, but in studying it I saw things I wouldn't normally have seen.

I'm pretty certain that rectangle isn't it. Between the rectangle and Picard is a diamond, or kite shape, somewhat more subdued and having more of a trapezium shape. It seems to be composed of wrinkle ridges that have small craterlets at at least two, possibly three of its corners. There's a long wrinkle ridge extending from one corner giving it a kite tail appearance. There's also a fine ridge or possibly a rille crossing from the corner crater across its centre towards the corner with the kite tail, but I don't think it makes the whole distance. I was observing around 2200UT, using my 4" OG with barlowed binoviewer and 35mm Ultima 's, ~90X. Seeing was wobbly but got a little steadier as time went on. All in all it was pretty uninspiring, but I did catch sight of a fine rille near to the western shore of Crisium that I've never seen before.

To add a little more info about Barkers Quadrangle, Wilkins makes a comment in his book The Moon (Wilkins & Moore). Page 197 paragraph 5. [It might be worth noting that since Wilkins wrote his book, the east west has changed, so that Wilkins west is now IAU east. If you could stand on the Moon with your back to north, the east would be to your left and west to your right, just as it would be on earth].

I know! I know!! An empty bank account! 😢

My guess Stu would be for arrow 1 it would be Mare Anguis, as its quite close to Crisium. For arrow 2 I'm guessing it could be the rear wall of Kastner catching the Sun. And for arrow 3 again I imagine this is Kastner in sunlight. But bear in mind I could be wrong, as I've been wrong before on many occasions. ☺ Lovely images by the way! 😊😊

I couldn't agree more Robert! The full moon is a spectacular sight, and to take in that low power view of the whole globe suspended on nothing is awe-inspiring.

What a man! You're a top class observer Mr Astro. Wish I'd gone out and observed now, as it was beautifully clear.

Very nicely made, and looks very professional! I've thought about a handle for mine, but I think even if I added a handle, I'd still be inclined to carry the tube vertical and tucked close to my body, so as to eliminate any risk of catching either end against a door frame or wall etc. Plus I like to cuddle it!

Superb image captures Fedele ! 👍

"Skiddoobies"! - was the expression used by a young boy who in 1983 asked me if he could look through my telescope at the Moon. He ran off to pleade with his parents to buy him a telescope. Not sure they would have understood him, but his enthusiasm was plain to see. Ever since then, I've used the nonsensical expression "Skiddoobies" whenever I get a WOW moment. It works for me!

It was just my attempt at humour Xilman, and not actually a serious comment. Just as my previous comment about looking into John's wallet was only a joke. We all know John doesn't really have that much money in his wallet!

Absolutely Louis. We'd use the Matabeelee gumbo beads or even chocolate buttons if they're worth more than the £, - and most currencies are! ☺

Your scope looks fantastic John. Really looking forward to your thoughts on its performance. Exciting isn't it! ☺

We all feel honoured John. It isn't every day we get to look inside your wallet! 😁

I know some feel that discussing higher end ED or Apo refractors might put people off when they look at the price tag, but I really don't believe that would be the case. Many of us remember the days of the beautiful 4" Unitron adverts that graced the pages of Sky & Telescope magazine, where the price tag was in the realms of car or even house prices of the time. They didn't put me off. In fact they gave me something to aim towards. When I eventually saved enough money so I could afford a 102mm F13 Vixen Pulsar achromat, I really felt I'd attained my goal of becoming a serious astronomer. Refractors above 3" were hard to come by when i started out in this hobby, so a 4" was something very special. That Vixen achromat was an amazing all round scope that would hold its own against any similar aperture ED or Apo. Part of me still wishes I had that Vixen achromat, but the reality is that modern ED doublets are just as capable, almost certainly better colour corrected, and a darn sight easier to mount and transport. So my old beautiful Vixen would be a relic that would hold a well deserved place in my heart, but that has been superseded by even the lowliest modern, shorter focal length, wider field FPL51 doublet. The original post asked the question "ed vs apo in layman's terms." Reading through the entire thread a second time makes me feel that question has been answered quite effectively. That question though, would by nature need to touch on the higher end ED and Apo telescopes. I haven't seen anyone pushing high end as a must have. Neither have I seen anyone trying to belittle the lower priced refractors, - quite the opposite in fact. If those starting out in this amazing hobby are to be denied the views and experiences of more experienced observers, or owners of high end equipment, and made to feel like they are treading on eggshells, just because someone might be offended if they mention a certain brand or manufacturer, then that would be a sad day indeed for both ends of the spectrum.

I've really enjoyed this excellent review about your new 4" ED ScouseSpaceCadet. You've really touched on everything that's important, and pointed out the real beauty of such an instrument. It makes me want to buy one! If it wasn't for this pandemic, you'd be able to observe alongside some of the Liverpool Astronomical Society members who also own Apo ED's. Irrespective of glass type or brand, I'd be pretty confident you'd come away with a very big smile on your face. ☺

Rosemary Naylor - wow, that's a blast from the past! Rosemary ran a lovely little bookshop in Hebden bridge, which I visited regularly. She was a very friendly lady. Later she gave up the shop and sold her books directly from her cottage in Todmorden. If you called at her home in person, which I did regularly, she'd welcome you inside and let you brows the vast array of books in person. Whenever I turned up she'd rub her hands together, knowing I'd spend a small fortune every time. Rosemary later left Todmorden so she could care for her elderly mother and moved down south, and so Earth & Sky came to its end.

I set my FC100DZ up in the obs late afternoon and am all ready to go. Just need to remember which end to look through! Fat end or thin end???

I definitely understand this, and perhaps ive been somewhat instrumental in emphasising my love of Tak. Twenty years ago Takahashi were one of a very small number of manufacturers offering scopes at the pinnacle of performance. Today, although Tak are still up there, other manufacturers have greatly closed the gap , so that the real world difference is often barely noticeable. I think this has been brought about by the availability of glasses such as FPL53, which is very close performance wise to Fluorite crystal. I've observed with my Tak alongside others using SW ED's, AstroTech and others, and in all honesty the difference is barely discernable. And most tellingly, I've enjoyed using those other scopes equally as much as I have my own, and I'm sure other Tak owners have similar experiences to tell.

It might be an idea Jeremy, if before you next decide to do something dumb, you give me a call first. That way you can be certain you don't really need your precious eyepieces and that they'ed be much better off in my possession. It's what friends are for! ☺

If someone who was new to the hobby and had their heart set on owning a 4" ED refractor, I'd say buy the one that fits snuggly into your budget and forget about false colour. Just enjoy the telescope! Most ED's don't show much in the way of false colour anyway, and those that do show only a tiny amount, generally around the edge of very bright objects, or when the scope is out of focus. Keep it focused and you'll not really see it, you'll just see the razor sharp view that refractors are famous for. Another thing I'd mention as an aside, is that there's always going to be a better or bigger telescope, so be happy with whatever you end up with, and don't get sidetracked chasing after the wind - use it to the full! 😊

You could always donate them Jeremy. If you need any suggestions as to whom to donate them to, just pm me. 😆

The 7mm Nagler was one of my favourites, although my prefered version was the 7mm smoothy. I made all my observations of Mars in 2003 using my FS128 and a 7mm Nagler, so I have fond memories of it. ☺

It can be difficult to know who makes good scopes. Cost can be an indicator to some extent, and of course certain brand names such as Astro Physics, Takahashi, LZOS are among some highly respected names that pretty much guarantee a truly top class scope. Vixen is another brand name that to me indicates top end performance. But there are what some might consider lower end manufacturers, that produce telescopes that are genuinely not that far behind. The Skywatcher brand offers some superb ED and Apochromatic refractors that would satisfy the most serious observer or imager.

I imagine the FPL51 doublet would perform roughly equivelant to the old Vixen ED's such as the Vixen 102ED F6.5. That scope, and in fact all the old Vixen ED's I've ever used are fantastic scopes, and made superb visual instruments. I'd be very content with one anyway! The FPL53 doubles are better able to control chromatic abberation, and very close to the Takahashi FS series of doublet fluorite refractors in terms of CA. FPL53 is among several glasses that can be thought of as Fluorite glass, so it can produce pure, virtually colour free views. But as has already been pointed out in previous posts, its the quality of the lens polish and figure that is more important than glass types used, so you could easily have an old achromat with a top class figure outperform an apochromat who's figure is not so good, yet costing thousands of pounds more.