mikeDnight

I'd aim for an ED rather than an achromat and I wouldn't be too fussed about which one. I'm a firm believer that a good observer will get more out of a lower cost ED than a medeocre observer will get from a high end refractor. In reality, the performance gap between say a 4" fpl53 ED and a 4" fluorite apo has narrowed dramatically over the last 20 years, and definitely not worth losing sleep over. Just aim for the best you can afford, but bear in mind that a good quality diagonal and good quality eyepiece will make it sing.

A years evening course in psychology is practically a PHD in the subject. I wouldn't worry about spelling either. I just blame the spell check incorrectly correcting my incorrect spelling, and who knows if its true? ☺

The famous british lunar observer Harold Hill used a 6.25" Newtonian back in the 1940's to observe the Moon. In the 1980's he used a 10" F10 Newtonian. Then he had opportunity to observe once again with his 6.25" and was surprised that although fainter, he could see all the same detail in the smaller scope that his experienced eye could see in his 10". I'm sure there were things visible in the 10" that would not have been visible in the 6.25", but these were of little consequence. A few nights ago I was trying out a new eyepiece while looking at M13 through my 8" F6 reflector. The globular cluster was nicely presented with spider like stellar tendrils extending from its core. Stars in the centre were nicely resolved and set against a nebulous backdrop as the deep core wasn't fully resolved. I then placed the same eyepiece in my 100mm refractor, aimed it at M13 and with the exception of a slightly dimmer image, saw the same beautifully resolved globular with the same nebulous backdrop and stellar tendrils. In fact the 100mm refractor gave a more pleasing image. Similarly, with the exception of brightness, the views of M57 and M27 were in no way inferior in the 100mm. I know others enjoy or may even need the added brightness of the larger aperture, as the greatest variable is the observer, and our eyes are not all alike. For me however, a good quality small aperture scope never fails to wow me.

Heat plumes from buildings or proximity to tree tops can interfere with the image. You may find that you have certain sweet spots where the seeing suddenly becomes excellent, so it's worth noting these. Then again the mood swings of our general and local atmosphere can change suddenly too, so perseverance is needed. Yet another thing that some observers fail to do is to regularly refocus the scope. As a planet moves across the sky it is viewed through different depths of atmosphere and so the focus naturally and continually changes requiring regular adjustments to maintain critical focus. Very often sharp planetary detail is fleeting, and flickers in and out of view throughout the observation. Actively recording what youre seeing either by making brief notes, talking into a dictaphone, or making a sketch of a planet over a ten or fifteen minute period may reveal you're seeing more than first meets the eye. There's another simple trick you might try. Deep sky observers will often use averted vision to detect faint detail. This requires that the light sensitive rods, which are situated around the periphery of the retina, be allowed to naturally scan the object on view. Rods too play a major part in detecting subtle planetary detail, and so if you're able to relax and let your eye naturally scan the tiny planetary disk, the rods can pick up on some very subtle detail. Staring directly at the planet can actually be counter productive. So try looking very slightly to one side of the planet while still concentrating on its disk to see if it helps. Don't force it, scanning the disk naturally is the key!

Thankyou everyone for your kind comments. Very encouraging! 😊

Nice observation David. I've struggled to use high powers on Mars so far this year as the seeing has been a bit wobbly at the times I've been able to observe. 274X would give a nice image scale so I'm a bit envious. I've also felt that the darker features have been a bit washed out so far, but I've only been able to observe while its been low. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing more of your sketches. Clear skies, Mike.☺

The Japanese made aluminium tripods are generally all metal which gives them more rigidity, where as the Chinese aluminium tripods use plastic connections which weakens them. Also, the plastic can often split when tightening the height adjustment knobs. From what I remember, the Vixen Porta were all metal. The only drawback might be that the short control knobs may be a long way from your 100ED's focuser, so you may require floppy drives. I've owned an AZ5 and really liked it, but I mounted mine on an old Japanese Vixen aluminium tripod which gave it stability. As a lightweight grab and go however, I really enjoy my AZ4, which is also mounted on a strong vixen tripod. I have successfully used in excess of 300X using this mount, which when well balanced and clutched is really quite smooth. I

Well you attacked last night with a vengeance Paul. That's quite a catch for one night and very impressive! 🏆 Happy to hear you're feeling better too!

Until I see a Clanger or a Soup Dragon with my own eyes, I'm having none of it!

Not much to look at, but definitely very round! 😊 Sorry the subtle colour didn't show up in the image as it does on paper. I'll try harder next time and may be ill get three 10's. 😂 THANKS! ☺

I never really did get aperture fever despite trying. Perhaps I have a natural immunity? Or perhaps it's because I've never seen a large scope deliver a view that has ever wowed me. Every time I look through a large aperture scope, with a measure of excitement due to anticipation of things to come, I step away disappointed, thinking "For all its size and trouble that's all it can show, its not worth the effort"! Or, perhaps it was because I was bitten by a different kind of bug very early on - the refractor bug. With their high contrast, high definition, beautiful wide fields and amazing high powers; if there has ever been a cure for aperture fever then this has to be it.

Just be mindful to tighten the two grub screws on the focus knob equally Dave, otherwise it might feel gritty.

Even though its tiny compared to Mars, Uranus is still well worth taking a look at. It's not far from Mars either, so it's a good opportunity to catch a glimpse If you sweep eastward at around 50X it will appear as distinctly none stellar.

My sketches made at the eyepiece look like little more than scribble Ade, so don't be put off by the cleaned up versions I post. It's amazing how a cotton ear bud can soften pencil lines and bring some realism to a pencil sketch. It took me about 15 to 20 minutes to complete the sketch, or rather until I'd convinced myself I'd seen all that was on show, so it's more a build up of information rather than an instant view. I hope you pluck up the courage to post your own drawings, as no doubt they too would encourage many to have a go at sketching. I've attached the last three eyepiece doodles of Mars just to show what a mess things look after sketching in very dim light. They may look rough and meaningless but every stroke, scribble and difference in intensity allows me to reconstruct the sketch as it appeared in the telescope. The pen lines on the final sketch were made after I came back into the house just to emphasise the outline. See, I draw like a 10 year old too! ☺

Another Mars observation showing a slightly different aspect.

If budget isn't an issue and you want sharp, then a Takahashi FC100DC or FC100DF will be ideal. If you want to push the budget a little further, then a FC100DZ would be another option. If however the Tak prices are a little off putting, then a SW 100ED Pro or SW 120ED Pro would be a class act too. The fact that you mentioned you're looking for a sharp scope, then I'd suggest you think along the lines of an ED or fluorite refractor.

I think Patrick's 5" refractor is probably responsible for many of the refractorphiles of today. I remember aimlessly browsing the shelves of WH Smith when I was 18 years old, when I stumbled upon a small white book Observers Book of Astronomy. I flicked through the pages and when i came across Patrick's 5" my heart skipped a beat. I bought the book (£1.99), and was immediately hooked. The following week I bought Guide to the Moon, read it from front to back in 6 hours, and have been addicted ever since. That is - addicted to astronomy but especially to refractors. Other scopes just don't affect me in the same way.

I'm sure there must be a physiological reason why some observers struggle with Binoviewers, but I image that most often the reason is down to poor mechanics. With my cheap binoviewer I cannot use the diopters to focus each eyepiece as they throw the images off axis. To overcome the problem I've wound the diopters inward and instead focus my right eye using the telescope focuser. Then I retract the left hand eyepiece very slightly until it too reaches sharp focus and lock it in position. Eye seperation is critical and needs to be accurately set, but this may move during observing if the binoviewer I'd handled, so regular adjustments, though subtle, might need to be made. A real problem I came across was that caused by locking screws. If I use my eyepiece locking screws on the outside of the diopters so they point away from the binoviewer, the images demerg, but when I use the locking screws using the threaded holes between the diopters, the images stay accurately merged. I only use my binoviewer for lunar and planetary observing, and as with mono viewing, it is vital to regularly adjust the focuser so as to retain critical focus at all times. In the attached images, the first shows the eyepiece locking screws on the outside where it is impossible for the images to merge properly. The second image shows the locking screws on the inside of the diopters where the image remains merged. This can only be due to poor mechanics, but after a bit of jiggerypokery I managed to find the best position for this particular binoviewer. Others models may differ!

Thanks for that Sigmund. So just to clarify, using both light receptive retina's has nothing to do with increasing the over all size of the light receptive area?

Scary isn't it John! I admit to being more a fan of Schiaparalli's drawings than those of Lowel. I first noticed Schiaparalli's canali back in 2003 while sketching Mars using a Tak FS128. It worried me at first, but I soon came to terms with their existence as visual features because they'ed been recorded by numerous observers, and many have even been named. They don't exist in reality of course, but appear to be contrast boundaries that appear where regions of contrasting albedo meet. During the 2003 apparition I remember that on occasions of split second top class seeing, Mars suddenly appeared more like the Moon rather than the featureless orchar deserts that we usually see. It wasn't possible to sketch because as soon as it appeared it disappeared. May be the canals are nothing more than multiple point sources appearing as if linked in the form of a fine grey line. Then again it could be Martians having a laugh! One of my astronomical hero's, the late Richard Baum, was a brilliant visual planetary observer and a great inspiration to me. The photo below was taken when we last met shortly before he left us. I've also attached a drawing of Mars drawn by Richard and showing the canals. Solis Lacus is towards the right of the bottom sketch.

It's not a stupid question at all Rob. I put it down to the use of twice the receptor size compared to one eyed viewing. With both retinas in use, it really does reveal detail more easily. I was reading a comment on the CN binoviewer forum only this morning, where one astronomer asked his optician why there would be such a marked improvement in planetary detail when using both eyes. The optician said" It's a simple case of 1+1=3". He may have gone to the same school as me, but in this case the calculation adds up! ☺

That's a nice write up Gary. It's not unusual for Mars to appear as a mushy ball, and for surface detail to be barely discernable. With patience though, fleeting glimpses of intricate detail often appears during moments of steady seeing. It's a good idea to jot these down in the form of a rough sketch, as you can then build up a better representation of what's actually on show. One tip while observing any planet, but very important when observing Mars, is to refocus your scope every minute or so. This is because the planet rapidly defocuses itself as it rises due to the differing depths of the earths undulating atmosphere.

Simply amazing! Thanks for posting this wonderful image Peter.

I must admit to cheating Chris. I use a binoviewer, which makes a massive difference.

I was a member for quite some time and thoroughly enjoyed it because it didn't take itself too seriously. The SPA had some very skilled observers in its ranks, and although it was initially designed to be for beginners, many seasoned observers encouraged eachother by displaying and discussing their talents in its magazine, section reports, and on its forum's. I seem to remember from the mid 2000's the then zealous new planetary section director saw an increase of visual observers joining the section, and sending in regular monthly reports by post, from around 15 to 36 over a 2 year period. There were some truly talented observers, many of whom were simply content to treat their observing as just an enjoyable hobby, but who could have equally stood alongside some of the world's finest. Not sure how things stand today but back then it was buzzing!