mikeDnight

I had first light through the clouds last night Paul. There were just a few stars showing in the north west, so I was able to check and tweak the colimation, and give the scope a trial run on the observatories tall GP. I need to stand on a short set of steps to see the zenith, but the ease of controlling the scope in equatorial mode is so much more enjoyable than using the larger Dob. Though not nearly as smooth as the Tak the single speed Moonlight focuser has no image shift, so I'm pleased with that too. All in all I feel like I've got a good deal for only £150. It's a two vein spider so I should only have two spikes on bright objects. Didn't notice any last night but the stars weren't particularly bright. What I did notice though, was that the diffraction rings were concentric and identical either side of focus (after colimating), so no noticeable spherical aberration, indicating a good primary with no turned edge. I'm not even sure I need a finder, as last night I merely looked along the tube from the rear of the scope and got the target every time. That's coz I'm clever! I'm still not sure of the exact focal length as I forgot to ask, but I'll measure it accurately anyway before I work out the various magnifications. 😊

Have no fear, the 8" isn't a threat to Taky. I've just had first light through the 8", through thick cloud. Colimation is very good, I've only had to tweak it slightly and stars are concentric. It looks like quite a nice scope, so I'm pleased, especially as I can use it on a real mount and not as a Dob. It was actually a joy to use slow motions on the GP to control movement. Im now looking forward to a starry night!

I hope I can find a comb that comes with instructions. It's been a while!

I'm presuming it is Craig. When I bought it yesterday I just looked at its condition, and as it was being sold for only £150, I didn't consider the F ratio. A rookie mistake really, although I'd have bought it no matter the focal length considering the price and condition. I've just measured it and it is F6 or there abouts. Very scientific! I'll measure it accurately using a comb, torch and tapemeasure in the next day or two!

A nice little addition to the scope stable. I've yet to have first light with this 8" reflector, but the colimation looks good and the aluminizing is in top notch condition, so I'm hopeful. Should be nice for fuzzy finding!

I used to believe that too Chris. However, when I think back at how my girlfriend of 40 years ago (now my wife), idolized my stunning good looks and Greek god like physique; then I compare the once reality with the Kodak instamatic photo's of that era, I'll never trust a camera again.

The Pentax XW is a fabulous eyepiece. Or you might consider the Baader Morpheus 6mm or 4.5mm.

The trouble with that is that its about the human eye and how it sees the detail. Camera's can't answer that, because how the eye and brain sees and distinguishes detail isn't the same as how a camera and computer records detail. When I've compared images of Jupiter and Mars with visual sketches I've made at the eyepiece, although the features are in the same position, the detail I visually recorded was at a different level of subtlety. With Mars, where I see dark albedo features, I also see the subtlest hints of mists and clouds that are rarely ever shown in an image. It's as if the camera sees at a different level of intensity and isn't as sensitive to the subtleties of detail. What's seen by a camera isn't what's seen by the eye/brain.

Just came in after a 500X viewing of Zeta Hercules (1.6mm HR), a superb view of M92 at 235X (3.4mm HR), and a spectacular view of M57 with its northern edge ablaze with brilliant nebulosity, and lets not forget the 13.2 magnitude star close to its following periphery - again 235X and 3.4mm HR. But believe it or not and try as I might, I didn't glimpse the central star despite the Kryptonite lens of my 100mm frac. 😟

I feel I've caught glimpses of the Pup in fleeting moments of good seeing, but then I really can't be certain. I've never been able to pinpoint it with any degree of certainty as the image never stops dancing all over the place, plus observing Sirius with prior knowledge of the Pup's position and distance from the primary has the potential for biasing my observation. Sirius always seems to be in a turbulent atmosphere from my site, so I'm seriously hindered by that. I may never see it for absolute certainty. It's a tough life!

Thats the best observatory ive seen in quite some time Jeremy. The Sun somehow seems much more appealing. Thanks!

For planetary, dim white light is fine, red when around others, and never look directly at the light source as it can damage your sensitivity to subtle contrast features.

That's an insanely low price for such a classic refractor. There's a lot to be said for the rugged construction of the 100R, which I personally feel is far better than the later model with its plastic lens cell. Whoever grabs this scope will have grabbed themselves a really great performer.

I've lost count of the number of people who bought go-to because they thought it would make things easier. I've watched as they've struggled along, often in the dark, getting more and more stressed as they fight with technology. Meanwhile my friends and I sailed effortlessly from one object to another in complete relaxation. I'd go for the Dobsonian or a simply mounted ED refractor and sit back and enjoy the ride doing visual, with the occasional snap shot.

There's a lot of playful banter between observers that really shouldn't be taken too seriously. When it comes to refractors having such high end optics as Tak and Vixen etc, the real world difference is largely academic, and probably difficult to distinguish under anything but laboratory conditions. Tone is probably the most obvious difference, but when it comes to the level of actual detail delivered at the eyepiece in scopes of roughly equal aperture you'd be splitting hairs. Perhaps the quality of the final image is much more due to the quality of the eyepiece and diagonal than it is from any difference between these amazing objectives.

The late Richard Baum was a great visual planetary observer and author. In his book The Haunted Observatory, he makes a profound statement - "Many look - Few Observe"! So for anyone looking for a challenge that will significantly improve observing skill and the detail seen at the eyepiece, Matthew's suggestion of a Sketching challenge is definitely the way to go. Even with limited artistic skill, the act of putting pencil to paper greatly enhances concentration, and although the image in the eyepiece may suggest limited detail due to the earths atmosphere, the accumulated detail recorded in the sketch can be similar to stacking images, revealing a surprisingly high level of detail. A couple of pencils, a putty eraser, cotton buds for blending and a sharpener cost pennies. A Good quality sketch book less than £10 = an impressive visual and historical record to look back on.

Bortle 3 is pretty impressive! Many years ago i lived in a house situated close to a motorway, so there were towering sodium lights to my south. So my observing from home consisted of lunar and planetary from the front street, which meant I had to tolerate curious passers by. While any deep sky was done from a back yard facing east west. Still, despite the obstacles, I maintained my enthusiasm throughout. I also built a rooftop observatory in my loft so as to get above the lights, which worked well. But I also fit a full internal opening window to my front bedroom, which lead to some comfortable viewing . So a full internal opener would be a great option for you if your landlord would agree to it. It wasn't expensive and was easy to fit.

No, you don't want to be considering any of that TSA triplet nonsense, they're old hat these days. What you need is a DZ!

I suppose there's such a wide variation in instrumentation and optical quality of scopes and diagonals, that a truly top end eyepiece such as the HR, could be revealing a weakness in the optical train that is no fault of the eyepiece, yet the eyepiece gets the blame. For me the HR's are as sharp as it gets and not just on axis. They are pin sharp right across the field, even at 1000X.

Thats great! It never crossed my mind to sketch a meteor shower, but I've been inspired by your excellent sketch.

Well I'm going to stick my neck out again and say you don't need a 20cm scope to see the Encke gap. Imaging may be a different thing, but visually it is visible in a good 120mm refractor when Saturn is high in the sky and the seeing is stable. I've seen it and sketched it numerous times over the years, and I'm not talking about the Encke minima which is easier still. The Encke gap is much closer to the outer edge of the A ring and reveals itself as an extremely fine sharply defined line in the ansae. You'll have to wait a while until Saturn once again rides high in our UK skies and you'll need a sharp scope, soft images will wash it out. For some reason it is usually easier to see in the preceding anse and you'll need to wait for those fleeting moments of perfect seeing, but once you glimpse it you'll wonder how you could have overlooked it.

I enlarged it full screen and it disappeared until I took my glasses off, then I see it but not as obvious as before.

The Pentax 3.5mm XW is a pretty awesome eyepiece worthy of consideration.

No I didn't enlarge it. I was about an arm's length away from the image.

Like John I see the 17 quite easily without my reading glasses. When I wear them the 17 is difficult to see, but when I scroll the image up or down the screen the 17 becomes very obvious. This happens with a planetary image at the eyepiece. I don't wear glasses for observing, but often the technique of moving the image across the field will often cause subtle detail, or even unseen detail to suddenly reveal itself.