Oldfort

One of these? https://www.wdscomponents.com/en-gb/indexing-clamping-t-handle-black-male-thread

To compare optical components (basically telescopes and eyepieces) to construction tools is a bit chalk and cheese. Optical components generally don’t wear out with use, unless mishandled. If they are high quality to start with, they stay that way. However telescopes may need periodic maintenance: optical alignments can get out of kilter – mirror based scopes in particular, and moving parts may occasionally need cleaning and re-greasing. Optical surfaces will likely need cleaning from time to time, depending on the environment in which they are used and stored. Mirrors will also benefit from being recoated to maintain peak reflectivity, but can easily go 10 plus years without attention. So basically telescopes and eyepieces last for ages. There are advances in optical designs and the coatings that are applied to lenses and mirrors that improve performance and it’s this that drives some people to upgrade otherwise excellent gear. Where the comparison is more valid is in relation to mechanical components such as mounts. Mounts have a maximum payload weight they can carry effectively. For better mounts, that’s usually a conservative estimate, and performance above that weight may fall off more gradually than for poorer quality (typically cheaper) mounts. With all the moving parts things wear out or need servicing, and with poorer quality models this will happen sooner than with the better models. Sometimes the poorer components can be replaced, although this can be a bit galling to have to do on a brand new mount. In addition modern mounts typically contain a lot of electronics and motors, where poor quality shows up as weakly soldered joints, cheap connectors and capacitors etc all of which are more likely to fail quickly. I don’t have enough experience here to give an indication of the good, the bad and the ugly.

1.Blackhole Sun - Sound gardenS 2. Supermassive Black hole - Muse 3. Set the controls for the heart of the sun - Pink Floyd 4. Rush - "The Black hole of Cygnus X-1 5. JethroTull - "Orion" 6. Dark Side of the Moon - Pink Floyd 7. Champagne Supernova - Oasis 8. Fly Me to the Moon - Frank Sinatra 9. The Planets/Jupiter - Gustav Holst 10. Starman - David Bowie

Hoarding old chargers .....

I have worn varifocals for several years, since I can only reach focus on objects between about 2 and 4 metres distance, with only a small amount of astigmatism. I generally observe without glasses (except for binoculars where having different prescriptions for each eye annoys other users of them). With glasses, the extra lens gets in the way, and is prone to catching reflections. Also if you forget they are on, it’s easy to knock into the eyepiece. However I have to put my glasses back on to read the focal length markings on eyepieces, and displays on keypads and the like. Also if I need to get a general view of the sky to get oriented, I my wear glasses. To accommodate both these uses, I need varifocals, not a fixed focal length. A further issue with varifocals is that you have to look through the right part of the lens. In day to day use – close up for reading and middle to distant for everything else – they work fine once you get used to them. Going down stairs can be a bit of a challenge initially. For astronomy you would want have a reasonable band at the top of the lens with constant focal length so that when observing, the focus doesn’t change from the top to the bottom of the FOV. That said, if your eyesight without glasses is poor enough that you trip over the scope or trailing wires, or astigmatism is an issue, then glasses is probably the way to go.

In fact I asked Rown about it at the time and this was their response (from May 2020).

I think there's a schematic in the AZ100 manual (available online) showing the hole sizes, location and separations. But, fwiw, I have a Losmany saddle fitted on my AZ100.

I think the bright orange "star" is Mars, with castor and pollux above it. To the right of your photos is another brightish star, which is procyon, with gomoisa (β CMi) above it.

What time of day did you take these pictures?

Welcome back to the hobby - it's still as wonderful as ever, even if the clouds are not.

I agree that adapter shown above is a good choice. There's also a Baader clicklock adapter. They do 0.75 and 1mm threads.

The C8 is a good choice. It's lightweight and packs a punch.

Look at it as an investment for the future. If you take to this hobby, then you will probably buy at least one more scope, and if you then want something more portable, it will be quitte a bit smaller than an 8" dob. That's when the 2.5mm Nagler will shine. OTOH, if you don't pursue astronomy, you will probably sell up everything so no hame done.

It might be that the clicklock is adding too much to the optical path. If you got the adapter that TiffsandAstro suggested, then I think you could replace the clicklock with it, and then having unscrewed the nosepiece of the flattener, the flattener screws onto the adapter. This would give about an additional 15mm inward travel. You could also use this: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/adapters/astro-essentials-2-inch-compression-ring-adapter-for-sky-watcher-newtonians-and-72ed-refractor-m54.html One of the reviewers said that's what they needed for imaging with a coma corrector. Whether that's enough I don't know as I have never used the flattener with my 72ED.

On the camera end of your setup, there seems to be a tube screwed in the the T ting. I 'm not sure if that should be there, but rather the flattener screws directly into the T ring.

I got some O rings from these people back in February. https://www.ebay.co.uk/str/sealsuppliesuk No complaints so far.

or heat shrink tube.

Maybe try handle bar grips or wheelbarrow grips and cut them to size, depending on what diameter you can find.

Living in a bortle 8 area, one of my greatest pleasures is to see the night sky from a dark location, bortle 3 or better, just with the naked eye. Even after mnay decades it brings a huge smile to my face. And really cold nights don't feel too bad (provided my feet are warmish).

Again from Tresco, I finally got to see this with the naked eye tonight (7.30 to 8pm) - did'nt need averted vision. The tail is longer without binoculars. Also took a few pictures with my camera. The brightish star that the tails points to is σ oph, which is about 7.5° from the head of the comet.

I'm happy with the SW 72ED, for both day and night use. It's light weight but feels sturdy. CA is unobtrusive. It's good value new, and excellent value used. I use it on an AZT6 mount, which it's well suited to, on a lightweight photo tripod.

I couldn't agree more. Neowise was far better - at least from a London observers point of view. But 2 in 4 years is nothing to complain about.

After the usual will it/won't it stay clear, Success. I think the best view was through binoculars, but for my family the little telescope was best. Also I think it was just visible with naked eye and averted vision. The picture was taken wide angle so I didn't miss.

Just got a view in binoculars (10x42) from Tresco. Dodging high cloud but visible for about 15 minutes, starting 7.25 pm (BST). Small and no sign of tail beyond about 5'. I have yet to see what if anything I've captured on my camera.