Alan64

The Meade 90mm f/10 achromat, with a very good if not excellent doublet, blackened and flocked throughout, and mounted onto an Astro-Tech(GSO) "Voyager I" alt-azimuth, given the telescope's larger/longer size... ...and a low-slung chair due to the current removal of the mount's pier. At 225x, the afocal-shot taken with the old Minolta with its shutter set at 1/10th of a second, and to compensate for shakes, wobbles, and the transiting across the field-of-view... It's slightly blurred there. Taken at 1/45th of a second... ...for what that's worth. The live view was better, of course. That last image approximates the live view best. I was dogged by the cold and moisture in the air. I then turned the telescope to ole reliable, Polaris. The seeing was somewhat turbulent. A few times I saw the star's Airy-disc as a perfect sphere. The first and second diffraction-rings were partial and dancing round the disc, yet they were nigh razor-thin. The false-colour of the 90mm at f/10 did rear its head, but not nearly as bad as that of the Antares 80mm f/6. It was so much nicer to simply observe, instead of taking snapshots. I seem to be seeing more clearly with my left eye, as I switched back and forth. Up until now I've always observed with my right. I'll need to give the left some more practice in future, apparently.

In the early morning, November 29th, I brought out the Zhumell "Z100" 100mm f/4 Newtonian on the ES "Twilight Nano" alt-azimuth mount, and for a look-see at the Moon. The sky was saturated with clouds, and the Moon nigh at full-phase... How theatrical, no? But I did manage at least one afocal-shot, courtesy of my old Minolta point-and-shoot, through the 4mm, and at 100x... Not very good, I'm afraid, as the collimation of the Newtonian is not spot-on, in addition. I got this eyepiece primarily for that telescope, and to test it, with a 2x-barlow at least. The parabolas of it and the S-W "Heritage" 100P are not specified as being "diffraction limited". Rather "frugal" on behalf of the manufacturer, I must say. Still, I have high hopes, but first I must tweak the collimation further. The live view didn't look half-bad, whilst peering through the clouds. Incidentally, I did not see the slightest hint of false-colour during that observation. The eyepiece paired quite well with that "apochromat", in that at least. It rained on the 30th, and the sky completely overcast. Last early morning, on the 1st, I brought out the Antares 805 80mm f/6 achromat... It was below freezing at the time. The Moon was up, and in a crystal-clear sky... At 120x... Grey-scaled... Possibly during a moment of steady seeing, I saw a broken line of "pearls", nigh tack-sharp, along the rim of this small crater... The camera couldn't capture that, of course. There was false-colour seen, as evidenced within those images, but that was the fault of the short achromat. The Moon isn't the ideal test-subject, particularly when at almost full-phase. But this accursed cold weather is hampering my efforts. The alleged eye-relief(16mm) was noticeably reduced when using the eyepiece with those two telescopes, yet the relief was somewhat greater with the f/6 achromat, naturally so I assume. The next test will be with a 90mm f/10 achromat, and a star-test utilising great Polaris A in addition.

I have the Meade "Polaris" 114mm EQ kit... The mount's saddle, where the telescope is attached, is a Vixen-type which is the common standard, for telescopes... The saddle accepts a dove-tail bar... In theory, the binoculars could be attached to a bar, then to the mount. I've never done anything like that myself, but where there's a will there's a way. Something like this might be attached to a bar... https://www.astroshop.eu/adaptors/omegon-tripod-adaptor-for-binoculars-metal-/p,4983 Now, don't hold me to that. The EQ mount, an EQ-2, can be converted to a simpler alt-azimuth... That might be a bit more user-friendly, but another solution would need to be found for attaching the binoculars to the bar, and to ensure that the binoculars are level; perhaps an L-shaped arm of sorts attached to the bar. The slow-motion controls are fully functional in that mode as well. The counterweight opposite the binoculars can be adjusted, and for a proper balance. This is my smaller EQ-1 in an alt-azimuth mode, and with the counterweight... The weight can be slid all the way over to the right for the binoculars. That's as far as my thinking takes me.

Hmm, I can get 120x out of this regression of the refractive design and evolution... ...and with that 4mm, alone, but not with that 2" star-mirror. But first, I must saunter outside into the cold, cold night, and consult fair Luna... <mumble mumble mumble> And she replied, "Talk about soft!"

Yes, I'm beginning to look more upon these as being grey-market, at least, if not black.

The 4mm planetary is available in Europe, and with the usual mark-up. In so far as "going" to China, do we not go for the rest as well? Yes, quite.

AA's BST planetaries are not branded as far as I can tell from the images, therefore simply an in-house affair I suspect. Perhaps the owner of AA didn't want to pay extra to have them branded; same eyepieces otherwise, I hope. I would doubt that as well, regarding the logo.

Oh, I also held the eyepiece up to a bright light, and not a single speck of dirt or debris was seen.

Yes, the grand total was less than $30, or £23. The type was introduced to the U.S. market in 2005 by Burgess Optical of Knoxville in east Tennessee. Barsta may be just a wholesale-distributor for Kunming United Optics. Incidentally, I unscrewed the bottom portion off of the eyepiece, with its smaller lens(es), and it's going to need blackening internally.

I'm all about high-powered views, as I use a telescope, regardless of focal-length, for which it is intended, and to see faraway objects up close. Else, I'd use my eyes or a pair of binoculars for the lower powers, which I rarely ever do. Up until now, the only 4mm eyepieces I've managed to collect, over the decades, are these two... The Tani orthoscopic on the left needs its lenses cleaned, perhaps in between even. The symmetrical-Ramsden(SR) on the right is surprisingly good, very good even, and for a kit-eyepiece. I also have a .965" SR somewhere, yet without its lens(es). But it was that Celestron kit-4mm that revealed to my eye just how good a 4mm can be. So much so that last late-summer I began to yearn for an even nicer 4mm, with a larger eye-lens, and at least a modest increase in eye-relief. Just a little extra, please, as I don't wear prescription-eyeglasses whilst observing. After looking round and about online, I decided on this one... https://agenaastro.com/bst-1-25-uwa-planetary-eyepiece-4mm.html For two months I waited, through September and October, and for the eyepiece to be re-stocked. At first, the listing stated the anticipated arrival as being "...early October", then "...late October". Even into November, late October was still being indicated. Then, in the end, "Please contact us for an update", and as it states currently. AA is the only vendor in the U.S. who stocks that type of eyepiece. I couldn't find another economical type in a 4mm, other than a Plossl or another orthoscopic. I almost bought a Vixen 4mm "NPL" Plossl, and with its own squinty eye-lens and tight eye-relief. I came precariously close to getting that one, but happily, I didn't. Onto the online ocean I embarked, searching every corner of the world. It wasn't practical ordering one from Europe. At last, I found one, via AliExpress, and direct from China, the "horse's mouth". As I pulled it out from my semi-rural mailbox, I immediately noticed that it was quite heavy; good, that... I haven't tried it out yet, but I do have hopes, albeit cautious ones. I got the eyepiece for less than US$30 total. It may be a factory-second. I don't think it's a counterfeit. If it is a second, then I hope that it is due solely to its cracked lens-cap... I think I'll break it in upon the upcoming "marriage" between Jupiter and Saturn this solstice.

Today, I'm scheduled to receive this, direct from China, and via AliExpress: a TMB 4mm planetary... I got fed up waiting, for months, for Agena Astro in California to get more in stock, and under the BST marque. AA is the only source for them here in the U.S. In addition, I'm getting it for a little over half of the price that AA charges for it. However, I have no idea what's going to be in that package once it arrives. It could be a counterfeit, or a second... ...or a package filled with hair-clips. I also ordered the 6mm, just a day or two ago, for slightly less outlay, but it hasn't been loaded onto the junk yet. The 4mm will arrive none too soon, and for the upcoming union of Jupiter and Saturn.

If you choose a Newtonian or Newtonian-Dobson, there will be collimation to learn and master, but not with a refractor... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/skywatcher-evostar-102-eq3-2.html You can get your feet wet in so far as imaging with the equatorial mount of that kit, and by adding a simple motor-drive in future. The refractor comes with a 2" focusser. If the prospect of collimating a Newtonian regularly, occasionally, doesn't bother, I would go with this... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-200p-dobsonian.html I suppose you'll never forget your first telescope as the years and decades go by, and most certainly not if the first was a 102mm refractor.

Jupiter is too bright at the lower powers to see much if any detail. You can dim the planet's brightness down a bit with this... https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1485009-REG/ice_ice_vp_125_1_25_variable_polarizer.html Or, ramp up the magnification until it dims on its own. In either case, you may then begin to discern the planet's features.

You don't have to get Celestron-branded eyepieces and accessories to work with your Celestron telescope. Brands are unimportant. One should look beyond such in the choosing... https://agenaastro.com/meade-series-4000-126-1-25-2x-short-focus-barlow-lens.html With that 2x-barlow, inserted into the diagonal, then the eyepiece into the barlow, the magnification is doubled. If you insert the barlow into the telescope first, then the diagonal and eyepiece into the barlow, an approximate 3x multiplier is had, which triples the magnification... https://agenaastro.com/gso-12mm-plossl-eyepiece.html

For some inexplicable reason, those marvelous pipe-type mount-heads are not available here in the U.S., price-wise.

The mirrors of any telescope scatter light more than lenses do. There is the option of disassembling the barlows, to check for proper blackening of the housing and the edges of the lenses. If sub-par or nonexistent...

8.5 kgs it weighs. Attaching 8.5 kgs onto the other side in counterweights is an option. That may help to prevent premature failure of the axes.

It's good to see that mounting system paired with a 150mm f/8.

Of the four, the "Skyliner" 150P, at f/8, would be the easiest to maintain, and collimate. Newtonians require collimation on occasion. Incidentally, it's always heart-warming to me personally to see an upgrading from binoculars to a telescope... The "Explorer" 150P and the "Astroview 6" are the same; a toss-up. The "Spaceprobe" 130ST is a somewhat smaller version of those two. All three Newtonians are at f/5, and would be more difficult to collimate, and more difficult to reach the higher and highest powers of which the telescope is capable. Some also mention the difficulty of operating a Newtonian mounted on an equatorial. The telescopes, however, can be rotated within their tube-rings to place the focusser in a more comfortable observing-position, as needed. There are also other telescopic designs to consider; a refractor which requires little to no maintenance(collimation)... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/skywatcher-evostar-102-eq3-2.html A Maksutov, which is the closest a mirrored-telescope may come to the optical-performance of a refractor... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-127-eq3-2.html https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-127-synscan-az-goto.html https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/sky-watcher-skymax-127-az-gti.html Maksutovs have long focal-lengths however. They are like microscopes, but for the night sky. Low-power, wide-field views are nigh impossible with a Maksutov, but then a telescope in the first place is for seeing faraway objects up close. Else, one would use their eyes or a pair of binoculars.

"Skywatcher SkyMax 127 AZ-GTI Maksutov" If you choose the Celestron Astro-Fi 5 Schmidt-Cassegrain, know that its secondary-obstruction is somewhat larger(left), likely resulting in less-sharp images... But the Celestron Schmidt would be somewhat lighter in weight, and somewhat easier to reach the lower powers with a wider field-of-view; more of an all-rounder, in so far as a planetary telescope might aspire. Still, I'd choose the Maksutov.

I would strive for as much aperture as possible, and over a go-to kit. The Newtonians on go-to mounts are not fully collimatable, and to save weight. I, too, suggest the Sky-Watcher 150mm f/8 Newtonian-Dobson.

I have a 150mm f/5 Newtonian, albeit not a collapsible... I spent practically all of 2015 observing the sky; once I relocated the telescope itself to a tripod-mount that is -- such freedom. One night, I observed Jupiter, the event recorded via this shot I took through the eyepiece at a lower power... Note the flaring caused by the secondary spider-vanes. Not long afterwards I inserted a 12mm combined with a 2.8x barlow, and for a higher power of 175x. Now, as you go up in magnification, the images will dim. True enough, the flares round the planet were more or less gone. But Jupiter was still a washed-out, white orb, devoid of any detail. I went inside and retrieved my variable-polariser. What a difference upon its integration. I could then see many details on the planet's surface, and the subtle colourings. During a few moments of exceptional seeing(you have be patient and wait for those to occur), the features suddenly became practically tack-sharp -- the festoons and whorls within the equatorial bands were a sight to behold. The planet appeared as though I was watching a NASA broadcast, albeit on an old CRT colour-television... Again, what a sight to behold, and for only this much... https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/antares-variable-polarising-filter-125.html Mars may also benefit, particularly when at opposition... Venus, too, and in discerning its Moon-like phases more easily. Brightness is not always our friend when observing the night sky.

Do continue to try for the Bresser, and its superior tube-support system. You can rotate the tube, thereby the focusser for a more comfortable observing position(s). All others cannot.

The worst thing you can do is to rush in making a decision, and without knowing what's out there. Per your budget, there are two telescopes, perhaps a third, available to you. A Newtonian: mounted on either an alt-azimuth or equatorial tripod, or a Dobson-type alt-azimuth... Newtonians require collimation on occasion, upon arrival to check and confirm after the trip from the factory overseas, and thereafter but usually only a tweak or two to maintain. The physically shorter the Newtonian, the more difficult to collimate; the shorter, the greater the difficulty in reaching the higher and highest powers of which the aperture of the telescope is capable. Higher powers also require a more accurate collimation than the lower powers; and for sharp, pleasing images. In addition, the aberration, coma, increases as the telescope becomes shorter. On the plus side, the views through a Newtonian are false-colour free, regardless of the telescope's length. Also, mirrors are easier and cheaper to manufacture than lenses, therefore you get more light-gathering aperture for the same outlay of funds, compared to a refractor. Newtonians are not suitable for terrestrial observations. A refractor(achromat): mounted on either an alt-azimuth or equatorial tripod... The objective of a refractor consists of two matched lenses, usually a doublet of crown and flint glasses, instead of a mirror. A refractor is more tightly constructed, in design and build, therefore collimation is rarely if ever required; minimal to no maintenance. Refractors oft ooze quality, and instill pride-of-ownership; not that other types do not, but not to the extent of a fine refractor. The shorter the achromat, the more false-colour is seen when viewing brighter objects. Again, the shorter, the more difficulty in reaching the higher powers, which is what any telescope is for in the first place, to see faraway objects up close. Else, you'd use your eyes or a pair of binoculars for the lower powers. Folks do choose the shorter telescopes for ergonomic considerations(ease in handling and storing), but unfortunately oft over optical performance in the process; a Schmidt-Cassegrain comes to my mind, also, in that. A refractor has an unobstructed aperture; no "junk" in between your eye and the object being observed. All mirrored telescopes possess a secondary-obstruction, with Newtonians having supportive spider-vanes which can degrade the images further. Such acts as a cataract of the human-eye. The apertures of a refractor and a Newtonian compared... As you can see, that of all refractors is unobstructed; no "junk" to degrade the view. For the same outlay of funds, the aperture of a refractor will be smaller. Those who dwell in light-polluted areas oft suggest a large "Dobsonian" off the cuff, but in that you enjoy darker skies you do have the option of choosing a smaller aperture, and with little to no disappointment. A third option is a Maksutov-Cassegrain, with the same mounting options as the other two types of telescopes, however with a Dobson-type tabletop alt-azimuth. A 127mm f/15 Maksutov of my own, and mounted on a manual alt-azimuth... If ever there was a telescope to see faraway objects up close, a Maksutov is it. It's like a microscope, but for the sky; also for terrestrial observations during the day and night(along with refractors); birds in trees, ships at sea, and surveillance even. Maksutovs have rather long focal-lengths. They need help to "see", to find their way round the sky. A large finder-scope helps, as well as a go-to alt-azimuth or go-to equatorial. Among all telescopes that use mirrors to form an image, a Maksutov comes closest to simulating a refractor in optical performance. A Maksutov does have a secondary-obstruction as well, but without the spider-vanes of a Newtonian... Maksutovs require adjusting to the outdoor conditions, acclimation, and before beginning to observe. That can take an hour or more. Some store their Maksutovs outdoors, protected of course, and to be ready when they are.

I live in DeSoto county, which is considered part of the Memphis metropolitan area. Actually, I observe from my home, only. It's not great, but not bad, in so far as light-pollution. I've been to Jackson a few times, in my past work. I remember seeing "Vaughn" on a sign or two whilst driving to Jackson. I'm a caregiver for my surviving parent now.