Ricochet

Thanks, Victor. How does the focus position of that eyepiece compare to others? If you add a 2"-1.25" reducer does that prevent your 1.25" eyepieces from focusing? 

I've just bought a Skywatcher 72ED to use as a grab and go, but having tested it in the day it looks like I'm going to run out of in focus at night using the 2" Baader Clicklock diagonal I already own. If you own(ed) a 72ED which diagonals have you found that allow you to reach focus? Based on a few measurements I'd guess that I'm looking for something with a light path in the region of 90mm. I'd like the option of 2" if possible but I'm envisioning that a 24 Pan would usually be my low power option so a 1.25" diagonal would also work. 

If the locking screws are tightened the strength of the springs doesn't matter as they are not being used to hold collimation. If the cell is firmly locked then it is likely that the movement is of the mirror in the cell. There may be some play in the position of the uprights that hold the mirror clips to allow you to move them slightly nearer or further from the mirror edge. It is a very fine balance between too loose with the mirror moving, and too tight with pinched optics. 

Each star in your image each star looks like two stars. The link above talks about the primary not being fixed and moving after a meridian flip, perhaps this is your issue (or one of your issues)?

6 minutes ago, Louis D said:

Since I've never used the Celestrons, I cannot confirm that.  However, there is a strong possibility they are related making the 7mm and 9mm basically the same.  I just like the adjustable eyecup design on the Meades better, so I bought a set of them for comparison to the BST Starguiders (Paradigms).  Those two focal lengths were noticeably better in head to head comparison with the 5mm and 8mm BSTs.

I thought the same comparing the 7mm X-Cel LX to the 8mm Starguider. 

14 minutes ago, kev100 said:

That’s very interesting, that you see the gap as being between 16 and 8.8, when I’m seeing the need for a wider field of view between the 20 and the 8.8 … a 16 being the mid point for me

1.4X rule, equating to a doubling or halving of exit pupil (~brightness of extended objects/background sky) with each step. In my opinion exit pupil is the most important factor in choosing eyepiece steps until you start hitting atmospheric limits.

16 minutes ago, kev100 said:

at nearly 50 quid cheaper than the Morpheus, the 14mm ES would be my preference

FLO have the 14mm ES82 at £174 (out of stock for 90 days) and the Morpheus at £188 (in stock). Morpheus were over £200 but appear to have come back down again.

How variable is the grass length? Would taller feet on the base board suffice?

18 hours ago, Louis D said:

If you can find used copies of the discontinued 9mm and 6.5mm Meade 5000 HD-60 eyepieces, they are real gems that perform very close to Pentax XL/XW and Morpheus levels at f/6.  They were under $100 each when new.  They're also quite usable with eyeglasses.  They should still perform well at f/4.7, but I can't confirm that as I don't have a scope that fast.

If eye relief isn't an issue, there are a whole lot of options out there; but many, like the Abbe Orthoscopic suffer a bit at f/4.7.

Aren't the HD-60s supposed to be the same eyepiece as the Celestron X-Cel LX internally? I had the 7mm X-Cel LX and remember it as being a very good eyepiece. In a way it is a shame that I sold it as it would have been good to reassess it now I'm a much more experienced observer.

I've got the same focal length scope and I go from a 21 Ethos to a 14XW. I can't think of any object where I think that I could do with something with a TFoV between the two. 20 to 14mm is also the ideal step in terms of exit pupil. However, if you can afford the 14mm ES82 then you can afford the Baader Morpheus and based on everything that I've read about them, that is the one I would go for. However, the 14mm Morpheus only makes sense if that is going to be the only Morpheus that you're going to buy, so say you end up with an eyepiece set of 20 Myriad, 14 Morpheus, 10mm and shorter XWs. If you're going to end up with multiple Morpheuses then you want to skip the 14, so I would go for the 12.5mm. The exit pupil is right where you want it for extended DSOs both unfiltered and with a UHC filter if the transmission of the Morpheus is as good as their reputation suggests. You could then see if you still find yourself using the 16mm ES68 or if you just skip right over it because at the moment I think your problem is the gap between the 16 and 8.8mm.

46 minutes ago, Olli said:

Thanks everyone for the suggestions. Sorry I forgot to mention the mount. With my 130ps I think  it has a az5 mount so I’m not sure if that’s  useful with the Mak? Before I got the dob I was very tempted by the maks as they do seem like a good choice.  For the budge if it’s not too expensive the mount can be separate from the original price.  Thanks again.

You already have a 130ps? Does that get use and if it does what are you looking for in the new scope that the 130ps doesn't give you? 

Sky Safari is better than Stellarium mobile. I had to use Stellarium mobile for a while and the free version is now completely useless for anyone who owns a telescope. Paying for the full version gets you something that is probably akin to the free version of Sky Safari in terms of features, possibly with the star catalogue of plus. I like the way the Stellarium mobile looks but once Sky Safari started working again I switched straight back. Sky Safari is a relatively large app in terms of storage space. I think my issue might have been that I didn't have enough space for downloading a data update, so watch out for that.

PC Stellarium is a completely different product and one I would also recommend.

Thanks, Mark, I just managed to get some viewing in before the sun dipped below the roofline.

42 minutes ago, Paul_Sussex said:

Oh, I agree. A Skywatcher equivalent (ish) is what I originally talked about. But it looks so cute and I could sit there fondling it and calling it "my precioussssss"! 😉 See what I mean about impulse buyer!

Oh well in that case, and with typical SGL budget creep, this is what you're after:

1 hour ago, Paul_Sussex said:

By the way, am I missing something obvious? Someone mentioned a for sale section on the forum, but can I find it..

You won't be able to see it until you have a certain number of posts. Unfortunately, scammers meant access had to be restricted. 

1 hour ago, Paul_Sussex said:

I'm desperately trying to resist this https://www.firstlightoptics.com/offers/offer_starbase-80-refractor-and-mount-package_264215.html at the moment!

In terms of being a reasonably lightweight planetary set up it is probably quite a good option. However, whether it is worth the price tag compared to an equivalent Skywatcher achro or Maksutov I can't say. For £500 you could get a 127 Mak / az5 which I would expect to outperform an 80mm achro and also could be carried in a backpack to sites away from home. 

I don't recall seeing anyone report this problem before but there are only a few options; the squareness of the focuser, the travel on the collimation screw, or the mounting holes. 

Contact customer support at bresser.de. It has a 10 year warranty so send it back for them to fix or replace. 

Check if the focuser is square to the tube. Perhaps there are some adjustments on the connection plate or the connections aren't done up correctly. If the focuser is square I think you may have to remove the secondary and spider in order to drill a new set of holes in the top of the tube to hold the spider further away from the primary. If you're lucky there may be enough play in all the existing holes to shift the secondary a few mm away from the primary and the focuser a few mm towards the primary. If you do remove the secondary and spider check to see if the secondary holder is being pulled tight against the spider. If it isn't you may be able to fit a shorter central bolt rather than having to drill new mounting holes. 

As it is clear I've just had a quick session with my 8" dob to give the CLS a go. Targets were the open clusters M35 and M37, the galaxy M51 and the globular cluster M3.

• M35, M37: 21E and 14XW. In both eyepieces the addition of the CLS dimmed the view and made some of the fainter stars disappear.
• M51: 21E - Slight improvement in visibility of the cores with CLS. 14XW - Cores visible, no improvement in visibility by adding CLS. Prior to LED lighting I remember the CLS changing the visibility from cores to cores and spiral arms.
• M3: 21E, 14XW, 10XW. In all eyepieces the CLS did not improve the view and fainter stars disappeared. I also tried the Baader Neodymium on this target and although it gave a more pleasing view than the CLS because stars were white instead of green, the unfiltered view was better.

The one thing that did make a noticeable difference was my Rsky observing hood, but I assume that recent events mean that we can no longer buy these and so you would have to find another item to block out any light not coming from the eyepiece.

3 hours ago, PeterC65 said:

I’ve recently started comparing it with no filter, and to be honest, the difference is marginal verging on non-existent.

In my experience neodymium filters are good moon filters but useless for DSOs. The Astronomik CLS used to be reasonably effective on certain galaxies and star clusters where you can't use a UHC/OIII filter but that was when street lighting was sodium and the majority of light pollution was in the band that it cuts out. However, now that almost everything is LED the light pollution is across the whole spectrum and the usefulness of the filter decreases every day. Depending on the type of light sources in your area perhaps a CLS might give some improvement for now but I wouldn't expect any advantage to last. I'll have to give mine another go to see if it is still useful on anything but I don't remember using it for a while now. With the additional transmission spike in the middle of the cut out section I would expect the L-pro to be even less effective than the CLS. 

Baader sell this pouch which is a larger version of the pouches supplied with their Morpheus and Hyperion Zoom eyepieces. You can also buy the Morpheus pouch if that suits you better. If you're in the UK you'll need to order through a retailer (e.g. FLO) as you won't be able to buy directly from Baader. Personally I would prefer a pouch or two over a tray as you want to keep any eyepieces covered to prevent them radiating heat to space and fogging up as soon as you go to use them.

I've got the old Meade version of the 2x ES. There are (were) reflections off the inside of the barrel between the two lens groups. This was solved by flocking between the two sections. 

Before you start taking things apart, try tightening up the grub screws. I had a fine focus not working on one of my focusers recently and the problem was that a grub screw was loose so the mechanism wasn't engaging. 

If you think you might want the Maxbright IIs it's probably worth contacting FLO to see if they could advise you how far down the waiting list you would be. The last I heard they were expecting stock to arrive in the next month or two but there are 18 month's worth of backorders to fulfil first.

17 hours ago, Louis D said:

Okay, I did so sleuthing on the Levenhuk Ra version of the 68° Long Perng LER eyepieces.  I came up with the following:

Review of 14.5mm on CN

Ernest in Russia's testing/review of the entire line.

Both seem to agree that the 12mm and 14.5mm were the standout performers of the line.

They were also sold as the Omegon Super LE and Altair Astro Lightwave Premium LER.

Thanks, Louis. Ernest's observations are always worth paying attention to. It's a shame that the two good focal lengths are so close that most people would only want one of the pair.

17 hours ago, cajen2 said:

I hope you're not suggesting that I'm not a 'reputable member'! 😡

Sorry, Cajen2, I shall never imply such a thing again. 🤣

I think it would be a good idea to get these eyepieces sent out to a few reputable members for testing/review. When the 80° range first appeared under the Orion branding I had a gap in my eyepiece collection for a 20mm, but a lack of reviews stopped me from buying one. Other people might now be in that same position that I was in with either of these new ranges. The 68° range sit in the price range that the Morpheus used to be in when it was the defacto upgrade from a Starguider. The 68°s might also make nice bino pairs if they are physically small enough.