Linda

55 minutes ago, CrashedOnEarth said:

I though that looked like the northern lights!!  So how does a single picture of you also capture an airplane in 13-14 different spots?  Wouldn't the airplane just be in one spot?  (yeah, I'm that new)

Just a long shutter time. Not too long, or the stars would have become stripes. Airplanes move fast. Just try it out for yourself and start with 10 sec shutter time. For the light, my hb used his headlight, which gave a better light than the camera's flash. I kept my eyes closed to not ruin my night vision.

1 hour ago, CrashedOnEarth said:

 

<>....but what is that strip of evenly spaced lights going between the trees just above your head to the left?   Camera effects?..... Mothership maybe? 

Indeed, it was an airplane. Perhaps it was the Santa Claus route from London to Rovaniemi , which should be flying over that area.

Above the tree in the middle you see a red spot. That is just a camera artifact that sometimes appears.

The green light low at the northern horizon, in the right part of the picture is a bit of northern light. :-) Only visible on camera with 10 sec shutter time. With the naked eye it looked like there was a city in that direction, but there is nothing in over there for many, many kms.

Here is a picture that my husband took of me last winter with my Maksutov under a dark sky. Not much scope to see, but it's my only picture of scope in action.

On 17.10.2016 at 20:31, poogle said:

Hi

I've been reading topics with awe in this forum section for a couple of months, and a couple of days ago I finally decided to build something  I early gave up the thought of building a regular observatory since the horizon is obstructed in all directions. I live close to an airport in Stockholm, Sweden and only use my scope for astrophotography (narrowband). The thought of having my scope in an observatory or shed in the garden would keep me awake every night thinking about burglars.

So I came up with the idea to just build some kind of box on my second floor balcony which just only fits my mount and scope. It's less than ideal (close to the house and might get a bit wobbly) but I figured that it's better than the current status of my setup (my wive uses it as a coat hanger and my son uses it while learning to stand) . The south and west views are quite unobstructed and I will be able to sit in my living room controlling everything.

It's a smart concept, building a scope shed on your balcony. It gives more peace of mind than having it in an accessible garden. When I let my scope stay outside at night for an early morning session, I also put it on the balcony upstairs.

Very nice solution. Cheap and effective.

I chose to buy the C8, because it is just a little lighter to handle than it's bigger brother. Although the 9,25 has better reviews.

On 22.5.2016 at 19:11, nightfisher said:

 

 

 

And what is that blue thing? Your lipstick??

Thank you for this review. Often we see reviews that compare what you see through the scope, which is also important. But you describe the quality of the construction, which is equally important.

Is a 180mm Mak also suitable for Deep Sky? In the sense that it could be a better alternative then a 8 inch reflector? Or is again the narrow FOV very limiting?

1 hour ago, menacegtr said:

@Peter Drew . Thank you for you suggestion, that's why I came here for advise. I never even gave the Maksutov a thought. Are you saying this telescope is far and away a better scope than the one i had in mind?. The one thing I would say is there are hardly any reviews on the skytravel 120mm, but there are loads on the Maksutovs so that must say something to me. I will take a serious rethink on what telescope to buy now. Thanks for yours and everybody's suggestions

                                                                                            Regards. Dave:

I think the difference in this case is not the quality of the scope, but the focus length. Long focus length is good for high power views, but it gives a narrow field of view. Short focus length gives a wide view. In watching the night sky, a narrow field of view is no problem when you are looking at a planet, which you typically look at with high power. Some Deep sky objects (DSOs) however are quite big and they are best viewed with a wider field of view. E.g. my Maksutov doesn't show M31 as nicely as my binoculars that give a wider field of view. Also the double cluster is quite difficult to get all the way into my view. On the other hand there are many deep sky objects that are smaller and that are even tiny in my telescope with magnification.

For daytime viewing I use an Amici prism (that shows left and right the correct way). I can easily watch boats on the fjord that are approx 25km away. For astronomy, I use a star diagonal, which shows left and right mirrored. That last thing is a bit confusing and is a matter of practice to get used to. If you want to, you can also use am amici prism for astronomy, but it might take away a little more light than a star diagonal.