iPeace

9 hours ago, RobertI said:

It seems, then, that there is no clear evidence on the differences between F5/F6. I tend to think if Skywatcher deemed F5 a suitable for visual, then F6 won't be noticably better. Then again, TS say they offer an F6 Newt specifically for visual (they also offer F4, F5 and F8 in the same range), and implies its better than the F5 for visual with its narrower secondary (45mm compared to 63mm of the F5) and matches the performance of a 4.5" APO (conterversial!).

I went through this myself, and though I'm not much wiser, I don't mind sharing...

I've come to the realization - and one's milage will vary - that it's all compromise. Always. Unrelentingly. It's never going to be perfect - whatever that looks like, anyway. But if you do your homework, it will always be good enough to make you happy, ecstatic, even.

You pick your premium. Whatever's important to you - size, weight, cost, light grasp, resolution, cooling, collimation, mounting, transport, etc. - a solution is available for your priorities, and you'll love it, exactly because it fits.

Plenty of folks fully enjoy their f/5 (or even faster) scopes for visual. They've often chosen eyepieces and other accessories to match.

You know what you really want. Go for it.

Pentax XL Zoom: very nice build, very nice views. Relatively heavy and bulky, but no more so than many other very nice eyepieces (I've switched to more compact types).

Baader Mk IV Zoom: nice build quality, to my eyes the views are just about as nice as the Pentax at less weight and bulk. I've kept this one.

HyperFlex Zoom: the most compact and lightest of the "mid-length" zooms I've tried. Build quality is less posh, but solid enough and the views are good. Excellent value; after comparison I kept the Baader but only for its more posh feel.

TeleVue Nagler Zoom: at 3-6 mm, limited to use for high magnification, but so amazingly useful and fun, premium quality, compact powerhouse. I also own the 2-4 mm version, now no longer in production.

Between the Baader and the HyperFlex, I'm inclined to say that the price differential gives you more additional build quality than actual additional optical performance. If you like your eyepieces light and compact, the HyperFlex will serve you well - surprisingly so, with a Q Barlow for higher mags. If your OCD is of the touchy-feely variety, you may enjoy the Baader more.

Good luck, and enjoy!

As @vlaiv mentions above, I've acquired and used a couple of newts from TS. The white one shown above is a 6" f/6 branded TS, made by GSO, and doesn't seem to be offered by TS any more.

I am inclined to assume that the PHOTON is assembled by TS from quality (GSO) parts, as is the 8" f/6 I got from them:

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p5052_TS-Optics-8--f-6-UNC-Planet---Newtonian---Fused-Quartz-Mirror---Carbon-Tube---made-in-Germany.html

As to the effectiveness of f/6, it does work very well, but I've never used a faster newt, so I can't really compare. My f/6 newts are easy to collimate.

I also own a 6" f/8 - which, of course, has the same tube length as the 8" f/6.

So...I suppose it would be helpful if I could tell you that the 6" f/6 works just as well as the 6" f/8 - and is easier to transport and mount...

Well, I hesitate here. I haven't mounted them up together to see which was best. I've used both (on separate occasions) to observe the Moon, and I didn't notice any real difference. I guess the theory is that the f/8 should be better than the f/6 on Moon and planets, but from my little bit of ocean floor (we're below sea level) it doesn't seem to matter.

Anyway, it's a bit moot for me, as I've got the carbon 8" f/6 and the other two newts get no more use (you'd be welcome to try them out, it's just that pesky North Sea that's so inconvenient).

I can confirm that the 6" f/6 works well on a Losmandy AZ8 mount, and fully expect it to do equally well on a SkyTee.

I've reported on how well it works on doubles.

Best of luck.

Arrived packaged in a manner of which I myself would be most proud, from the true giant among gents that is @Alan White

23 hours ago, astronoam said:

I understand that with a 5mm I get 1mm exit pupil which is recommended but this only gives me 120x magnification and I hope for more...

I often find that 120x is most pleasing for Jupiter and Saturn. The view is great, and I always try more magnification, but most often I'll return to 120x to enjoy that less-magnified, but nicer, view.

So based on my own experience, I'd suggest getting a 5mm first. That will make you happy and wanting even more...and when you eventually try something below 5mm, you may well find that you're glad you have the 5mm to fall back on most nights.

14 hours ago, Victor Boesen said:

Everything helps;) I've also seen a thread posted recently about the undercuts on eyepieces and I think I will probably give some electrical tape a go.

Thanks in advance!

Well, the best I can measure gives a result of 3.8 cm added to the path, perhaps 1-2 mm more. Not exactly compact...but, as stated, the added length is a feature for me, not an issue.

On 23/09/2019 at 07:36, Victor Boesen said:

Thank you very much! The reason I am looking to buy it is because of the locking mechanism. My ES 82 degree oculars all have an undercut to them and I can't lock them completely tight(without mentioning how much turning I have to do after). I could look into other clicklock options that have a shorter lightpath.

Apologies for the delay. I will only be able to measure approximately (hopefully tomorrow), so I hope that will be of use. Alternatively, you could wind some narrow isolation tape around the eyepiece to fill in the undercut just enough (I understand if you don't want to do this, it's just a suggestion). I think other SGL friends have done similar things to solve this problem.

2 hours ago, Victor Boesen said:

@iPeace I'm looking to buy these parts for my diagonal but I already have a nosepiece that screws into my M42 thread. Would the reducer thread allow this??? I assume it accepts both because of the (Incl. T-2 threads). And, would any other 2" to 1.25" adapter work with it?? I ask this because I need a shot light path otherwise it won't reach focus so a low profile 2"-1.25" adapter would be ideal. How far is the optical length of the entire reducer??

Victor

I'm travelling abroad for a few more days; will do my best for you when I get back.

Off hand, I assume the shortest light path would be obtained by just using the diagonal without any additional parts? Do you actually need the Baader bits? I need them to lengthen the path for use with my Borg refractor.

Dear OP:

No.

2 hours ago, johninderby said:

Now a Skytee engineered to the same standards as the Giro would be a winner

1 hour ago, jock1958 said:

I think there is - the Losmandy AZ8 but you will need extra cash

4 minutes ago, Alan White said:

I think you are spot on, @iPeace has one and talks very highly of it.

Having used the Ercole and having read a few less than positive reports on SkyTees in the wild, I dearly wanted an AZ8 and have enjoyed it immensely.

Thing is, I'm not convinced it actually does anything more than a SkyTee. Granted, the AZ8 will not fall apart - which is quite a boon for those who have gone through a few SkyTees - but if you do manage to find a good SkyTee and keep it in working order, the price of an AZ8 is very tough to justify...

Excellent build quality and views, certainly the clearest, sharpest high-power views I've enjoyed. The eye relief somehow seems more than specified, so they're more comfortable in use than you might expect. The only real drawback for me is the FOV, which is important as I only use undriven AZ mounts. So when it came time to thin the herd, I let the HRs go in favour of Nagler Zooms and DeLites; views nearly as nice, with more FOV and/or flexibility in use. If I used a driven mount, it may have been a different story. If orthos are your thing, you'll absolutely love the HRs.

As promised, we're ready

Bump - a friend on SGL asked for the particulars concerning the use of a Baader adapter to lengthen the path and avoid using the Tak prism's clamping mechanism; I've edited my post above to share with anyone interested.

12 minutes ago, John said:

sometimes the forum can seem a little daunting with folks all apparently rushing outside each and every clear night

It can...

12 minutes ago, John said:

But it's fine not to actially observe sometimes, good for your overall enjoyment of the hobby in fact, IMHO.

...and it is. I always check Clear Inside before checking Clear Outside.

So, permission granted to stay in, but feel free to join me / us outside tonight, if it may get your mind in a better place.

Been there. Breathe.

Don't do it for a result. Just have some fun setting up your kit and mucking about. I'll be out with you - and I see b-all below 30 degrees, so there!

We can share sightings here. Nothing fancy required - easy favs will do.

Nice one, I've turned it into an observing list to try soon.

7 hours ago, JTEC said:

I’ve looked at the AZ8. Does anyone have experience of these?

Yes. Love it.

7 hours ago, JeremyS said:

I considered the Losmandy AZ8, but the advice there was that the mechanics are like the GM8

This is true insofar as it is comprised of parts milled to the same spec. As such, I'm inclined to regard it as equal to a GM8, but I've never used one of those.

5 hours ago, JTEC said:

The figures, 16kg a side, suggest that the AZ8 ought to be up to it.

4 hours ago, John said:

I have considered a Losmandy AZ8 but I'm not convinced that it will offer any additional stability.

I'd like to help, but I must tread carefully here. I use a 8" f/6 Newtonian on the AZ8 atop a Berlebach PLANET tripod to my complete satisfaction. Smaller refractors, as you might expect, are handled with absolute glee. On the other hand, I wasn't so happy with a 120ED on it - but in hindsight, I wasn't used to such a large scope back then (long before the Newt), so I may have been wanting too much.

56 minutes ago, John said:

It is not just the tube weight that creates the challenge for the mount of course, the length of the tube, in the case of these large refractors, is a major contributary factor as well.

...so that might have been the issue for me. Now, the AZ8 doesn't hold the 8" f/6 absolutely rock-solid-dead-still when you work the focuser whilst wearing oven mitts, but then I don't expect it to (could any mount?). It does very easily carry the weight very smoothly, properly counterweighted of course, and it's a great solution for my current herd.

So, what to say? It's portable, very well made, will not fall apart and will carry the weight. But how much you enjoy the experience (and this may apply to any 'portable' mount), especially at higher magnifications, may well depend more on your expectations than on anything else.

Good luck.

38 minutes ago, -philip- said:

I really miss the nudging around to find what I want to see and it also helped me get a grip with knowing where everything is.

As I suspected - you already know all you need to know to proceed.

My largest telescope - ever - is an 8" f/6 Newtonian, like your old 200p. And it's enough for me. Like you (it seems), I prefer manual control. I've never used anything with motors - and never will.

Your post reads like you already know what you should do - find someone with a 200p who wants to trade up.

In any case, thanks for sharing and good luck!

On 05/08/2019 at 14:56, Stu said:

This one arrived today, lovely Baader Diamond Steeltrack focuser for my 12.5" Truss Dob project, with adaptor plate which I hope allows it to fit without too much hassle.

Excellent kit; just stays out of the way while you crack on (no news to you, I'm sure). Best of luck with it!

Well, I'm no authority on this, but I do very happily use the Tak prism with a TV-60 at f/6 and with a Borg 71FL at f/5.6. Whether I'm seeing and just not minding what others seem not to like - or not - I don't know. The one thing to keep in mind is that the Tak prism has a relatively short path; I need an extension tube to reach focus with the Borg with its short-travel focuser (the TV-60 has a nice long drawtube).

You can see here (with a TV-85) how I use a Baader adapter on top of the Tak prism both to lengthen the path and avoid having to use the prism's turn-all-night-long-and-snag-the-safety-undercut locking mechanism. The adapter is T2 threaded on the bottom and has a T2-1.25" adapter screwed onto it which inserts into the prism; it remains on the prism when not in use.

EDIT: a few pics to clarify

...and the part numbers are:

I'm not familiar with your scope, but assuming the dovetail protrudes forward of the mount's clamp, you could use a weight attached to its own clamp, thus making it easy to slide it along the front of the dovetail to find the perfect balance point.

Berlebach makes clamps with threaded holes and weights with protruding bolts to match.

Tiny addition - if not the Losmandy AZ8, then ANYTHING made by @Doc.

It would have to be the TeleVue 3-6 Zoom. I gaze most contentedly at Luna, Jupiter and Saturn, so I'd weld it to the diagonal and have done.

No polar alignment. No motors, or anything else that might break. No bits falling off at awkward moments. Left and right, up and down with dreamy slow-mo control. Carries an 8" f/6 newt to my satisfaction - on a Berlebach Planet tripod, that is...