Louis D

11 hours ago, bigben83 said:

FL 1295mm 51.0

Focal length of 1295mm for the primary mirror.  I'm not sure what the 51.0 refers to.  If you measure the physical width of the mirror in millimeters, you could get the f-ratio by dividing it into the focal length.

Having grown up in Iowa and worked in St. Louis for a time, I offer my sympathies to you for living in a state of Misery, I mean the state of Missouri. 😉😁

If you've got the money, go big with an Obsession or Webster Dobsonian telescope.

30 minutes ago, Commanderfish said:

They can't legally charge EU/German Vat to a consumer in the UK and pay it to the EU/German revenue. They can charge Vat at the local rate (19pc in Germany I think?) and then use that to pay HMRC for part of the UK Vat.  The customer should then be charged the difference, plus the customs charge (I think that's 4pc for telescopes and accessories) upon import (courier has to handle this if not already done by retailer).

If the customer gets charged twice, someone has made a mistake, either on filling the customs paperwork or the processing thereof.

This is not surprising in the first few months of this year seeing as all the paperwork is new to most of us. I spent a few hours in a phone queue to a courier as I hadn't completed all the relevant digits of the goods code for a mount I sold to an SGLer in Ireland.

Fun and games and higher prices. 

I've heard VAT is bureaucratic nightmare and paper management expense.  This seems to confirm it.  With US sales tax, goods just move around tax free until sold to the end consumer.  There's literally no tax paperwork to manage for wholesalers.  I'm not talking about duty or customs expenses, just VAT/sales tax expenses.

49 minutes ago, Stu1smartcookie said:

The world relies on oil . its a captive audience . They set the quantity , they set the rate . And the rest is history , a very expensive one . 

 

Not at all the right thread or forum to discuss this.  I'm no mod, but I'm not going to bite on this anyway.  Perhaps Reddit would be a good venue for such discussions with a broader audience?

As far as SCTs and planets, the only SCT I've ever look through that produced a sharp image of Jupiter was an EdgeHD.  Traditional SCTs always seem to produce a somewhat blurry view as compared to a Newtonian with a premium mirror of the same aperture.  Newtonians with commercial mirrors fall somewhere in between.  I think it's down to better figure, lack of astigmatism/coma, flatter field, and smaller central obstruction of the premium Dobs with a Paracorr.  The EdgeHD line fixes many of these issues with its corrector lenses in the rear baffle tube making the image significantly sharper at high powers.

1 hour ago, MiladyB said:

I REALLY want to buy a Heritage 150p when they're back in stock, but I'll have to gamble regarding the price not falling again.

As long as demand remains strong and there is no domestic supplier to undercut them, Chinese made scopes will likely stay at inflated prices for the foreseeable future.  It's not in their best interest to cut prices if they can sell everything they make at the current prices.  They've already driven out or bought out just about every non-premium astro equipment supplier over the last two decades, so they're not likely to be undercut on price by a local producer.

3 hours ago, astroman99 said:

I believe that the lead time for a  Zambuto mirror in over a year now.

I will say they are sublime, though.  My best views of Jupiter were through a Zambuto equipped 12.5" Mag-1 Portaball on an Osypowski equatorial platform some years ago at a star party.

2 hours ago, 200pman said:

Bst work very well in my 200p skyliner.

If you clad the whole think in brass plate, it would have a definite steampunk vibe.

46 minutes ago, Stardaze said:

The 22T4 Nagler is held in very high regard I understand John, yet noted that @Louis Dfound there to be some kidney beaning evident in that model too. Was it something you noticed yourself?

As for me, I find the kidney beaning very moderate to unnoticeable in use.  Despite having the same size eye lens and AFOV as the other two NT4s, it does have longer eye relief making it easier to use with eyeglasses.  Back to back comparisons over multiple sessions led me to oust the Astro Tech AF70 22mm from my A-team case and replace it with the 22mm NT4.  It has a bit less eye relief (about 2mm less), but it is significantly sharper at the edges.  The centers are roughly equivalent.  The wider AFOV of the NT4 sealed the deal to live with the tighter eye relief.

27 minutes ago, John said:

Ultra-wide (80+ degrees) and Hyper-wide (90+ degrees) eyepieces do take a bit of getting used to I've found.

The ES-92s were pretty easy for me to get used to.  I never got on with the 17mm or 12mm Nagler T4s very well.  It turns out the latter two have strong SAEP.  The 22mm NT4 is pretty decent to use.

I'm wondering if the 16mm Nirvana has undiagnosed SAEP.  It makes the field of view all but impossible to hold once the field stop pops into view.

25 minutes ago, Jubi_Resik said:

So I'm definitely luckier than other people from the balcony. I don't have any Streetlights near my place. I only got 3 neighboring houses that also don't emit almost no light. The next bigger place is 10km away and i live on the border of a national park.  My balcony is facing south , the only view obstruction are the mountains in the background, but since i also live on top of a hill this is not that much of an issue. I have a 180° view from the balcony with just really small villages with no real light pollution. balcony use is mostly for winter, because we got really cold dry nights. in summer time would be more in the hills of the Gantrisch region.

Now you're just trying to make us jealous. 😉

22 minutes ago, Stu said:

the attitude towards customers is often brusque to say the least.

Sounds like NYC photo retailers.  Unless you're buying product, they really don't want to be on the phone with you.

8 minutes ago, KP82 said:

OOUK actually sell their dob base separately. So all their newts are simply sold as plain OTAs, but you can add a dob base or EQ mount during checkout.

Thanks, I forgot about that.

9 minutes ago, KP82 said:

Thanks for sharing the info. That's a lot of premium mirror/dob makers. 😍

I didn't even mention Obsession who uses OMI and Ostahowski mirrors.  I'm sure I'm missing a few others.  There are also a bunch of others like Star Splitter and Tectron who, like Starmaster, and closed up shop over the past 25 years.  Their used scopes can make for a good deal.

3 minutes ago, KP82 said:

If the OP is in the states, wouldn't Zambuto or Parallax Instruments be the more usual options for premium newtonian optics?

Zambuto, Kennedy, Lockwood and other premium mirror makers don't make finished scopes.  Webster might be a good choice for them to get a complete telescope.  Starmaster closed up shop some years ago and then the owner, Rick Singmaster, passed away just a few years after that.  Teeter also makes premium scopes from premium mirrors, though Rob was taking a pause a little while ago.  I don't see that mentioned on his website anymore.  Most of these scopes are Dobs.  I don't see any Dobs listed on the OO website, so it's not really an apples to apples comparison.

Parallax is a closer match to OO, but I know little about their telescopes.  They're mostly known for their EQ mounts over here.

52 minutes ago, ollypenrice said:

The only thing I ever asked for (perfectly politely in my view) was a manual for a new telescope. I didn't get one though.

Olly

You're just supposed to know how to use any telescope if you're ordering from OO. 😉😄

First off, nothing priced under several hundred dollar offers actual aluminum sides.  That's actually a very thin, textured plastic painted to look like aluminum.  It punctures fairly easily if hit up against a sharp corner.

If you were in the US, I'd tell you to buy a Plano 4 pistol case at Walmart for under $20.  However, they don't seem to be sold in the UK.

For you in the UK, I would recommend a hard plastic waterproof tool case such as this one.  Even the cheap Chinese made ones are pretty rugged.  Get the deepest one you can afford so you can store your eyepieces upright.  The dimensions can be misleading because they usually refer to outside rather than inside dimensions.  Subtract at least 1/2" (13mm) from the depth to get the inside depth.  Check your local discount big box retailers and Amazon to see what they carry before ordering from China directly.  I picked up mine from Fry's and Sam's Club here.

It's not as good as the near perfect 30mm UFF, but it is as good as it gets for eyeglass wearers at this focal length in 1.25" eyepieces.  I've measured the AFOV at 63 degrees, the eAFOV at 66 degrees, the usable eye relief at 17mm, the field stop at 27.5mm with some vignetting, and weight at 12.2 ounces.  I've found the 22mm AT AF70, Redline, Olivon, and other 70 degree 2" eyepiece brands to be better across a slightly wider TFOV (30.9mm field stop), but it is 2" only.

Below is a comparison image of several of my eyepieces in the 24mm range taken through a field flattened f/6 72ED refractor.  It's clear the 24mm UFF is not perfect near the edges, but not bad by any means, either.

I've got both the Telrad and Rigel, and each has its place.  The Telrad rings go to 4 degrees instead of just 2 degrees for the Rigel, are thicker, have less parallax, and are easier find in the window.  The Rigel is much smaller, has pulsing circuitry built in, and runs off a lithium button cell instead of two AA batteries.  I prefer the Telrad on my Dobs and the Rigel on my fracs and Maks.  I rarely use finder scopes with anything other than the Maks.  Lately, I've been relying on green laser sights instead of either the Telrad or the Rigel to get on target.

They tend to get quite long, so most are permanently installed in observatories on piers.  F-ratio must increase as the objective gets larger with a constant design type to maintain the same level of color correction.  This makes the length grow faster than the aperture.  This is why ED glass and triplets have become popular.  It allows for shorter f-ratios and thus shorter tubes while maintaining good color correction.

There are also Kick Me Not's for tripod legs.

Basic questions:

1. How much weight are you comfortable lifting and for what distance?
2. Will you be observing from home or taking it somewhere?
3. If traveling with it regularly, do you have a car or SUV?
4. Are you willing to learn the skies and find things mostly on your own or would you prefer letting a computer do most of the work for you?
5. Are you opposed to manual tracking or do find occasional nudging to not be a big deal?
6. How much storage space at home do you have?

6 minutes ago, AstroNebulee said:

OK maybe I should of phrased it better I guess. My apologies 

No problem, I'm just a bit dense.  We got it straightened out.  The OP can indeed screw it straight on the visual back without any other adapters, saving him some money in his tight budget.  Good catch!

I would start with an 8mm BST Starguider for less than half the price of the Pentax XF unless you're trying to tease out low contrast details, at which the XF excels.  Both have about a 60 degree AFOV.  I have all but the 3.2mm Starguider, and the 8mm is probably the best of the bunch.

There is no such thing as an 8mm Vixen SLV.  There's a 6mm and a 9mm.  There used to be a 7mm Vixen LV, but it was not carried over to the NLV or SLV lines.  I have the 9mm Vixen LV, and while it is Pentax XL level optical quality, it views a bit darkly.  Otherwise, it's a great eyepiece if you need long eye relief and can live with a 50 degree AFOV.  Focal lengths below 9mm are all 45 degree AFOV, so be aware of that.  The advertised specs are wrong.

Again, the Vixen SLVs are more than twice the cost of the Starguiders, at least in the US.  If you can find a used LV for under $70, they're worth it in my opinion.

10 minutes ago, AstroNebulee said:

This is my dslr connected to the back of my skymax 127 as John says which I forgot to add has a sct thread on it. 

 

 

Okay, I see what you've done.  I checked my old 1.25" visual back, and it is indeed T-2 male threaded.  I'd never noticed them.  However, that's not same as attaching "straight onto the back of the scope" which would mean without the visual back.  More exactly, you meant "straight onto the visual back of the scope".  That's what threw me.

All this presumes you get the Skymax version with the 1.25" visual back.  My daughter's 127 Mak came with the 2" visual back and obviously has no T-2 male threads.

1 hour ago, AstroNebulee said:

You can screw the t adapter for your Canon straight onto the back of the scope and then attach your dslr as this is what I do. A batinov mask would be handy for focusing. I just use an old lif with hole in it pushed onto the original focuser and works perfectly. 

How is that possible?  The Synta Maks use an M44.5 x 1.0 thread while T-2 adapters use an M42 x 0.75 thread.  I was unable to locate such an adapter.  To my knowledge, you'd need to get the Mak to SCT thread adapter and then add an SCT to T2 thread reducer adapter to that.

Even at that, the DSLR may be a bit large that close to the back.  It may tend to hit the focus knob.