Louis D

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.

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: How much weight are you comfortable lifting and for what distance? Will you be observing from home or taking it somewhere? If traveling with it regularly, do you have a car or SUV? 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? Are you opposed to manual tracking or do find occasional nudging to not be a big deal? How much storage space at home do you have?

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.

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.

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.

I would get a 50mm RACI finder and a 2 or 3 to 1 finder bracket so you can continue to use the RDF as well. At 1500mm and using 1.25" eyepieces, I find the FOV is insanely narrow. In my experience, the finder often gives a more pleasing view of the context of small objects seen in the main tube. If you mount the RACI finder in the lowest position foot (left-most for this mount), it balances better on the mount as well by putting it more in line with the altitude axis. Keep the RDF in the farthest right (top-most) foot to keep it from interfering with your use of the RACI. In the future, you may want to upgrade to 2" accessories with a Mak to SCT thread adapter for the rear port, a 2" visual back, a 2" diagonal, and, of course, 2" eyepieces. Sure there is vignetting to the tune of about 40% light falloff at the edges, but the wider views with the same scope are so worth it. The below images taken through my 127 Mak give an idea of just how much the view widens going from a widest field 1.25" eyepiece to a widest field 2" eyepiece as well as the level of vignetting:

Yes, sorry it didn't work out for you. However, I don't get on well with the BHZ because even with the eye cup removed I can't take in the entire field of view with eyeglasses which is not the case for the Celestron Regal with its eye cup removed. I guess the non-parfocalness never bother me since it is no where near as bad as the Speers-Waler 5-8mm varifocal zoom. Since I rarely use filters, the lack of threads is a complete non-issue for me. When I do want to use them, I just use a fixed focal length eyepiece for monoviewing or screw them into the nose piece of the binoviewer to avoid buying two. I'm pretty sure the upper thread is 37mm. There are generic 43mm to 37mm step down rings that could be added to adapt it to Dioptrx.

Vignetting? When you say dark ring around the center, how far out percentage wise does it extend? I guess what I'm asking is it more of donut of darkness with brighter images inside and around it or does the darkening extend all the way to the field stop.

I use a pair of them 3x Barlowed in my binoviewers to good effect. With the eye cup pulled off, there's enough room for eyeglasses. Since the top is an engineered plastic, there's little risk of scratching eyeglasses on it. Even at f/6 in my AT72ED field flattened refractor, the images are pretty decent and should meet your criterion of sharp in the middle and softer at the edges. Just don't try to ever clean the eye lens because it is a fairly soft plastic and is prone to damage. As such, always wear eyeglasses when using it and you'll be fine. Here's a comparison of it with other eyepieces in that focal length range from my collection taken with a cell phone camera through the eyepiece:

I think they're sold out of the 300 piece limited edition production run pretty much everywhere. So, unless you can score a used one, I don't think so.

Upgrade to either a decent zoom or some Starguiders or Paradigms (depending on where you buy them from). The 5mm, 8mm, and 12mm would be my choices of that line.

I can't Imagine enforcing those new old stock laws on ebay where people pick up new old stock from store foreclosures and estate sales. Who knows how much a 45 year old, unused socket wrench set originally sold for in the 1970s.

Very! 😁

Watch out for the pitfall of getting a scope that takes a fair bit of setup. I find I use scopes that can be hauled out in one go more than scopes that require several trips and some assembly outdoors. I've read of others as well who use scopes less that require more assembly. If you can carry a fully assembled C8 SE out the door in one trip, more power to you. I find it too awkward and top heavy to do that.

Looks less like a living room and more like a mud room/entry foyer. Our living room has oodles of stuffed furniture, television, gas logs in the fireplace, etc. It doubles as a home theater. Different floor plan entirely.

Using a 14mm Pentax XL which focuses at the shoulder as near as I can tell, I get 2.4x natively for the Meade 140 2x Barlow, 1.6x with the nosepiece screwed into the filter threads, and 3.0x with the nosepiece screwed into an Arcturus binoviewer's nosepiece. I've never tried it screwed into my WO 1.25" diagonal alone, so no measurement there. I did manage to get 1.0x using the nosepiece spaced 45mm ahead of a 0.5x focal reducer which was then screwed into the front of the binoviewer. That leads to field curvature, but a nice wide field of view.

Why? Last I checked we don't live in a state run economy.

Try resolving M13 or M22 to the core with each. I find there's no substitute for aperture for globs.