Louis D

For planets, there's no substitute for aperture because aperture determines theoretical maximum resolution.  Even the finest 6" APO is put to shame by a similarly priced C14 EdgeHD when imaging Jupiter under ideal conditions.

I prefer Stellarium on a tablet or a 3-in-1 laptop when assessing what to search for on a given night.  If I'm having issues identifying an object like Neptune or Uranus, I'll zoom way in with Stellarium and bring it outdoors to look at the adjacent star patterns to figure out what is a star and what is a planet (or planetary nebula) in the eyepiece view.  Since it's free, it's great for beginners on a budget.

Essential accessories for a Newtonian of any sort would include basic collimation tools such as a collimation cap like a Rigel A-Line and a sight tube with crosshairs.  That, and reading online collimation guides like Astro-Baby's.

Other accessories would include eyepieces for low, mid, and high power views to start with.  I generally recommend a 2" eyepiece between 30mm and 40mm for finding the general vicinity of objects or observing large objects, a 12mm to 17mm eyepiece for most objects at mid-power, and a 5mm to 7mm eyepiece for high-power views of small objects.

I'd hold off on filters because they're mostly useful for viewing nebula in light polluted skies.  Start by observing the moon, the planets, and the brighter showpiece objects such many of the Messier catalog objects and a few he missed.  Some object categories like nebula and galaxies are nowhere near as visible from most populated areas as they were 200+ years ago when he put his list together, so temper your expectations accordingly.

An observing chair or stool is handy for comfortable viewing with Dobs.  Many folks on here recommend using water butt stands to jack-up Dobs a bit off the ground.

A unit power finder such as a Telrad or Rigel QuikFinder is handy for putting the scope on targets and for star hopping.

20 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

Had to google those. 🙂 

My grown kids clued me into FOMO last month.  I'd never heard of it, either.  Apparently, my daughter's future father-in-law has FOMO in a bad way and often goes to concerts and other events in case the performer never tours again or gives the performance of a lifetime that night.

4 hours ago, johninderby said:

There is no equivelent to chapter 11 in Europe. Declaring bankruptcy here means you are going out of business unless someone buys the company and puts money into it.

The closest thing in the UK is going into administration which means someone else such as an accounting firm takes over your business and looks for a buyer but will wind it up if no buyer is found.

Haven't some too big to fail companies been nationalized in Europe rather than let them go under?  I think they are sometimes re-privatised once they get on their feet again?

1 hour ago, JamesF said:

Most things are replaceable.  Time is not.  I do try to use mine to the fullest of my ability

James

YOLO and FOMO come to mind.

27 minutes ago, Owmuchonomy said:

Whilst I do sympathise with this philosophy, a year of doing outreach with groups that include children reveals that GoTo is worth its weight in gold.  One formula that works is to have a pair of binoculars on hand and that provides some celestial sphere navigation experience whilst the (GoTo) scope eyepiece is occupied.  I would steer clear of the EQ solution because it is not intuitive so the 200P choice is a sound one in that respect. Enjoy.

But working with the same two kids each outing would not equate to a public outreach event's experience.  My oldest daughter quickly picked up how to track with the Dob as a grade-schooler.  My wife, on the other hand, has no desire to touch a telescope, but still enjoys a peek at solar system objects occasionally, so I have to constantly recenter the object for her.  My other two children never showed the slightest interest in astronomy, so I have no idea if they could track with a Dob.

One thing I've noticed with tracking is that the view is more static.  Without tracking, you realize just how fast the Earth is spinning under your feet making the view more dynamic and interactive.

15 hours ago, johninderby said:

Not good news but not terminal.

In the US chapter 11 Bankruptcy protection is often used by bigger companies carrying out reorganization or restructuring. Doesn’t mean the company is going out of business though as companies can carry on trading while they make changes. Gives them protection from creditors while changes are made and can stop a hostile takeover.

In this case it’s more about protecting themselves from a court judgement in an anti-trust case.

A lot different to bankruptcy in Europe.

Correct.  Bankruptcy rarely means going out of business in the US.  More often, it is used as a legal reorganization tactic to get out from under debts, union contracts, and court judgements.  I have no idea what the equivalent is called in Europe.

Ironically, had the Chinese manufacturers not bought US companies Meade and Celestron and had simply colluded overseas, they would have been outside the reach of US antitrust laws.

Dobs are also far more stable dollar for dollar at equivalent aperture than an EQ mount.  It takes a massive EQ mount to hold an 8" newt as rock solid as a Dob mount, for instance.  This translates to faster settling times after touching the scope to move it, focus it or simply from contacting the eyepiece when observing.

11 and 13 year olds should be able to take to controlling a Dob in short order, so I wouldn't worry about having to constantly jump in and adjust it.

I compared the Meade HD-60s to the Paradigms/Starguiders in this thread a while back.  Below is an image through each eyepieces (except for the 3.2mm BST for which I have no use) in an f/6 ED refractor.  I think the 12mm and 15mm are too closely spaced to recommend getting both.  I'd get the 8mm, 12mm, and 18mm if three was the target number.  If you wanted to add a fourth, I'd get the 25mm since it comes close to maxing out your true field of view in a 1.25" eyepiece.

Remember, if you buy 2 or 3, FLO gives you a 10% discount. For 4 to 6, a 15% discount.

The focal reducer will allow your existing eyepieces to provide wider true fields of view, so you can avoid buying 2" eyepieces and a 2" diagonal to achieve the same result.  However, you'll want to remove it for high power viewing rather than stacking a barlow behind it.

I created a DIY unit power OCS/GPC by combining a Meade 140 2x barlow nosepiece at the front of 40mm of spacer tubes (IIRC) and a GSO (or generic?) 0.5x focal reducer at the back end and then screwing it into the nosepiece of my Arcturus binoviewer.  I'll have to double check sometime, but I think there is some vignetting with widest field eyepieces and obviously some field curvature/distortion issues.  However, it reaches focus in my Dob's limited backfocus focuser.  It's startling to see with two eyes how much sky is visible, even if it's not perfect, compared to the 2x barlow nosepiece by itself which yields about 3x in the BV.  That's nine times as much area on the sky visible at once!

9 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

It's funny how we all differ regarding our preferences.  I had a terrible experience trying to observe with the monstrously recessed 30mm Tak LE and couldn't wait to get rid of it. I find recessed eyepieces very uncomfortable and having to keep my eye tight against the barrel, so as to see the full field, straining to say the least. I've not used the TV 32mm plossl, but find the Meade 32mm Japanese smoothy and other such designs like the 30 and 35mm Ultima's, Eudiascopics etc are an absolute joy to use. The eyepiece almost disappears as the star field appears suspended above the eye lens. Awesome!

I totally agree, but I also wear eyeglasses at the eyepiece when using all but the very highest powers because of very strong astigmatism in my observing eye; so I am a bit biased.  I can make the 32mm GSO Super Plossls work in binoviewers, but just with only 15mm of usable eye relief.  I cannot comfortably use my 26mm Sirius Plossls with only 11mm of usable eye relief.  However, the 23mm aspheric 62 degree eyepieces are super easy to use with 17mm of usable eye relief once the rubber eye cup is pulled off.  I so want a pair of those 32mm smoothie Meade Plossls.  All that beautiful glass right near the top.

Perhaps the manufacturers of recessed eye lens eyepieces could have had a screw off extension akin to the latest Morpheus eyepieces that could be removed by those seeking the maximum usable eye relief?

1 hour ago, joe aguiar said:

the celestron 76mm was my first one ordered so ill see how that mount or overall scope is for a new person.

I tried one out at a recent star party.  An advanced amateur had a couple of these setup for the kids to try out.  He'd picked them up from Goodwill for $20 apiece.  Being on a table intended for little kids, I couldn't get low enough to sight along the tube, so I shot from the hip, so to speak, and lined it up on Jupiter before it set.  In the dead center, you could just make out the Galilean moons and Jupiter's disk, but not much else thanks to the massive spherical aberration of the mirror.  Pointed at a star field, not much was visible because most stars were smeared out to imperceptible faint smudges.  It's no wonder they were donated.

35 minutes ago, johnturley said:

I have the cheaper Meade Series 4000 32mm Plossl, and this unlike my 26, 15, 12.4, and 9.7mm eyepieces, is one of the later 4 element made in  China versions, and I have never experienced this sort of problem. 

Having only recently seen this thread, I tried it out on the moon earlier this evening, and it was fine no problems.

John

 

That's because the eye lens is very recessed, effectively having a built-in extender:

Compare it to an original smoothie version from Japan which would have more in common with the Televue 32mm in question:

Are the TV 32mm Plossls easy to use with eyeglasses due to the long eye relief?  The GSO 32mm Super Plossl is just usable with eyeglasses despite having a recessed eye lens.

Here's a link to the patent description.  There's no assignee, so I'm not sure who is manufacturing it.  A good guess might be GSO since they're based in Taiwan.  However, the markings look different from their focusers.

The innovation appears to be the addition of hardened steel tracks for the bearings to ride against.  However, Starlight Instruments Feather Touch focusers use hardened steel rails for the bearings, just in a different location than these rails.  See US patent 6,069,754.

6 hours ago, Timebandit said:

 

 

 

 I myself am a sucker for a good old Ortho. Nothing like a good Ortho for planetary where fov is not a high priority. But clear sharp views are. A good Ortho I have a soft spot for, and so reasonable in price compared to some wide angle eyepieces available today.

 

 

 

 

Someday I'll have to see how orthos stack up against Pentax XW/XL, Delos, Morpheus, HD-60, and Starguiders at shorter focal lengths with an undriven Dob to see if the added sharpness is worth the loss of field.

2 hours ago, Second Time Around said:

I can't see the full field of view with the Nagler + Dioptrx. 

Yeah, it's tight on eye relief with eyeglasses.  You've got to push in with glasses to see the field stop.  I imagine the same with a Dioptrx would be true.

The 22mm Panoptic might be easier to use with Dioptrx given similar eye relief but smaller AFOV.

Here's a comparison review of the Vixen 2.1x42 Super Wide Constellation and Kasai Trading 2.3x40 Wide Field Binoculars.

3 hours ago, munirocks said:

Nice rulers. I'm from Iowa, too.

We can thank my dear, departed dad for making sure I left Iowa with plenty of yardsticks years ago.  Every once in a while, I come up with a good use for them.

Does anyone still give away yardsticks these days?  They were a staple handout at county fairs in the 70s and earlier.

So something along these lines would probably work for your husband:

On a refractor, it doesn't matter much which size you use so long as the front of the focuser tube doesn't have to be racked in so far that it starts to cut off part of the light cone.  Aside from using a binoviewer with a really long focuser tube, this usually is not an issue.

On catadioptric telescopes that focus by moving the mirror, the smaller ones are often designed to work best with the optical path length of a 1.25" diagonal, and moving the mirror to accommodate the additional path length of a 2" diagonal can add some minor spherical aberration in SCTs and possibly something similar in Maks.

It's alive!  This thread is alive!

Seriously though, what you have to watch out for is the working distance.  Most field flatteners have a working distance of 55mm like the one you referenced.  It would require an eyepiece holder that attaches to T-mount threads.  That, and you would need quite a bit of in-focus to make it all work.

Alternatively, you could try what I did with my AstroTech 72ED.  Buy a TSFLAT2, a 15mm SCT nosepiece, and a 2" GSO/Revelation dielectric diagonal.  Remove the original nosepiece from the diagonal, screw the SCT nosepiece into its place (it may not want to thread very far I've found, but it's still solid), and screw the TSFLAT2 into the SCT nosepiece's M48 threads.  You'll have a nearly perfectly flat field with your 72ED scope.

5 hours ago, Merlin66 said:

In my fifty years of astronomical experience I have never seen a proper amateur Serrurier Truss telescope. Never.

Truss designs are just that truss designs.

 

True, but there are plenty of commercially made Serrurier truss Ritchey Chretien telescopes in the price range of amateurs.

5 hours ago, F15Rules said:

This eyepiece is also an excellent performer, not far behind the Vixen IMO👍☺.

Dave

Apparently, the 24mm ES-68 and Meade 5000 SWA both work with Dioptrx and have just enough eye relief to make it work.

With double sided tape on a 34mm Meade 5000 SWA:

Well, there's the 24mm APM UFF with an m43 eye cup flange.  It's a bit shorter than the Televue flange, but perhaps it would be enough for the Dioptrx to grab onto:

You can see the AFOV image in my post above.  I'm sure it would perform better than the 24mm Hyperion at f/6 (the f-ratio of the scope used to take those images).  I measured it as having 17mm of usable eye relief, so if you can get the Dioptrx attached, it should be easily usable with it.  I measured a 27.5mm effective field stop on mine.