Louis D

I'm assuming it's the mount that can't hold the scope steady. That's why Dobs rule for stability compared to low-end GEMs. You can lightly hold onto the edge of the tube while observing to gently nudge it for tracking with very little vibration being transferred to the image. If it's the tripod not dampening the vibrations, trying adding vibration dampening pads under each foot.

I knew you knew, but I was trying to point this out to @thekwango in case it made a difference in choosing between the two sizes. I had forgotten that the extra inch(es) in radius of the tube also puts more of the light path perpendicular to the tube getting it to the focuser. The 8" might actually be shorter overall. The heavier mirror might also allow for the altitude bearing to be further back on the tube allowing for shorter base sides. Sounds like they need to work on finding a way to save some weight. Perhaps something lighter than particle board could have been used. I've seen lots of folks build their own solid wood bases, but even that won't save all that much weight. I've been looking at the ultralight 12" Dobs made of aluminum for this reason. Their main problem seems to be control of structure flexure.

Height-wise, 6" and 8" work out to the same length because the 6" is f/8 and the 8" is f/6. 6x8=8x6=48 inches in focal length of the optical tube. The main difference is in girth and overall weight (and price, of course). If a car can fit a 6", it most probably could also fit an 8". Of course, if you're camping, there isn't much room left over for gear in a small car. If you've got a van or large SUV as many of us have in the US, they can be swallowed up with ease in the back.

Plus one for the 127 Mak on an alt-az mount. That's the route many folks go for compact transportation in the trunk (boot) of a car. The problem is, being a more complex design than a Newtonian, it costs more. TANSTAAFL.

A used 8" classic Dob would work well for your needs and budget.

I'm up to six cases now. Hold onto that old case, you'll need it. I guarantee it.

Sorry @Alfian,I keep forgetting the exceedingly high tax rates in Europe to pay for the cradle to grave social services. Texas doesn't even have a state income tax like the vast majority of US states, nor do they impose sales tax on interstate/international sales into the state. I just filled up my car at $1.91/gallon yesterday. That's about £0.39/litre. All that taxation must really limit discretionary spending on hobbies like astronomy.

It must be something with European shippers. I had an eyepiece sent from Germany to the US, and the box looked even worse than the second photo. Multiple corners were crushed in. The retailer had only put air cushions around the eyepiece box, pushing it to one corner. Luckily, that corner escaped major damage. That, and the eyepiece was wrapped in factory bubble wrap inside its box. I've never had a US domestically shipped box destroyed like that. Either we use stronger boxes or handle them more carefully. Most US shippers won't honor their damage insurance unless they, or one of their licensed associates, does the boxing. Otherwise, they'll blame improper customer packaging every time. Even when you use their associates to pack it, you'll still have to fight them for compensation because they'll try to say it was fully depreciated in value to zero dollars. @Alfian Were the alternate offers from the US or mainland Europe? Britain is so small compared to the US, I can't imagine not driving halfway to meet a buyer. London to Liverpool is only 220 miles. That won't even get me out of Texas. For big ticket, heavy items, most Americans are willing to drive at least 200 miles to a halfway point. I drove 200 miles to pick up my used 15" Dob years ago and turned it into a nice daytrip. I've seen offers of 400 miles or meeting at the next big star party to finish the deal on really expensive items like AP scopes or 20"+ custom Dobs.

It depends if it is high density or low density. High density foam like that found in high end cases like Pelican can just be put back in place and will generally stay put due to friction and rigidity. Low density like that found in discount store cases can also be put back in place, but it tends to move about as eyepieces are pulled out and put back. Heck, low density foam tends to keep tearing along the perforation lines over time. I've had high density foam in a couple of 20 year old cases that has yet to crumble, so it's worth the investment.

No, definitely no plastic lenses in there. I do have a Galileo telescope kit that uses a singlet DCX lens for the objective and another for the eyepiece, IIRC. Pretty crappy views, but assembling the whole thing from cardboard tubes and washers was fun.

That's what I have my Z-team case for. I have Kellners, reverse Kellners, 70 degree Konig variants, Rini modified Plossls, etc. in it.

I have ES-92s stored vertically without problems in my old Doskocil XL case. It's equivalent to the Pelican 1600 case. The problem becomes one of extreme weight with so many 2+ pound eyepieces (including 30mm ES-82, 40mm Meade 5000 SWA, etc) in one case and having bad shoulders. I could store my eyepieces horizontally if I went to a long enough gun case like this guy did on CN:

No, it just means you need to get another eyepiece case. I recently added my sixth case. I had my A-team, B-team, Z-team, binoviewer, and Meade HD-60 cases already, but I needed somewhere to put some largish eyepieces I seldom use yet keep for comparison's sake.

Definitely share your experiences here when you get the 13mm in.

This was done in daylight at an astro shop side by side with Pentax XLs, both eyeguards set to the proper height for my eyeglasses. The XLs had zero blackout issues while I was continually chasing the classic kidney bean around the field of view of the Radians. I'm sure at night, except on the moon, it wouldn't have been an issue. I decided to go with the XLs because of the lack of kidney beaning and slightly wider field while still being just as sharp.

I passed on the Radians 20 years ago after trying them out and discovering they had massive SAEP (kidneybeaning). I haven't discovered any in the Meade HD-60 line.

I recall reading about a C11 user who got so frustrated with Crayford focuser sag and slippage that he switched to a Clement focuser instead. Don't discount your focuser's ability to counteract sag under heavy imager loads.

Comparing the Meade HD-60 9mm and 6.5mm to the 10mm Delos, 9mm Morpheus, 7mm Pentax XW, and 5.2mm Pentax XL, sharpness, edge correction at f/6 and stray light control were all pretty similar. The main edge the more premium eyepieces had was a slight improvement in contrast likely due to better polish leading to slightly less scatter. Today's step-up 60 degree eyepieces are very good in the sub-10mm range.

Yes, you probably need more spacing. The shorter the focal length, the greater the field curvature in a refractor. That flattener is optimized for a certain focal ratio range, but curvature mostly varies by focal length. I use a TS - 2'' Field Flattener - Universal Field Flattening Lens visually on my 72ED and have to space it out to about 127mm to get about the best correction for most of my eyepieces that focus at the shoulder. Their values suggest the following: • Achromatic refractor f/5: 100mm to 105mm • Refractor f/6.6: 103mm to 109mm • Refractor f/7.5: 105mm to 110mm For the very short 72ED, these values are no where near long enough. As a guess, I'd say to try adding 8mm additional spacing to start with. I'm basing this on your corrector doing the same work as mine in half the distance (55mm vs 110mm) and I needed to add about 17mm additional spacing.

The original Vixen LV line had a 7mm that got dropped with the NLV line. Their LVW line had an 8mm.

Pick up a used 8" or 10" Dob for a quick grab and go option. Sure, you'll have to manually track, but it's manageable.

The 10mm Delos is the only Delos I own. It is a terrific eyepiece. I'm thinking I might get the 6mm and 8mm Delos to slot in between my Pentax 5.2mm XL, 7mm XW, and 9mm Morpheus. Right now, my old Speers-Waler 5-8mm zoom covers those gaps.

Prime focus is generally located well above the most inward travel position of a focuser to allow various eyepieces to come to focus. The problem for the OP was that it wasn't at least 55mm, the required distance for a T-mounted DSLR. That Raspberry Pi imager should have no problems coming to focus in that scope (or any other for that matter).

I swapped out my venerable 27mm Panoptic of 20 years for the 30mm APM UFF this summer. All good things must come to an end.

I've been using Heavens Above for years to time ISS passes and Iridium flares. It has lots of other event timings and observing tools.