JOC

Maybe I can try to find that too. I don't know what other kit you've got, but if you can find it using purely visual astonomy with a 17.5mm I must have a combination with my 8" F6 that will provide similar 'magnification'. I've also just found a zoom in on the ESA Hubble pages that show where it is. I had heard it was part of Orion, but assumed that it was within the same nebula area as the trapezium, the ESA website shows that it is actually closer to the left hand belt star than that.

The darkest place I've been recently was a camp site in the middle of the Kent coastal marshes last year. The nights were as clear as a bell, the stars in quantities I'd not seen for many years and as I had not been there previously I didn't take a scope with me. However, just to drink in the whole atmosphere the old Mark 1 eyeballs did stirling service and I didn't even deploy my birding binoculars. I don't know if counted as 'astronomy' but I spent many trips back from the wash-block late at night just stopping and looking in awe at was was up there.

LOL! Yes and Yes and I'm half adequate up a ladder 🤣

Not yet, the shed is still in its box in the tool shed. Though I have been giving it serious thought as a project whilst we are all locked up - the problem for projects like that is getting hold of the concrete for the flooring at the moment. I'm the same with my fencing - I've used the last bale and can't get any more. I've also not worked out where it can go yet. Its a square plot, with the house right in the middle and garden around all four sides. With the scope mobile I can move it to where the stars are, deciding on a fixed location for the observing shed is more difficult esp. as I can't put it where I often put the scope as this is on the car driveway!

I guess a hood might help if I was settled down for a good spell at a single target, but I still tend to charge around like a bull in a china shop chopping and changing and every time I get up the stray lights nearby probably ruin any dark adaptation that I have achieved.

I find I don't tend to use the rubber eyecups on any of my EP's - in fact it has only been recently when experimenting with some of the cheaper ones that I even discovered they had a pop up or rotating rubber eyecup. Perhaps its because I wear spectacles to observe - I think this is also the main reason I find short eye relief difficult to use too. With a rubber eyecup I would probably not rest my spectacle lens on it as you might your eye if you did not wear them. Consequently I just tend to hover the spectacle glass just above what I am viewing through and even with a rubber eyecup I would still be above it which might then be too high. I'm the same with binoculars and again don't use the eye cups.

I've yet to try the 17.5mm it only came this morning, but I found the 14mm to be very good. Like the Pentax XW5mm I found the M4.5mm to be almost OTT in terms of working with my setup and UK atmospherics - I did hope it might be solution to teasing out the E and F in the trapezium, but I think that will call for better weather than I've tried it in. I found that despite the same wide field of view it was still difficult to look through - though perhaps not as much as the Pentax. For more regular 'close up' things the 6.5mm seems to be the right choice - that's a doddle to use and I have high hopes of using it as a planet watcher when the two king planets come round in the summer. The 9 and the 12.5 will probably service for galaxies and nebulas of various sizes, but I haven't played with them much yet.

So probably as many folks have done I've coverted a full set of eye-pieces. I've seen those beautiful and extortionantly priced boxes of green and black that many own and wished for similar, but I could never justify that amount of expense for what little observing I actually get to do. However, from the eclectic assortment of cheaper EP's that I accumulated from SGL classifieds I realised I much preferred an EP with plenty of eye relief and a wider field of view. I then got a chance on the SGL classifeds board to buy a Baader Morpheus 14mm at a good price. What a difference - this really seemed to be a great thing and on the moon it was terrific. I wanted more - the trouble was they were mostly upwards of £190 a pop sometimes clearing the £200 mark depending on the seller - I couldn't afford them. Then a second one popped up on SGL classifieds (I forget which now) - sod it, it was around the same price as the first one - ouch went the bank balance, and again and again and again! Of course the more I got the more I wanted to complete the collection and thanks to SGL classifeds I am finally there - it took a while, but I now own the whole collection for a fraction of what I could have got them for new. Bro had a really nice old metal flight case, so I've sprung for pluckable foam and here is my 'best' collection of EP's - it rather ruins the look to add the Pentax XW 5mm, but I know that's also rather nice glass so it does belong there I think. The only thing is the Morpheus stops at 17.5mm and that rather misses on the wider field views of the sky, but for the sake of my bank balance that's probably a good thing and I have some lesser EP's that do serve in that capacity. I do think I am very lucky - it isn't a box of classic green and black, but I'm rather chuffed with it.

They re-ran Voyager - The haunting of deck 12 last night and that did refer to a loss of gravity on one deck with the result that a crewman bumped their head. So we have a visitor who is stuck here for C-19 lockdown - daughter's BF and he brought with him Prime subscription!! My son and myself are currently rationing ourselves and have got to episode 5 of Picard. I am a bit of a die-hard Star Trek fan, and really like Patrick Stewart as an actor so what am I making of it? Well so far it's been VERY slow. The story premise is OK, lets face it there was no way they were ever going to bring Data back full time, the guest appearances by Brent Spiner are nice, but it's a pity that he also looks old (and rather portly - to put it politely), when you might assume that an android would not alter. I am def. not overboard about Picard's wardrobe - I know the wardrobe depts often struggle with what we will end up wearing, but it's hardly futuristic even for an older man. I also don't like the notion of the holodeck office being a reproduction of the chateaus work area - it seems to me that was just so that a cheaper set could be used. The in-the-air computer holgraphic interface is slick, but it's a pity it had already been done by American crime fighting shows, Knight rider and even Stargate in places. Seven of Nine was nice to see (what a shame about Icheb) I hope she makes further appearances. Maddox is a nice touch. I just wish it would all start to gel. The flashbacks are too numerous and if you miss the screen shot you are liable to miss that it is a flashback which just confuses things. At the moment it just feels like a parade of special appearances by much loved characters - it would be great to see some interaction between them. Yes, time has passed, but it would be great to see more of the sparks of a less-broken Picard - at the moment these have been few and far between and it is a shame to see such a well loved character so old and broken. The look and feel of it set wise is on the hole fine, and it has promise, but it needs to pull the cat out of the bag soon. I shall stick with it in the hope of improvements - historically all Star Trek Series have been slow to get going as the actors get used to working together and I cannot believe that anything with Patrick Stewart in it won't get better especially as I note from the credits that he has some production control in it.

The bank balance is now safe from SGL classifieds my final 17.5mm Morpheus turned up today. Look out for the triumphant thread with my box shot in it!! 😄

Found that on my Stellarium NGC 869 and NGC 884 - that wasn't far from where were if I'd have know about it. I looked up the name on the SGL search and found the NGC numbers, I also found in the same search someone had imaged M81 and M82 - they seem up off the end of the plough in the rough vicinity of Polaris - so they ought to be doable too. The goto app on the phone likes the catalogue numbers rather than the names, but with these I'll find them next time.

We've got my daughter's BF with us for the duration and I'd been promising him a look through the telescope so last night I made the effort and we took the Dob out to play. I added the power so she'd track and remembered to put it outside an hour or two before I wanted it, then I actually remembered everything I wanted in one hit (which is little short of a miracle) - the dual finder setup, the focus adapter from 2" to 1.25" (though I guess with my Baader EP's this isn't strictly necessary as it just occurs to me in typing that they will seat in the 2" holder too) , the box of smart EP's, the cable from powerpack to mount, oh yes and an essential warm coat. I didn't really have a plan for what to look at, but thought that as it was so long since last viewing the old staples would be good cannon fodder. I started with Venus - that was exceptionally bright and at a sort of hemisphere state. I tried adding in the plastic baffle to the top of the Dob, but even then that was still on the bright side - I read somewhere tonight that a filter would have helped - that of course didn't occur to me, and I did have a polarising filter that I expect would have done the trick - always next time - 4.5mm was over the top and adding nothing to this subject, but the 6.5mm worked well. There was no moon whatsoever to look at, but we got M42 up good burst of nebulosity even with no filters. We had a go and finding E and F and I even just about got the trapezium going with the 4.5mm, but even our younger set of eyes could not pick out the two feint additions to the trapezium regulars. In order to show the sort of thing we were looking for I pulled up to Polaris and we easily split that and saw the less bright double next to it - again this was working best in the 6.5mm. Surprise was expressed that Polaris did not appear more prominent in the sky and I explained that unlike some other stars it stays still relative to our posiiton whilst the others don't and this is why it is useful for navigation. I also showed off Pleiades, but even with 14mm in we were still too close. In the finish I went back to the original SW 25mm that I find is best for callibrating with and that showed the wider star field much better. Then I asked if there was anything else he fancied looking at and he pointed to Sirius 'that twinkling star over there'. Despite the difficulty in viewing it, Sirius (the monster raving party star) is always good fun to see and last night it was doing the multicoloured twinkle thing for all it was worth - again its anothe bright object and the 6.5mm was best on it. I think like the Pentax XW 5mm the Morpheus 4.5mm will lend itself to specific objects, but the 6.5mm will be useful for lots of things. Anyhow after a couple of hours we were getting cold so knocked it on the head, but it was quite nice to have finally got out observing again and nice to share it with someone. I just wish that I could have thought of some more things to view - I guess that's where I should have done some quick homework before I went out. However, BF seemed happy with what he had seen and the lack of the moon did make the sky fair glisten with lots of stars.

Those are most def. stonking binoculars!

it might have been a spec of dust flaring on the camera

It looks like it might be half handy if you could get it up and going. It looks like it needs a finder scope, but if you haven't got an optical one to go in the rings you could pick up a cheap Red dot finder which would be just as useful and maybe remove the finder rings. That thread linked to above looks useful. Good luck with it.

This is my 8" Goto truss-tube SW 200P (the first of these of this size on this thread I think) doing outreach work as a solar viewer, except we didn't get the sun out that day apart from literally the 30s I took this photo!! so no filter present and it is actually looking at a distant aerial It has a modified focus wheel to help with fine focus (I can't justify the expense of a Lacerta) and is normally used with my favourite Y set up of finders and here is her solar filter

That might be the case during the daytime, but I wouldn't hold out the same hope at night when things tend be B&W 😉

Perhaps I can suggest that you wander outside the next time its reasonably clear with a pair of average every day binoculars and focus on the moon (even on one of those afternoons when he is out during the day (don't point a the sun though) and a few stars, maybe Pleiades, it should show crystal sharpness everywhere when in focus. If you can't achieve the same or better with your telescope on a dew free night then I am going to suggest that you might soon get frustrated and perhaps need a better telescope? Try clicking on my Avatar photo a couple of times and it should show you the photo it comes from which I took. You should be looking at getting the same sort of amount of sharpness visually through your scope and should be able to match it with binoculars (and that's not even a brilliant photo).

If those images posted on 31 Dec above, starting 'venus I think' are the best you are seeing then there is something wrong, either with the scope (possibly dew) or your process. What sort of telescope is it? I am sure that even a cheap and cheerful scope should do better than you are seeing. I have a small scope and it shows me things as crisp as my big telescope. Those images just look way off focus to me. You do mention that the kit was drenched by the time you had finished so I reckon you were swamped with dew which won't give you any pleasing images at all. You definitely should NOT be viewing all those concentric rings. People deliberately De-focus to get them in order to check their collimation, but then pull the focus to make things crisp spots of light which is what you should be seeing - it doesn't matter how you interpret those links if you are seeing those rings and can't get rid of them then something is wrong - either you have optics smoothered in dew, not in focus or a bit of both. When you are viewing things in focus the stars should be entirely crisp spots of light, Venus should be a bright spot with clear edge - it might be going through phases like the moon and the brightness might be a little off-putting, but the image should be a clearly defined circle or part circle - not the wobbly edged blob in your photo - OK it might be a photographic flaw, but if you saw it visually like that it wasn't being viewed properly, the moon should also resolve to entirely crisp edge that you could slice your fingers with - just like you see it with the naked eye only bigger. If you have sufficient magnification and a semi-useable scope the craters should also have sharp, crisp edges.

Just as an observation 😉 I thought that the Airy ring pattern arose when you had a perfectly COLLIMATED telescope and you DE-focussed the stars - the rings appearing concentric due to good collimation (the lining up of the mirrors in the scope's optical system) when the stars were deliberately NOT in focus. Sirius is often a bit wobbly and 'disco like' due to the amount of atmosphere that we see it through being low on the horizon (so I am not altogether sure that a paper like Sirius is always going to be relevant to other stars - it does have specific issues not shared with other targets), but most other stars should appear as the same pinpoints of light as you see with the naked eye when viewed with the telescope IF you ARE in focus. I am surprised you could not get the moon crisper than you did either. Maybe you were plagued with dew - I've seen airy discs appear on mine when the dew is about. All your pictures suggest to me a scope that was NOT in focus OR plagued with dew - I think you will find that you could improve on a different night.

Excellent news - glad you are underway. I do now feel somewhat mollified about pushing the point about leading zeros and location inputs into these things - sometimes, it seems, the experience of even someone with a Skywatcher scope can be helpful 😉 the thing is I made exactly the same error at one point by missing the leading zeros and it even put out my Skywatcher Goto LOL Def. a case of been there, seen that, got the T-shirt and washed it!!! The thing is in the dark a 6 can even look like a zero if you look at it quickly and all sorts of errors creep in. I think we all know that times will change from night to night and tend to update those, but we tend to rest on the fact that we think the lat and long will be correct from the night before and tend to pay less attention to that - or as least I know I did. Now you can find things take a look at the ring nebula and the blue snowball when they are next up there - quite amazing!

The only thing I got brand new was my telescope from FLO, mind you since then I've seen many instances where if I had waited I could have bought it for half what I paid and would have been happy to do so. However, at the time I got it when I wanted it and it was nice to have something new for a change - I am a big 2nd hand buyer. However, all my EP's etc. have come from SGL classifieds. I try not to look as these have relieved me of so much cash over the years. However, I am still looking as there is just one more EP that I want to get and I am still hopeful that one day it will come up 2nd hand, then after that I am promising myself I will look no longer and the bank account will be safe.

That's a stonking tripod - looks like a Mars lander!!

I must admit I've never tried that - I thought the standing advice with this sort of thing actually was to pick stars that weren't too close together and hence I've also always picked stars a long way from each other.

FWIW I hadn't even considered that computers would want to run 'headless'. However, with SGL help (Considerable, wonderful, amazing SGL help) I experimented with a R-Pi media server and learned just so much in the process - as well as getting a functioning system I ended up with a huge feeling of accomplishment. My headless R-Pi and attached media disk is attached to my network and thanks to dial-in software on my windows PC I can shift files onto and off of the media disk and log into the R-Pi itself to control it if I need to. Of course to set it up I needed to initially attach it to a mouse and keyboard, but once done it is happy to sit under in a cabinet serving my media files (in fact I'm listening to R-Pi Plex server music as I type via Alexa/Amazon Echo which also 'talks' to it). I now understand the theory of why you would want a headless system and the potential of what one could do. I suspect R-Pi is as far as I will ever go with the concept, but I would like to find something else that I could set up one to sort out as the whole process was totally fascinating. I suppose when you use one to control imaging things it gives you the ability to sit inside in the warm at a PC whilst logging into the headless system to see what it is up to and to control various commands that it can send to things or just leaving it to carry out a pre-programmed set of instructions from some software you've previously setup, i.e. open the shutter for 400 times and hold it open for 15 seconds on each occasion. With the benefit of hindsight - NOT! I was so concerned as to whether I could deal with this sort of thing and in fairness I wouldn't have touched it with a barge-pole without SGL encouragement, but the reality wasn't actually that difficult and I definitely think you should have a bash with one. If anything it showed me what you did with something like a R-Pi. Apart from knowing it was a small computer I had never managed to see what you did with a computer with no keyboard, mouse or monitor or why they were of any use to anyone. If I can manage to get my head around it (and actually have such a system up and running - Yay - go SGL help!) then I think anyone can. Oh, yes and apparently these mini R-Pi and similar win over leaving an old full size running because they take far less leccy to keep going.