Icesheet

I would call it having a grumble (albeit laced with sarcasm) rather than having a go. It’s ok to have a grumble, even a go if the situation merits it. The average consumer hardly ever has the full picture at their disposal and in Mr niall’s defence I don’t think he may have seen FLO’s post regarding the rises. It was probably one price one day and another the next. I’m sure we’ve all experienced frustration at sudden price rises. You even voiced it yourself in your position as a retailer. In the absence of any further information it’s only natural that those frustrations are directed to the next in the chain (consumer > retailer > manufacturer). Whilst we all appreciate FLO sponsor this site and play a huge part in what I consider the best astro community on the net, I don’t think it’s healthy to suggest any negative opinion of FLO should be suppressed based purely on that fact (and I’m sure FLO agree). FWIW I think FLO’s business model is spot on and highlights their place as the UK’s no.1 retailer. A strong loyal following supported by their 1st class customer service and interactions on this site. Coupled with a pricing regime that keeps the regulars coming back whilst also attracting those ‘one off’ buyers that must make or break a business in this niche market.

You could always leave the stacking to run overnight then it’s ready for you whenever. Sounds like you’ve made your mind up to upgrade though and it wouldn’t be a bad investment anyway.

I think you’re on the right track with what you are looking at. I’m not familiar with the EQ5 or EQM35 but either should do the job for the 72ED. I think I’d plump for the EQM35 if you pushed me since it seems to be a modular mount and very portable. If you really wanted to future proof yourself and could stretch the budget a bit, then the HEQ5 or iOptron CEM25p would be ideal. By the way, the link you sent for the flattener is actually an adapter for the flattener. The actual flattener is: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/pro-series/skywatcher-85x-reducerflattener-for-evostar-72ed-pro.html That might impact on your budget a bit. If it does give priority to the mount. If you already have a DSLR and lenses use them then buy a telescope later 👍🏻

That was my first year out of school and I had just signed a professional contract with my local football club. I remember being fixated by it while the others continued to train after a quick glance. I think my head has been stuck in the clouds since then. It’s no wonder I never really made it as a footballer 😂

This looks brilliant! Thanks for sharing, I have registered 😊

I don’t use PixInsight but I’m surprised it’s taking you that long. Despite it being an older processor it’s not exactly a slouch and you have a more than decent amount of memory. The graphics card doesn’t sound bad either. I used to process with a lot worse specs than that and it didn’t take that long (DSS and PS) How many subs are you stacking and is there anything else running in the background? Anyway if you are going to upgrade check how the software handles the number of cores/ threads. For example Photoshop does not necessarily benefit from hyper-threading. For most processes it’s the clock speed of the CPU that is most important and not necessarily the amount of physical cores or the ability to hyper thread. Not sure if that is how PixInsight handles things but best make sure whatever upgrade you are making is the best for what you will be using it for.

It’s no criticism of iOptron and it certainly seems like they know what they are doing. The CEM design and performance in particular appears to be leading the way in mounts at their price point. However, particularly with this model it seems the differences are not that significant. At least not significant enough to merit a whole new model. Ironically one of them would be beneficial to me so please carry on as you are iOptron 😉 It will be interesting to see if we see a GEM30 in the future too. Looking forward to the official announcement.

Yes, iOptron confirmed this was in the pipeline to me last month. An iEQ45pro replacement. I don’t quite understand why they have a GEM line and CEM line that have many similar features and therefore compete with each other. The specs I was given were pretty similar to CEM40 but with some manufacturing differences and of course the extra 5lb payload.

What about these from FLO? That’s the cost including delivery to a random address in Israel. Trusted manufacturer with 30 year warranty and they generally seem to have good reviews. Just for your information when you buy from European retailers you will get VAT removed from both the purchase cost and delivery cost. I’m not sure what the import rules in Israel are but you would have to deal with ordering from AliExpress anyway Surely there are some binocular retailers in Israel?

I think you have to trust that these have an ED element and I agree with what @Stub Mandrel is saying. However, I do believe they could have given you a bit more info on them without revealing anything that might compromise their product design or whatever they feel they need to protect. Is it possible to order both and return the ones you don’t want? If not I would just bite the bullet and get the APM’s as you seem more confident in their quality. Also, you might want to check the Bird Forum to see if there are any reviews there. That’s my go to place for anything binocular.

Thanks, will do 👍🏻

Well they specifically state they are using ED glass so I can’t see it being a ‘HD’ marketing ploy. I note the APM ones state the type of ED glass they are using while TS don’t. I would imagine TS are using a lower quality ED glass. It's not just about the glass in the objective though. It looks like the APM have a higher quality body and are probably using better quality eye pieces and coatings. The tripod adapter is included with the APM too. Whether all this merits the extra cost I’m not sure. Why not fire off an email to TS. They’re usually quite helpful.

Hi @FLO, Any news on the iOptron delivery? Do you expect to have any CEM40's amongst it??

I've looked through these and I agree with your assessment. Very pleasing view. I was actually close to buying them before I found a second hand Swarovision 8.5x42. Zeiss (and the other top bino manufacturers) have excellent warranty coverage and they have on more than one occasion been known to repair accidental damage as a warranty repair. Even when they don't the price of repair is usually quite reasonable. If the deal could still be done you might want to fire off an email to Zeiss and ask what they think?

Sorry, I’m not trying to put doubt in your mind here! I guess there is no harm in double checking before you invest more. I can completely sympathise with this. I recently set out with a modest budget for binos for my holiday and now I’m sitting here with Swarovison 8.5x42 and Zeiss Victory 8x25 (and that’s after getting rid of Pentax ZD 10x50 ED!) Don’t get me wrong I appreciate the optical excellence but did I really need them?? I am now also looking at birds and nature, something I thought I would never do! Seems like we are in the boat here 😊 I would be interested to hear any further thoughts you have following tests 👍🏻

I've not tried any IS binos but have seriously being considering them as people seem to swear by them, particularly for astronomy. Are you sure you could hold the Optricron's steady for long viewing sessions? Any way you could test them side by side with the Canon? The only reason I ask is that I seem to be able to hold my binoculars steady during the day but at night my view can quickly disintegrate into a sea of smeared light trails! I'm not sure if the brain makes corrections with objects during the day but loses it's bearings at night with all the tiny light sources?

If your pupils dilate to 6mm then all else being equal the 56's should appear brighter and be able to resolve more detail than the 42's but you would be as well going for an 8x50 as the 6.25mm exit pupil of that would deliver the same amount of light to your eyes as the 8x56. Think of it like stopping down your camera, it's the same principle. Bak 7 v Bak 4 would not alter the field of view but it would likely affect image quality towards the edge of the field of view and generally the glass used in Bak7 prisms is of lesser quality than a corresponding Bak4. Most people can hold 1kg but it's holding them for long periods and how this affects your viewing pleasure that is the concern but if you're sure it's not an issue for you then it certainly gives you more options. I hear the 'porro is better than a roof for astronomy' a lot and I think it's misleading. An optically equivalent porro would be no better than a roof for astronomy (although some people prefer the 3D effect porro's give you). What a porro generally does give you is better value for money as a roof is a more complicated design. That coupled with the design limitations and cost of larger aperture roof binos is more likely the reason porros are more prevalent for astronomy use. All that being said as long as you enjoy them and use them all of the above doesn't really matter!

I haven't used either of those but based on your intended use I'd go for the Hawke's. +1 on what Paz says here. The Celestron weigh over 1kg compared to 650g of the Hawke. They will likely be significantly bulkier and coupled with the weight will probably make them uncomfortable to use hand held for long periods and if you can't take advantage of the larger exit pupil then you lose any further benefit the larger aperture of the Celestron will bring. Also, the Hawke has a FOV of 7.3 deg while the Celestron only has 6.2. That's going to put a whole load more sky in front of you. Even worth the loss in aperture for me, especially since you already have the 20x80's. If you plan to use them during the day the Hawke also have significantly closer focus. I have two pairs of roof prism, an 8x25 and 8.5x42 and neither of those exhibit the spikes others have referred to here., although they are more expensive. I see FLO have them on deal at the moment https://www.firstlightoptics.com/offers/offer_hawke-endurance-42mm-ed-binoculars_125512.html They also got good reviews from in the best binocular website: https://www.bestbinocularsreviews.com/HawkeEnduranceED8x42-172.htm Good luck with your choice

Thanks folks. I’ll fire off an email to teleskop express then 👍🏻

I have just acquired a UNI tripod and I'm wondering if anyone here has mounted any of the following on it: EQ6-R , CEM60, CEM40 or iEQ45. I guess if it can handle the EQ6-R it will handle the others but just curious to hear about stability with total payloads up to 30kg. It's rated to 50-55kg so I wouldn't want to put much more on. Also, any info about mounting plates would be helpful. I tried to contact Berlebach and they are on holiday until Aug 5th! Lucky them

Ok, good luck! I’m sure the Hawke will be a good buy 👍🏻

Have you used compacts before and are aware of the advantages and disadvantages compared to full size binos? I have handled a few a pairs of compact/ pocket binos recently. Zeiss Terra 8x25, Swarovski CL 8x25, Zeiss Victory 8x25 and an old pair of Nikon 7x20. The optical performance of both Zeiss and the Swarovski were outstanding for their form factor and matched full size 8x32 and 8x42 for day time use. What I found is that what you gain in size and weight, you can lose in ergonomics. I would be particularly concerned with 8x compact bino on a boat. Anyway, I’m not sure what your budget is but if you can stretch to £250 then the Zeiss Terra 8x25 are great! Also, read the bird forum those guys know their stuff when it comes to binoculars!

Hi, If you look around the forum you will see a lot of people produce spectacular images with unmodded cameras so my first instinct is that it’s less to do with the camera and more to do with something else. What that something else may be is hard to say without seeing any of your images. Right now I feel chasing better image quality by modding or going OSC CCD/ CMOS this early will likely frustrate you further and waste a lot of money in the process! If you have decided you ultimately want to shoot mono then my advice would be stick to your 60D at the moment. Post images, get feedback and when you know you’ve reached the limit of what your camera can give you make the jump to Mono CMOS/ CCD. Chris

This is exactly what I’m getting at but as hard as it is to properly compare on paper due to the variables it will be just as hard to compare the results in final images due to the same factors. Unless someone does numerous side by side tests with exactly the same equipment. Perhaps beyond it all is what @ollypenrice and others have said previously, we’re probably going to be seeing limited anyway. FWIW, in my opinion, at shorter focal lengths (<1000mm) and a typical image scale of >1.5”/px I don’t think you’d notice the difference between the two mounts. Longer focal lengths and smaller image scale is where you might see the benefit from the CEM60 (on nights where seeing permits). Thanks! Interesting read.

Your rule of half seems to be consistent with what I’ve read and what the theory above suggests actually. I’ll be honest I hadn’t really thought about all this until I started considering this mount (and possible scope) upgrade. I’m glad I did though as I now feel I’m in a better position to chose a suitable set up based on my likely sky conditions. Im curious to know why binning on CMOS sensors with small pixels would not be beneficial?