Littleguy80

Finally saw this as a triple for the first time! Took 300x with the 4mm circle T Ortho to get it though. The close pair just looked like a fatter star previously. Very happy with that

Now seeing this for the first time. Good tip and great thread

If David doesn’t purchase for any reason then I’d be interested in one of these

Thanks Iain. Lots of food for thought there

I've been going over options for a travel setup that could be used for widefield and solar. I initially set a budget of around £1000 which would get me a nice ED80. The more I've thought about, the less I think this will be used in practice. I've enjoyed views through a 3" Tak at my local dark site but always returned happily to my dob feeling like I was getting the better views. What led me back to this finder, is that it's something I can use with my dob so it will get plenty of use. It'll work for solar. Would a Lunt Herschel Wedge be overkill for this? With a simple mount and photographic tripod, it'll give me a travel setup. I often wish that I'd had something more than my 10x50s when travelling. The things I'd really like to get from this are: Viewing the Veil in a single FOV. Getting detail isn't important as that's what I have the dob for. If I stick an OIII on do you think this is possible or am I asking too much? This will be my first solar setup but I'm really keen to catch the Mercury transit in November (Please stay away clouds!!!) A budget travel setup that will get me into the 100x mag region for those occasions that the dob won't fit into the car/suitcase Any thoughts or suggestions greatly appreciated.

Hi Mark. I was thinking about this finder again. How do feel about it after a few months use? Is it good for widefield? Would it make an effective travel scope?

I recently observed my first Quasar, 3C 273.0, which is in Virgo. It's listed as being 2 billion lights years from Earth. A phenomenal distance and a pretty impressive distance record. SkySafari lists it at mag 12.85 which is achievable in a great many scopes. After reporting on this success, Stephan @Nyctimene, made the excellent suggestion of trying for the Quasar PG 1634+706. This Quasar is in Draco and is a mind bending 8.6 billion light years away. Any light that reaches your eye from this target will have been travelling for more than half the known lifetime of the universe! Last night, I had my first attempt at viewing this target from home. My skies are around 19.5 SQM. I was using my 10" dob and after some experimenting, settled on my Lunt XWA 9mm paired with the Baader VIP barlow, giving 267x magnification, a 0.4 degree TFOV and just under 1mm exit pupil. There are two mag 8 stars near by and I used these are my jump off point. My process was to begin by identifying the stars that were visible in the eyepiece in SkySafari. Initially, I picked up a mag 11 and then a mag 12 star. I was then able to form a triangle with a mag 13 that is very close to the Quasar. I started picking up a mag 14 star intermittently with adverted vision. The Quasar is mag 14.6 and seemed to be within reach. However, despite a couple of possible sightings, I eventually had to admit defeat on this occasion. I intend to return to this target from my local dark site which has an SQM reading of over 21. This should bring the Quasar into range, I hope! I intend to update this thread with my future attempts to view this object. I hope others will also share their attempts and successes. I've also included a SkySafari observing list of Quasars that I've created which includes both 3C273.0 and PG 1634+706. Happy hunting! Quasars.skylist The image below is from the Interstellarum Deep Sky Guide. I've marked the 4 stars mentioned above with their magnitudes as recorded in SkySafari.

Thank you both. I broke down and ordered these at the beginning of the week so am no longer looking. A shame as it’s exactly what I was after too

Here’s a screenshot from the link, Mark.

Thanks Stephan. Looks like a good challenge and 8.6 billion lights years!!!!!

I think you’re absolutely right, John. The little differences will make certain filters lend themselves better to particular targets. So maybe the NBP has the edge on M42 but the Astronomik wins out on the Lagoon. Once you add in personal preference then it becomes even more difficult to separate the better filters. The answer with astronomical equipment always seems to end up being “give it a try”!

Thanks John. Very interesting comments. I have the Astronomik OIII, UHC and H-Beta which all served me well. I do tend to reach for the OIII over the UHC but that’s probably doing the UHC a disservice. When I had the 1.25” version with my old scope it gave the best views of the Lagoon nebula. I also have an original Lumicon OIII which is noticeably darker than the Astronomik OIII but does seem to draw out the fainter detail better than the Astronomik. I originally thought the Lumicon would replace the Astronomik but overall I think they both deserve a place in my eyepiece case.

Thanks Gavin. That was a surprisingly easy answer. Sounds like an odd effect with the red stars.

I have an Astronomik UHC filter which is excellent. However, I find myself considering giving a DGM NBP filter a go based on the number of positive comments I've seen on this filter. People seem to most commonly reference the views of M42 with it. I'd be interested if anyone has ever tried these filters side by side? Any thoughts or experiences appreciated

Thank you, David. The Deep Sky Guide is excellent. It's the book that I refer to most often at the moment. SkySafari is superb when used at the eyepiece. I have my phone set to low brightness and use a setting to make everything display red. Really useful to be able to set it to display the FOV of the scope/eyepiece combination you're using at that point in time.