Mr niall

Thanks, but I think spending more than my entire budget on a single eyepiece is perhaps not the way to go...

Hello there I've got enough money for 3 (more or less) BST starguider eyepieces to replace the stock affair I've been using. I've chosen these as they seem a reasonable mix of quality and value. Although I can't decide which three to go for. Obviously relying on just three eyepieces means I will need to extract maximum benefit from each one, so the 25mm is in. But then I'm struggling to decide on the other two. I'm a typical observer, bit of DSO, Bit of planetary. Although LP around here kind of kills the DSO hunting, fine on globs and clusters generally but Galaxies are harder work eg M51 is a smudge, Leo triplet is "suspected" even in the big dob. I was thinking either the 12 or the 15mm for one of them. The fov on the 15mm appeals more; but the exit pupil of the 12mm seems more suited for DSO hunting. However again - the 100x of the 15 seems like it may be a bit more forgiving for planetary work in poor conditions than the 125x of the 12. And then this choice obviously has a concomitant impact on the "high power" choice... the 3mm is out as it seems a bit overkill. Which leaves the 5 and 8mm. The 5mm with a 1.0mm exit pupil and 300x seems like the ideal planetary beast. But I'm wondering... how often am I likely to really use 300x in UK skies? Especially with the positioning of the planets over the next few years. The 8mm 188x seems a better allrounder. But then I'm worried I'll have nowhere to go on those really good nights when the planets deserve more. Additionally getting the 8mm kind of makes getting the 12mm too a bit daft as they're so close together (not daft in general, daft because I'm only getting three eyepieces in total; hopefully you know what I mean!); and I really haven't decided whether that's the right one. So I guess the choice is 25, 15, and 8mm or 25, 12 and 5mm. I do own an ok-ish quality 3x barlow, but I don't really like using a barlow for some reason (not sure why, just never seem to enjoy the view as much) Alternatively I have considered getting a Hyperion zoom but that would push the budget to the absolute max (and beyond really), and never having used one I am concerned about the perceptions surrounding performance around the 24mm end of the spectrum. Remember this will be my only eyepiece... although the fov issues are concerning I'm not sure how much of a concern they would be in reality, tempered by the fact that at 1500mm, despite the fact its F5 its still not a fast scope. Similarly I'm intrigued by the hyperflex 9-27mm which is interesting at £108 but this seems like a bit of an unknown entity. Also, I'm not tied to the BST's per se. Just want to make a sensible investment and don't want to get into a "mix and match" scenario. As always, many thanks all. (m45 below, hopefully everyone knows the relative size of that one!)

Sorry bit late to the party. Definitely the top one for me too. Just has that little more "punch", and that makes all the difference. Both absolute crackers btw.

Generally they're good for terrestrial but not so much for astronomy for two reasons: 1. The zoom makes them difficult to handle had-held at higher magnifications so you'd need to mount them anyway. 2. The field of view shrinks quite a lot at higher mags (as above) but I've read you get a weird "tunnel vision" effect which can be a bit nauseating.

as above, here it is.

Will be doing the same funnily enough with my 15x70's. I think I missed a trick though last year as I concentrated low in the south to try and bag M16-25 as I was in the south of France. Did spend a bit of time in Perseus and Cassiopeia which were nicely placed high to the North.

Very cool don’t see Saturn often

Fab image - I managed about 20 mins on it last night in between gaps in the clouds last night; couldn't even pick out the bands. Total waste of time.

I've got the one on the left of those two "cheap" EP's at the bottom. It is bad, trust me!

My mum asked me the same thing yesterday... that Brian Cox has a lot to answer for. But yeah, what they said!

As above I’d say, it’s a very faint smudge in my sky max 127.

Thanks I'm using a straightfinder instead already; that's what my post was about!

Yes.... Some good points but I think everyone has just reinforced the point I was trying to make; RACI finders - on their own - as supplied by the manufacturer - aren't actually used by anyone for their intended purpose. They are, at best, used to complement a Rigel / or Telrad. I'm a big fan of Telrad's and understand their place (I actually use a Telrad friendly version of the messier chart for finding messiers), but it seems to me that the point everyone is unanimous is either: "RACI finders work great... as long as you have something else to actually do the finding" or... "I never got one to work so I don't use it" So I wonder why SW ship them with packages as the only way of finding your way around the sky if they don't work?

Well... Having acquired a big dob I've had my first exposure to a relatively deluxe finder - the SW 8x50. But... as it is a right angled finder, I'm having a bit of a mare using it. I mean I have no idea how to point it in the right area of the sky! It seems quite difficult to get it in the right part of the sky and the field isn't so big that star hopping is particularly any easier either. Obviously for bright targets its not such an issue but for chasing the fainter stuff it seems nearly impossible; so much so that I've changed to a trusty 6x30 I had lying around as its a straight through design that makes like much easier, which feels a bit disappointing really. The obvious solution is to buy an accessory finder - like a Telrad or RDF or something, but I can't help but think if I forked out on a Telrad it would completely supercede the finder anyway and begs the question; if you have to buy another finder to make your original finder work... well... then whats the point of the original finder? Does anyone exclusively use a RA finder for finding their way around and, if so, do they have any tricks or tips on how to do it?

Honestly there is nothing easier to point and drive than a dob - at any magnification. I started off with a manual eq3 (no drives) for visual use and it very nearly put me off astronomy for life. As alluded to above, there isn't really a good all in one adaptable package for quick quality visual viewing and astrophotography, yes you can get a setup that does both) and your choice is in that ballpark so youre on the right lines - but you'll always be compromising with either and this is a frustrating hobby at the best of times! My advice wod be either A) decide on a focus (either visual or astrophotography) and buy for that or.. B)) Buy a setup that is visual orientated but does have some mild astrophotography potential - like an AZ gti or nexstar system. Or... C) Buy a visual only system on an altaz mount eg a dob or a refractor on an az5 or similar and then either buy a cheaper tracking mount at the same time or later - for example a star adventurer. While the above may seem counter intuitive what you will find is that astrophotography is very very expensive: if you get bitten by the bug then you will without doubt want to spend a fortune on equipment anyway. Or you may dabble and hate it and then you're lumbered with a mount for visual only use that isnt the best it could be. However, a good visual system never goes out of date whereas a budget all rounder may leave you frustrated. But that's just my thoughts! Edit _ I've got the 12" flex tube and it's 64cm across the bottom and 1.1m collapsed but extended. Takes about 45 secs to dissassemble. Nb the 10 and 8 inch are considerably smaller.

Already in the diary. I assume I’ll still be using this iPhone 6 by then...

But that doesn't match my experience, M31 is, at best, suspected on an excellent night.

Yes but based on last nights experience I'll soon be sleeping in the living room with it every night anyway so will have lots more time to enjoy it. Every cloud....

Picked up my new (to me) 300p on Saturday - managed to have an hour on it last night. Its so big that we can't physically find somewhere in the living room to put it where its not in the way. Additionally its so heavy, my wife had to help me lift it to take it outside, and then bring it back in later on. All things considered, she's not happy with me.... Great scope though, bagged M51 almost immediately, only taken me two years. And in the wise words of Marge Simpson... "Well, I guess as long as you're happy, then nothing else matters!" ?

I think I'm going to take a break from posting for a while. I'm turning into the astronomy equivalent of Private Pike... ??

Sorry I should have been clearer - the sun dog isn't called a giants tooth its the little snippet of rainbow on the edge. I've never seen a sun dog - good catch. Although I did see the moon version two years ago. Whats that called I wonder? Does it even have a name?

That's called a Giants Tooth where I grew up.

It's really not my fault - 300p flextube, with baader laser collimator and full astrozap shroud and all original accessories for £460. I'd have never forgiven myself if i didnt get it. And i've been trying to see M51 from my back garden for two years so if this doesn't work....

Well having poo-poo'd the practicality of big scopes as recently as 48 hours ago, I've just gone and bought a 300p flextube... I hate this forum sometimes... ??

Just wondering why you think a 5 inch reflector is "measly", lots of people on here don't use anything bigger, they provide a fabulous middle ground between seeing and usability. Generally speaking in UK skies a 10 inch is roundabout the point where atmospheric seeing begins to limit the true potential of a system and then you begin to get diminishing returns as the aperture increases (yes bigger is better but the opportunity to use it to its potential decreases and the setup time becomes such that real planning is required for sessions). You can find massive systems for sale second hand all the time, often bought by people who considerably misunderestimated the amount of time and effort and money involved in setup and ownership.