Zeta Reticulan

Astronomy for me is about enjoying the night sky. I live in a Bortle 4-5 area. I'm also physically disabled. A Dob' isn't practical or enjoyable for me to use. I have as much fun with my 60mm as anything else. It isn't always about what you can see, it's about enjoying the night sky. I like having fun.

I think complaining about the quality of the bundled eyepieces with what are effectively Synta entry level scopes is a bit redundant. Anyone buying a scope in that category for the first time would expect to be able to use it out of the box. It would not make economic sense to bundle expensive eyepieces. Some bundled eyepieces are better than others.

Sir Patrick Moore always maintained that a 4" refractor was roughly equal to a 6" reflector. Obviously the larger aperture will have better resolution and light grasp, but the refractor can seem as effective for a variety of reasons. I am not a Dob' fan although I can appreciate the idea of mounting a large aperture Newtonian on a simple mount. There is an old joke on astronomy forums that the answer to every question asked on a forum is 'A sixteen inch Dob'. I have telescopes ranging between 60mm and 235mm. I've had over a hundred observing sessions so far this year. Sixty five of them have been with refractors of 80mm and under. Forty nine sessions have been with either my 72mm Evostar or 60mm ED doublet. I think that says it all.

In my experience, the only discernible differences between TV Plossls and NPL's are ergonomics, build quality, and focal lengths.

I just can't unsee that now, lol

I suppose the Gregory spot in the meniscus lens causes or contributes to the bright first diffraction ring.

I'm not overkeen on Mak's for double star observing as they tend to have a bright first diffraction ring. This isn't noticeable for lunar or planetary observing. Or on many brighter deep sky objects. However, it is on tight doubles particularly.

I think there is a distinction between a telenegative Barlow type of lens and a multi-element (usually four element) amplifier. An amplifier won't increase the eye relief in use and is often designed to produce a flatter field than a more traditional Barlow. In use, I find no real difference in quality between this 3x 'Altair tele extender' and my 2.5x and 5x TeleVue Powermates.

I'm guessing it's the Synta-made 127mm? The 127mm actually has a focal length of 1540mm, effectively giving it a focal ratio f/12.1. In my experience these scopes are excellent for lunar and planetary viewing. Although their narrow field of view precludes them from wide rich field observation. Technically magnifications of at least 254x can be achieved. I was viewing Mars at 257x with my 127mm Mak' this morning in fact. Mostly though magnifications of around 120x - 170 are more usual for targets such as Jupiter and Saturn. The OTA can need a good hour to cool down outside before use. Otherwise the internal environment of the scope will suffer thermal air currents making sharp focus difficult.

One size fits all!

I will also specifically recommend the ST80 as a starter scope. It might only be an achromatic doublet but it is surprisingly well colour corrected. These are incredibly popular starter scopes. They are light and portable. Many more experienced observers still hang on to their ST80's. FLO sell dovetails so that they can be used in Vixen-style mounts. The optical tube assembly is robust and includes a removable dew shield. These Synta-made scopes are also sold under different names, including Orion and Omegon. Mine still occasionally get out, albeit now with aftermarket focusers. These scopes are a lot of fun and are excellent instruments to learn and explore the night sky. I still recommend it to be used in an AZ5. Even if you eventually upgrade to better instruments, these tough little refractors make great travel scopes. T-shirt is optional.

I have the WO's and normally use them with a 127mm Mak'. I find 20mm SWAN's (not the bundled WO 20mm eyepieces) and a pair of 15mm GSO SuperViews get the most use. Merging is a bit of an art form with the WO's and I find the wider the eyepiece FOV the easier it is to merge. I also have the WO 1.6x and 2x Barlows. Plus a third (TS Optics) 2.6x Barlow. The shortest focal length eyepieces are a pair of 12mm GSO Plossls (with WO barrels) and a pair of SvBony 10mm aspherics. Admittedly I really only use the bino's for lunar/planetary. In the past I've successfully used a pair of 25mm Ohi (Astro Hutech) orthoscopics and a pair of 32mm Baader BCO's. I also have used a pair of 19mm Panoptics but found them heavy for the set-up I was using.

Is the mobile phone glass manufacturer JOC, Don?

Basically you're going to get a variety of answers to this question. No one answer will be necessarily correct or incorrect. A lot of it will be what you eventually discover what is right for you. Personally, I'd recommend a short tube doublet refractor between around 70mm -100mm in aperture on an alt-azimuth mount to start with. For a variety of reasons: 1/ It will be relatively portable (so should get out regularly). 2/ It will be instinctive to use (point and look). 3/ It should have no collimation issues (Newtonian reflectors need constant collimation). 4/ It will have no real cool down time. A 150mm Newtonian may need up to an hour to reach thermal equilibrium when taken outside. 5/ It will have an inherent versatility in the fact that it can be used for lunar, planetary, deep sky and rich field observing. Sky-Watcher ST80 on AZ5 mount/tripod Altair EDF 60mm ED doublet on AZ5. Sky-Watcher ST102 on AZ5. 102mm Altair Starwave ED-R on Vixen Porta II mount and Vixen TL-130 tripod.

The curse of buying new equipment combined with OCD is even worse. Vixen NPL set. No problem. GSO Plossl set. The 40mm and 32mm are badged as 'Revelation' and the 20mm has a silver housing. AAAaaaaggghhhh! Edit: notwithstanding some have undercuts and some don't. 🤯

Not so long ago I waited months for an ES 18mm. I've got a feeling that ES were working on introducing a new range, but covid got in the way. Regardless of world events and geopolitics supply chains will no doubt recover and be reinstated.

Good luck.

300 different companies? Everyone knows 99% of all astronomy equipment is made in one giant underground robotic factory in China!

I dream of standardised filter threads. lol

Thanks for the info about the AZ5 tripod. It certainly sounds about right. I've always suspected that it wasn't the claimed 5kg of the actual mount. I never thought my 127mm Mak was particularly stable on the AZ5. My best guess is that the Heritage is at the limit of the tripod payload. If the OP is using the bundled tripod of course. So, as wulfrun said, add a big eyepiece and you're near the payload limit. It could explain any vibration return issues.

Very nice. I believe Mars is barely eight arc seconds in diameter at the moment. I could see Syrtis Major with my 127mm Mak' at 257x.

OK thanks for the info. Yeah, 4kg or thereabouts is a more realistic upper limit with the stock AZ5 tripod. I reckon the AZ5 could do 5kg with the heavier tripod. I have an f/6 150mm Newtonian. I doubt I could mount it on an AZ5 unless I used the tripod on this EQ5. Even then there would be issues with the length of the OTA.

I thought the 150P was bundled with a Dob' mount too. The whole 150P with mount is 7.5kg. I don't know how heavy the 150P OTA is. As Dob' mounts are basically made from old banana crates the OTA on its own may well exceed 5kg. Which would explain any vibration return issues. In my experience when OEM's state that the maximum mount load is 5kg; they really mean: 1/ Will hold 3kg fairly well (depending on length of tube). 2/ Might hold 4kg if you're careful. 3/ Will hold 5kg in a showroom if it isn't actually moved or used.

I'm not so sure the AZ5 was designed to be positioned by hand with tightened clutches. If they are slackened slightly it can be achieved. They may need to be re-tightened enough to engage the slo mo. I also believe it was designed to hold up to 5kg. At a push, it will hold my 4.2kg Altair Starwave but I prefer a stronger tripod. With 2" accessories it would be 5kg or over. 5kg or over needs a Porta II, half-pillar, and HAL-130 tripod. So the AZ5 would definitely need a stronger tripod if used with 5kg IMO.

The AZ5 is a capable mount but I wouldn't use it with the stock tripod if you're using a heavy OTA. The azimuth and altitude slo mo only properly engage when the clutches are tightened. My 127mm Mak was bundled with an AZ5. In my experience it just about holds it. The Mak OTA is about 3 kilo although it is short. For a heavier OTA it would probably need a heavier tripod.