Mr Spock

Very good on doubles - I split 0.7" with it. Mostly ok on the moon depending on seeing. I've had it up to x294 on a few occasions. On Jupiter I have consistently better views with my 100mm apos (current and previous). I could never really see any belt detail with it. It was always soft and 'mushy' - it doesn't have the MTF 'bite' for belt detail. It was also very prone to poor seeing conditions. It was stored in a cool place and still left to cool a couple of hours. Often I would just bring it straight back in as the views were too 'mushy' to do planetary.

Well, as the saying goes, "After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true" My logic is more practical though

Back to the original question, I have what I need already

Still cloudy here, like it has been all March. Forecast is the same

Mine just says 'We've got it, parcel accepted by Evri gateway'. Who knows when it will arrive

In size order: 1) Takahashi FS-60CB 2) Celestron 80ED f7.5 3) Takahashi FC-100FT 4) Helios 120mm f8.33 achro (solar) 5) StellaLyra 8" f4 M-LRN 6) StellaLyra 12" f5 Dobsonian There, that's not too painful or excessive

My most used scope is the 100mm, so it would have to be that.

When I had a C9.25 my most used eyepieces were 12mm, 10mm and 9mm Vixen NLVs (now SLVs). They are very sharp for planetary - like an orthoscopic but with 20mm eye relief.

Excellent 👍 I think the white / red loses a bit of highlight detail though.

I use a Sigma 150mm f2.8, but it is Nikon fit. MPB have some Canon fit for £184 https://www.mpb.com/en-uk/product/sigma-150mm-f-2-8-ex-apo-dg-macro-hsm-canon-ef-fit

I'll admit that's a bit more unbalanced than mine 8° is a bit fun though.

I only use low power, wide field eyepieces as finders. The sky is too bright here for serious dark background observing. Most would say an exit pupil of 0.5mm is the lowest you should go due to floaters and the fov getting too dark. I stretch that to 0.45mm with my 100mm on the moon, and a more comfy 0.54mm on Jupiter; I reckon that's about as low as I want to go for each.

The bigger and wider you go, the bigger the exit pupil. My 8" f4 can cover over 3°, but with a ludicrous 8.8mm exit pupil...

Would I? First I have a lunatic half-brother nobody knows about, then an over emotional adopted sister. The logic defies me...

With my 12" globulars are impressive. Galaxies are just grey smudges.

The Star Trek telescope was Georgiou's family heirloom; she, Saru and Burnham used the scope to get a visual on an unidentified object. It was passed on to Burnham in Georgiou's will.

I've found that x185 (4mm) in the 100mm and x190 (8mm) in the 12" are just right for Jupiter. Occasionally I've found x148 / x152 in the same to be ok when seeing wasn't as good.

That 125mm ED from StellaMira has a hugely tempting price. There's only one left though! If it wasn't for the fact I can't justify it over the 100mm I have I would snap it up

I don't notice them on planets with the 12" as I use a polariser to cut down the brightness. You can see them without the PL. I can't say they interfere with stars either. They are one of those things you either don't notice or they get on your nerves

I haven't got a close up view resembling what I was seeing through the eyepiece, just this snap through the 120mm. The actual view was a lot more detailed. Same day - 24/02/24.

I've looked at larger scopes a few times. Each time it comes down to the same thing - portability. A larger scope needs a larger mount. My 100mm is perfectly happy on an EQ5. So rather than go to the next size up, I maximised the quality of everything attached to the 100mm. I can use my 120mm on that mount for solar but it isn't ideal. If I need more aperture, I can get the 12" out. It's all about convenience and maximising the amount of time at the eyepiece and the 100mm is the perfect balance.

The fence to the left is due south with the scopes in position. So I'm guessing no.

It's below my fence for the 12" and the 4" doesn't have enough 'welly'. In fact, I haven't tried the 4" that low - it may not even get over the fence!

Not seen Antares yet. It's just too low here

Mine says 42mm 72° on the side If you look through one it's clearly half way between a regular LVW 65° and Nagler 82°. I think they changed the later ones to 65° because of complaints when they really should have changed the 42mm...