Rob Sellent

If one could handle the mounting issues and weight, I figure a 140mm apo would be a gorgeous scope. Despite its acknowledged drawbacks compared, say, to a bigger aperture dob, each night I use the little FL 102, I'm simply drawn in by its fabulous contrast, colour correction and lovely, gleaming tight stars. For all its irrationality, the lure of a decent refractor still gives me a buzz . - - - - P.S. The OP's link didn't work for me, so have no idea of the particular scope's specs, price etc.

Not to mention that mango and pineapple with a gentle sprinkle of fresh lemon makes for one of the best fruit salad breakfasts

I've gone many seasons without observing but have never thought the hobby is dead or that I've lost interest. I just need to get on with something else and know that sooner or later I'll be back. The key is to let my time and interest, money and space follow the hobby, not the other way around.

Not too sure if this will work in digital format but worth a try. The solar disk is a piece of weighted paper placed over a sheet of rough textured paper and then shaded very lightly with graphite and a soft cloth. Prominences and filaments are made with blending stubs and soft pencils while plage and other lighter areas are made with gentle dabs of a putty-like rubber. This method is suffice for my notebook. Back indoors a photo is taken of the sketch and then loaded into Gimp. Background is blackened and a number of distinct layers of yellows, reds and oranges are layered over each other to create the orange peel effect. The disk is then feathered around the edge to give that blurred/astigmatic effect. Prominences are touched over with a small, almost transparent soft brush and then softened further with Gimp's smudge add-on. Hopefully the image size is tolerable on most monitors (aboout a 1,000 pixels wide) and that within reason there is an acceptable idea of the visual encounter yesterday morning:

After the aggressive winds of last night the sky today is calm, deep blue and very warm. Sitting out for breakfast in the garden this morning was just a little too hot in direct sunlight. In terms of white light the Sun continues to be dormant but in H-alpha there has been some pleasing shows this week, culminating in a spectacular firey display this morning. At both 4 and 10 o'clock two huge wisps of flames stretch out into the cold darkness of space. With the aid of a Baader Microguide, I estimate that they're respectively around 80,000km and 150,000km in length the latter cascading back to the Sun's surface visually forming an enormous structure like that of an acute triangle. Further prominences are on display at just after 12 o'clock and around 5 o'clock. The former fan like the latter a very active surge. Needless to say, surface detail isn't that great in either white light or H-alpha. There are no sunspots and only a very casual showing of a filament or two. I've made a sketch but don't have time to scan it in at the moment. I'm off to an olive pressing farm to exchange my olives for oil but if you get a chance today, hopefully you'll be able to see the structures I've mentioned. If there's any interest, I'll post up a sketch latter this afternoon

Great and worthwhile purchase, @jetstream I have a 14 and 10mm Delos and they're a joy to handle and use. However, there is one significant problem. Once used you cannot go back to the night before you owned one, because you were a different person then, and like Alice, you’ve gone through a looking glass and have entered a new world of visual wonder, opened up a celestial window onto the universe from which you can never return

What are you finding trouble with? Is it the views or finding objects, or something else? Any highlighting of the concerns would be a help

I rarely plan sessions, but I rarely just pan through constellations (unless it's through the summer milky way). Instead, if the Moon and planets aren't up, I choose a portion of the sky and open that page in one of the star atlases.

I've got a Mak 127. I can't look tomorrow becuase I'm running errands all day but Saturday looks to be clear and bright all day, so I can put the Mak through a testing Just let me know in simple terms what I'm looking out for

Whatever you decide, if you’re thinking about choosing physics, astronomy, electronic and computer engineering, and so on, as a degree, check you are ready for mathematical study at this level. At some UK universities there are no formal entry requirements (OU, for example), others require GCSEs and relevant A Levels (phsyics, math, higher math, chemistry etc). With that said, whatever the university you will need to demonstrate you have competency in mathematics and quite possibly an understanding in 'further' or 'higher' mathematics both of which will put you in good stead and aid your application.

To my understanding, seeing colour in DSOs is predominantly a function of the eyes' sensitivity which differs in each individual. While some observers may see hints of colour in brighter emission nebulae, for example, others won't see any colour regardless of how big their scope. The general advice is to use fairly low powers and to observe the brighter regions of nebulae. Other than that, stars are a nice source of colour.

If I understand correctly, could there be a source of significant light pollution in your area which is being scattered across the sky by the aid of water droplets mixed with other pollutants ranging from auto exhaust to dust and microscopic particles?

Odd 🤔 In accordance with my own records and those of Meteoblue, in the last 90 days, for example, we've had 67 days of potential solar observing If you've never heard of such a thing, you have now

You certainly have grown yourself a bigger pair than I have, @John. I find the Spanish Sun does no favours for gorgeous couplings of white flowers or delicate pairings of shrubs 😁 Oh, and there's no way I'd have the courage to use the Vixen for white light. You're a brave man with your Tak 😀

This is for general consideration only, not to overload you with information: get yourself a decent star map. I find the Pocket Star Atlas by Sky and Telescope indispensable. It's not that expensive, it's a piece of art in itself and it is extremely useful. The first pages have a kind of overview of the night sky's constellations so a planisphere isn't necessary. at some point you might find yourself wanting to upgrade the view finder. I have found that Skywatcher's 9x50mm is the business and it ought to be the right angled correct image one. It will deliver stars down to about magnitude 8 and when you move amongst the stars following your atlas, your left is left and your up is up. a Telrad or Rigel finder will also be a big help in star-hopping. Position the bullseye, or the other two rings in the proper place against the stars and you’re more or less done. If you're out a little you can work out where you are by the three ringed cirlces giving you varying degrees of the sky you're looking at. The only negative point about the Telrad or Rigel is that they can’t deliver more stars than your eyes alone can see, so if you're in an LP area, they really do speed up your finding, really do help to judge where you are, but it must be used in conjunction with the findercope. at some point you might find yourself itching for more eyepieces, but take your time! Use your gear first and get to know what you're looking for and what you need. With that said a low magnification EP is often handy for finding DSOs. The low mag EP should offer you sufficient sky to manage along with your star map and it will hopefully pick out or hint at what you're hunting. For an 8" f6, you don't really need more than 3 eyepieces and a x2 Barlow. An eyepiece in the range of 10 to 12mm, something in the range of 14 to 16mm and a low power 24mm. There's no need to be blowing loads; scan the secondhand market for two decent eyepieces and a Barlow and you're pretty much sorted. do check out sketches. They are often overlooked, but they ought to be viewed. NASA photos or those produced in the imaging sections here are not going to help you visually. Sketches are generally produced by patient observers who are trying their best to get what they see right. As such, the drawings should give you a very good idea of what the DSO will more or less look like in your eyepiece. your scope will need collimating on every session. So whatever else you do, you must budget for a Cheshire type of eyepiece or collimating cap. a visual astro book like Turn Left at Orion or my own favourite, The Illustrated Guide to Astronomical Wonders is worth your time. Both explain what are some of the more important objects worth going for in a particular season. They'll explain how you get there (more or less assuming you're in a dark area, so if not, keep your wits about you). Both will explain how you move your finderscope (non-correct image for Turn Left, correct image for the Illustrated) to star-hop to the given DSO and both will offer a little 'positive' sketch of what the thing looks like in a normal 4" to 8" scope. if you can master patience you'll be a master of the night sky. To gain patience and to be concentrated and comfortable, a drummer's stool or an ironing chair is an absolute must. I truely belive being seated not only augments your concentration and patience but literally adds an inch or so to your aperture. there are little tricks you can learn to find yourself about the night sky. For example, find the plough in Ursa Major and look for Merek and Dubhe, the distance and angle between these two is one step. Now count that distance, in that direction another 5 steps and bingo, you'll be with the double star Polaris (do observe that!). Learning the big stars and diving quickly between them makes hunting stuff easier. cloudy nights are just that. Not wanting to go out is just that. Don't ever beat yourself up about not observing. This is a hobby and it is meant to be fun. Those stars and DSOs are not going anywhere quick. So, if you don't observe, no worries. Those gems of the night sky will be back to give you another chance tomorrow 😀

Re: Solar viewing & Petzval fracs....(@Hallingskies) I also find it quite confusing. On the one hand, it's acknowledged from experienced observers on sites like Solar Chat, SGL and Cloudy Nights that using Petzval fracs and a wedge is fine. On the other hand, we get warnings from the wedge manufactures like Baader and Lunt categorically stating that they're not suitable for such scopes. Similar kind of thing happens with Quark's solar eyepieces. Quark makes no mention but again, experienced observers argue that either a) it makes no difference, b) it only becomes a concern if you're tracking for a long time, c) they canot be used in oil-spaced Petzval's d) but can be used in air spaced Petzval's. Icing for proverbial cake comes in the form of using Fluorite fracs for white light. Again, experienced observers argue that either a) it makes no difference, b) the risk of cracking a €2.5 - 6k scope is just not worth even contemplating, and c) thermal expansion, fracturing and shock of the lens is augmented in Fluorite. In my own case solar viewing is important. I'm not out everyday but I reckon we get an average of around 300 clear days a year. For white light I finally settled on a portable TV-76 + Wedge. A Lunt 60mm for H-alpha (ease of use, no cables, no faff) and a fluorite strictly for those delicate and tender photons of the night .

Aye, wise words @Totally_Computerized:From my extremely limited understanding - as a visual observer - it often seems to me that visual and imaging require opposite necessities in many respects. For example, for the visual observer the brightness of a given deep space object (DSO) is dependent on aperture whereas for the imager the signal or brightness of the image depends on the focal ratio of the scope. An f/5 8" scope will produce a brighter image for the visual observer than an f/5 80mm scope but curiously, both these scopes will provide the same brightness image per pixel for imaging. Sure, the 8" scope will offer more resolution but I think unless this can be put to use with well suited cameras and imaging gear it probably goes to waste. Again, for the sake of argument, the mount is to the imager what aperture is to the visual observer. For the visual observer the question would be, "Can I pick out detail from the object being observed?" For the imager, "Can I track the object accurately?" For guiding over a period of time an EQ mount is necessary but large Newtonians plus all the necessary assessories for imaging would place huge demands on the mount. Not only in terms of the mass involved but also in terms of the scopes' focal length. I've read about imagers using 5" Newts on an HEQ5 , but for an 8" something like an NEQ6 Pro would be needed to keep the tube and imaging gear rock steady. Combining astrophotography and visual astronomy will more than likely lead to an EQ mounted Newtonian probably no bigger than a 6" to start off with but as with all things, compromises will be made. Visually, aperture is very important but for imagers bigger is not necessarily better, and is the reason why so many imagers end up choosing relatively light and fast 80mm APO refractors for astrophotography.

Not romanticized at all I think it is that 'wonder' which drives all of us into this wonderful hobby. I'm not an imager but if you have any questions, worries or concerns, I'm sure you'll get responses almost immediately. Visually speaking your 8" Dob is going to be lovely. There are so many winter treats to enjoy that I guess only the cold and clouds will keep you away. Again, if any questions or concerns crop up, just let us know and I'm sure you'll get help straight away. Welcome to SGL and I look forward to meeting you on the boards and reading about your new adventures

I think - but don't quote me on this - a binoscope offers the same performance of a telescope about 1.4 times its diameter. A 14" binoscope becomes a 20" monocular scope, an 18” becomes a 25”. Another more subjective evaluation would go as high as 1.8 times due to two eyes reducing 'false light signals', so contrast, darker background, and fainter objects are further augmented. For all the potential benefits, weight, set up time and collimation must be a right pain

Not an imager but I do know that TS Optics have a range of Newts under 6kg: 6" f4 6" f4 Carbon 6" f4 UNC 6" f4 UNC 6" f5 UNC 6" f5 SW Their photoline apos under 102mm should all weigh under 6kg as well. I'm sure there are more options but this little lot should start wetting your appetite . On a personal note, I'm sorry to hear about injury, Nadeem. I hope you're on the mend and doing alright

Just a little more info for you and your daughter... Within reason every scope shows a topsy-turvy image of orientation. Depending on the type of telescope, the star diagonal in use, the image may be upside-down, backwards, rotated, or normally oriented. For astronomical observing it makes no difference, for after all, there’s no correct up or down in space. The tricky thing is that when stargazing it is often hard to compare what you’re seeing through your scope to what your star chart or atlas is showing. Assuming your first scope of choice will be a reflector (Newtonian/Dobsonian) the eyepiece image is inverted. If you’re using a star chart or atlas, all you have to do is rotate the map 180º and then slightly rotate it a little further at an angle that more or less matches what you are seeing in the eyepiece. If you two get the astro bug, further down the line there are special 'correct-image' finders that provide a 'correctly' orientated view which makes starhopping and searching for objects much more easier. Online there are many excellent resources, so here are just a couple that are worth looking into (both are free) and playing about with: Stellarium - an excellent planetarium Virtual Moon Atlas - playing with the settings to the left (and right) you can fix your orientation, plug in your scope's details etc and get an excellent idea of what will be possible through the scope you buy Again, there are many excellent books on stargazing but these spring to mind immediately. Sure, the books are going to be a little heavy for your 8 year old daughter to tackle alone but you can read them together at night and they'll help you become a pro quickly so your daughter's early adventures will be easier and less frustrating: S&T Pocket Sky Atlas - essential star map when out in the field star-hoping and hunting down those deep space gems Astronomical Wonders - excellent observing book and lovely introduction (might be worth purchasing before your scope) Turn Left at Orion - this is extremely popular amongst beginner observers. Personally, I couldn't stand the thing but that probably says more about me than the book itself. Rukl's Moon Guide - this is quite dry and out of print but it is cheap, extremely accurate and highly detailed. It is my go to Moon atlas. S&T Field Lunar Map - nice to use out in the field. Discover the Moon - it's not perfect but I feel it is a very good beginner's guide to lunar observing. It comes with both refractor and reflector orientations, handy features to pick out each night and a lamanated lunar map for both refractors and reflectors to take out in the damp field. Other considerations. There are few more handy assessories that might make your sessions more enjoyable: red torch to use at night to read the maps etc which can be suitably dimmed and which doesn't ruin your night vision fingerless gloves, warm hat, warm socks, winter coat and boots big enough to accommodate 2 or 3 pairs of socks. If you're cold in winter, observing is horrid. jaffa cakes, donuts, and other favourite snacks note/sketch book, pencils, rubber and sharpener to plan your sessions and note down (writing or quick sketch) what has been seen a seat to rest upon (ironing chairs are most useful) patience of a zen master and of course, SGL. Hope that helps and please, don't become a stranger. Get yourself and daughter on here (we're very family friendly, we don't do politics and we don't do religion) and please don't hesitate in asking any questions

Welcome to SGL, @mike2k. I think you've done your daughter a massive deed by simply joining this forum before purchasing a scope. It makes my heart sink when I see an individual with some tatty but equally-as-expensive telescope that will inevitably frustrate one to the point of never wanting to use it again. I wonder how many budding scientists or artists were successfully discouraged from pursuing astronomy and the wonders of the night sky by these kinds of shoddy instruments. Typically the scopes branded for children at Christmas might seem okay for the price but the set up is generally worthless. Shoddy scope, eyepieces, diagonal, finder and the tripods are tiny, they sag and wiggle. Something that would make anyone give up, especially a child. It's probably not necessary to say, but I'd suggest that you buy your first set up from a specialist telescope shop that can provide advice and an ongoing service – not from ebay and not from some supermarket or photographic store where the staff will generally have no knowledge of what they are selling. If you haven't already had a peek, First Light Optics comes highly recommended as one of Great Britain's best astronomy shops and, of course, SGL can help out a lot. When looking around at your new potential purchase, although there are excellent reasons to buy a refractor the general precept is that aperture rules and so you'll find that if a beginner asks 'what should I buy?' 99% of those answers are always going to suggest the biggest Newtonian (reflector) you can afford and carry about, and more than likely a Newtonian which is Dobsonian mounted rather than GEM (EQ) or AZ mounted, simply because Dobsonian mounts (the rocker box) are probably easier to use and set up and are cheaper, so in effect you're putting more money into the optics and less into the mount. With that said, I think FLO's beginner recommendations are spot on and personally I think any one of the Heritages will be a lovely present for your daughter. The scopes come pretty much assembled and generally only need the finder attaching. They're all well made, very sturdy on their wooden Dobsonian mount and look very attractive. There's a large knob for altitude tension adjustment and a nut and bolt for azimuth, so they're easy to use. Standing the scope on a stool puts the focuser at about the right height for a child to use standing. The little 76mm weighs in under 2kg, the larger 100mm just under 3kg and the 130mm just over 6kg. It's late now, but when I get a moment, I'll try to report back and find some useful links for you and your daughter regarding lunar, planetary and deep space observing

When it comes to white light the Baader solar film is very high quality, cheap and does the job just fine - especially at the moment while we're peaking somewhere within the solar minimum. As with many things astro related, most gains are relatively small. As such, the Herschel wedge was purchased for very much the same reasons as the gentlemen above. Slight increment in finer detail, more robust, safer to use, easier to store and travel with and longer lasting. Installed in an eyepiece when using the Wedge is a Solar Continuum filter which isolates the 540nm bandwidth and helps a tad with contrast and a polarizing filter which rotates via the eyepiece and adjusts the overall brightness. If you do purchase a Wedge make sure it has an ND 3 filter already built-in the actual unit and if not, you must have this. The continuum and polarizing filters are optional the ND 3 is not. Finally, I know you know this already but the Herschel Wedge is only suitable for refractors. It cannot be used on any type of reflecting scope. Whether you feel it's worth forking out so much more money for a wedge in these times of solar minimum I cannot say. NASA have made very tentative predictions that we'll pull a little out of this solar minimum cycle around 2020 before dropping in again around 2025. Some research suggests that post-2025 might even be the advent of another Dalton Minimum. Needless to say, when the Sun was more active the views with the wedge were spectacular. Good crisp detail which often showed different solar tones within the umbra itself. Granulation was nearly always apparent and faculae bright and twisting. In short, a visual experience no less equal to and often better than the white light images you see in the solar section. Hand on heart, I'd rather view the Sun through the 80ED with Herschel Wedge than a 6" newt with solar film.

@AdeKingand @Alan White, I'd be interested in any kind of review you give of these two cracking items

Sorry to hear about this. Hope you're on the mend now, Alan