Second Time Around

You can (and probably will) upgrade any other component relatively cheaply, but not the mount.    So IMO the mount is the most important factor in deciding between the scopes.

I'd therefore recommend the Bresser. I did head to head comparisons and found that because of the large bearings it has a much  better mounting than the  GSO. 

I also found that with this style of mount I could carry one size bigger scope than the GSO and most other competitors by using the altitude ring.

The Bresser also has a very good and better focuser, that can be upgraded at low cost to a dual speed.  

Edited November 14, 2023 by Second Time Around

Like 1

Quote

I suspect that these days most big Dobs bought in the UK are used in an observatory, like the excellent 20 inch I looked through at Eddington Lodge holiday cottages near Bude.

I don't have a garden suitable for anything bigger than a 10 inch f/4.8, which is the biggest I can carry outside.  It's also small enough to go on the back seat of most cars.

Rather than the expense of a big Dob I've spent the extra money on a night vision device. 

On many DSOs, especially globulars and gaseous nebulae, it's like having a scope 2x or even 3x as big.  My OVNI-M is about the same size as many eyepieces, and can in fact be used as an eyepiece on any scope. 

It can can also be used with many camera lenses for handheld use - my favourite is a 75mm f/1.8 that gives 3x magnification.  With an h-alpha filter this gives great views for instance of the North American Nebula, the Rosette Nebula and Barnard's Loop in my Bortle 4/5 sky.  It can also be used on its own as a 1x monocular with a 40 degree FOV where it shows hugely more stars than the naked eye.

In my head to head tests I found the APM 7.7-15.4mm zoom better than the Baader zoom.  Moreover the actual field of view at 15.4mm is bigger than the Baader at 24mm.

I'd then add 1 or more Barlows where the lens cell can be screwed off and screwed into the filter thread of the eyepiece.  This is because the amplification of Barlows is greater than normal with the APM zoom, particularly in 1.25 inch mode (it can be used in 2 inch mode as well).  However the APM needs more infocus than usual. I don't know how much infocus the TAK needs, but using just the cell of a Barlow it's likely fine.  Can someone please confirm?

Here are the results of some tests I did of several Barlows on the APM zoom giving the amplification factors both with just the cell and the complete Barlow.

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/782373-apm-super-zoom-eyepiece/page-45#entry13165411

I had the same astro/terrestrial requirements for 2 of my grandkids.  I bought them a Starsense Explorer 70mm refractor (£179). 

In my experience, by far the most common reason for giving up astronomy is not being able to find objects.

The great thing about the Starsense Explorers is that they make finding objects so easy - even my 8 year old had no problem.  You use it with almost any modern smartphone, and there's even an option to set it up so that it talks to you about many of the objects you're looking at.  So it's perfect for today's youngsters.

Also, because the 70mm Starsense Explorer is the least expensive of the series it's very easy to sell for a good price.  Indeed, many of us (including me!) have bought one just for the Starsense Explorer itself.  We've then used a 3D printed adapter to use it on all our scopes.

By the way, don't be tempted by the slightly bigger 80mm model.  It has a smaller field of view, so for instance won't show all the Pleiades all at once.  It also comes with the same mounting as the 70mm and so won't be as stable.

My advice would be to wait a few months and then go for the 8 inch rather than a 6 inch plus accessories.  You can always add accessories later - everyone does.  Doing it the other way round would work out much more expensive in the long run.

That's a relief.  Many thanks indeed, Elp.  It looks as though I've saved myself £60.

It seems as though I couldn't change the order as it was a one time code from the EE shop for having bought a Pixel 6 from them.

Everyone 's selling the Pixel 8 Pro for a minimum of £799, including the EE shop.  The code gave me a huge £250 off so only £549 - even less than the non-pro model!

Thanks again.

Let me start by saying I've never taken an astrophotograph in my life.

However I like the idea of taking some lunar and solar photos.  The solar ones would be through my 72mm ED on a Solarquest tracking mount, the lunar ones through the 72mm ED or my 10 inch Dob, possibly on my equatorial platform.

What's prompted this is that I've just ordered a Google Pixel 8 Pro.  However I wonder if I've dropped a clanger by buying the model with just 128gB of storage.  The operating system and my apps already take up almost half of this.

I assume I'll be doing some lucky imaging with the video camera and then uploading the results to Google Photos. 

Would a little over 64gB of working storage be enough for the videos?  

I understand that OOUK will build a scope with a focuser of your choice.  I would suggest the excellent Baader Diamond Steeltrack that I retrofitted to my VXs. You could buy one for £297 plus postage and have it sent to them.  Going by what OOUK were charging for just the focuser they now fit to the VX series (the ACU-2S) it shouldn't cost much more and may actually save you some money.

I have a 10 inch VX f/4.8 and amongst the advantages are lighter weight plus the tube length means it'll fit onto the back seat of most cars.  The 10L won't though.

3 hours ago, Louis D said:

I won't lie, the 22mm NT4 is nice and sharp edge to edge compared to the 22mm Redline 70.  It was enough different to persuade me to retire the Redline to the B-Team case in favor of the NT4 despite the tighter eye relief and slight SAEP in the NT4.

What scope was that in, Louis?  If a reflector, was that with a coma corrector and if so which one?  Thanks.

Louis, I agree that the APM zoom isn't small, but it's not huge either.  However, I don't add a complete Barlow when I want to increase magnification, just the cell containing the lens.  So it's barely bigger than the zoom itself. This is because, as mentioned above, adding a Barlow to the APM zoom increases the magnification more than normal.

In fact I now have 5 different Barlows that I can use with just their cells, although I've yet to try the 2 newest.

Found my receipt too.  The Omegon Redline was £116 including postage on 2nd Jan 2020.  So a big increase since.

I also use sat24 that's the same as netweather.  Both use infrared satellite pictures so, unlike visual pics, show cloud at night.

Another similar but different site I find useful is https://zoom.earth/maps/satellite/ This also shows low cloud/fog.

38 minutes ago, Don Pensack said:

It's the same eyepiece as the Astromania 22mm for $128.99 (£103.54).  Even with VAT, it'll be cheaper than the Redline.

https://astromaniaoptics.com/products/astromania-2quot-22mm-70-degree-super-wide-angle-swa-mean-you-always-enjoy-a-huge-field-of-view?VariantsId=10092

Also sold as Arcturus Ebony, and Omegon Redline.  You might find a used one sold as an Astrotech AF70 or Olivon 70.

Thanks, Don!  Good spot!  I see that Astromania is having it shipped direct from China, that hopefully will mean that postage is also low. 

Has anyone found it even cheaper?

I said to my wife that the current Omegon price is a lot higher than I paid, that if I recall correctly was about £110 including VAT.  However, that was just before Brexit.

On 13/04/2024 at 15:42, groberts said:

If I may, a couple of questions:

1. What's the eye relief of the APM?

2.  Looking around, I see that using the AMP as 1.25" can be a problem - any thoughts?

1.  Ernest in his bench tests measured the eye relief at a constant 17mm, i.e. about the same as a 25mm Plossl.  For comparison he measured the Baader Mk IV to be 10-15mm, and the Svbony 3-8mm to be 6.5-9.5mm, both depending on the focal length.

Incidentally, I didn't buy the Svbony 3-8mm because of the short eye relief.  I prefer to Barlow my APM zoom, especially as  Barlows somewhat increase the eye relief.  

2.  Whether it's a problem will depend on the amount of infocus of a given scope.  There's no such problem with either my 72mm ED refractor nor my 10in OOUK Newtonian.  I haven't tried it on my 4 inch achro yet.

One thing to note is the amplification factor of Barlows varies from eyepiece to eyepiece according to the position of the field stop.  With the APM zoom it's particularly increased.

I have several Barlows including the Revelation in your signature.  Here are the amplification factors I measured:

As 1.25 inch cell only 1.97x

As 2 inch cell only 1.77x

I couldn't test the complete Barlow as the set screw was too long.  I haven't got round to replacing it as I have other Barlows I can use when I want greater amplification.

19 hours ago, Second Time Around said:

We repeatedly have comments on the forum dissing the cloud forecasts.  However, some of you will remember that I recorded the accuracy of 6 (later 😎later eight such  forecasts every night for 17 months.  See https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/376745-a-record-of-the-accuracy-of-my-local-cloud-forecasts/#comment-4081235) These showed 2 things:

1) the forecasts were correct roughly 2 nights out of 3

2) only 4% were completely wrong

3 there was no significant difference between any of the sites (including Clear Outside)

So how do we account for the criticism not tying in with the data? I commented in that thread that it's human nature to remember the wrong forecasts more.  In fact, there's a scientific term for this;  it's called Von Restorff Effect.

 

 

Can't get rid of the sunglasses in the above thread.  

Any suggestions?

We repeatedly have comments on the forum dissing the cloud forecasts.  However, some of you will remember that I recorded the accuracy of 6 (😎later eight) such forecasts every night for 17 months.  See https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/376745-a-record-of-the-accuracy-of-my-local-cloud-forecasts/#comment-4081235)

These showed 2 things:

1) the forecasts were correct roughly 2 nights out of 3

2) only 4% were completely wrong

3) there was no significant difference between any of the sites (including Clear Outside)

So how do we account for the criticism not tying in with the data? I commented in that thread that it's human nature to remember the wrong forecasts more.  In fact, there's a scientific term for this;  it's called the Von Restorff Effect.

I bought the 22mm/70 Deg Omegon Redline.  Everyone's different but I preferred it to the much more expensive 22mm Nagler.  It's supposed to be not quite as sharp as the Nagler at the extreme edge, but the shape of my eye sockets means that I can't see the very edge of many wide angle eyepieces anyway.  I also found the Redline very comfortable as well.  A further advantage is, as Louis kindly pointed out to me some years ago, it can take a Dioptrx astigmatism corrector that I prefer to wearing glasses.

It's currently £162 including VAT plus shipping from £6.90.  Go to https://www.omegon.eu/eyepieces/omegon-redline-sw-22mm-eyepiece-2-/p,33239

I'm a great fan of zooms and have used 5.

The best is the APM Super Zoom, that I found even better than the Baader.  It has a constant 66 degree field of view.

I haven't tried the very expensive Leica though.  This is because it doesn't accept a Televue Dioptrx astigmatism corrector that I prefer to wearing glasses.  Both the Baader and the APM accept a Dioptrx, although the eyecup of the Baader revolves when you zoom, making it fiddly.

Neither have I tried the Svbony 3-8mm as there would be insufficient eye relief for me.  Instead I prefer the APM plus a Barlow.

Another site with seeing forecasts: https://www.metcheck.com/HOBBIES/astronomy.asp

It also shows transparency forecasts.

I mentioned tourism, that of course affects locals and the local economy.

Done.

1 hour ago, Flame Nebula said:

Hi John, 

Yes, you're right. I actually have the Barlow. I should have said use the 2.25, but I'd still fall a bit short of 290 mag, especially if I have a 0.95xcoma corrector in place. Having said that, might be able to avoid the corrector for planets. 

I'm wondering if something like the explore scientific 52° 3mm might be better than barlowing a 6mm.

Mark 

You can add an inexpensive extension tube(s) between the eyepiece and Barlow.   For instance Baader do an 18mm one, and each of these will add approximately 0.25x extra amplification. 

Go to https://www.firstlightoptics.com/adapters/baader-dt-4-1-31-8mm-nosepiece-extension-18mm-long.html

One thought is to combine an OOUK Dob base with another make of OTA.  This is what I posted recently about the OOUK bases.

"The bases are the best part of the OOUK Dobs.  They're made of aluminium so are lighter than steel or plywood let alone particleboard.  They also have a smaller footprint that enables them to be carried close to your body. 

Both of these features make them much easier to carry.  Indeed, I can go up to a 10 inch OOUK Dob, but only an 8 inch with Chinese makes.

The only mod I've done is adding a pair of kitchen door handles.

OOUK make these bases to order to fit any Dob, not just their own.  Expensive yes, but well worth it."

A second idea is to buy the cheapest Starsense Explorer in the range that costs £189 and retrofit it to whatever scope(s) you end up with.  I believe Ratlet here can provide a 3D printed adapter.

The only solar I'm doing at the moment is with my Quark at a final f/26, so at that focal ratio there won't be many aberrations.

However, it's often said that prominences are a stiff test of eyepieces because of scatter.  One data point here is that I found my Baader 8-24mm zoom markedly better than my Svbony 7-21mm, although there was less difference on other objects.

Usually I'm using 25-32mm Plossls and I did other head to heads between the following:

Televue

GSO clone

Baader

Vixen NPL

I found no discernable difference between any of them.  The ones I kept were the NPLs because they were the easiest to acquire and retain the image (awkward with a Quark) due to the adjustable eyecup.  I need it in an intermediate position but if I rest my eye on the top it slips.  This is easily solved with a doubled-up hairgrip or an elastic band in the desired position.

Wow! Those last few minutes from 2023 were spectacular!

My wife is hopefully having a knee replacement shortly, although the date has already been changed 3 times.

Because of this we plan to go on a cruise to see the aurora as she won't be fully mobile after the op.

Depending on the date of the op we plan to go late autumn or early Spring.