Second Time Around

I encountered the same problem and solved it with a Glatter parallizer.  This allows 1.25 inch eyepieces and lasers to be fitted into 2 inch focusers and hold them without slop.

It works very well with my Baader Diamond Steeltrack and my Hotech laser.

VAT goes to central government.  HMRC inspects the books from time to time of those businesses whose turnover is above the threshold to pay VAT.

Local taxes are paid by businesses and the public in addition to VAT and paid direct to local councils.  They're based on property values.

Like others above my prescription changes yearly, especially the astigmatism angle.  In fact the latter changes during the course of the year.

For that and many other reasons I don't wear glasses at the telescope but correct my astigmatism with a Televue Dioptrx.  With this I can correct the angle at the scope.

It's often suggested that astigmatism gets somewhat worse in low light.  I therefore tested this by comparing a 0.75 dioptre Dioptrx as per my prescription against a 1.00 Dioptrx.  The latter was indeed better.

It's not just astigmatism that usually needs a higher correction in low light.  Especially if you're short-sighted you'll probably need greater spherical correction as well.  This is called "night myopia".

My helpful opticians, Neil Gordon and Co in London, lent me flipper lenses to hold in front of my glasses.  I found I needed an extra 0.625 dioptres correction in my left eye and an extra 0.5 dioptres in the right eye at night.  I therefore had them make up a special such pair for naked eye astronomy, including an extra 0.25 dioptres astigmatism correction in both eyes.

I put a doubled up hairband on the barrel (an elastic band would work as well).  This allows the eyecup to be set and stay put in any position.

Just one word - wow!

My observing eye prescription has 0.75 dioptres of astigmatism.  However, I'd read that in low light a greater correction is needed.

I therefore did a head to head test with a 0.75 vs a 1.0 Dioptrx. The latter did indeed work out better.

1 minute ago, Clarkey said:

I put a steeltrack on my newt. To block the gap I used an oversized bit of sponge and screwed it down under the focuser. Once fitted I just cut of the excess. Works fine for imaging so it must be quite a good seal. I have two steeltracks and I have found them excellent.

Excellent idea!

I agree that the base not sitting flush isn't perfect.  In practice though I haven't found it a problem.

However, the short extension to my mind is a plus rather than a minus.  A low profile design like this means that the secondary can be smaller for a given fully illuminated FOV, or the FOV wider for a given size secondary.

If you have a scope with the focal plane well outside the tube the simple answer is a detachable extension tube on the focuser.  I prefer such a location for the focal plane as this gives lots of flexibility for accessories.  On my OOUK Dobs the focal plane is 100mm outside the tube, and I find this ideal.

Apart from the heavy load that the Diamond Steeltrack accepts, the other feature I like is that, unlike the Moonlight, it has a scale to show the position of the drawtube.  I find this very useful when switching around accessories.

YMMV.

Teleskop Express in Germany are showing 3x Baader Steeltracks for Newtonians in stock.

I use one for very long stacks with a night vision device and they support all this very well.

I've now found a suitable stool in red and white.  Go to https://www.amazon.co.uk/GMWD-Telescoping-Telescopic-Lightweight-Adjustable/dp/B096FS9Q59/ref=mp_s_a_1_10?crid=OQXI7P3JYZZD&keywords=rainbow+telescopic+stool&qid=1650338114&sprefix=rainbow+telescopic+stool%2Caps%2C157&sr=8-10

I think for many Starsense Explorer is a game changer.

I bought the 70mm refractor for two of my grandkids and was so impressed I bought one myself just for the Starsense Explorer itself.  I've now adapted it so that it fits into the finder shoe on all my scopes.

However, the DX models have a different phone mounting, and so the adaption will probably be different.

There's a long thread on adapting Starsense Explorer to other scopes at https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/362327-starsense-explorer-stand-alone-conversion/

6 minutes ago, cajen2 said:

It's just a shame that the FOV is so narrow - in a dob, you're constantly nudging to keep the target in view.

 

This is of course where the wider FOV of the BCO compared with standard orthos pays off.

Luckily, my OOUK Dob mount is lovely and smooth, so nudging is easier than with mass market Dobs.  That said, I do track with my equatorial platform when I'm observing one object (such as a planet) for some time.  This makes it easier to catch fleeting moments of good seeing.

The equatorial platform also costs less than expensive wide field eyepieces!

On 15/04/2022 at 14:57, jetstream said:

The 10mm BCO will pull away from many other eyepieces under the right conditions ie cooled, collimated accurately and great seeing. Honestly the 10mm BCO hangs right in there with my Docter 12.5mm UWA for sharpness and contrast.

The 10mm BCO goes deeper than the Docter however.

The BCO is a Zeiss design and some say it is not a "true" ortho. The field is opened up to 50 deg and will show some small distortion with ortho purists quick to point this out. Years ago I tested many orthos with some also showing hints of distortion....

Just for reference balancing distortion is a function of eyepiece design- TV chooses pincushion distortion over barrel distortion- Many Televue enthusiasts dislike the Docter 12.5mm UWA for this reason as it shows a small bit of it at the edges, squeezing stars together a tiny amount.

In my large dobs I use a 10mm Delos a lot and when wanting to confirm very faint objects I use the 10mm BCO as it shows a tiny, but real amount deeper than the Delos.

Yes, the Baader Classic Ortho has been criticised because the very edge of the field of view isn't perfectly sharp.  However, I feel this is unfair as the inner 43 degrees (that a standard Abbe ortho has) is just as sharp as the latter.  So the extra FOV is just a bonus.

Additionally, the volcano top that the 6 and 10mm BCOs have is more comfortable than orthos that don't have this feature.

I eventually got the new style stool after the original order failed to turn up.  However, the replacement didn't always fold down completely.  After contacting the seller I quickly got a refund and was told to keep the stool.

I've now had a chance to take it for a test drive, but unfortunately I can't recommend it.  This is because it's unstable when leaning forward, something that could cause an injury or result in knocking your scope over.

This has made me revert to the original much more stable model, but there's a silver lining to the story.  My Dob is an OOUK one and, like the Bresser First Light, the tube can be rotated.  By turning the focuser so that it sticks out from the tube horizontally I've been able to reduce the maximum height of the eyepiece by several inches.  This means that, unless I'm using my equatorial platform, my original stool works on my 10in Dob for objects from the horizon right up to the zenith.

I've also just bought a red stool for my brother.  It's similar but a slightly different design to my original one, but Richard says it's stable and very easy to expand and contract.  What's more it's only £19.99.  Here's a link:  https://www.amazon.co.uk/Booxihome-Telescopic-Generation-Lightweight-Gardening/dp/B08TT848D8

I still can't find one in white or red/white though.  Can anyone help here please?

Finally, if you need a slightly higher stool Spiel has come up with the ingenious idea of putting it on top of a bucket and securing it with Velcro.   Thanks, Brett!

I much prefer a headlamp to a torch. Headlamps are often decried as they shine in the eyes of others.  I very rarely observe with anyone else, and so my headlamp doesn't have a chance to shine in anyone's eyes. This is because on the very rare occasions I am with others I'm carrying the headlamp in my hand - just the same as a torch! 

So a headlamp is multi-purpose, and to my eyes preferable, especially as it keeps 2 hands free.  Most also have a variable tilt feature, that's useful when on a desk.

Many headlamps are way too bright for astronomy use though. So I insist on ones that can be dimmed right down.

I'd recommend one of the inexpensive Black Diamond range that can be set very dim. Moreover, they can be set to always come on with the dimmest red light whichever button you push - so no accidents!

The red beam is wide and even, as is one of the two white beams, the other white one being a spotlight.

You do need to avoid the higher priced ones that have a battery check on starting up though. This is because they light up an intense blue that'll ruin your dark adaption. Additionally, those with the Powertap feature can be knocked on accidentally. BTW, the so-called Astro models aren't suitable for astronomy as they don't have a red light!

Here's a link to the Cosmo 250 on Amazon, that costs about £20 to £25 depending on colour: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Black-Diamond-Cosmo-250-Headlamp/dp/B07S2ZJ6CG

However, this model has now been superceded, so I'd suggest the Cosmo 350. Here's a pic in the black/red colour (there's a choice of 5 colours). The Black Diamond website is at  https://www.blackdia...shop/headlamps/

I'd add that I also have the Photon Freedom Covert light that Wulfrun referred to.  However I rarely use it as the beam is very narrow with 2 uneven rings.  It may just be because of the covert nosepiece though.  I've hesitated ordering the standard model as it's so expensive to import it from the States.  However, Wulfrun has solved that with his link to a UK supplier at a very good price.  I've therefore just ordered one, so many thanks!

Here's the March results.

Where I've put hazy was during an anticyclone with Saharan sand in the sky.  The result was very poor transparency.  It wasn't just here, but over a very wide area as reported by others on SGL.

Fabulous!

What a great report! I felt I was almost there with you.

Thanks, Mike.  That unfortunately knocks it out for me. 

Might be good for outreach though, especially if it's parfocal or nearly so.  Guests love to be able to zoom into objects like the moon, double stars and globulars.

A night vision device might be worth considering, although very expensive.

See the brown Ga-As curve on the graph below.

Thanks. Just signed up.👍

Ah, I see.  Thanks.

This Lanthanum zoom sounds interesting.

@MikeQ.  How parfocal is it compared with the other zooms you've tried?

What's the maximum width? I'm wondering whether it can be used in binoviewers.

Can the eyecup be removed?  If so, what's the diameter under the eyecup?  This is to see whether a Dioptrix can be fitted.

Many thanks.

I need to make a small correction to my previous post.  I do have my Report 112 tripod extended a little bit, but just enough to bring it up to the right level for me to observe sitting on my adjustable height stool.

If I didn't need the head in the picture I posted I'd also use an extendable centre column.

@Ags. I assume your centre column is non-geared. How easy is it to adjust?

As Ags mentioned, the ability to customise is one of the advantages of buying from Berlebach.

This invaluable site does lab tests on a lot of camera tripods for stability and portability: https://thecentercolumn.com/

As a result of their tests I recently bought (from Sweden) a carbon fibre tripod from the Leofoto Ranger range, the LS-364C.  These have no centre column and so are lighter and fold to a very compact size.

However Leofoto make a lot of other ranges too, with and without centre columns.  Go to https://www.leofoto.eu/

There's a lot of different combinations in the Ranger series.  The first 2 numbers in the model refer to the diameter in millimetres of the thickest carbon tube; the last number refers to the number of sections.  They're now imported into Europe as well as the US with 16 in the range in various weights and sizes, all but 3 having ball and socket heads in a package. 

Like you I have a Scopetech Mount Zero, and initially used it with my Leofoto Ranger tripod.

Then I bought a Skywatcher Solarquest mount.  I'm very pleased indeed with the Solarquest as it automatically finds and tracks the sun.

This means of course I have to swap between the mounts whenever I change from day to night use or vice versa.

I didn't think this would be a problem.  However the Mount Zero wouldn't release from the tripod.  It may be because I'm disabled and my hands don't work properly, but First Light Optics very kindly sorted this out for me free of charge.  It happened again though, but this time with a help of a strap wrench I (eventually) got them apart.

Thanks to a suggestion here on SGL I then bought a Berlebach Report 112 tripod.  This has solved the problem as a lot of the Berlebach tripods have interchangeable heads.  The one I chose has a spring-loaded bolt to fix a mount on top (see pic below), and this makes it very easy to swap mounts.

As I said, it's probably just my disability, but I'm flagging it up in case it's peculiar to the Mount Zero.

I love my Berlebach Report 112, and chose this model as it collapses to a small size and isn't overly heavy.  Yes, it's a little shorter than the more popular 212 and 312 models; however I always sit to observe and so this isn't a problem for me at all. 

Additionally, not having the legs extended means that it's more stable.  Plus I use mine with an accessory tray that makes it even steadier.  I don't detach the tray from the legs for speed of set up, plus this means that the whole scope and tripod easily fits through a doorway.

I'd add that my Berlebach is much steadier than my Leofoto, although of course the Leofoto is a lot lighter.