Second Time Around

Another vote for the Baader zoom + Barlow. One of the many plusses for me is that it takes a Dioptrx to correct my astigmatism. From what I've heard the Lunt is not as sharp as the Baader on fast scopes, but I can't speak from personal opinion. However, extra eye relief sounds interesting and would be an advantage if you observe with glasses or a Dioptrx. A couple of questions about the Lunt zoom: firstly, does a Dioptrx fit it? Secondly, does the eye lens rotate when zooming?

The problem with straight through finders (of any kind) is that you often have to twist into uncomfortable positions, especially as many of us have bad backs. Having a neck problem as well, they're very much a no-no for me.

I live in a hamlet East Kent and according to Clear Outside my estimated sky quality is mag 20.83 and Bortle 4. However, as I posted earlier on this topic, this seems optimistic. From looking at www.lightpollutionmap.info I'm guessing those figures are based on the World Atlas 2015. The VIIRS 2019 doesn't appear as good. If you look at the FAQs on the light pollution map it explains the differences between the maps plus lots of other useful information. I used to live just a few miles away from Stelling Minnis and one of the advantages is that there's public access to the nearby Common, although it's not as good as you might think as JTEC pointed out. However it's certainly better than just about any of the villages. I've just received a package that hopefully contains a secondhand Unihedron Sky Quality meter. I got it for £35 + £5 postage from UK Astronomy Buy and Sell, and there were 8 available from a finished project. I'm looking forward to using it and will be checking out lots of locations within an hour of home - as JTEC posted Romney March looks promising. I'd already started investigating here, but the meter will make it easier to compare.

I've got the Antares 10x60 Versascope finder and can thoroughly recommend it. It comes as a RACI (right-angled correct way up image) but can easily be converted to straight through as it has a huge range of adjustment., It comes with a 25mm crosshair eyepiece that you can swap out for your own 1 1/4 inch eyepiece. It also has a T2 thread so you can attach a camera. It's very good value for money at just £145 including the mount. Go to https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/antares-versascope-10-x-60-guiding-x-hair-finderscope.html.

I have no problem with splitting Mizar and Alcor any time I can see stars as faint as Alcor .

About mag 5.5 with averted vision on the clearest of nights here at home. However, we're low lying and so get a lot of mist (and dew). We're supposed to be Bottle 4 here, but I have my doubts. It seems about the same as when I lived in the suburbs of London. But I was a teenager then. Of course increased light pollution is likely to be a big factor in addition to my poor pupil size now I'm an old man.

Seeing faint stars is different to how sharp your eyes are. The former partly depends on your maximum pupil size, that tends to decrease with age, plus of course on light pollution and sky clarity. Unfortunately the maximum pupil size in my better eye is only 4.5mm (7mm is more typical for young people) and so my naked eye limiting magnitude is well below average. On the other hand I have very sharp vision with glasses: 6/4 in each eye, that corresponds I believe to 20/12 old style.

As my wife would say to me, "Yeah, right!"

Couldn't agree more. I always knew when my wife was reading a Bryson book in bed. She couldn't stifle her laughter and kept on waking me up!

You probably just need glasses, or a stronger prescription if you already wear glasses.

Thanks, Dave! I've not long returned to astronomy so wasn't aware of that thread. Like others I've had nothing but good service from FLO, and as I said I go to them first. Only if they don't do what I'm after do I try elsewhere.

There's an optional upgrade to the Bresser focusser to convert it to dual speed. I gather it takes about 1 minute to fit. Cost is 75 Euros so probably about £65 from UK suppliers, so a lot less than replacing the whole focusser.

The German Bresser site says 28% for the 8 inch, 29% for the 10 inch.

I didn't know that FLO actually hold stocks. Another reason to add to the list as to why they're my first port of call.

I'd recommend you avoid equatorial mounts altogether. They're more difficult to use and cost more for a given amount of stability. It would be better to put the saving in cost into a bigger aperture scope. A Dobsonian mount would be much more suitable for your husband. The Skywatcher Dobsonian you linked to is good value for money, but like John I'd recommend you go for the slightly more expensive Bresser. It comes with a highly regarded focusser plus the eyepiece is of good quality. In particular the mounting is much better than all but the most expensive Dobsonians. Comparing several Dobsonians in showrooms I also found the Bresser of a given size is more easily transported.

I can't help but love the Milky Way pic in your signature!

I wanted the biggest aperture closed tube Dob I could carry outside in 2 pieces and, having handled lots of scopes, decided that was 8 ins with most brands or 10 ins with an Orion Optics UK. The limiting factors were not only the weight, but also the bulk. The OOUK Dob metal base has a smaller footprint so is easy to carry close to one's body rather than at arms' length. Plus the tube rings make it easy to carry the tube. In fact I can carry my 8 inch OOUK base in one hand and the tube in the other on my good days. I say good days as I'm somewhat disabled, and I suspect that someone able-bodied could probably manage 1 size up from me. OOUK Dobs are justifiably expensive so I decided to look for a used 10 inch. An 8 inch very quickly turned up and I grabbed it. However it took over a year before I found a used 10 inch. I'm keeping the 8 inch though as there'll probably come a time when I won't be able to manage the 10 inch. The 10 inch has cured my aperture fever and I have absolutely no plans to go bigger.

What's the back focus on these please, Steve - enough for a binoviewer plus filter wheel?

I think I'm right in saying that the 20mm Explore Scientific 100 deg accepts a Dioptrx. Can anyone confirm?

I have an OOUK 8L as well as their 10 inch f/4.8. The focal plane is 100mm outside the tube. So an extension tube is needed for most visual use. Both have the same OC1-M focusser that you have. The 10 inch is currently stripped down ready to paint the interior with Black 3.0. Then I'll be fitting a Baader Diamond Steeltrack focusser. There's just no comparison between the two focussers with the Baader being as smooth as butter. I''m another who uses the moon to align the finder. There's certainly no parallax then!

SRB Photographic in Bedfordshire do custom adaptors. I've not bought custom items from them myself, only their standard ones. A long established company with excellent reviews. Go to https://www.srb-photographic.co.uk/

The 30mm binoculars mentioned above are image stabilised models. I have the 12x36 version and because of the image stabilisation they outperform my 10x50s. However they're way over your budget. I haven't used the Opticron Adventurers but I do have some 8x42 Opticron Discoveries. Based on my experience with the latter I'd expect the Adventurers to be a good choice, and as mentioned they were well reviewed by someone very experienced.

I have a damaged neck so the solution for me (and a necessity rather than a luxury) is a binocular harness, that is even more comfortable than a wide strap. Normally a harness is much bulkier than a strap. However I've found the one and possibly only exception is the Rick Young Ultralight. Not only is it indeed ultralight (1 ounce!), it's so small it easily fits in my binocular case so I leave it on my binoculars permanently. It's also extremely versatile as it can be set up in so many different ways. Additionally it's ever so easy to adjust and doesn't twist. It's also much easier to hold the binocular steady, with the result you can see more detail. Most of all it's extremely comfortable. I thought the narrowness would mean that it would dig in to my shoulders. It's counter-intuitive, but even over just a thin shirt it doesn't at all. This is because the weight is distributed over the chest as well. I really don't know it's on and carrying my binoculars (Canon 12x36is or Opticron Discovery 8x42) for hours is almost effortless. I also have one on my dSLR. Go to http://binoharness.c...larharness.html for further details and a video demonstrating it in use. At £26.40 it's not cheap but I wouldn't be without it. In fact every time I buy binoculars or a camera in the future I'll be buying another one. Go to https://www.amazon.co.uk/Ultra-Light-Binocular-Rick-Young-Outdoors/dp/B018JM01WW/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=rick+young+harness&qid=1582302302&sr=8-1 I'd add that I have no connection with the company other than a (very) satisfied customer.

I remember her well, especially her lovely rich voice. A sad loss so young. RIP Heather.

I have the Canon 12x36 image-stabilised binoculars. I find with these I can see more than with 10x50s. The steadier image more than makes up for the bigger objective. I suspect the same would apply to your 10x30 IS as well, but can't say for definite as I've never tried them. I agree with Olly in that I'd rather use my 8x42s than 10x50s, as I can hold them steadier. Some of the earlier Canon IS binoculars had problems with the stabilisation but the newest versions seem to have solved this completely. Like others here on Stargazers Lounge and on Cloudy Nights I'd never buy other than image stabilised binoculars again for more or less any hand-held use.