Second Time Around

Could you please post a link to the Svbony Barlow you bought as they have several models? The reason I ask is that some of them can be used at 1.5x as well as 2x. This adds versatility, and also give a wider field of view at a given magnification with nearly all zoom eyepieces. I agree with Bugdozer that the 15mm wouldn't be a good buy if you get the 7-21 mm Svbony zoom, the latter being something that I'd definitely recommend. Good choice! It looks as though your scope comes with a 45 degree diagonal, that's great for terrestrial viewing. This won't be as good quality as the rest of the scope, and will literally be a pain in the neck when observing objects high in the sky! So I'd forget about the 15mm eyepiece and buy a 90 degree diagonal instead. Sybony do a cheap model, but the optical alignment of a diagonal is important. I'd therefore go for the slightly more expensive Celestron at £45. It's worth spending a bit more on a diagonal as you'll be using it all the time. Go to https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/celestron-90-prism-diagonal.html#:~:text=Celestron's Prism Diagonal slides into,chance of a cricked neck!

We also need to know whether you wear glasses when you observe, and also how dark your skies are. Finally, what 2x Barlow do you have?

Thanks, Louis. Harry Siebert quoted me $300 for a 67mm Plossl. That was 2 or 3 years ago too. This is the maximum focal length with a 2 inch focuser to get a 40 degree FOV that night vision devices have. Unfortunately, Gary Russell doesn't sell to the UK. It may be that, like some other US companies, he doesn't have an export license.

Very interesting, John. I'd love to get hold of an 80mm. The reduced apparent FOV wouldn't be so much of a problem with my night vision device as it's limited to 40 degrees anyway. Anyone got one to sell by any chance?

I use a 40mm Plossl with my Quark at f/26 for h-alpha solar when seeing is poor. I also use a 55/67mm afocally with my night vision device. The latter makes a huge difference to the brightness of nebulae. But these are quite specialised uses.

That's interesting, Louis. You learn something new every day. Can you give any specific examples please?

I've just added the following to my last post. Additionally, unlike Go-To, Starsense Explorer can be moved around the observing site without the need for realignment.

I don't think there's a "right" answer, just what's right for an individual. I should correct what I posted before as I do occasionally use 1 finder. That's an Askar 180 camera lens that can be converted to visual use with interchangeable eyepieces. For instance, together with a 20mm/70 degree crosshair eyepiece from Svbony this gives me a 9x40 finder with an approx 7.75 degree field. However, as I said I hardly use it, instead preferring Starsense Explorer. The main reason is that, due to poor health, my observing sessions now have to be short. Starsense Explorer allows me to see many more objects in these short sessions. I came back to astronomy just a few years ago (hence Second Time Around). Luckily I remembered all the constellations plus the position of quite a few of the bright DSOs. I still sometimes enjoy "the thrill of the chase", but for me Starsense Explorer is by far the best option. So it doesn't make starhopping totally obsolete for me or indeed anyone else. However, I think that the main reason that so many beginners give up is the frustration of not being able to find objects. Starsense Explorer solves that very nicely indeed, plus it tells them either on screen (or even verbally) about many of the brighter objects. It's also quicker than Go-To and, as I mentioned before, can easily and cheaply be moved from scope to scope. Additionally, unlike Go-To, Starsense Explorer can be moved around the observing site without the need for realignment. Also, with Starsense Explorer you still see a lot of the intervening sky between objects and the area around the objects themselves. Unlike Go-To you can go as quickly or slowly as you want. So there's still an element of learning and discovery. New technology in any field often takes time to be fully accepted. I'm normally as guilty as anyone of this. However, I truly think that Starsense Explorer really is game changing.

I've adapted my Starsense Explorer to fit all my scopes using a 3D printed part to fit any standard Synta finder shoe. Go to https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:4868065 I find this far easier and very much quicker than starhopping using finders, and is especially useful in urban areas where few stars are visible. There's no problem whatsoever in getting objects within even an 0.8 degree field. There's no need for a finder - I sold all mine and put the proceeds towards the least expensive Starsense Explorer scope, that anyway comes with a red dot finder. The updated database of the Starsense Explorer now contains all the objects in the Sky Safari Plus app, and so will keep anyone happy for a lifetime. I learnt to starhop 60 years ago but for me Starsense Explorer makes it obsolete. That said, starhopping is fun, and I do (very occasionally) do so.

John, it was my 72mm f/6 I was referring to. However, it's an earlier model from Altair Astro with I believe a shorter main tube, so may have more infocus as result.

I did a series of tests on a variety of Barlows (including with the lens cell only when this is detachable) on my APM zoom. Here are the results: 1.25 inch mode FLO Astro-Essentials 2x Barlow (probably the GSO) - cell only - 1.97x FLO Astro Essentials 2x Barlow (probably the GSO) - complete - 2.63x Baader 2.25x zoom Barlow - cell only - 2.48x Baader 2.25x zoom Barlow - complete - 2.75x APM 2.75x Barlow - cell only - 1.89x APM 2.75x Barlow - complete - 3.28x 2 inch mode FLO Astro Essentials 2x Barlow (probably the GSO) - cell only - 1.87x FLO Astro Essentials 2x Barlow (probably the GSO) - see below* Baader 2.25x zoom Barlow - cell only - 2.33x Baader 2.25x zoom Barlow - complete - 2.54x APM 2.75x Barlow - cell only - 1.83x APM 2.75x Barlow - complete - 3.07x * not tested as APM zoom set screw too big and needs replacing with a smaller one I usually use my APM zoom with just the lens cell of my nominal 2x Astro Essentials Barlow (GSO) from First Light Optics, or just the lens cell of my nominal 2.75x APM Barlow. In each case this gives just under 2x amplification, so gives me all the focal lengths from 15.4mm down to about 4mm. If I want even more magnification I use the complete Barlow lens. For still more magnification I add 1 or more inexpensive Baader extension tubes when in 1.25x mode. Each of these adds about 0.25x amplification. Go to https://www.firstlightoptics.com/adapters/baader-dt-4-1-31-8mm-nosepiece-extension-18mm-long.html I've just bought but not yet used an Omegon/TS glass path corrector. This has a nominal amplification of 1.6x in a binoviewer, but 1.30x with the APM zoom in 1.25 inch mode. It doesn't fit in 2 inch mode.

Good point. However, in my refractors I don't need to go up to a full 2 inch diagonal. Instead I use the excellent Baader T2 prism that's intermediate in size, and have no problem. The APM zoom also works well in my OOUK Dobs in either 1.25 or 2 inch mode.

The ZWO Seestar 50 may suit you better. Strictly speaking, it's a camera rather than a telescope and builds up an image over several minutes on a smartphone screen. I've no experience of one myself but I'm sure others will chip in.

+1 for the APM Superzoom. It's by far my most used eyepiece and even better than my Baader zoom. Rather than the Svbony zoom I use the APM zoom plus a Barlow as that gives more eye relief and a wider FOV. The Barlow also makes the APM more parfocal.

I did similar damage to my scope and the local body shop sorted it out beautifully.

Another good point. The Starsense Explorer Technology can be used on other scopes and many of us have done a simple modification to do just this. This makes a Starsense Explorer scope an even better choice.

I agree with Dave that the mount is a little wobbly, but it's perfectly useable. As Dave said the weakest point is the diagonal (this changes the angle you look through the scope and makes it more comfortable to view), but at least the one supplied is better for terrestrial use as the image isn't reversed left to right. So the first accessory to buy would be a proper star diagonal (£20 to £30). The image will be reversed but much better quality. As I mentioned above, I'd stick with the 70mm as it'll be more stable than the 80mm and have a wider field of view. I've found this 70mm will clearly show that Saturn has a ring, and that'll be a real wow moment! It'll also show not only the 4 main moons of Jupiter, but also it's 2 main belts. Mercury and Venus will show phases like the Moon, and on the Moon itself you'll be able to see a multitude of mountains and craters. One warning though - don't look at the sun with it as you could severely damage your eyesight. As Jim said most galaxies will be a faint smudge, certainly from urban locations. However, the many clusters visible, even in town, will be well worth a look. Another advantage of the 70mm over the 80mm is that'll give a better view of the Pleaides (AKA the Seven Sisters) as you'll be able to see the whole of this naked eye cluster. Also visible will be a lot of double stars. These are stars too close to see as more than one with the naked eye but resolve into 2 or more components with the scope. They also often show beautiful colours. The database contains a huge number of objects, and many of them are described on screen or read out. We'd love to hear what you get and what your experiences are!

Thanks Stu.👍 I tried the NexYZ and found it fiddly with my hands not working properly. Is the Move Shoot Move any better in this regard. Or can you recommend anything better - I know you've tried several.

How did it go, Stu?

I think the main reason why people lose interest is that they find it hard to find objects. This is especially so in towns and cities where there are few stars to see with the naked eye to guide you to objects. Therefore I'd very much recommend that you look at Celestron Starsense scopes. These make it very easy to find objects with a free smartphone app - indeed my 8 year old grandson picked up how to use it in minutes. Go to https://www.firstlightoptics.com/celestron-starsense-explorer-series.html?gclid=Cj0KCQiA35urBhDCARIsAOU7Qwnbi6bN7TTF30Xxg8ALXRvQWIoxQcdIdhMIofHouUaaA4qQKzz4AKcaAiaJEALw_wcB By the way, the 70mm one you linked to is the model I bought for my grandkids. First Light Optics has the next model up (the 80mm) on special offer. However, although it has a larger aperture it's on the same mount and is likely to be a little more wobbly due to the increased weight and tube length. It'll also have a smaller field of view and so show less of the sky at once. So my choice would still be the 70mm. Finally, one of the other advantages of Starsense Explorer telescopes is that they'd be very easy to sell secondhand and for a good price.

I agree with this. In particular the Bresser has a better mounting. You can upgrade everything in the future, but it's expensive to upgrade the mounting. Because of the half moon-shaped altitude axis I found I could carry a 10 inch Bresser tube as easily as an 8 inch from Skywatcher/Celestron or GSO/Ursa Major. The bases were more similar. I chose an OOUK model though that has an aluminium tube and base so is much lighter. In particular, the footprint of the base is much smaller, making it easier to carry. They're very expensive new but depreciate quickly so are good value second-hand. A used 8 inch is very much easier to find than a used 10 inch - I had to wait a year for my 10 inch. Had I not bought the used OOUK I'd have bought a Bresser. As Richochet suggested I also bought the cheapest Starsense Explorer model, the 70mm f/10, and did a simple mod to fit the bracket into a finder shoe to use on all my scopes.

I've always strongly recommended the Starsense Explorer technology. It makes finding objects so easy, especially in urban areas where few stars are visible. As the focal lengths of the 8 and 10 inch are the same the eyepiece height is likely to be very similar.

I think the main reason why people lose interest is that they find it hard to find objects. This is especially so in towns and cities where there are few stars to see with the naked eye to guide you to objects. Therefore I'd very much recommend that you look at Celestron Starsense scopes. These make it very easy to find objects with a free smartphone app - indeed my 8 year old grandson picked up how to use it in minutes. Go to https://www.firstlightoptics.com/celestron-starsense-explorer-series.html?gclid=Cj0KCQiA35urBhDCARIsAOU7Qwnbi6bN7TTF30Xxg8ALXRvQWIoxQcdIdhMIofHouUaaA4qQKzz4AKcaAiaJEALw_wcB Just spotted you mentioned $s, so here's a link to Celestron's US page in Starsense Explorer scopes - the range is slightly different to what we have in the UK. https://www.celestron.com/collections/starsense-explorer-smartphone-app-enabled-telescopes

Ricochet makes a very good point about zooms being most useful at high powers and I'm in full agreement. Having said that, there are sometimes objects where a small change in focal length even at low powers can make a small but significant difference. This is with deep sky objects that have a low surface brightness. They may be bright in total, but if that's spread over a large area the surface brightness will be low. It can also occasionally happen with the fainter areas of some more normal objects, and in a few extreme cases there have been reports of a faint object with a low surface brightness being invisible altogether but then becoming visible with a small change in focal length. In this case such an object may be invisible in a fixed focal length eyepiece but visible in a zoom.

Rather than an elastic band I use a doubled over hairgrip and find that this holds position nicely. The great advantage of this on the NPL range is that you can set it at the position to get the optimum eye relief. This varies from person to person. I did head to head tests on the 30mm NPL against 3 other Plossls, including a 32mm Televue. There was no difference between any of them using my Quark. Admittedly this was at f/26, but h/alpha solar is notoriosly needful of good contrast. As a result I also bought a 25mm. Initially I bought a pair of each but found I couldn't get on with binoviewing so sold the 30mm, that went quickly. The 25mm is still in the for sale section and now at a reduced price.