The60mmKid

Only Takahashi telescopes can see black holes. Recommended. (More helpfully, though, I'd also consider a good pair of 10x50 binoculars for your purposes of taking the instrument along on hikes and learning the night sky.)

I wonder if anyone bothered to ask Jupiter. Typical.

Worry not; it won't make a difference! I've owned a couple of dobs with focuser tubes that intrude on the light path, and I've also used accessories (e.g., Paracorr, binoviewer GPC) that do so. Even when using high magnifications, there isn't a visible impact. Like you, I worried about this at first and consulted with a couple of respected telescope makers, who shared the perspective that it's a non-issue.

Has anyone used a Baader Steeltrack focuser with a Tak? They're such darn good focusers (I had the Newtonian version), and they're priced competitively with the Tak fine focusers.

Anyone who spends hours sitting in Crocs in November looking at Schröter’s Valley is so much more than a "telescope owner." Thanks for the enjoyable report!

Buying high quality eyepieces gives you the peace of mind to start worrying about whether your diagonal is good enough.

To understand why aperture matters, all I had to do was use a larger telescope once 😉

One of the merits of Sissy Haas's double star book is that it clearly demonstrates that how different observers perceive color is highly subjective. In the book, side-by-side notes from various observers often report different colors. I think there are a few variables at play. 1. The inherent subjectivity of color perception (see https://www.britannica.com/science/color/The-perception-of-colour) 2. Telescopes that are either truly apochromatic (e.g., reflectors) or that exhibit varying degrees of chromatic aberration 3. Atmospheric conditions 4. Aperture Number 4, aperture, is what concerns us here, so it's helpful to account for the other variables. If we are only considering aperture, then I think photography provides a useful example/parallel. Camera lenses have built-in diaphragms that control the aperture (i.e., "stopped down" to the minimum aperture, "wide open" to the maximum aperture, and all of the "stops" in between). One of the main considerations when selecting an lens stop is that you don't want to let too much light in since that would result in a loss of detail, including color. You "blow out" the details when too much light enters the lens... The vividness and nuance of color is lost because everything is washed out in the overexposure. I'm not sure whether this is an oversimplification, but to me this seems to carry over to astronomy. On bright, colorful, high contrast targets, larger apertures can overwhelm the eye's/brain's ability to interpret color. So stopping down (i.e., using a smaller aperture scope) can make it easier for the eye-brain to interpret color. This isn't to say that all stars display color more manageably in smaller scopes. I predict it depends on their brightness, and I think there's probably a correlation between 1) brightness of the star, 2) size of scope, and 3) perceived vividness of star color. In other words, I predict that some of the brightest "showcase" doubles display their colors more vividly through smaller scopes, but that the color of fainter stars/pairs benefits from increasing aperture in proportion to their faintness.

Make sure you get binoculars with ED glass. Otherwise people with pale skin will appear purple on sunny days.

Have you ever used a binocular telescope? It's a different beast. I have a friend who detests binoviewers but is head over heels for his Kowa Highlander. A binocular telescope can be a brilliant stargazing tool, including for doubles. Possibly worth trying.

A moment of revelation for me was the first time I observed with a binocular telescope. I could not believe how much more color I could see in stars vs. monoviewing.

Yeah, it's a thing. https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/633339-put-your-stars-on-a-diet/

You'll get the hang of it! It all gets easier with practice! Before you know it, you'll be aligning your finderscope while collimating your mirrors while brushing your teeth while singing 😎 Hang in there!

You're from one of the few places on Earth that has an eyepiece named after it. Cool 😎 Welcome to SGL!

😍 London misses you, little friend! I'm glad it's in good hands ☺️

Since you're off the wagon, look at the binocular telescope I'm selling while you're at it. If you're gonna slip down that slope, do it in style 🤩

PS: Binoculars without go-to are really the best.

I admire that you sold off what you wanted to sell off and are enjoying observing on your terms! Well done 🎉 I highly recommend the Astronomical League Observing Programs: https://www.astroleague.org/alphabeticobserving/ I've completed a few of them and especially find the Deep Sky Binocular Observing Program to be a joy. The summer Milky Way, a pair of binoculars, an atlas, and an observing list... Ah, such fond memories!

Are you sure the Meade is still in production? I was under the impression that it isn't. I just pulled mine out of storage, so this eyepiece has been on my mind.

Beautiful! Thank you for sharing!

The solution is to buy more telescopes while waiting for the sky to clear. Then, we're still "doing astronomy."

I think it's worth noting that much of the central obstruction debate relates to planetary performance (i.e., reduction of low-contrast detail relative to the CO size). Low-contrast detail isn't a consideration when observing double stars. In my experience, the way that CO comes into play when observing double stars is by exaggerating the diffraction rings (which may be a issue or a non-issue, depending on the observer's subjective preferences) and, relatedly, by making the telescope's performance more susceptible to poor seeing and poor thermal acclimation vs. an unobstructed scope. And I think the exaggerated diffraction ring "issue" only pertains to brighter doubles. I don't find it noticable or even perceptible when observing stars that aren't as bright. A run-of-the-mill 5" mak that I owned easily split closer doubles than any of my prized 60mm refractors could. But sometimes I'd prefer the cleaner (i.e., with more subdued diffraction rings) view through the refractor.

Now, that sort of behaviour would be indiscreetly continental for a forum such as this.

😭

I've decided to settle for telescope bigamy. It's the best that I can do. I asked FOA-60Q and HD-145 for consent, and they're both cool with it.