alex_stars

Thanks everybody for your input.

I worked out a lightweight option with a few Baader EP holders, which works very well for me.

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/363512-lightweight-visual-back-for-a-180-mak-with-micro-focusing/

Clear Skies,

Alex

Great images and the animation is awesome 👍

Dear Stargazers,

I have been searching for a new visual back for my 180 SkyMax Mak-Cass, especially with micro-focusing ability. My 180 Mak has a standard 2" SC thread on the back so the obvious choice would be a Crayford style aftermarket focuser with 1:10 micro-focusing. However I did not like the idea to add about 750 g of focusing equipment to my telescope when my heaviest "payload" is 522g, thats visual with a 1.25" diagonal, an ADC and the Hyerflex zoom EP.

So I was thinking a bit and came up with the following setup, both for visual as well as planetary photography. Here is the shopping list:

• 2" SC to T2 rotatable adapter (there is a Baader one, I went for the TS TSSC-T2S adapter)
• 2x T2 - Baader 1.25" focusing EP holder (T-2 part #08A or #2458125)
• a 40 mm T2 extension or an ADC with T2 treads (I have both)
• a micro-focusing diagonal (I converted my TS 1.25" diagonal with one of the two Baader #08A EP holders and this TS ZS1D-T2 adapter)

Now first some images of the 1.25" diagonal conversion:

off goes the standard EP holder and mount the T2 adapter:

and on goes the Baader #08A EP focusing holders

well that was straightforward, but it's nice to focus the EP directly on the diagonal.

Onward with the new configuration. I removed the standard visual back and the 2" to 1.25" adapter I used to use:

and mounted the SC to T2, the 40mm T2 extension and the Baader #08A EP holder. This setup is about 100g lighter than the original VB. It places a camera at FL = 2477 mm and one can directly micro-focus the camera.

Another setup is with an ADC:

where this setup is about 70g lighter than the original VB and places the camera at FL = 2400 mm. Again micro-focusing is achieved with the Baader #08A EP holder.

Now when it comes to observing planets, an ADC is quite crucial in the next few years to come so I mounted it as seen above. You can level the ADC with the SC to T2 adapter, which is rotatable, but you can also easily lock it in place by tightening the outer ring with the grooves. Add the now focusing diagonal and your favourite EP and:

You are ready to observe at an FL = 2730 mm (almost stock FL). The advantage is that you can easily rotate the diagonal with the first Baader #08A EP holder (before the diagonal in the light path) and then focus your EP with the second Baader #08A at the diagonal. 😀

I like this setup, both because it is very lightweight and also versatile. Downside is that you can not add a motor focuser, which I don't mind. I will test this setup extensively now during October (Mars!!) and report back on how it performs when using it out at night.

Let me know what you think about the setup. Hope its useful to anyone.

Clear Skies,
Alex

Just came in this morning, new parts for my planetary observation setup with my 180 Mak:

Vixen SLV 15mm, two Baader #2458125 focusing 1.25" eyepiece holders and in the front a 2"SCtoT2 adapter and a T2 adapter for my TS 1.25" diagonal.

That will create a new, lightweight visual back for my Mak. Will post when it's done.

Again thanks for the input, N.F.

As I do planetary observing and imaging I never exceed a payload of 1 kg, even with a motorized filter wheel (e.g. the one from ZWO), but you make a good point about the focusing motor! That might be interesting in the future.

Cheers and clear skies,

Alex

Thanks N.F.

I think for my application these Crayford focusers are oversized as my "payload" on the focuser is about 500 g not several kilos as with DSLR imaging, so I try to keep the overall weight down on my scope.

Clear Skies,

Alex

a decade in and I'd like to revive the discussion as I am at the same point of updating my Skymax 180 focuser.

@A McEwan, do you remember what the payload was when you used the Borg helical. I am in contact with TS and they state that their helical focuser (https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/language/en/info/p7051_TS-Optics-1-25--und-T2-Micro-Helical-Schneckenfokussierer---T2-Anschluss.html) should easily carry about 500g of equipment. In my case that would be sufficient, both for visual as well as imaging.

Also what did you end up using for your Mak, would be interesting to know.

Clear Skies,

Alex

Planetary is hard indeed,

I agree with @jambouk, your frame rate (shutter speed) is too slow. To successfully beat the seeing, you want to be as fast as possible. However you are not too far off, as @Nik271 suggested, 1/125 (8 ms) should be already sufficient. As an example here

this one was done at 1/167 shutter speed, or better said 6 ms through my 180 Mak recorded as an uncompressed SER sequence. Also be aware of the video mode of your camera compressing the data, there you loose a lot of detail, like @jambouk pointed out.

Overall a very nice picture you took there

Clear skies

Alex

Welcome to the forum.

Hi and welcome to the forum!

Clear Skies!

Hi David,

why don't you order it from Germany, it seems to be available there and then inside EU, no fuss:

https://www.astroshop.de/fr/alt-azimut-avec-goto/monture-skywatcher-az-gti-goto-wifi-avec-trepied/p,55177

Clear skies,

Alex

16 minutes ago, globular said:

Nice comparison 

The Hyperflex has stated FOV of 40 @ 21.5mm and 60 @ 7.2.  I estimate it's about 55 @ 10mm, so it should have looked similar to, if not a little larger than, the BCO.  
(I have the Hyperflex but not the BCO so can't compare them as you have).

Thanks, glad you enjoyed it. I did not estimate the FOV of the Hyperflex yet, I focused more on comparing sharpness and contrast. My impression was that it is a bit narrower than the BCOs.

Also @Louis D posted in the preceding thread (https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/361158-settled-12-mm-planetary-eyepiece-ortho-or-zoom/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-3937213) this:

Quote

My version from Surplus Shed has between 9mm and 11mm of measured, usable eye relief, a measured AFOV of 33 to 49 degrees, and weighs 180g.

which I had in mind I guess.

Either way, the FOV of the Hyperflex is not at all limiting when observing planets. Maybe one day I should do a detailed FOV estimate of both (BCO and Hyperflex) at 10 mm.....

Dear Stargazers!

as a follow up of the discussion on 12mm planetary eyepieces: [settled] 12 mm planetary eyepiece ortho or zoom I though I share with you my experience with my newly acquired EPs which arrived last Monday from Aunty FLO 😉. Just before placing an order, I had a change of mind and went for the 10 mm BCO instead the Q-turret barlow. So here is the list of EPs in this comparison:

• Hyperflex 7E1 Zoom: 7.2 - 21.5 mm (which has already a very good reputation as we all know)
• Baader Classic Ortho 18 mm
• Baader Classic Ortho 10 mm
• Seben Super Plössl Zoom: 8 - 24 mm (same as Skywatcher, Starguider, Zhumell, Agena, ....)

So here are the contenders. I am well aware that all those have been reviewed and compared, but I though I share my experience with them in the hope that somebody finds it useful.

The comparison was done with my 180 SkyMax Mak-Cass, set up with the original VB, an Omegon ADC, a TS-1.25" star diagonal and then the EPs. In this configuration, which works really well to correct for atmospheric dispersion, my scope has an effective focal length of 2940 mm. I had the chance to use the EPs two nights in a row, one with ok seeing and yesterday with good seeing conditions. After cooling the scope for about an hour (where I try to place the scope outside for cooling when the outside air temperature is the same as the storing temperature of the Mak, about 24 deg C) I went to work comparing the EPs. Each comparison was done for about an hour, where I switched EPs back an forth, using the orthos as baseline for quality.

Comparison on Saturn at 10mm, so the BCO 10, the Hyperflex at 10 and the Seben at 10 were compared. That's at 294x magnification:

• The BCO 10 is really sharp (as expected) and to me surprisingly comfortable to use. I was initially sceptical about the 8 mm eye relief, however for me it works and thus gives superb views. 52 deg FOV is also very comfortable. The Cassini Division was clear and easily discernible.
• The Hyperflex, even though with a smaller FOV, was very close to the performance of the BCO 10. Also expected, I read a lot of good reviews on the Hyperflex. Again Cassini Division nice and clear.
• The Seben zoom also performed, however noticeably less good than the Hyperflex or even the BCO 10. Basically I missed some sharpness, obviously in comparison with the BCO, but also with the Hyperflex. For my eye it was harder to make out the Cassini Division through the Seben.

Comparison on Jupiter at 18 mm: BCO 18, Hyperflex and Seben at 18. That's at 163x magnification. Here a picture of how Jupiter should have looked like to describe what I managed to see:

• Again the BCO 18 gave superb views, sharp with lot's of contrast (as expected for an ortho). Quite some structure visible in the cloud bands.The two main bands where easy to see, no problem there. I was able to see the short dark band below the lower main band, as well as the eddy structure to the right of it (referring to the picture above). I have to say I was impressed.
• The Hyperflex zoom was quite up there with the BCO, maybe a bit less contrast, but I still could make out the short dark band.
• With the Seben zoom I had a hard time discerning the short dark band as well as the eddy structure to the side of it. Would I not have known where to look, I would have missed that. So noticeably less contrast in the Seben.

Summary comments:

• Using the BCOs as baseline, they both produce very sharp and contrast rich views. The 52 deg FOV is very comfortable to view planets. As said I was surprised how comfortable the BCO 10 is to use even though with its short eye relief (8 mm). Obviously not useful to people who have to wear glasses.
• The Hyperflex zoom is quite close to the BCOs, even though with a narrower FOV. Sharpness and contrast are comparable. Probably one would not switch too often to the BCOs and happily observe with the Hyperflex.
• The Seben zoom is a good EP, but not there with the Hyperflex or the BCOs. To my eyes its a workable zoom, but you miss out on details of the planets with respect to sharpness and contrast. I can recommend going for a Hyperflex (as so many have said before) if your are looking for a zoom EP.
• These three EPs, BCO 10, 18 and the Hyerflex are a very functional base set for a 180 Skymax. BCO 10 very sharp on Saturn (looking forward to see Mars with that). BCO 18 produces contrast rich views of Jupiter. And the Hyperflex for everything between 136x - 408x 😉. Maybe another fixed focal length EP in the 14-15 mm range, just to bridge the gap between the BCO 10 and 18. However the Hyperflex does a great job at that already.
• A yes, and I really can only recommend an ADC. Without it the cloud band details on Jupiter disappeared even in the BCO 18 and the typical blue/red colour seams were clearly visible.

Clear skies,

Alex

At my place, clouds moved in rather early, I did see the GRS though nicely (for the bad seeing conditions, high jet-stream speed) with my 18 mm BCO (150x mag, 21 ppi). More was not possible given the conditions.

Hi,

the 12" Lightbridge Plus has a focal length of 1524 mm, 304 mm is the aperture. You got a 26 mm 2" eyepiece along as I saw on Meade's homepage. That places you at about 58x magnification. As John above pointed out, a 8mm would give you 190x magnification, really nice for planets. 5 mm would result in about 304x magnification.

Hope that helps.

Nice, I will be out too! First light for my new eyepieces: Hyperflex Zoom, and Baader Orthos 10 and 18 mm.

Hi Kevin,

I think what you are looking for is this page: https://pds-rings.seti.org/tools/ephem2_sat.html

When you activate the field "Ring opening angle to Earth (deg)" you get the ring tilt angle as seen from Earth. Positive values (like for today 22.66) mean that the front side ring part (the one facing us) is down, negative is front side up.

Clear skies,

Alex

Same here last night, way too bad seeing (fast jetstream). Made out the GRS but not much more. Too bad.

Hi all and once again thank you all for your valuable input. 😀👍

I had now two nights (rather short as clouds moved in) to play with my existing 8-24 mm zoom and come up with a list of priorities. Without looking at my post from early on, here is my list of properties that are important to me for my new EP:

• sharper, more contrast views.
• eye relief not too short (even though I don't wear glasses)
• FOV can be narrow, don't mind that. My current zoom has a calculated FOV of 47.5 at 18 mm and I am just fine with that for Jupiter and Saturn
• eye lens of my current zoom is 24 mm, nice.
• A yes and I have to honestly say I really enjoy zooming.

Now I observe quite often with an ADC in my visual light path, which moves the effective focal length of my 180 Mak to 2956 mm. Also when I use the ADC, I don't want too huge and too heavy EPs, even though a Morpheus should be possible. Taking together all the ideas of the post so far, I decided to go for the following options:

• 7.2-21.5 mm Hyperflex. This is just too tempting. Thanks @John, @johninderby, @chiltonstar(via PM)
• 18 mm Baader Classic Ortho. That still has some nice eye relief and should be very sharp. Using an ADC, this results in 164x magnification with my setup and an exit pupil of 1.1 mm. This should be really nice for Jupiter. I enjoyed the views of my current zoom at 18 mm the last two nights
• Baader 1.3x / 2.25x Q-Barlow. That one will bring the 18 mm BCO down to 13.85 mm with the 1.3x element screwed into the ortho. This results (with ADC) in 214x magnification and an exit pupil of 0.84 mm and I guess that just should be really pleasant for Saturn. I played a bit with my zoom today and got some nice views, even though the seeing was not the best.

As I have also a Hyperion Barlow, I can push the 18 mm BCO down to 8 mm. Thanks @F15Rules for the BCO and Barlow idea. Having the new zoom and an ortho will allow my to do all kinds of comparisons, between the two zooms and the ortho... with and without ADC... I look forward to that.

Upgrade paths for the future are also clear:

• one day maybe a 12.5 or a 14 mm Morpheus, that would be interesting too. Thanks @iPeace
• or one day maybe a 14 mm Pentax XW. Thanks @dweller25

In a few days I will place an order so comments are still welcome.

Again thanks to all who participated. I really enjoy these discussions.

Clear nights,

Alex

On 02/08/2020 at 10:05, chiltonstar said:

Despite their current low altitude, I got a real treat last night with Saturn and Jupiter at their glorious best, despite the intense moonlight! Using my 180 Mak with ADC, Vixen SLV 15 mm, Baader Ortho 6 and 10mm and a 7.2 to 21.5mm zoom EPs, I had almost Hubble-like views for a few minutes as the seeing improved after a bank of cloud. Best magnification for J and S was about x245 and up to x300 once or twice.

Hi @chiltonstar

Those are exactly the views I am after. Since we have the same 180 Mak and I am on the lookout for some new EPs, may I bother you for some advice?

Currently I have a cheap 8-24mm Seben Zoom (Celestron and such quality) and I have an ADC which I plan to use visually. Now I am on the outlook for some EPs to extend my set.

I see you list the candidates I have in mind, Baader Orthos, Vixen SLVs and a Hyperflex zoom (I presume from the focal length). Unfortunately I can't get all of those at once so I thought I ask:

Having experienced such a great night recently, which of your EPs was the most useful in combination with the ADC during that night?

Clear Skies,

Alex

1 hour ago, F15Rules said:

Correct, it's a cracking eyepiece - but the trade off is not the best eye relief. In your Mak, an 18mm BCO wi with a 1.6x Barlow nosepiece such as W.O. or Antares would give you 11.25mm effective focal length, and the Baader Hyperion Zoom Barlow (2.25x) would get you down to 8mm EFL with the 18mm BCO - but with better eye relief than the 10mm. Worth considering?

Hi Dave,

thanks for the input. The BCO 18 mm is a nice idea indeed. However is it not counterproductive to add barlow lenses in front of an ortho EP and add "glass" in the light path?

Clear skies,

Alex

On 08/08/2020 at 15:04, Barry-W-Fenner said:

I have just ordered my 2nd Morpheus, the 6.5mm. Not had a huge amount of time with the 14mm yet but it is a stunning eye piece with a very good wide field.

I am looking to have a mixture of the BST range and Morpheus,  along with my 30mm 2" Aero ed.

Hi @Barry-W-Fenner,

I saw you aim for a mix of BSTs and Morpheus EPs. What is your experience with the both so far? Especially, how do they compare?

I am in a similar position of choosing which one to get first. In principle I need to span the range from 12 - 18 mm, but getting two or three Morpheus at once is too much for my budget.

So I thought to myself to get the BST 12, 15 and 18 mm first and then maybe upgrade later the one most used to a Morpheus.

I have an f/15 Mak and observe mainly planets.

Clear skies,

Alex

41 minutes ago, Ships and Stars said:

PS @alex_stars I haven't done much planetary (yet) but would some affordable binoviewers with a couple of nice orthos be ideal for this? A lot of people don't get on with them though.  Just thinking.

Right. A binoviewer is down the road an option. Would have to reconfigure my visual back and eyepiece holder to use up less backfocus when a bino would be used. A while ago @Captain Magenta and myself worked out some detailed specs for the Skymax 180 and estimated the maximum backfocus before aperture loss: https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/355495-reverse-engineering-the-skymax-180

Anyhow for now it's mono-viewing and maybe adding an atmospheric dispersion corrector as the planets are low these years 😁

Nice arguments for wide angle as well as razor sharp narrow ortho's.

12 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

The 13mm Hyperion has severe edge of field brightening--the worst in the entire Hyperion series.

The ES 82s do not, and would be a better choice.

Bear in mind, the ES cannot be used with glasses.

Thanks for those insights, I did oversee the field brightening issue with the Hyperion

7 hours ago, Louis D said:

Keep in mind that budget wide fields are not known for their excellence when viewing planets, which is what you're after.

True, I guess I really should aim higher at the wide field EP segment, or swing over to orthos and such if FOV turns out not to be the key issue.

Still waiting for a few nights to test my old zoom more...

Hi all,

as I wait for my next observation night, I was researching a bit some fixed FL eyepieces. Does anybody have experience with the following two:

• Baader Hyperion 13 mm
• Explore Scientific 82 deg in 11 or 14 mm

I did read quite some good reviews of both so I was wondering if I should add them to the list of contenders?

Remember, I have a f/15 Mak-Cass and mostly observe planets 😀