globular

It was research and write-ups similar to yours, Don, that persuaded me to choose the DGM NPB as my first nebula (narrow-band) filter. (Reviews by David Knisely and Phil Harrington clinched it.) I'm sure I'll accumulate more over time but this seemed a good place to start. [OIII (line-filter) next I think.... but that's a different thread.]

I've noticed a very slight colour splitting of very bright starts a couple of times - but only when the nebulosity doesn't improve with the filter. When it does I'm probably taking in the nebula too much to notice. Everything is so new and exciting to me. I'll make a point to look out for this more carefully next time out.

Nice report and well sketched 👍

Nice report and lovely sketches 👍 I'm itching to get back out but the conditions have been against me here.

If you scroll a bit further down in the Notification Settings area you'll see each type of "thing" and whether you want to be "notified" (i.e. get a browser notification) or "email". I suspect you need to tick a few "email" buttons for the "things" you want to be told about. As you can see, I prefer notifications over emails - but you can customise your setting to your preferences.

Great. Loving your technique.

Lovely once again.

I'm trying to get glasses friendly EPs at all focal lengths too. Can I be cheeky and ask you to cast your eye over the them in my thread? https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/362724-perfect-set/ (Very cheeky but I'm lovely with it 😇).

Please post back if you give it a try - I'll be up that way in a few weeks and will give it a go if it's good and safe.

Does the 22mm Nagler make this list too? It’s on my short list, with the ES 92s, for a glasses friendly fairly wide set. On paper it has 19mm eye relief like the 31. In actual use does it not work well with glasses?

Nice thread this. Thanks all, especially @jetstream

Very close to what I saw too - just lacking the frosting to the north as you described it; also a bright / white edge to eastern side (left side in the above picture); and a thin light strip running horizontally through the middle splitting the dark patch into two. I was amazed how stable the view was. No need to concentrate and build up the details from glimpses; it was all just there. And for so long too. I was gobsmacked. (I was using 8" F10.5 Edge HD at 300x + ND0.9)

You captured my expression perfectly! Can you see into my garden? Thankfully I kept my gear out and it cleared to reveal lovely conditions. I was then:

My early clouds cleared and revealed some of my best skies yet. Mars in particular was taking all the magnification I could throw at it with some lovely stable surface detail at 300x. Big smile on my face.

I'm under the one bit with cloud 😢. And your post had me all excited too.

I can't advice you as I have no experience of these EPs - but I'm following this thread with interest as I have similar decisions to make. If you're considering the APM Hi-FW 12.5 does that not also bring in the ES 92 12mm too? Or have you ruled that out? And if so what's your reason?

Hi All, I got some reasonable views of Mars this morning (relative to recent cloudy or very poor conditions) and decided there was enough detail to try my first sketch. I had my 8" Edge HD and Hyperflex Zoom at 10mm giving 214x and sketched from 12.40 to 1.10am. I'm sketching to observe more rather than observing to sketch - so this is just the doodle I did at the eyepiece not a 'proper' finished piece. I was so excited when I compared it to a map picture of Mars just now! It does seem to have some of the main features in about the right places.

How about I give you $325 for yours? 🤣 72ED is food for thought. I've had plenty of times I wished I had more sky at my eye - but there is so much more to enjoy I'm in no rush to go multi-scope..... yet. Would a plan to add this at a future date change my EP choices now? It seems to me that the ones I'm considering would work well in the 72ED too? Except weight perhaps?

Thanks for the advice @Louis D Yeah I know pupils below 0.5 are rarely usable and agree 300x mag is the place to stop. The Powermate was there to give the 20, 15, 8.5 and 6mm (all >0.5mm pupil). The resulting 5 and 3.5 are just 'free' bonuses for exceptional seeing. If I drop the Powermate would the gap from the 30 to the 17 be too big? I'd probably then want something like the 22 Nagler. But then this is likely too close to the 17 to have both (not to mention cost). I like the idea of the ES 92 series as it's the only one I am aware of that gives that level of FOV with eye relief comfortable with glasses. It's a similar story with the 12mm and 10mm being close. I feel I "want" the ES 92 12 for the FOV but then without the 10 I'm not covering the mags from 178 to 306, which feels too long without any coverage. This brings a 9 or 10 back into the equation, or a Powermate. If I drop the Powermate and pretend the ES 92 series doesn't exist then I'd probably end up with: Not sure I can get behind that as much as the original list though. I can't convince myself the Powermate is a bad idea (I feels like you get "free" EPs) and I can't help wanting to try super wide FOV. Then again it's growing on me.....🤔 Thanks again Louis. Suggestions like this is exactly what I was hoping for to challenge my logic and fill my knowledge and experience gaps.

That was the point I was making. I should perhaps have spelled it out more clearly.

I'm new to all of this so can't give you much wisdom from personal experience - but I have read a fair bit on this over recent weeks and can share what I've concluded from the experience of others. Most planetary visual filters only work effectively with exit pupils 2mm or larger. Typical / good conditions support planetary magnification of around 250-300x. So if you have a scope and an eyepiece than can give 300x and 2.5mm exit pupil then filters might add something noticeable. But, if you're more typical, you'll likely have an exit pupil much smaller than this when viewing the planets and the range of filters that make a worthwhile difference is reduced; and the effect of those filters is less obvious. It then becomes a personal things as to whether these more marginal impacts are worth it for you. Or, in less words, you'll have to try it yourself to know if you it works for you. 😃 I've ordered a few filters myself to give them a try. I'm not expecting "wow" but I'm hoping to tease out some detail that is eluding me. I suspect I just need to train myself to be more observant / patient - but I can't resist trying them anyway.

Hi all. I'm after some opinions and advice regarding building up my eyepiece set (pretty much from scratch). I have an 8" Edge HD SCT F/10.5 which I use for visual only. I like to do a bit of everything; planets, nebulae, galaxies, clusters. I don't wear glasses but share my scope with my wife who does. [edit: apparently she shares her scope with me 🤐] I've put together the following list of EPs that I'm thinking about: I tried to select fl gaps that will fill nicely with a 2x powermate (no overlapping) but where the EPs used on their own will be at the most useful spots. I've selected ones with eye relief between 19 and 22; and with wide fov but not super wide; so that both with and without glasses should work well. I know ES 92 in a Powermate is a weighty combination but I think my mount will manage it ok. I have a Hyperflex 7.2-21.5 Zoom for when narrow FOV isn't an issue, but feel some individual EPs with wider FOV are needed too. Have I overlooked any EPs that would work well / better? Any on the list that have an alternative that might be better? Similar at lower cost? Or better and worth the extra? Is this too many? Or not enough? The Morpheus and Delos ranges are tempting too - but their fl didn't seem to slot into the list as well. Maybe I'm being over mathematical? Look forward to your advice.

Great report - thanks for posting! I've been getting some good glimpses of Mars recently and have been keen to get some filters to see if that helps tease out some detail - looks like quite a few of the ones I've ordered won't be that useful after all . Shame you didn't post it 2 days ago 😄. I'll give it a new home if you still aren't impressed John 😇

Is there a "correct" or "ideal" position for the focus knob to be before tightening and locking the mirror for transporting? All the way in? All the way out? Not important?

They both agree it's good until 1am. CO then goes up from 3 to 13 but stays green, whereas NightShift goes amber. They must have a lower threshold. Having 2 is better than 1 I reckon.