globular

If you’d drawn the 32mm with reducer compared to a 50mm without the reducer then they would have given near identical fov, mag and exit pupil.

“But”, I hear the OP scream, “my scope has a 1.25 inch visual back so I can’t use a 2 inch 50mm eyepiece!”

Well, you could buy a 2” to 1.25” adapter (£20 or so) and accept the vignetting of the outer portion of the fov.

Or buy the reducer (£130 or so) - but it too will vignette to exactly the same extent. Because both are limited by the same 27mm effective field stop caused by the telescope back. (Or more likely there will be vignetting and distortions, because reducers tend to squeeze and distort while they compress).

I’m sure vlaiv is right that the vignetting won’t be that bad.  But my point is that it will be about the same with or without a reducer.

I think the best views you’ll get with that scope is with an eyepiece with a 27mm field stop and a focal length that gives you an exit pupil that best matches your sky conditions and your dilated pupil size.

Just now, John said:

Yep. The largest I currently use is 5.25mm. I'm over 60 so I assume that my max dilated pupil has started to get smaller now.

I'm around that too - 5.5mm last time I measured it.
So my f10.5 scope isn't too limiting as I get 5.4mm with my 56mm plossl - and, when the sky is nice and dark, DSOs pop with the right filters.
Personally I see no reason to go the reducer route for visual astronomy - just pick the right eyepiece.

20 minutes ago, John said:

At what exit pupil does the secondary shadow start to show with an SCT ?

Roughly speaking, when the exit pupil multiplied by secondary obstruction % is about half or greater than your dilated pupil then you'll see it.

So in Louis examples;
lets guess his secondary obstruction was 30%;
and he started to see it around 5mm exit pupil;
when secondary exit pupil was 30% * 5 = 1.5;
so his dilated pupil when looking at the moon or sun was probably around 1.5 * 2 = 3mm.

When dark adapted his dilated pupil is probably 6 or 7 (if he's lucky);
so the exit pupil of the secondary would need to be 7 * .5 = 3.5;
and the full exit pupil would, in that case, be 3.5 / 30% = 11.5mm;
you'd be mad to create an 11.5mm exit pupil when your own pupil is only 7mm - seeing the shadow won't be the only problem you'd face.

(And Louis isn't mad - hence why he's never seen it when dark adapted).

Very impressed.

It looks like the filter screws into the slider (rather than just drop in)?
So I'm guessing you'll make a slider for each of your filters for quicker, easier changes?
And a nice storage box to slide them all in for safe keeping will be on the cards too no doubt?

5 minutes ago, fwm891 said:

@globular I’m able to build this because my camera has a 54mm threaded connection and I’ve been able to modify the rasa’s camera connecting plate to suit. It won’t work for a 48mm or smaller connection because there’s no support for the male thread into the camera.

To connect to your binoviewers I don’t know what connections are involved.

Connecting an M54 into my train won't be an issue - I've accumulated lots of adapters over the years - but if you're modifying an existing rasa connecting plate to make this then you won't have a surplus of them to make more. No worries.

Keep posting updates - can't wait to see the finished working version.
 

Looking very good 

If you're up for making more than just for yourself then I'd be interested in buying one or two. (Not for a RASA but for minimising back focus usage with binoviewers on an EdgeHD.)

4 hours ago, dweller25 said:

It has held perfect collimation ever since after a lot of “in’s and out’s”

17 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

They hold it VERY well.

Thanks both.
I'm not scared of collimating (ok, I am a bit scared) but I'd rather spend the few opportunities I get to observe observing rather than fettling.
Sounds like the Mewlon ticks that box.

Sorry to butt in momentarily but, for my future reference, how well does a Mewlon hold it's collimation once you get it right?  If it's just on and off a mount and into and out of the house should it stay 'forever'?  Or do they just naturally lose it over time - no matter how carefully it's handled?
Many thanks 

Stop. You'll have me in stitches.

13 minutes ago, saac said:

Does anybody recognise this famous phone box

Would Edward know? I think he would.

Friday at 10pm is my best forecast for I don't know how long... but something tells me I shouldn't be an amber gambler.

Have you considered the Pentax XW40?
It's 700g so is heavier than the LVW's 550g - but not by 'that much'. And there are none of the distortions and varying magnification described by Michael in the LVW - and it's the same price.  I love mine. 

Where is the jealous emoji? 

Good luck with Triton 

Fairies pinch the power to charge their 90s game boy consoles.
In cold weather the fairies also use the power to heat their wing warmers.

The 8"CC has an 8.4% secondary obstruction ==>  7.4" effective aperture

The 9.25" SCT has a 13.1% secondary obstruction ==> 8.0" effective aperture

The 10" CC has an 10.9% secondary obstruction ==> 8.9" effective aperture

The 11" SCT has a 11.6% secondary obstruction  ==> 9.7" effective aperture

Personally I'd make sure I was really getting everything possible out of the 8" CC before concluding I need more aperture.  It should be capable of producing stunning planetary images - not that far behind a 9.25% SCT (non edge hd). Are you really sure it's lack of aperture that's holding you back?  It could be a multitude of other things.

But if you're adamant more aperture is what you need / want then I think you need a step up bigger than a 9.25" SCT to make the extra spend worth while.

Lovely 

Wow, impressive.

Call your SSID  "InternetFor£10perMinute" and no one will go near it 😉

24 minutes ago, DaveL59 said:

So pretty pointless feature for anyone wanting some security on their network,

Hiding SSIDs really doesn't provide any extra security.  It might stop a casual attempt at joining your network - that will likely be kept out by the key and/or mac address security - but a real hack attempt won't bat an eye at a hidden ssid. 
I used to hide mine years ago - but I don't think it worth the hassle it causes when connecting new devices to bother any more.

14 minutes ago, DaveL59 said:

But once you re-hide the SSID you're done, it won't try to connect even tho it seemed to save the details just fine.

Something for ZWO to fix then.
Was worth a try - sorry it took up so much time.

I was going to reply to this thread earlier, but then I couldn't find it.

1 hour ago, DaveL59 said:

I'd need it to display the MAC also so I can authorize it which doesn't seem available in the app.

Again, you could temporarily disable mac authorisation while you add the seestar. You can then see the mac address on your router so you can turn authorisation back on and enter the correct mac address.

58 minutes ago, DaveL59 said:

So, station mode offers both 2.4 & 5 bands but seems your WiFi needs to be visible SSID, no option to add your hidden ones which all of mine are.

You could try temporarily unhiding your ssid so you can add it to the seestar. Then, once added and saved, hide it again.  It should connect again once added even if hidden.

I find it very accurate and very reliable.  The only time it fails to align is when I forget to take the lens cap off.

Is it worth the money?  Only you can decide that.  It will cut your 10 minutes aligning down to zero.  (It takes a minute or two - but you can be doing something else while it does it... I go and get my eyepiece case and it's done when I get back).  So how much is 10 minutes worth to you? How long does your CPC take to cool - maybe the few minutes you've saved won't actually get you any more quality observing time?

Do I think it's worth it for me?  YES.  I love it and wouldn't have a driven goto mount without it.  I use my scope much more often because there is no lengthy set-up process that would to put me off bothering on those all to common iffy partly cloudy nights.  It's like a grab and go manual experience with goto and tracking. 

You are doing the right thing - get the scope and see how your existing EPs work in it.

I will repeat my earlier comment on exit pupil though.  Your 40mm plossl will give you an idea of the FOV you can get - but I suspect the way the FOV is presented will not be very good, and not representative of what a higher power but wider eyepiece would produce.

With an exit pupil of over 8mm you will not be able to get all the light from your scope into your eye all at once.  This means the image will be dimmer and is akin to losing some of your telescopes aperture.  
Your scopes aperture is already small at 102mm so I'm not sure you'll enjoy the view when giving up a significant proportion of it.
If your eye's pupil size is, say 5mm, then you're losing about 22% of the light when using a 40mm eyepiece - so the brightness will be like that from an 80mm telescope (although the magnification and field of view will be that of your 102mm scope).

My guess is that the best wide field views you'll get from that scope will be using a 20 to 25mm eyepiece.