Stu

Agreed! Taking Ha images with a phone is blooming hard and the results rarely show anything vaguely approaching what you see at the eyepiece. I’ve heard the SolarScouts can be variable, much like the Quarks from Daystar I guess so it’s a bit of a lottery.

Go to bed at 8 and have a couple of hours before you leave at 3am? Early hours are often better as the land and buildings have cooled so the air is likely to be stiller.

Good point regarding white light. If the OP hasn’t tried a Herschel Wedge in a decent refractor then that might be an option to try. I must be easily satisfied because I actually found my PST40 gave great views, albeit at small image scale and limited resolution. The joy of a PST is that it can be used in a PST mod which I now have two of, a 102mm and a lunatic 150mm. This is probably the cheapest route to larger aperture Ha observing but needs competent DIY or someone to build it for you (as in my case) so I doubt it is what the OP is looking for in this instance. Just for reference though, my 150 probably cost me about the same as the Lunt 50 all in, by careful second hand purchasing of the various components over a period of some years. Depending on what scope the OP has, Quarks can be an excellent option to decent aperture and great views. Buying from a reputable source with a good returns policy is essential though as the quality and reliability does vary. Mine had some variability in detail across the field of view but I was very impressed with the views whether it was full disk in a 60mm or high power in a 100mm.

It’s interesting to a degree, although the cynic in me thinks it’s likely more marketing driven than actual improvements. Not taken by the ‘Ideal’ branding either, I preferred the VX naming. Hope to be proved wrong when we see them in the wild.

The Nagler is small, but the tin of soup is far, far away 🤪

A nice session for me on a mix of objects. Most varied session I’ve had for a while. Sky was pretty decent, though typically not as transparent as the previous night when I couldn’t observe!

I had no expectation of heading out last night as the forecast looked quite dodgy. However, Mrs Stu had a work call at nine so I thought I would have a look see. Amazingly enough, clear skies! Some light cloud headed through then completely clear until I came in at around 10.30. Scope of choice was Phyllis, the FS-128 on the AZ75/Uni-28 for speed of setup. I then remembered my StarSense, so thought I would give that a go to see if it was quicker than aligning the mount. The answer is probably not, but still it worked well and got me onto quite a few targets as you will see! First up I tried for Tegmine, that was actually my initial reason for heading out after Wookie65 mentioned it in his post about his new Vixen. Well, it looked beautiful in the Tak, three lovely airy disks with separation between the tight pair. Hints of a first diffraction ring around them but not much. The seeing was a bit variable (when isn’t it? 😩) but mostly it was consistently split. I tried a few different eyepieces including the SvBony 3 to 8 zoom, some BGOs and Vixen HR Planetarys (2.4 and 3.4). The SvBony held its own against these, splitting it just as cleanly. The HRs may (and I emphasis may) have been slightly cleaner but really nothing substantial. It does make you question the value of all these hyper expensive eyepieces! Next up I popped a 31mm Nag in and headed to M44. What to say, absolutely beautiful, pin point stars and lovely contrast. A quick pan to M67 and a switch up through a few eyepieces; 22mm and 17mm Nag, then Docter 12.5mm which really brought it to life. M35 was another cracker, can’t recall which eyepiece framed it best, likely the 31. I diverted over to Orion for the 37 Cluster NGC2169, an old favourite. It looked best in the Docter, and I love splitting the tiny double in the top corner of the 3. I moved the double right out towards the edge, and was still able to split it there so the eyepiece is not too shabby in terms of field curvature and edge performance. Less challenging at f8.1 I know, but not all eyepieces will do this. I then went on a bit of a galaxy hunt just to see what was possible. The sky looked fairly transparent but I wasn’t particularly well dark adapted. M66 and 67 were immediately obvious with their angled yet parallel orientation. Initially I couldn’t see NGC3628 so headed to the other triplet M96, 97 and 105. These were all clear straight off, nice little group. Although they are dimmer, they are also smaller so I suspect the surface brightness is similar to M66/67 and better than 3628. I then went back and tried 3628 again. I backed off to the 31mm Nagler and could then just about spot it. It got easier in the 22 and better in the 17mm I think. It needed averted vision but I was pleased to see this one. I stopped by Algieba while I was nearby, upping the power to see two unequal airy disks, nice, then went over to M51 which I didn’t have high hopes for. How wrong I was! Two glowing centres with haloes around them in the 31mm Nag. Upping the power showed a little more, very nice! Then on to M81 and 82 which were really fabulous, best I’ve seen for a while. I think I forget sometimes just how much better my skies are down here than they were near London. M82 in particular was quite dramatic and showed some mottled internal structure. I know I can do better too, as there were still lights on around the house and I had been looking at my phone so wasn’t dark adapted in any real sense. Last two targets were M97 which showed as a roundish grey glow, hints of something within but I couldn’t claim eyes! M108 was tougher, but definitely there nearby. Unfortunately Mrs Stu’s call finished early and I was also tired after a long day of working on the house, so I called it a night, but my heart wanted to stay out for another hour or so! From a kit perspective, the scope is amazing, and so much better since I fitted the FeatherTouch. Focus is so much easier to find with the dual speed. I used a variety of eyepieces, namely 31, 22 and 17mm Nags, 17.5mm Morpheus, Docter 12.5mm for deep sky stuff. High powers were achieved with SvBony 3 to 8mm zoom, orthos and Vixen HR in 3.4 and 2.4mm guise. I also used an 18mm Ortho at one point and really enjoyed that. The SvBony continues to impress, very practical in terms of range and optically excellent. Actually with the SvBony, Leica Zoom and 24mm Panoptic I have a three piece travel set that covers most bases except for very widefield. The mount/tripod combination is fine for shortish sessions but there is a little more vibration than I would like with the Tak on board. This was just on the patio, so having the tripod dug into the grass would help, but really the AZ100/Planet is much more satisfactory. I suspect the AZ75 on the Planet would be nearly there too but that kind of misses the point of the AZ75 as a lightweight setup. Finally the StarSense. This was nicked from an LT80AZ and I modified the base to fit onto the finder slot on any scope and it seems to work well on the FT despite being slightly obscured by the mount. Once aligned, it got me either on or very close to all my targets very easily even with a higher power eyepiece in place. I would say it’s not as accurate as the encoders on the mount, but perfectly useable and a great aid. With short sessions, I like to avoid time taken finding targets so this is a great way of maximising time spent observing. So, a nice little session of an hour or so, must get out with the 128 more often, and make the effort to put the AZ100 out.

Ah yes! I knew there was another important difference! I use an AP Barcon element with my binoviewers and use extension tubes to vary the magnification rather than changing eyepieces, much quicker and the quality remains excellent.

As I understand it, the PowerMates and TeleExtenders maintain the eye relief of the eyepiece whereas Barlows extend it outwards. This can be useful for short focal length orthos for example, or annoying for long focal length plossls where the long eye relief can make eye positioning difficult. I’ve used x2.5 PMs before and found them excellent. Barlows can be too though, I have a Zeiss Abbé Barlow and the quality is superb.

If you want/need tracking then perhaps consider and EQ platform. Quite a few of us use them; they are easy to setup and give around 45 mins to an hour of tracking. I keep tagging him for this 🤣, but @Captain Scarlet uses a 12” newt in an AZ-EQ6 successfully so will be able to comment. Orion Optics dobs are significantly lighter as they are aluminium rather than steel. Theoretically they can have better mirror quality if you spec the higher grade mirrors but I’ve not seen a side by side with a GSO scope to know whether this actually gives better results or not. They are a chunk of cash new, so buying used makes a lot of sense.

Totally agree with this, for both Ha and White Light. A small fraction of a turn on the fine focus really makes the granulation pop in white light.

I saw this one linked to on one of the threads I read. No idea of it’s available or not. Looks a bit ungainly to me. https://www.firstlightoptics.com/specialist-focusers-borg-tele-vue-lunt-gso-rc/feathertouch-125-dual-speed-focuser-for-lunt-ls50-solar-telescopes.html

Can’t beat a nice Feathertouch, and that looks really nice! Looks very neat and compact. I had wondered whether dual speed would be better but from a bit of reading it’s not necessary on these scopes, and actually the dual speed version looks a bit ungainly in comparison. Make sure to post an image of it fitted, and enjoy! 👍

Yep, probably needs a very good day to make it worthwhile, but useful as a very compact travel kit. Simplistically yes, just need the back end from the other mod but I need to get the etalon at the right distance. It’s not just a case of measuring 600mm from the objective because of the CQ module, but I did find the focal point then the etalon needs to be 200mm ahead of that. Will give it a go at some point soon. I have had a brief solar session with the FS128 but not in gods seeing, should be good anyway. I’ve also got a 120mm Celestron Omni XLT f8.3 which nearly went to Wookie65 but had a last minute reprieve so I’ll try that too. Ludicrously enough, I also have a second 150mm f10 in the attic (don’t ask) which just needs a bit of fettling to get sorted. Might just try that for white light alongside The Beast! That would be a crazy setup for days of really good seeing!

Have been meaning to try this for a while, the CoolWedge in my FS-60Q. I was concerned about heat build up in the Q module, probably unnecessarily but I rigged up a UV/IR cut filter ahead of this lens just for safe measure. Not needed with the Sun this low, but perhaps will help on a hot mid summer’s day. Inwards focus is always a challenge I find with the 60mm, especially with the Wedge which has a long light path and Binoviewers on top of that. I played around with a few options, eventually removing the 2” ClickLock so I could attach the MaxBright IIs directly to the CoolWedge II, which has that option. I had to use a x2.6 GPC, but with 25mm eyepieces this resulted in a decent sized full disk view but with plenty of surrounding sky. Adding extension tubes allowed me to up this so only around 50% of the disk was visible, giving significantly higher mag. Seeing was pretty ropey in the gaps between clouds, but still good enough to see the large AR which is disappearing around the limb now, plus plenty more of the smaller ones. Even 3597, 3594 and 3592 showed as small spots. Granulation was pretty much invisible, just a hint of mottling over the surface, small aperture and poor seeing the culprits. Anyway, nice to have the option of a very compact scope for travel. I did try the 76 DCU aswell, finding focus with the same setup and that showed the same mage scale but more resolution at a very similar magnification due to the virtually matched focal lengths; 570mm vs 600mm for the Q I’m intrigued by the prospect of using the 60Q as a small PST mod for travel too; it is f10 which is ideal, I just need to source a Baader Ha filter to sit ahead of the CQ optics and see if I can reach focus. It may need a cut down rear tube but I’ll see what happens. Some pics for reference.

Let me see what I can do. They may be somewhere already so I’ll post a link, otherwise we may be able to get them into a gallery.

It’s worth having a look through Mike73’s Sketches; he did a project to sketch all the Messier objects, all viewed from a dark site through 12” and 16” scopes. I thought there was a gallery or website with them hosted on but they seem to have lapsed, so have a look through this thread. I think I have them all saved so can post them up somewhere if that is easier?

They’re ok I s’pose 😉

If you’ve got the ability to take a bit more weight then yes it would. A lot depends on the tripod too though, as you know.

They look nice, sourced directly from Japan?

I agree, the AZ75 engineering is in a different league to the Giro-WR, but to be fair, so is the price! I’ve found the 75 to be hugely capable, and just like the 100 it does not need counterweights to stay smooth; the only reason to add a counterweight is to ensure the stability of the whole rig if you feel that is necessary. I’m thinking of switching my FC100 to the AZ75/Uni-28 and putting the FS-128 on the AZ-100/Planet. Currently I have the 150mm PST mod on the 100 simply as somewhere to keep it, but Mrs Stu is not overly happy about it being around so it may have to live upstairs. Back to the point, the other thing that surprised me about the AZ75 was just how compact and lightweight it is compared with the 100, but with the same superb engineering.

Good good. As my wife frequently says to me when I tell her I was joking about something, ‘I would work on that’ 🤪 Absolutely, friendly disagreement is fine and an essential part of the forum. I guess I just personally work on the basis of presenting opinions and letting the OP take all the info in and decide themselves. Much like when people ask for advice on which scope to buy, I prefer to see people discussing the pros and cons of scopes they think are suitable, rather than a ‘you must buy this because it’s what I’ve got and think is good’ type approach. I will drop you a PM later, but all is good 👍

I have used a Mewlon 210 for some time, so am well aware of the characteristics. I have already pointed out the need for a centred star and agreed with the need for a cooled scope. I have said that I don’t think the hairy stars are related to collimation but are likely cooling or seeing related. To get the best out of these scopes, they need to be bang on with collimation so that is certainly something well worth doing as David has verified, carefully and with research. I really don’t see what your beef is?

Well it is Malcolm’s choice, and there are other ways of going about it such as an artificial star. Cooling is a problem we all face, and all deal with when collimating scopes. He has said the collimation looks slightly off, and that can have quite an impact on planetary detail. I don’t think it is the cause of the hairy stars as I said, but do think it is worth looking at, carefully as I’ve said. It is actually not as hard with these scopes as it seems.

Why so sad?