Tiny Clanger

OK, so, a good photographic tripod will have a removable head . The leg section of the triopod has a centre column that can slide up and down, at the top of that column will be a 3/8" threaded screw. That is the standard photo tripod top fitting. On top of that simple 3/8" screw, photographers put a head of some kind, maybe a ball and socket, maybe a pan/tilt ( typically the ones with handles) The photo head has a socket which screws onto the 3/8"screw of the tripod. On TOP of the photo head there will be a 1/4" screw, which is the standard that (almost) all normal cameras have a threaded hole for in their base. Some small, short, lightweight 'scopes have a threaded hole (or a few, to allow you to choose the best balance) drilled into their vixen dovetail bar. If not, then this adapter https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dovetails-saddles-clamps/baader-vixen-style-dovetail-clamp.html screws to the tripod, and provides a clamp to hold a dovetail. A few possible difficulties to be aware of : you want a really sturdy photo tripod and a really good smooth running head , and those things are not cheap. Avoid anything much below £100 or claimed to be travel friendly, you want big and heavy for stability : video tripods might be worth a look too. You will miss out on having the slow motion controls that make dedicated 'scope altaz mounts so good for the job. And, if the 'scope has a fixed dovetail ( not rings with the dovetail on) it might be that having it on top of a mount rather than on the side of a mount puts the finder in an awkward place. The good news is that many alt az 'scope mounts use a 3/8" to tripod socket (I can say with certainty that the az5 does, as I have one on a photo tripod myself) so if the tripod you buy is good enough, and the head can be removed, you could upgrade to an altaz later, keeping the tripod legs. Heather

That feeling is awe, but the true meaning of 'awesome' has been so devalued by overuse on trivialities , maybe try awestruck ? It has the clobbered by awe shade of meaning covered . I'm reminded of the apocryphal tale about John Wayne in a biblical epic ...https://ntweblog.blogspot.com/2017/09/say-it-with-awe-apocryphal-john-wayne.html

I'm not sure if I want to laugh or shudder at sacks may contain eyes ! (Engage gravelly voiced, portentous film trailer voice) "They thought they were prepared for the dark .... But were their eyes really ready for what was to come ? When the FLO astro head sacks (T.M.) come off , the horror awaits ... "The Seeing" , coming to a cinema near you (eventually)"

Dear Dragon's Den, I wish to manufacture special high quality 'astro head sacks' which I believe will find a ready market , .... 🙂 Heather

A two tennis ball sized package ? What can this be ?! Aha ! A securely packed set of 3 little filters , thank you F15Rules ! 🙂 Hurry back, Mars, Jupiter and Saturn !

I have the same bin.s, if you check the opticron site it gives suggestions of bracket for each specific model : https://www.opticron.co.uk/our-products/binoculars/adventurer-t-wp-binoculars/adventurer-t-wp-10x50 check the drop down menu for 'accessories' I bought my bracket at the same time as the bin.s to minimize postage. AFAIK, all binocular mounts use the same (camera to tripod style) threads, so pretty much any you buy will fit all binoculars with a threaded socket and all photo tripod heads. I have an old monopod and a small photo tripod ball head , perfectly sufficient to take the weight and reduce the wobble of the 10x50s, you don't need an expensive monopod , or a high quality ball head ( the head allows you to swivel upwards with the binoculars rather than tilting the whole momopod) , just be sure the monopod is tall enough to hold the binocular eyepieces at a comfortable height. Basketball players may need to be picky with monopod selection, most of us could just buy something like the Amazon basics model , which was £15 last time I checked Heather

Welcome, there's no such thing as a silly question, ask away ! Stourbridge should be a good place for telescopes ... it (along with Brierly Hill) was the major Brum/Black Country area glass making centre during the industrial revolution as I recall 🙂 Heather

OK, so I don't know about those specific binoculars, never used them myself . Nikon cameras yes, but brand loyalty across such different instruments would be foolish. I was dissatisfied with the 8x30s I was given when my dad bought some better ones 40 years ago for astro use, they are fine for general use, but 30mm aperture is small for astro use, and I'm in suburbia, I need all the light from objects that I can get ! I took the good advice from binocularsky who has actually used and compared all the ones he recommends. I bought the 10x50 opticron WP , for about £70 (this was 6 months ago) along with a simple tripod adapter for £10 . This allows me to place the bin.s on top of a cheap, no-name monopod I already owned, with a small cheap ball head I also already owned . The monopod is light, easily transportable (it closes down to less than 60cm) and supports the weight of the bin.s , less wobble, no arm fatigue, better viewing. Last time I looked Amazon did a 'basics' monopod for £15, there are loads of cheap small ball & socket photo heads around, All you need to check with a monopod is if it would bring the binoculars high enough for you to look through, remembering you will be looking up 🙂 . Heather

Yep, got my az5 on a venerable manfrotto 55, just the standard photo tripod to head 3/8" screw.

So, the way the threaded bar and triangular bracing thingy works, is by tension , the bar runs between a threaded hole in the top plate to under the triangular brace thingy where there is a black knob on the threaded bar ( a bit like a quick release plate, When the bar is in place, the triangular thingy is tightened by turning the knob on the threaded bar , and pulls it up towards the top plate, bracing the legs, yes ? I wonder if maybe you could find a threaded bar of the same length, and the correct diameter for your mount, along with a nut and perhaps washers or some sort of plate to spread the stress out. Would it be possible to have that smaller diameter threaded bar simply pass through the larger threaded holes and up into the mount's threaded socket. Then the nut below the triangular plate (taking the place of the black knob) could be tightened to pull the thing together in tension . The threaded bar would not stay in place when the mount is removed from on top, it would just fall, not being retained by the 1/2" thread which we assume is in the tripod top plate . It's beginning to look like rather a lot of a project to make this thing work ...

Have you seen this thread ? I think it is asking something similar https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/493417-astro-mount-tripod-to-photo-tripod-thread/

So, am I right in thinking that the long threaded bar and vaguely triangular shape are threaded through that mammoth top plate from below , and that is actually the mount holding bolt ?

Good isn't it ?! I still get plenty of 'WOW!' moments 4 months on from receiving my mak. My first love er, I mean 'scope was the Heritage 150 dob, and the pair absolutely make a great combination. If the Moon is out, or there are planets to see, I take the mak out into the garden, if I need more light gathering on faint stuff, or want to see a wider field I take the little dob out , I made it a low 3 legged table from scrap wood to stand on because the garden table I thought I'd use is cast iron, weighs a ton , and I need to keep shifting my 'scope when neighbour's trees get in the way of the view ! The heritage 150 (or 130) can easily be put on the az5 , as all have a standard rail ( so do 'tube only' OTA 150 newtonian reflectors, so if you only wanted to use one 'scope at a time, they could share a mount) . The heritage dobs unique party trick is closing up to half length though , which makes for easy storage in small homes like mine ! Heather

Glad it worked out for you, when folk think about this as a first 'scope I tend to say get something wider field to start off with because of the patience needed to find stuff , especially using the not very good red dot finder it comes with, but your upgraded finder will be a great help tracking down the fainter stuff. I have the smaller 6x30 finder on mine (and a rigel quickfinder too) , and sometimes realize I'm still looking through the 6x30 entranced, and really ought to go to view through the actual eyepiece ! Speaking of which: because the 127 mak is a forgiving f12 (ish) 'scope , it is not picky about eyepieces, so you don't need to spend loads. I have no experience of zooms, so can't comment on them, but regular plossls of a decent brand from around 15mm to the max 32mm will be fine and set you back around £30. Below 12mm or so plossls are less easy to use , which is where spending a bit more on the much lauded BST starguiders is a good idea. I've found an 8mm BST a very handy thing, pushing the magnification any higher doesn't often yield decent results in our UK skies , so lower EPs than 8mm may not get a lot of use. If you are thinking of ever changing telescopes though, and might one day get something a bit less easy on the eyepieces, forget the mid range plossls and just go for BSTs which you will want to keep , rather than plossls which you will want to upgrade. I went the other way, starting with a picky f5 before getting the mak, and the difference between a 12mm plossl and a 12mm BST in the f5 is well worth the difference in price. Heather

Ah, I thought I'd seen some combination of the digits 0, 1 and 2 and for sale, numbers mix up easily in my head though ! Do you really want me to answer that last question ?🙂 Heather

I thought you'd sold that 'scope ?! I just can't keep up .... 🙂

English understatement at it's finest ! 🙂 Heather

Volunteer for overtime ! 🙂

Thank you for the rant, which I'd prefer to call a public service ! Heather

ROOF ?! You didn't mention roof ! Whole new landscapes of possibility open up ... 🙂 Take a chair & blanket up there and some binos and lean back in comfort ! Heather

Yep, it is too easy to chase the impossible goal of technical perfection and lose sight of the point of it all, something I said way back in this thread ... The OP has not looked at the night sky through any telescope yet . As for everyone over the past year it's a shame he can't go along to a local club meet and do so, try a few options out and see the 'scopes and mounts size and heft. That would give him an idea of if CA was or was not an important factor for him I don't think we can gauge this at all . Step back from the black hole of ever higher priced , incremental quality improvements Basementboy , think about what is a truly sensible budget for you to spend, when you really don't know if this will be an interest which holds you for long. Then on a clear night get out in the park to look up at the sky with whatever you have, unaided eyes are better than you may think, any binoculars at all will show you some amazing stuff. You will be amazed. (Don't forget your friend to watch your back while you are amazed and engrossed though, we only want you stunned in the emotional sense, not the 'and then they took my wallet and 'phone' sense ) Heather

vlaiv as usual has the technical aspect nailed ... for chromatic aberration you need to think of light colour as a product of the wavelength , send light through a simple lens and precisely where focus in longer wavelength light (e.g. red) falls is different to where focus in shorter wavelength (e.g. blue) light falls, In refracting 'scopes , expensive glass types, and combinations of several types and shapes of lens are used to try and minimize this, whilst trying to not introduce any of the other aberrations lend based optical instruments are prey to . That's why 'good' fracs are expensive , or long ( long focal length minimizes C.A.) or both .... By the way,chromatic aberration is only found in refractors , not reflectors , bouncing the light off a mirror does not cause the same problems (naturally, other problems arise tho', nothing is perfect !) Heather

That's not a sermon by my standards, that's a precis ! 🙂 There just is no easy answer to the 'one best scope' question as far as I can see, price constraints and physical size/portability limitations mean major compromises have to be made. The question is , where do you make those compromises when you are a beginner with no idea of what will catch your interest once you get further into observing, and need kit that is good for that specific purpose . Or for that matter how far into observing you will get, or if it will be a passing phase, and the 'scope will sit in the corner being an ornament and wasted money. It's easy to concentrate on the kit and lose sight of the fact it is nothing more than a tool . As with cameras, and hi fi and camping gear, I'm only interested enough in the intricacies of the kit to try to make sensible, cost effective, informed decisions for myself about purchases . I want to use these things as tools to facilitate activities I enjoy , I don't want to fall into the trap of thinking the tool is the activity, something it is all too easy to do in this kind of forum where one can just get carried along . Heather

I'd clean forgotten this advert from gilesco which has the 120 OTA and a rather nice bag to carry it in as well as all the standard accoutrements and some things you probably don't want (but they are small and postable, so could probably sell on to recoup a few £) . You could ask him about the portability of this longer tube . I bought a diagonal off him, good chap to deal with. https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/367636-startravel-120t-ota-and-accessories-electric-focuser-carry-case/?tab=comments#comment-4040792

Why are you shouting ?