Deadlake

The Pegasus has an ALtZ mode for visual hence the question.

Two scopes for me would be hitting 20 kg, however same time visual only. I could want to go up to 25 kg double scoped in the future however I wonder what the stretch is using the counter weight?

Since the Pegasus can be used in AltZ mode I'm wondering if this might be a better alternative to an AZ100. Lighter in exchange for giving up dual scopes. I think the light weight mounts will cause a rethink of lighter AltZ mounts for visual usage. For example the Pegasus plus a carbon tripod is around 10 kg, which is the weight of an AZ100 without a tripod. That makes moving a 5" APO scope + Pegasus around the garden quite possible. However traditional mounts have much better guiding accuracy so are quite safe for now.

More discussion here: https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/818409-pegasus-astro-nyx-101-harmonic-mount/page-4#entry11901336 However the gist is that the results where due to poor seeing due to African dust flying into Europe.

That’s a good question, I do not know. Rumoured price is around $3000. This is close to RST-300 in load capacity, 20 kg, so why not two scopes?

This has no AltZ mode and no brake at all? I'll wait for the Pegasus to come out, built with a Swiss harmonic gear. https://pegasusastro.com/nyx-101-harmonic-gear-mount/

I was going to swap out the Vixen HR's for TOE's. However I used the HR's for the first time in an age on the Moon (Monday) and I thought to myself no I'll keep them. The only one I would consider moving on is the HR 1.6 mm as I hardly use it, however I do not want to break up the set. One question how do you find the TOE 2.5 mm on the moon @Stu? Note, the difference between the TOE and HR is less when comparing using an LZOS than with a FPL53 based scope.

Look at petrol and gas prices, they really have increased and I cannot believe they will come down regardless of which way the war in Europe resolves itself. LPG is also used for making plastic, so it’s not just transportation costs that will rise and with China going into recession it will get very scary out there. To add ta data point I’m told that a 105 mm APM triplet with Phenolic tube and FT3545 will now retail for £5500. When I looked 2 years ago they where around £4000. I’m also not surprised that Chinese made products have gone up, the free lunch is over, I.e. relative pay will equalise. I guess manufacturers will relocate to more stable geo political areas….

Someone wanted one on UK Astro buy/sell, offering £300. I will keep for now…

APM 10 nn and 24 mm UFF. The APM 10 m really hold their own when used in a BV, amazing.

I have a 130 mm APM however the 105 mm APM is growing on me, just nice to have a small RFT scope out very quickly.

Using a flat field *might* need a completely different set of EP's. An XWA 20 mm from memory seems a little flatter at the edges in a APM 105/f6.25 compared to a APM 130/f6.

I was thinking of modern multi lens EP’s, say 20 mm upwards where the effects of field curvature would be more noticeable, usually termed as astigmatism. Take a 20 mm XWA or maybe a 21 E these EP’s have been designed to work with F4 scopes to produce a flat image, of course the manufacturers do not put a spec on the EP, usually have to wait for observer reports like this one Here Jerry is reporting the lack of astigmatism in the EP. I take your point if you want a flat field then go with a Petzval design of add a field flatter to a scope, however placing the correction the EP to reduce astigmatism maybe a more practical approach.

Is there any particular reason why Takahashi or any other vendor does not come out with a fast doublet 4" (around f6 ish), even for visual a smaller scope has some advantages. Modern EP's even mid priced can cope with the field curvature so not a valid argument. The f 7.9 doublets are capable, however compared to the Vixen fluorite do to its speed creates a noticeably larger exit pupil which for a dark site visit will pay back in spades. APM lens are made of ok-1/ok-4 which is fluorite like but you have the weight penalty of a triplet, returned with that brightness of the lens and contrast. I presume why the Vixen is a one and only fluorite scope of this type is due to the glass available at the time.....

The performance provided by this EP is a bit or a bargain. I have two for BV usage, I prefer the eye relief over the TV alternative.

It's a shame the Starbook 10 was not reviewed, it resolves many of the issues with the original star book. That being said in reality an iPad has replaced the need for the Starbook, however it's not replaced the dedicated control pad it has which is great for glove based usage.

Can SkySafari be set to green instead of red for night time viewing. The eye is less sensitive to red than green, so if using green the screen brightness can be turned down.

Tamiji would 😁😁😁

Hopefully, don’t want to feel it’s the same as when Vixen stopped HR production and then everyone rushed to get the remaining sets….

Anyone compared a TOE 3.3 to HR 3.6 mm?

Presume this is cool down related?

In an idea world to be as portable as possible a harmonic drive would be the lightest tracking mount running in Alt-Z mode. However thats quite an expensive option. I suspect the AZ100 tracking will be close to an EQ mount in cost but for the payload (up to 20 kg each side) will weight less. A ScopeTech Zero is also great but the scope will need to be less than 7 kg (Hence 115 mm ) to be usable, but much more portable.

From above I mentioned "Maybe a 115-120 mm would be a compromise?" I mentioned the 115-120 mm size as the 125 mm is around 7.8 kg which would rule out quite a few light weight mounts...

Are there encoders for these mounts at all?

There is a review of the Noh mount here: https://www.cloudynights.com/articles/cat/user-reviews/field-test-the-noh-ct-20-alt-az-mount-r3313 I was tempted however slow mo comes up, then then AZ75 as well. I find tracking mounts better on the moon where any vibration causes wobble it degraded max magnification I can use.