Deadlake

8 hours ago, Captain Magenta said:

The person I bought my refractor from gave up observing on that Walton green precisely because of that pub. Because he had to drive there, the proximity of the beer and its total unavailability broke him 🤣🤣

That establishment does look very inviting last time I visited. 

Sommerset is a beautiful part of the world. There is quite a difference observing on Waltons Green to a rural setting, however Waltons Green does have the Prince of Wales pub on it for when the cloud comes in 😃.

As far as SQM measurements, most of the data sources are I believe based on 2015 measurements and I believe that light pollution has increased a little. Same time I find SQM highly directional.

Really hope the move works out and remote working is here to stay as this opens the door to not having to choose between work and our interests..

Ps. Looking forward to your reports on new kit. 

An LZOS 105/F6.2 is also very good, but availabllty is jan 2023.

http://alpha-lyrae.co.uk/2014/01/01/the-apm-tmb-105-f6-2-triplet-apochromatic-refractor/

This scope and a TSA-102 in a CN shootout of over 40 scopes came out top…

Managed to get out on day of scopes arrival, clear skies to around midnight.  On first light, Jupiter was looking good, incredible detail of the belts using a 4 mm TOE, seems to give best views of Jupiter. Colours of the planets looked photographic/film like in nature. However to be fair seeing was not the best. I feel I need to swap the 2" Baader diagonal for the Baader T2 BBHS prism diagonal. The FT focuser made all the difference in making fine adjustments.

Note the amount of counter weight used to balance the scope, its 11.5 11.5 kg without a finder scope or diagonal.

On 06/08/2021 at 11:01, Alan White said:

Or how about the super APM UFF 30mm I have, replaced my 27mm Panoptic.

The APM UFF 30mm EP works really well, great for wide angle viewed of the sky... 

23 hours ago, Stu said:

Which scope Martin?

For an F6 as well as well as an F7.7. Presume Morpheus 9 mm will work well.

30 minutes ago, Barry-W-Fenner said:

Truth is I don't fully understand all of that, I do however appreciate an informed/wise opinion.  So I guess we won't be seeing anything larger than the 17.5 in the Morpheus range. Any recommendations for something arround the 25mm that performs similar?

Cheers Dom

24 mm APM UFF, a very good EP, however 65 degrees not the 72 you might be looking for. Also bino’s well.

1 hour ago, John said:

When I've seen LZOS scopes tested independantly (eg: by Herr Rohr) they usually do a touch better than the supplied tests. I think the latter are mainly to demonstrate that the objective has passed the quality control levels stipulated by APM.

 

 

The accuracy of the test bench is such that it could really be 0.98 Strehl, but as noted the atmosphere needs to cooperate to make use of it…

2 hours ago, jetstream said:

Ok, I'm officially jealous!!

Wanna trade?!

What you got! 😉

Better be quick before admins like @Stu close the bartering down as on wrong forum...  

Some more photos:

Now see how short it is:

And as for the focuser:

Ok, should be photo bombed out.

3 minutes ago, JeremyS said:

I heard there were delays in dispatching some scopes as a consignment of handles was held up on that boat in the Suez. Possibly why the WDS share price was so volatile: I hope John Handleby was trading on the shorts. 🤣

Baader is blaming the Suez Canal incident for delays, for instance BBHS 2" diagonal are meant to ship November 2021... 🤔 I've benn waiting since last March...

3 hours ago, JeremyS said:

Is the handle only standard for hand delivery? 🤣

Seriously, though, @Deadlake, that looks like a terrific scope and I look forward to hearing about your experiences.

What’s its weight?

It's one I think @johninderby would of approved of, would he buy the scope to get the handle???

Weight, around 11.5 kg, more then I thought...

1 minute ago, tooth_dr said:

Here mine 😜 

APM LZOS 105/650 with 0.75x RR reducer, 3.5” FT focuser with motor.

Nice! 😃
How new? Mines been waiting for the star light rings and focuser to turn up since March....

This is a Rupert @ Astrograph special APM 130/ F6 scope. Hand delivered. 

LZOS lens with a Strehl of 0.978. The phenolic tube is reduced 4cm from the standard KUO tube to allow more infocus for binoviewer use.  The tube has baffles whereas the APM phenolic tubes no longer do.

Usual Starlight 3.5" FT focuser and tube rings.

Comes as standard with a handle, unlike a certain Japanese manufacture...

In addition no more LZOS lens cells till January 2023, so I don't expect many more posts here for some time.

Not seen first light, however I expect clouds...

I'll post some pictures next to a Vixen SD103S so you can see how much shorter it is.

14 hours ago, Stu said:

Which scope Martin?

One of these:

130mm/F6

It's shorter then a SD103S...

2 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

Magnifications the Morpheus eyepieces produce in my scope and how they work:

Scope is 12.5" f/5.75 (the f/ratio with a Paracorr), 1826mm focal length

17.5mm--104x.  A good, fairly low power eyepiece for larger objects--frequently used on large clusters.  I don't often go below this power because few objects look better at lower powers.

14mm--130x.  A popular all-around magnification for many objects.  Not high enough for a lot of objects, but seeing never interferes at this power, so it is often used on large nebulae and clusters.  My #1 finder eyepiece.

12.5mm--146x.  a comfortable magnification for nearly everything large and a frequently-used focal length.  I use the Apollo 11 a lot more (166x) because the 11mm focal length is more usable for galaxies.

9mm--203x.  THE galaxy focal length, large planetaries, etc.  Very frequently-used focal length.  Sold my sample, but will acquire another one when they're available.  

6.5mm--281x.  Not too high.  Good for nearly all small objects and good for Jupiter and Moon in average seeing. I use the 6mm Ethos a lot more due to a wider field and MUCH sharper optics.  I don't use glasses at this magnification,

so the eyepiece needs the eyeguard extender ring.  The extender ring also helps block peripheral light, so the eyepiece has excellent contrast.  If anyone uses any Morpheus without glasses, I recommend the extender ring. 

4.5mm--406x  Not used because my 4.7mm Ethos SX has a field 45% wider, which is more useful in an undriven scope.  The Ethos SX is sharper and brighter, too.  It isn't just seeing, because the 3.7mm Ethos SX is sharper than both of them.

I was thinking of 17.5 mm Morpheus for bino usage, any others I should consider?

For larger magnifications the 9 mm Morpheus also looking interesting, again any other EP's I should consider?

Thanks

5 minutes ago, Stu said:

I know, it does frustrate me and I guess that was the gist of my post. People often recommend eyepieces to others, only considering how they work in their own scope. Different scope focal lengths and ratios make a big difference. As an extreme example, a 31mm Nagler gives 5 degrees of sky and x16 in my f5/500mm Genesis, whereas it gave 0.6 degrees and x129 in my old f20/4000mm focal length Mak. 

I have a 20 mm XWA and a 30 mm UFF, this does not work with a Vixen SD103S as it does not have enough infocus.  
Another variable too bring into what EP works with which scope. 

7 minutes ago, John said:

I'm sure the NW 17 is superb. I used to have the Ethos 17 but as a focal length that I don't personally use I thought it excessive to have an expensive "place filler" in the eyepiece case so moved that one one to a home where it would be used more often. The ES 92 / 17mm fills the space in the foam less expensively and is a pretty good experience when I do use that focal length.

Can't see the point of of investing close to £1K on another 17mm eyepiece, even if it is the best 17mm in the world,  given the use that I make of that focal length

Personally, I've given up chasing ultimates in each focal length now. Mind you that pursuit does keep the eyepiece forums ticking over

I've an excellent couple of eyepiece sets now and I'm, content. Many folks would give their right arms to own the 17.3 Delos or the ES 17 / 92 and I still have both. Got to draw a line somewhere and carry on with improving the viewing skills I think

 

17 mm is a length which as you said is just a filler and might not get much use. On price however the owners of the Nikon HW don't pay Treasure Island prices, but import from Japan.

e.g.

https://www.kyoei-osaka.jp/SHOP/nikon-nav-125hw.html

It's around £600, similar to Tele Vue prices, or maybe wait for one needing to be re-homed....

To be honest I'm thinking of getting a bino viewer, so a pair of 17.5 mm Morpheus would slot right in, making the purchase of a 17 HW for mono viewing a little over the top.

1 hour ago, Stu said:

The Nikons certainly have a great reputation, but it totally depends on the focal length (and ratio) of your scope as to which eyepieces end up being most useful. You can’t really generalise I don’t think. For similar focal ratio scopes the exit pupil remains the same regardless of aperture/focal length so then it is more relevant. I used to have scopes from f5 to f20 and needed a much wider range of eyepieces to cover those than now where I have from f5 to f8.8.

Very true but I could imagine that between f4-f8 would be general coverage for most observers. At the same time when EP's are compared I don't really see much reference made to focal length. Good point to make because it's not mentioned, it's not some thing I considered when reading reports.

20 hours ago, John said:

I find ~17mm a focal length that I just don't use much. With my 2 inch eyepieces I tend to skip straight from 21mm to 13mm and with my 1.25 inch set I step from 24mm to 14mm. I guess this is related to the focal lengths of my scopes which vary between 663mm and 1590mm.

I do have some fine 17mm options including the 17.3 Delos and the 17mm ES / 92 but the poor things seem to get a little overlooked.

 

17 mm size seems great for bino’s. @jetstream tells me the Nikon 17mm HW is one of his best EP’s, better then Tele Vue or APM.

How suitable would the EP be for bino use? I ask as I can imagine for portable use it would cover a lot of bases. Since bino's can be tricky to get working would the below restrict the choice of binoviewer model used?
Largest outer diameter : 53 mm , and thus suitable for binocular use for people with at least 53 mm interpupillary distance ( IPD).
 

Wednesday first day with window from 9 pm to midnight, not much overlap.

I may of missed but what is the SQM where you view? If it’s > 21 then the 30 mm UFF as the large exit pupil and a OIII will let you see nebula’s. If the SQM < 21  the 20 mm XWA has better contrast which will be more beneficial.

33 minutes ago, AstroMuni said:

I like Skyeye and its my app of choice on my phone. Will be good to see how plate solving works with it, although I probably will have no need for that feature as I control my scope using Kstars/Ekos.

I have GEM and the weakness of polar align pro is interference from the metal in the mount. Setup using a phone with plate solving would make the process quicker and hopefully more reliable. I did also think maybe a raspberry pi with a camera running linux and a full fat desktop app was another way to go.

When this gets the polar align module will be hard to beat if the plate solving works:

https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/778670-skeye-cam-beta-release-for-android/#entry11259156

No longer at the mercy of magnetic compass and mount interference...