Deadlake

What’s wrong with a Yellow Submarine from TEC, same price range as the LZOS and Yuri’s order book is open..

AP have different sized real cell adapters to 2.7” for Meade and Celestron for example.

The rear cell is different between the Meade and Celestron for starters… The only time I would say Meade is they have a faster F8 version, but apart from that not much to choose from apart from popularity..

The C11 has been around years, well supported and all the accessories you could imagine. I went with a C11 as well.

Actually do any Takahashi EP’s have undercuts?

The curse of the undercuts stopping any thread on SGL or CN....

It does indeed correct for aberrations, however if you want to increase magnification then using a Telecentric lens allows this while maintaining the exit pupil. There are also other BV which have no prisms in them such as Dennis's here: https://www.cloudynights.com/gallery/image/63529-apo-ss-binoviewer-premium-quality-apochromatic-sharpest-signature-series-binoviewer-available-for-sale/ No need as far as I know for correction in this case. There are quite a lot of threads on CN for this approach.

I usually use the GPC 2.6 option the most used in a dedicated Baader diagonal. However the other option is use a Barlow to PowerMate ahead of the diagonal. With the PowerMate gives you options of using higher power EP's, no change in exit pupil.

Would this work with a VIxen APZ mount at all, given the payload for the mount is 8 kg?

I thought 4.7 kg was with rings however no, it’s 5.8 kg which is good but needs a better mount.

Is 4.7 kg to much weight for a ScopeTech Zero mount I wonder???

Do you have a response graph of the mirror in question? All stellar targets are broad spectrum emitters. While image intensifiers can see visual spectrum they are not nearly as sensitive as they are in near IR. In fact, the near IR range is the big magic of NV. An image intensifier takes light that is too far into the red end of the spectrum for us to see and merely amplifies and converts and it to a color that we can see. For nebula, you need good system transmission at 654nm, but for stars you need good transmission from where-ever your long pass filter kicks in to 900nm, which is the range where the photocatode is the most sensitive. I.e. you will boost the spectrum where you cannot see in aided considerably.. As far as dielectric coating many observers using 16” dobs are using NVD’s due to image scale, the contrast boast from the NVD will overcome any loss in infrared light and this is where the multiplication provided by the NVD is greatest.

I'll take a picture of the C11 and it mounted. If you lift the C11 with 1) Left hand on the Losmandy bar and right hand on the handle right side. 2) Slot into saddle. 3) Push with right hand on handle and tighten up one saddle knob, also tighten brake. 4) Before balancing C11 attach dew shield. 5) Then use the right hand to push C11 against saddle balance in the saddle. To be honest would be easier to mount if both ends of the C11 on the left hand side had a handle attached, or maybe Losmandy bar both sides is the answer. The other approach could be to place the C11 vertically on a BB chair(with lens cover on) and attach to the AZ100. Rotate, lock the brake and then attach the dew shield. Then balance the AZ100. To take the C11 repeat as usually harder to take off then put on, sounds weird but number of times out this has been the case.

I'm using a StellarVue case. There's a longer model. The main advantage is a soft case which gives very good protection. Very popular with the TSA-120 and AP130GTX crowd on CN.

@john1971 The C11 works very well with the AZ100 and motor drives. In fact due to less moment of force being applied it works better than the refactors I have. The C11 can be mounted one side with no counterweight on the other. I would however suggest getting the Y mount saddle as demoed by @swsantos with a C9.25 as the AZ100 really should have this by default. I find balancing hard when using a BV or very heavy EP/NVD. It's not changing an EP where the issues is, the scope just gets out of balance when the changing zenith angle and when using the motors the brake knob can only be tightened so far which is what I did before having motor drives. As far as mounting I usually mount the C11 on the right side, I've moved the handle to the left side and this helps gripping the scope as it goes on. The next step is to place the dew tube on and then rebalance at that point. I'd stick to using a lightweight finder scope, e.g. a red dot as this causing minimal issues with balancing. AZ100/Planet or T-Pod tripod works very well with C11, once it's setup.

This is the DPAC test from what looks like the same lens cell in an aluminium body: https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/873307-dpac-test-of-an-astro-tech-at125edl/ All good!! That scope is 7.2 kg, guessing the carbon version will be closer to 6 kg.

The other answer is a lightweight mount. @GavStar has a HAZ31 and super mount tripod, looking at a total weight for mount and tripod of around 6 kg and it takes an AP130GTX easily. This would work for the 105 and 130 mm LZOS scopes I have and in the case of the 105 mm the scope and the mount would fit in a carry on photo bag. The other advantage is no need to balance the scope with the HAZ31, I could then use the 105 or 130 with BV's, something I'm going to have to wait for the Y saddle mount for the AZ100 I have to arrive. Note: Currently awaiting a review about how the HAZ31 performs with he replacement ADM saddle for it, the iOptron saddle is not meant to provide a firm grip to trust a scope with.

That was my thoughts, Tecnosky have good optics, especially the 115 mm triplet. Tecnosky give a minimum Strehl measurement on their scopes will Flo as well if from the same factory?

The issue with carbon is that the thermal expansion with not compensate in the same way as aluminium does for the change in the lens cell expansion. Carbon is very well matched for mirrored scopes. The cost of a phenolic tube for a 105 mm / f 6.25 scope is around £550 including VAT as of spring 2022, hence really only used with premium optics....

As noted above I get the over shoot issue with Luminous Pro as well. SS works fine with Vixen mounts as does Luminous Pro. I'll run Luminous Pro with the log file turned on and ship it to Steve @ wobbleworks.com and see what he makes of it....

I used the word presumed as why take away the ability to move the mount by either the slow mo's or the pan handle? Being able to use either of the above is a major differentiator compared to other mounts, particular in alignment, with the pan handle the scope can be quickly pointed to where it needs to be. The Nexus is taking away functionality and the only item it adds to me is being able to use the mount at dark sites.

Which is why a joystick with slow and fast speed would be great to have to align and move around the sky. Presume you can disengage the motors from the Nexus?

Maybe, however also present with Luminous Pro. Let us know how you get on once the fires are out, however not holding my breath for golden master of the firmware.

Ok, so a unwanted feature in both versions...

This is interesting regarding overshoot. I performance a two star align using the Rowan progressive web app (PWA). Then using either SkySafari or Luminous Pro for goto the target is moved to however is aligned a small distance top right from the target. This is not a one off and quite repeatable. Which firmware are you on @swsantos current and not preview?