Deadlake

From what I've read the AZ100 will be fine in general with a 130 mm APO and C11 on the other side. I'll be able to tell you soon as have a C11 in bound. If I was buying from scratch I would go straight for the motor kit and have it fitted at the factory. The Nexus is great however I usually use sky safari and the only real use case against SkySafari is to deal with an wifi issues (which I think are rare and not really a decision point) or more importantly for dark site trips where the red colour and low light level of the Nexus will not effect dark sight adaption. The final point is really the only justification for getting the Nexus and of course the Nexus attaches via a serial cable to the motor controller so it's not one or the other. Might be easier to just get the motor kit and then add the Nexus depending on how you get on with using Sky Safari? The other point with the motor kit is it sips power, might be good to see what other CN observers have done in attaching the battery pack to the top off the AZ100 mount so no cable wrap and better portability. Going with the motor's of course doesn't stop you using the slow mo controls, you just need to turn the motor's off.

I think most of what you are considering for the AZ100 has been discussed on this thread on CN: https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/851729-rowan-az100-with-motors-first-light/ If you want to avoid wireless the Nexus DSC can drive the mount in push-to or goto configurations.

It's in the manual linked above, however you can turn the motors on and off from the web app. Personally I'd use the handle to move the mount and then the motors for fine adjustment. Due to the encoders the mount does not lose its position. No need for the telescope to wobble with manual adjustment. if needed the slo mo cables can be fitted quickly, just leave them in the bag/case.

What is your tolerance to weight versus manual controls? You could look at the HAZ31 that is around 3.7 kg and can take an AP130GTX easily. Almost grab n' go and with great tracking at the loss of manual controls. If you want manual controls and possibility of tracking (GoTo guidance) then AZ100 is unbeatable, The Panther if you need a top loader however twice the price for that feature, no manual guidance, I'm not sure it is worth it.

I'd be interested to know if the Leica is worth the extra over the APM. The Leica is meant to be a step up, but so far with the APM EP's I own I've not seen the need to jump to TeleVue (XWA 20 mm vs E21 for example). Is the Leica really that much better? Main use would be to fill a hole in the 7-15 mm range when portability is key. I'd take a TOE 4 mm, Zoom (insert name) , 20 mm XWA and 30 mm UFF. Actually either the 20 mm XWA or 24 mm UFF depending on weight or if I was bringing a smaller diagonal.

In case people don’t go across the pond, Steve has posted a great YouTube on new Y balancer for the mount: Wonder what other items Derek has tucked away?

That will work very well with your LZOS on Jupiter/Saturn and the Moon. I find using a BBHS mirror diagonal will bring out the reds on Jupiter a little more than a normal mirror diagonal like the MaxBright. Enjoy!

In the EU fabricated by Haarder, ITAR prohibits the export of NVD’s from the US.

It has always been like this going back some years.... It might simply be due to hunters in the US using NVD's and hence there is a bigger market... Also the best tubes for astronomy have low EBI's, not really used for other applications as far as I know.

In Europe the price has gone up, however the cost of a good L3 MVD in the US is half the price including taking taxes into account. I guess the question is why the NVD kit is twice that in EU compared to US? Also all relative, the cost for a 20" dob set of mirrors in the EU is around EUR 10,000 excluding the frame, focuser etc. A 10" BS Newt + an EU NVD is less and you will see more and can use the NVD in more scopes.

I just need some good seeing to try out the HR 1.6 mm, no TOE to compare with there. 😃

The main reason for the HR range being discontinued is Vixen was not happy with the QA they could do on the EP’s. Having said that APM have ordered a new run of Doctor EP’s, maybe Marcus could be convinced he could do the same for the HR line?

Maybe back scatter, it’s there will every scope I’ve used the TOE EP with.

If this is a blueish warmth to the presentation then yes, not present on the HR.

I’m think the main difference in use is the TOE add a brightness to the object, however this really only pops up on the moon and a moon filter can control this. With average seeing the 3.4 mm HR and 4 mm TOE are the most used EP.

I like my small scope too for the wide fields of view. Very versatile as I can move it around the garden for tree dodging duties. Works best with XWA 20 mm or 30 mm UFF. Also very good for looking at the moon a x500. A great swap...

Yep, helps with high Strehl scopes around 0.98 to 0.99 to pile on the magnification. I have used a BRAVDA and 10 mm UFF on other nights, but comparison of performance is as ever seeing limited… If I had done my research based on CN feedback a high quality Barlow mounted ahead of the diagonal and a good 10 mm EP might give more contrastly views then some high end EP’s.

I prefer the TOE 4 mm. Having said that the seeing was so good tonight I spent most of the time using the HR 2 mm that the 4 mm didn't get a chance. 4 mm is usually most used when seeing is average on planets.

In the UK really need the planets high up, last few years low down and large depth of atmosphere to peer thru..

I had the fortune to have a TOE 3.3 mm and HR 3.4 mm using with an LZOS 130 mm on a night of exceptional seeing when viewing the Moon. Not much chance of looking at anything else this year due to the cloud cover. 😀 The one data point that the HR really showed it pulling away from the TOE was the level of shadow contrast visible within craters. At one point I had to pinch myself at the detail. Also the dynamic range as well, noticeable more than the Vixen SD103S scope I used to have which I feel was still very good. I also used a 2 and 2.4 mm HR, the scope just opened up with the level of detail on the moon, the limiting factor being I needed a guided mount to minimise vibrations. Note: using a Baader moon filter took off the extra brightness the TOE adds. Hoping for another good night, I'll try a BRAVDA and 10 mm UFF and see where that gets me.

I has to experiment with different EP’s and diagonals. However on nights of good seeing all is possible. Sometime best to have multiple scopes out to experiment with Barlow or BV’s side by side…

For planetary observations some of the best planetary views I had are by attaching a Barlow on the scope ahead of the diagonal (now running at F20) and using a 10 mm UFF EP or some BV's. This helps with bring up contrast from observation and also brings out the reds on Jupiter.

It was not just me, one of the best nights for seeing for some time. Why or why on a moon light night.....

4-9 Working days, https://www.bresseruk.com/Astronomy/Telescopes/Vixen-SD103S-apochromatic-Refractor.html Actually quite shocked how much SD80 as gone up, when I bought my SD103S the SD80 was around £900, not just under £1300. Well done government, this is not just global inflation.

I think the reason for little data is the hit on resale value, a theory but a reasonable one. With regards to red line testing, I think the current theory is that the blue line will be more optimised than testing in the green and the green line will also not be as high. Obviously eyes and CCD are more sensitive to the green line wavelength. At the same time if SV are forced to optimise in the green and red line then the produced lens will be made similar to how AP and LZOS produce their respective lens by testing with multiple wavelengths with an interferometer. Which is good for the quality on the lens, however will make them more expensive to produce.