Ags

That's not chilled enough. Just step outside and admire the stars naked-eye. ?

As long as you read it first ?

I totally overreacted. Apologies.

I'm certainly less flexible than when I was younger (not that I was an Olympic gymnast then!) and it gets pretty uncomfortable and awkward when I have to use my RDF as my tripod is at sitting height. But I try to take the view that all that bending and kneeling is good exercise for me, and I should probably do more of it! Another thing to consider is an RDF is really intuitive and I can locate invisible objects just by pointing at the right location in the sky and then switching to the ST80 for a more detailed search. A RACI as the only means of location is much less intuitive, as you have to look at right angles to the telescope - figuring that out is beyond me! At least for me, I have to start off by sighting along the tube.

It's a Tesla - fully self-driving ?

I use an ST80 ?

The lack of a hand controller puts me off the AZ GTi. A glowing touchscreen with no tactile feedback is no substitute! And the handsets cost way too much... I'd be happy to use my phone for goto, if I had a small dumb cheap handset for fine adjustments.

I tried stepping up from a 102mm scope to 150mm on the assumption that bigger is better and 150mm is the "minimum requirement", but I found that it was more of a disadvantage than an advantage. Even at F5, 150mm aperture had too much focal length for convenient object location with 1.25" eyepieces, also the scope weight was more than my mount could take at high mags, and with city sky background washed out at 2 mm exit pupils and up, the aperture meant I needed magnifications in the range of 100x for pleasing views, which was too much for many targets (and too much for the mount). By changing to a Newtonian light bucket I thought I would get vastly improved star clusters etc, but all I got was clumps of hairy stars on a grey background. Retreating to a small refractor and Mak, I get dark sky backgrounds, proper-looking stars, wide fields* for easy object location and no issues with undermounting. I doubt I can do much "serious" astronomy, but I think if I wanted to get serious (e.g. measure light curves of variable stars, or do spectroscopy) I would still use a relatively small telescope, good mount, and lots of electronics. * Of course a Mak does not give wide fields, but it is small enough to mount alongside the little frac, so I get the wide fields of the ST80 and the superb views of the Mak in one package - after some simple trickery with the tube rings to get the two scopes aligned.

A Berlebach Castor II is now mine, all mine!!!! The postman (SGL member) actually brought it many months ago and it has been on long-term loan, but transfer of ownership has now occurred ? Next purchases for dual-scope perfection are two Nirvana ES 16/82 eyepieces. In the ST80 they will give 3mm exit pupil to cut through the light pollution and over three degrees of view. In the Skymax 102 the same EP would give 1 degree of view and 1.3mm exit pupil, which is about right for most observations from my city location. After that, scope upgrades: Skymax 127 and ED72, and then surely I will be done with visual acquisitions? Well, maybe a couple of eyepieces... And better diagonals... And a nicer RDF... Maybe an AZ5 for planetary observations... ?

I am Borg.

I have an old Speer WALER 9.4mm. It is comfortable to use and very acceptable at F13 and at F5. I use it both for DSOs and planets. However the build quality of these older SWs is a bit suspect: 1. The eyepiece suffers from visible internal dust (not sealed). 2. I got mine cheap because at least one of the lenses is slightly loose and rattles around. I have seen multiple SW owners report this for various focal lengths. The old SWs are very very long, these new type 3s look a lot shorter, which could be a very good thing, but I suspect it puts more demands on the optics. At any rate such a radical change to the eyepiece length indicates a radical change to the design, so no extrapolation can be made regarding performance. I'm always thinking of replacing my SW because of its size, but can never justify the expense - it works well enough. One SW I have always wanted is that 5-8/90-80 zoom. Certainly one of the highest rated zooms out there.

Canon 200/2.8L?

Is there any way this could give a straight through correct image view with a 32mm plossl?

If only I could hacksaw this in half; I only look through the one side.

I am still thinking about this. Everything has been on hold for a bit because of uncertainty over our residence in Holland. I have just about decided on the Pentax XF 12mm, on grounds it has a wider FOV than the SLV and is also smaller and lighter. Also I can pair it with the XF 8.5mm for higher power targets like Saturn and Mars.

We believe you ?

Unlikely - I expect it will take at least several weeks to sort out production issues.

Interestingly I can no longer see them on the Bresser site. Looks like they jumped the gun and have now corrected.

The description claims they are also good planetary eyepieces....

No myth, here they are: https://www.bresser.de/Astronomie/Zubehoer/

Thinking about switching to one of these, if i can get it in Europe: https://explorescientificusa.com/collections/52-series-eyepieces/products/soft-sided-eyepiece-case-epwp-kit-case

A very short focal length refractor has a very large amount of field curvature. To get a wide field you would need a flattener I think.

My partner was diagnosed with cataracts by this hobby. She was complaining our microscope lens was dirty, then the next week she said the same about ALL my eyepieces. So I suggested a visit to the doctor...

I like the Explore Scientific 82 degree eyepieces, but feel the 14mm is a waste - too close to the 11mm, and I want the longest possible 82 degree eyepiece possible in 1.25" format - so the Nirvana 16mm is on my shopping list. Eventually... ? Let us know how the eyepiece works out!

I've had my eye on a Nirvana 16mm for a while. The price on FLO is definitely right. I rember when these things had a much higher price tag - in a different housing however.