Ags

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.

My skies are Bortle 7 according to the site, which would mean M31 would be possible naked eye, which hasn't been my experience.

Regardless of what the map says, there is a lot of variation. Some nights feel like Bortle 6 and a lot feel like Bortle 8.

Originally the LX2 was only suited to the northern hemisphere, but they have brought out an NS variant for 30 euros more that does both hemispheres:

https://www.omegon.eu/camera-mounts/omegon-mount-mini-track-lx2-ns/p,57993

Pictures please, @AlYev!

Big milestone for SpaceX. Today a Falcon first stage flew for the third time for the first time. (Too many numbers in that sentence...)

https://www.space.com/42599-spacex-falcon-9-rocket-3rd-launch-success-sso-a.html

Not exactly the postman, but my partner did spot a council worker on top of a cherry picker, doing something to my street light. Could it be connected to my complaint about glare from the light, which somehow got much worse a few weeks ago? Indeed it was! Tonight the I can see the worst of the glare has gone and while the light still makes its presence known, it is tolerable. For the first time in a few weeks I felt inclined to spend some time under the stars, just doing some naked-eye observing. Very relaxing - do we really need all this equipment?

With the Oculus Go you only need your smartphone to initially set up the headset. After that it is completely self contained and you don't need the phone for anything.

13 hours ago, RobertI said:

recently experienced the Apollo 11 and ISS simulations on a friend’s Occulus Go (virtual reality headset) and was blown away.

I am a big fan of the Oculus Go - I have two of them! Do you have links to the Apollo 11 and ISS sims?

Basically plastic, more plastic, and traces of microchip?

Big milestone for SpaceX:

https://www.google.nl/amp/s/www.teslarati.com/spacex-falcon-9-block-5-return-to-launch-site-landing/amp/#ampf=undefined

Hi, welcome to forum! May I suggest NOT getting the scope yet. I've heard nothing but good about the ZS61, but maybe you don't need it. I presume you have some camera lenses for your camera - some of these may be excellent for astrophotography. That will save you some upfront expense and you will be able to start out your learning curve at a shorter focal length and less weight, which will mean easier polar alignment and longer subs. Also the lenses are probably faster, so those longer subs will also go much deeper.

What lenses do you have?

Its been solid rain for several days but I don't remember buying anything?????

Start as you mean to carry on!

You have twice as many eyepiece cases as I have eyepieces! (Not counting the odd SR4 or Super 25...)

My eyepiece case is quite deep, I was thinking of perhaps having a second layer of less used oculars.

This has become a bit theoretical as I have a Berlebach Castor on loan, and it now looks like all available funds may be diverted to the mount acquisition department. But my current thoughts are as follows:

Widefield: ES 24/68, TS 16/82, SW 9.4/82, ES 6.7/82 (of these I still need to acquire the 16 mm)

Planetary: 12SLV, 9SLV (I also have the ES 6.7 mm for golden nights).

I've figured out my eyepiece case can only hold 8 eyepieces, so that leaves two slots. maybe room for a 15SLV and 6SLV ?

A fellow SGLer dropped off a Berlebach Castor; I have it on loan for a few weeks.

It's twice as big as I expected, but very smooth!

I think a Radian is a bit too much money and it looks like other options go for less new and at least equal them optically. If one came along at the right price I would snap it up though!

I think comfort comes from good eye relief + 60 degrees AFOV. I find wider angle eyepieces generally less comfortable and harder to use, but I favor them for DSOs as I simply need to to use a higher magnification to tame light pollution, so need wider fields to compensate for the greater magnification.

@vlaiv, I found the HR Planetaries good enough and nice to use in an F13 scope but quickly sold them on when I switched to F5 scopes. I also noticed a loss of sharpness. Yes I have also heard that the BSTs edge out these TMB Planetary clones.

Even at F13, my Myperion 17mm (adjusted to 9mm with fine tuning rings) easily outperformed the Planetary HR 9mm. I expect a similar (maybe bigger) gap between the SLVs and the BSTs in all seriousness.

I had a couple of TS HR Planetary EPs for many years, these are apparently comparable to BSTs although they are of a different design. The HR Planetary EPs were great little eyepieces (wonderfully relaxing) and I was very happy with them, so I imagine an 8mm BST would work well. I might get a HR Planetary for nostalgia's sake, but it would have to have the old TS blue branding!