Ags

I waited for Jupiter to rise higher (42°) before setting up and was rewarded with a sharper image. I started at 157x with my C6 and then dialled back to 105x which kept all the details but was a sharper and richer view. The SLV 6 and NLV 9 were performing great, but I wished I could cross them and produce an SNL 7.5! I was flipping between glasses-on and glasses-off views, and I had to reluctantly conclude that glasses-on was better. I had a look at Capella to confirm, and the star was better formed with glasses on. Have to consider long eye relief eyepieces now!

Just to be clear, I was keeping the whole optical train the same except for the eyepiece. I have no reason to doubt that the numerous positive reports about the Nirvana 4 are genuine, so I assume I am just unlucky in the sample variation lottery.

Good to know - I will try it on the Moon next (which after all was my main reason for getting the EP).

I will stick to Explore Scientific widefields and SLVs from now on I think.

I am not doubting that some or even most people get a good one, but the one I'm looking through is flatly unacceptable for detailed planetary viewing. It's not even close. I think there are good Nirvanas out there, but buy new so you can return your sample if it fails to perform.

I would be using the 4 mm in my C6 (with f6.3 reducer) for about 230x so similar to the 7 mm on your 12" dob. I think the Svbony zoom is a better choice for doubles as it can go wider and reach a higher mag.

Edge performance of the 16 mm was abominable. It is one of the few eyepieces I have had that actually made me angry.

I'm not remotely seeing that, but I remember the Nirvana 16 which I didn't much like was a spectacular lunar eyepiece, so hoping the 4 mm will come through on Luna.

I took delivery of a Nirvana 4 mm today to complement my Svbony 3-8 Zoom as the high magnification options in my ~f6 telescopes. Surprisingly the skies were a bit hazy but good enough to view planets, so I thought I would try these two eyepieces head to head on Jupiter and Saturn. The scope of choice tonight (so nice to have a choice of telescopes!) is an f5.5 Long Perng 90 mm Apo(ish). 4 mm eyepieces give 125x magnification in this scope, which is a touch high for Jupiter but fine for Saturn. Jupiter was first. On axis, the Svbony gave sharply delineated views of the big planet, while the Nirvana didn't seem to reach perfect focus no matter how I tweaked the fine focuser. However, the color of Io was much more apparent in the Nirvana. Moving the planet to the edge of the field, the Nirvana view held up well, but the Svbony view degraded - Jupiter went soft and distorted, and Io grew a little finger of light reaching back to the center of the FOV. I noted the Nirvana view of Jupiter was significantly bigger than the Svbony set to 4 mm. Perhaps the Nirvana is more like a 3.5 mm focal length. Saturn showed the same differences - the planet was sharp in the Svbony at 4 mm (and at 3 mm) while the Nirvana couldn't reach the same sharpness. So a bit disappointing, I had hoped for more from the Nirvana. It will be interesting to see on a less hazy night, and also compare performance on the Moon - the good off-axis performance of the Nirvana might work well there. I think however I may give the Nirvana 13 I was planning on getting a miss. The Svbony 3-8 is staying in the focuser for the rest of planet season.

I picked up a reasonably priced second-hand Nirvana 4 mm. I had the 16 mm in this range and had a real love-hate relationship with it. I hear however the shorter focal lengths are better. This is my high power alternative to Svbony 3-8 zoom, that currently lives in the focusser. I'm thinking the wider field might do well for Luna or white-light solar.

Watched Io emerge from behind Jupiter.

Want. Need. Must have!

What do you mean? It can take a 15kg OTA?

For moon and planets, a mak 127 on an az5 would be perfect.

Is that only 9, or is it possible at eight too? When I am about in my city garden at night I can still make out the color of some vegetation etc.

My home renovation is nearly complete so the Zenithstar 66 is out of its dust shelter and mounted on my AZ-GTI. The only problem is I can't find my talentcell battery, so the past few days I have been using the AZ-GTI as an unpowered manual mount. It's been good to see Jupiter again, and this morning I caught a crescent Venus just before sunrise. No Saturn so far, that observation spot is still occupied by a large number of exiled house plants!

I smell a cover up. Clearly a UFO crash site.

Our puppy Wurzel infallibly sits wherever I want to sit.

Well, the story has a happy ending.

I was surprised how effective a little Zenithstar 66 is, even on planetary targets. And I do feel happy when I pick it up and carry it out - so light and compact!

I found a small fun-size telescope on an undriven alt-az mount helped. Also just going out with a pair of eyes and nothing else and marking the passage of the seasons. Then there is always the New Eyepiece trick to get me outdoors again.

And a second-hand forklift to go with the second-hand 14" goto dob! I am tempted, if I can contrive a way to wheel it out to the observing spot. Sadly, unless I put the C11 on my plucky little AZ-GTi, I don't have a mount for it.

While looking at the Moon with my C6, and particularly while admiring regions like Aristarchus, I felt the first fever chills of aperture fever. 300x is really pushing a C6 but I felt the Moon has more to offer. My current thinking is a Synscan 250mm dob - the parts are still reasonably manageable, 250x would still be a 1mm exit pupil, and the tracking is useful at high powers. It would also be a good platform for planetary imaging. The other contenders are a manual 250mm dob on an EQ platform, or why not the 300 mm synscan dob and a wheelbarrow?

I don't often look at super-telescopes, I mostly confine my drooling to telescopes I might conceivably get - which turns out to be the most expensive form of drooling! Far better to to fantasize about the completely unobtainable... Currently I think a lot about a 10" synscan dob. It should be great for planetary imaging and for visual browsing of the Moon. I can also continue my alt-az lucky imaging of DSOs with it.

So many options.... gotta think. Explore Scientific Twilight I mount aka the Wobbleizer. Whata piece of junk! It can hold a small Mak ok, but certainly not the 150PDS I optimistically put on it! Nirvana 16 mm 82 degree eyepiece - aberrations galore. Apparently the rest of the line is significantly better. The GSO 1.25"0.5 reducer was a bad purchase for 10 years, being useless in all applications, but now it is indispensible for solar photography with my quark.