Ags

...and put more info about nearby objects at the bottom of each page.

I replaced the index at the back of the book with a more informative table.

The general consensus is its maketing hype.

Regarding the RD, at least it will be less of a problem at 67° FOV as opposed to 75° FOV.

66 degrees is still quite nice, as long as the other optical qualities are up to the claimed standard.

Not totally happy with this one - either focus was slightly off or shooting at 37 mm aperture caused some softness from diffraction. Processed as a partially inverted image to squeeze some detail from it, and to make the proms pop.

The SS60-DS is supposed to have the same quality as a proper quark, but less aperture - only 12 mm I think. Edit: the Scout has 16 mm eyepiece aperture compared to 21 mm for a proper Quark. If a big quark can do full disk at 400 mm focal length, then logically the Scout could do a full disk at 304 mm or f5. That would have been a lot better than the f3.75 objective they chose. And it would only have added 8 cm to the scope length...

The quark is not removeable in the SS60-DS- there's no way to barlow.

I'll be sure to get that issue - Astronomy Now i a bit tricky to get in Holland though.

@Highburymark So how does the Sundancer compare to a Quark?

Here is an example of the compactified 8,6,4,2 format for the bortle charts. Actually, I think I will change it to 9,7,5,3 - trying to decide if skies are bortle 1 or 2 is a luxury problem, much better to focus on the polluted end of the scale.

Well, I have tried both and I know what works better for me.

They're nice eyepieces - I've only got the the 6.7 and the 20/68.

Can I guess the gaps? top row: ES 4.7/82. Bottom row: ES 18/82, ES 24/82? 😀

Based on my tests it strongly affects contrast. So there is a balance between resolution and contrast, and that balance seems to be 43 mm 😀

I'm currently settled on 43 mm aperture (f22). That seems to be a fair compromise between f-ratio, resolution and light gathering (to keep noise down and keep subs short)...

With the book in front of me, I rather agree. I will enable the new look for all diagrams, but will need to spend some time fine tuning the label placement.

Trying different labeling styles for the DSOs. Either callout lines from the side of the diagram, or more conventional labels close to the DSO. I find the callout lines clutter the diagram, but at night the diagram is easier to read with a torch - you can find everything by scanning down the left side of the page. Labels next to the DSOs can be less cluttered overall, but very difficult for crowded regions like the Virgo cluster.

@vlaiv I really like your process - a refreshing take on a familiar target.

I'd like to see a Great Comet. I also wish we lived near a bright planetary nebula - imagine if the Ring Nebula was the size of the Moon (in angular dimensions of course).

I hope the optics are as good as the looks, which are very, very good.

Started the mountain of edits. Added QR codes as suggested by @badhex

The AZT6 certainly has its limits, but it gets the job done. I particularly like the low weight and small size. I do think a Scopetech Mount Zero would be a good upgrade for me.

I had a Castor II for a while, I am sure you will enjoy it. Ironically, I am now using an AZT6 🤣

Antici.......