Giles_B

Thank-you very much for these responses and apologies for my delay in replying - I guess picking up my scope and getting out of town is the best, and maybe I'm just getting over influenced by catburglar's recommendation, but I think I may start to seek out some emission nebulae with a view to getting an OIII if I can get a reasonable view (i.e. not obstructed by trees and houses from my garden) - there's nothing like the convenience of observing the sky from my backyard

It was a wonderful clear night in Bristol last night. I got some great - really great - views of Jupiter and Saturn - the atmosphere seemed crystal clear and they were probably the best I've managed since getting my scope, a 130mm Newtonian (Celestron starsense explorer 130AZ ). Once again I was also draw to deep sky objects which I find fascinating (despite the light pollution of a big city). You can't see much from my garden, but I spent a good time looking at the Andromeda and the Hercules cluster. The view is very faint, and it is difficult to make out structure. I understand, thanks to discussions on SGL, that this is normal for visual astronomy and not helped by the limitations of my location and equipment. While I'm content to persevere, I wondered if it would be worth getting any (more) filters for my set up. I have a moonlight/city light filter, which doesn't seem to do much to the view when I combine them with my 25mm BST explorer eyepiece, but I have read (I think) that some coloured filters can improve the view of DSOs. Is it a pointless waste of my money to add filters when I could get a much better effect by driving 20 miles outside town to somewhere with less light, or would filters be worth it? If so, can anyone recommend 1.25" filters that won't break the bank?

Indeed, this suggests the "interview" quote was probably from a press release (standard practice for science reporting) - so the Royal Observatory rather than BBC is probably the institution to get annoyed with / complain to....

@Louis D It sounds like an advance on an Ikea bag and a couple of towels wrapped around the tube, which is what gets me by

There might be a cheap solution that is a step up from duffell bags and bubble wrap if you don't see a special advantage in spending £££ on a bespoke case. If any padded bag of the right dimensions should do the job - a quick google for "padded bag" using the dimensions of my scope (a Celestron 130mm admittedly much smaller than yours) showed this might just do the job: https://www.terralec.co.uk/padded_bags_and_covers/padded_equipment_bag_762_x_356_x_356mm/28075_p.html - I just wondered if there might be something similar that would suit you, that could be found with a bit of searching?

Thanks John, I'll be looking out for these sessions! Tiny Clanger - you may be right, my experience of DSOs may be a repeat of my initial "isn't Saturn small" experience... I'll check out the guide

Thanks for talking me through this - it is really helpful and deepening my understanding. It is a bit embarrassing to be making mistakes like confusion the focal ratio with the aperture (thanks for pointing it out), but it's a fast way to learn. So far my best results have come from appreciating the strengths and weaknesses of my current set up and it is easy to overlook the part the portability of a small scope plays in getting good views, well away from my neighbours security lights! Unfortunately my budget won't run to EEVA, but I'm certainly interested in the BST eyepieces and can see from this forum they are well respected, so I'll check these out for the high magnifications. I'll stick with the Plossi for DSOs for now.

Thanks for these replies, and the tip on open star clusters - I'll try these next time I get some clear skies. I don't think I explained myself well enough about magnification and switching to 2" eyepieces. I think I understand that 2" will offer low magnification and a wider field of view and perhaps better eye relief. I'm interested in the wider field of view of 2", but would also like to be able to use 2" eyepieces at high magnification (when viewing the moon and the planets). The most economic way of doing this could be by combining a 4x Barlow with a medium focal length eyepiece (20mm or less), but I'm concerned the weight may be prohibitive. However, as moving to 2" would also in part be with upgrading to a larger scope in mind, I'm interested to hear that I'd be unable to visualise galaxies clearly without delving into astrophotography. Would this still be the case even if visualising through a high aperture like an f12? Sorry if this is a silly question, just wanting to make sure I get this right.

I am new to astronomy, getting my first scope, aCelestron Starsense Explorer 130az (f5, 130mm Newtonian) about 3 months ago. This is my first post, apologies if it is a bit long or misinformed. I've upgraded the eyepieces to Baader 6 / 10mm orthoscopics / 32mm plossi, plus a Celestron 2x Barlow, all at 1.25". I've had satisfying views of Saturn, good views of Jupiter, plus some great views of the moon. I live in the very light polluted part of a city, but have managed over the holidays to get to some darker skies, however even in dark skies I've been disappointed with the views of brighter DSOs like Andromeda and Bode, which appear as cloudy puffs of dim light, with no resolvable detail. I understand I'm not going to get good views of DSOs on an f5 aperture, so eventually a new scope will be needed, but I'd like to get more out of this scope if I can. I'm thinking of upgrading the eyepieces further. With a view to greater eye relief (I find the high magnification orthoscopics uncomfortable) and use in a future scope that is suited to DSOs I'm considering getting some 2" eyepieces. Ideally I would like to use them for high magnification if possible. I've been looking at eyepieces from Explore Scientific 82° range, or the Celestron Luminos range. For magnification I'm wondering if it is worth splashing out on the Televue 4x powermate. My concerns are firstly, whether a 2" plus a Barlow will be too much weight for the Celestron explorer - the televue plus a luminos would be about 900g - I'd be interested to hear your thoughts and experience. Secondly, I'd be interested to hear your views on a move to 2" eyepieces more generally. Is it a sensible upgrade path or should I be looking for better 1.25" eyepieces instead? and will any brand enhance my views significantly over the Baaders, or is the f5 ultimately the restriction here?