Search the Community

Hello all! I recently bought a Meade telescope at goodwill. It says D=114mm F=1000mm f/8.8. I dont know if im missing a piece to it, cause i cant focus on anything. I can see stuff, but i dont know what im doing wrong. Can anyone direct me to a manual or anything? Im dying to use it.

Hi, the theoretical max magnification for my scope according to astronomytools.com is 375x - 150 x 2.5. I’ve surpassed that on a few occasions but only with very good seeing. I’ve just got a new zoom eyepiece which together with a Barlow will easily allow much higher magnification. When the skies up here in Oregon eventually clear I’ll be out observing the moon. Will I be able to achieve greater magnification while observing the moon? Does it make any difference that the moon is only a hop, skip and a jump away? Thanks

Just a quick comment on the service I've received from Steve Collingwood at SCTelescopes. I had a 14" Meade LX200 which had developed a very serious intermittent fault with its electronics. By arrangement, I took the scope to Steve today for him to look at as he is a trained Meade service engineer with many years experience behind him. He offered to work on the scope while I waited since I had a 260 mile round trip and it would potentially save me a second journey to collect the scope. In addition I would provide a second pair of hands as the 14" is a good weight to manhandle. That suited me fine so work began. The electronic faults were investigated and fixed. The scope was then thoroughly cleaned and serviced to a good standard. Normally Steve would accurately collimate the scope before it left the workshop but, as it was going to be bounced around in the back of a car for several hours, we agreed it probably wasn't worth as it would be better done once remounted in the dome. Even so, Steve had a quick check for any obvious misalignment before letting the unit leave. Steve was a very pleasant and knowledgeable chap with a good, traditional approach to and appreciation of quality engineering. The final price was reasonable, the work quality good and, most importantly, the tea was nice! All-in-all a good experience. AndyG

Howdy All, Here is a capture from Beatty, NV. from 110417 042738 during the transit of the ISS across the Moon. Here are some of the ISS details. ISS angular size: 34.31″; distance: 805.38 km Angular separation: 8° 31′; azimuth: 265.4°; altitude: 27.1° Center line distance: 138.00 km; visibility path width: 7.67 km R.A.: 02h 21m; Dec: +12° 13′; parallactic angle: -46.2° ISS velocity: 22.6 ′/s (angular); 5.29 km/s (transverse) ISS velocity: -5.14 km/s (radial); 7.37 km/s (total); Direction of motion relative to zenith: -40.7° Moon angular size: 33.2′; 58.1 times larger than the ISS Moon phase: 99.7%; angular separation from Sun: 174.1° Sun altitude: -32.5°; the ISS will be in shadow Canon 60D, ISO400, 1/3200, 60fps, f/10, 2000mm, Meade LX-200 8", Beatty NV. Composite image of the ISS from video. Jason Snyder

I am excited to join this big star gazing community! I realize I am abusing of your kindness, so that you in advance for any help you can give. I have an old telescope, what appears to be a Meade ETX 90 from the early 2000s. I cleaned it pretty well after many Youtube videos and online research. I found full blown spider webs and dead spiders! I have encountered a few of issues as I'm putting it back together and I wonder if anyone might be able to help. 1. I took off the screws of the back of my OTA (I know I shouldn't have!) and now I'm not sure how to put them back on (see attachments). When I try it seems to push the primary mirror instead of fastening to anything. 2. My secondary mirror flip is broken, the plastic piece part fell off. Is it possible to fix? The mirror itself is also very dirty (see attachments) and I don't think it can be cleaned further. Any tips on how to replace it and where to buy the parts? Or is it possible to not use the 90 eye piece viewport and instead use the front one so I don't need to fix the flip or the mirror? 4. My secondary baffle is sliding off. I've read that this is a problem w/older models. I tried pushing it to the right place and it requires some force, but after 1 minute it slides back to its original place. What should I do? Does this matter? 5. The plastic attachment to hold the smaller lens (finderscope?) wobbles no matter how tightly I screw it on. I don't know if it has anything to do with the front plastic part being a little broken. Thank you for your help in advance, and I am still learning terminology so be easy on me

What is needed to complete the Az adjustment on this upside-down view of an AE MegaWedge? I'm guessing that the sideways adjustment isn't feed via the threads on the stub? So perhaps a starwheel as shown on the Alt adjustment, but with a shoulder or washer that runs in the groove in the Az Index bracket? Michael

Hi everyone, about a month ago i got my first telescope. Wasn't sure what to get but i wanted something portable and easy to setup and use. After some internet "research" i decided to go for a refractor on a manual alt/az mount. The telescope was on a 50% sale so i decided to go for it , the Meade infinity 90. The package: The scope came in one big box, everything was inside. Included was the optical tube, the mount, 3 eyepieces (6.3mm, 9mm and 26mm), a 2x barlow lens, 90 degree diagonal, red dot finder, an eyepiece holder for the mount and a few manuals. The optical tube: The tube has a 90mm (3.5in) aperture and 600mm focal length. It looks and feels as a quality instrument, it has a small dew shield and the focuser is smooth when you move it back and forward. As expected the lens looks to be coated. It has a dovetail bar on it with 3 holes for screws. The mount: Light but stable, made of aluminium. It has 3 extendable legs, and 2 slow motion cables (alt/az). One screw to mount the tube on on top (adjustable back and forward). The eyepieces and barlow: All 3 are modified achromat eyepieces, the lenses are made of glass and are OK for the beginner, but i would suggest upgrading if you can. The barlow is bad i even think that the optics are plastic (not sure), it is usable if you don't have other options but this should be the first upgrade in my opinion. Observing: First light: The telescope arrived in the morning so the first thing i did after a quick setup was to adjust the red dot finder. I looked at some mountains about 20km away, the view was nice and very detailed using all eyepieces. Combining the 6.3mm with the barlow got me a bit blurry view, but the barlow in combination with the other eyepieces was ok. Night came and it was a moonless and clear night (only light pollution from the city i live in). I saw orion right infront of me, "marked" it with the red dot finder where i thought M42 should be and looked through the 26mm eyepiece. It was a bit blurry but after adjusting the focus i could see some nice pinpoint stars and also something fuzzy, i realized it was the orion nebula. After letting my eyes adjust to the view for a few minutes i started seeing 2 faint "wings" on both sides and in the center were 4 very tiny stars, i didn't expect to see that on my first night. I followed my target for about 15 minutes using the slow motion controls , it was easy to do. Also tried the 9mm eyepiece and with it the 4 stars were more easily seen but the faint clouds got fainter so i moved back to the 26mm. Next target was venus, i tried all eyepieces + with combination with the barlow. It looked like a very bright half moon without any details. When using the barlow the view was ok but purple glow was showing around the planet, without the barlow the purple wasn't noticeable. I also looked at the star Sirius which looked nice, bright and much bigger then any other star i could see that night. After Venus went down i decided it was enough for day one. Moon: I expected it to look good, but not this good. I was observing the moon for a couple of nights until it got full. I could see a lot of details at the terminator , with low and high magnification. When the moon was full it was very very bright and it looked best with the smallest magnification using the 26mm eyepiece. Jupiter and Saturn: I got 2 opportunities to look at these 2, the first time i think the "seeing" was bad. I could only see Jupiters 4 moons and the planet was a bright disc without any details at any magnification i tried. Saturn also wasn't very good, i could see the rings but they were blurry and "dancing" around. But the next time i had the chance to look at these planets the conditions were much better, first target was again Jupiter. With the 26mm eyepiece i could see a white disc with 4 moons.With the 9mm i could see the moons again but now the disc had very faint 2 bands without any color. The view was best with the 6.3mm eyepiece, the 2 bands were clearly visible and on the upper belt on the right side there was a small dark dot, i am not sure if it was anything . Next target was Saturn, event with the 26mm eyepiece i could see that it has rings, i switched to the 6.3mm right away and wow there it was, Saturn and its rings clearly visible, i even think i could spot the cassini devision, but it might have been my eyes playing tricks. I tried using the barlow on both targets but it was making the image blurry, but at this point i had purchased a higher quality barlow and the views were very nice with it , but the max magnification i could use that night was 133x, anything higher and the image was getting wobbly (probably that was due to the atmosphere that night). After that some clouds came in and it was time to get back to bed (got up just to see the planets in 4am). Conclusion: I think i got what i wanted, a small and very portable telescope for some basic amateur observing. I do recommend this telescope to anyone as a first telescope or even to an experienced astronomer who is looking for something light, portable and being able to set it up and start observing in 2 minutes. Also i would recommend you replace all of the eyepieces and the barlow. I got me a few plossl eyepieces and a nice barlow, it was worth it. Feel free to ask me anything regarding this telescope i will be more than happy to answer. Sorry for any spelling mistakes this review probably contains Also i am attaching a few images i took directly off the eyepiece using my smartphone (handheld). The Telescope The Moon: The Moon: Venus: Saturn: Jupiter:

Why crave for long eye relief, and then restrict it with a raised eyecup? Why conceive wide fields optics only to make them narrow with same raised eyecup? My Myriads and Nirvana/TS/William clones have a rotating eyecup that resists turning firmly, they never spin unless I want them to. The Meade/Maxvision 18mm/82° and 34mm/68°, on the other hand, possess a rubber eyecup that also serves as a grippy external frame. These oversize grips offered so much leverage to the turning mechanism, they triggered it often with no will on my part. Almost each time I handled them, the integral cup spun, reducing the eye relief and field, plus it made me doubt if I had fully seated and locked them in the diagonal. The 34mm was the worst offender, its mechanism had almost no resistance at all. That was very annoying, when you observe you want quietness, your gear shouldn't be doing irritating things of its own. Having had enough of that, I lifted the rubber with a handy little tool I always carry in my back pocket: the Dunlop Ultex guitar pick. Ultex is plastic, but it's the glassiest pick material, dump it on something hard and its sounds almost like glass foil or stone foil, if such a thing was possible (Dunlop's more rubbery Tortex was great but it's outdated, just compare). Still Ultex is flexible, a mandatory quality of guitar and bass picks. And it won't scratch anodized aluminum. A 1mm thick pick did the job after a 0.73mm colleague broke; not tough enough. 0.60mm's give out the most harmonics but they were too thin at first sight for this. I don't play 1mm's anymore, they mute too much harmonics, however this one got a nice alternate occupation. Experience from many other little jobs similar to this one made me keep the broken pick when most folks would dump it right away. Never trash something until the work is over. This piece of scrap plastic proved the ideal tool, with the right curvature and bite, to remove the crystalline superglue that remained on the metal cylinder. The mechanism is simply a stud that moves inside a curved slot. I wiped the now-useless grease, and filled the slot with a short piece of electric wire to block the stud. Sorry for the blurry shot. No need to glue the wire, the tight-fitting rubber housing keeps it in place. I did put three drops of glue to attach the rubber to the inside metal housing. I kept the caps on, but I should have taped them to better protect the lenses against tools and glue, big sin here! I didn't use superglue, I'll wait and see if that all-purpose Pattex sticks hard enough to both metal and rubber. If it doesn't, superglue it will be. The "tire" fits the "wheel" tight enough that even no glue could do temporarily. Did the same with the 34mm: Interesting how the crown's edge has some green anodizing that was destined to match the green deco of the eyepiece, had it been sold under the Meade brand. It was impossible to lift that massive rubber housing with a pick, I had to do it with a screwdriver, but it inevitably scratched the black barrel, which I patched up with a black marker. These are the black smears under the wire. There is some risk in opening a high-grade eyepiece, so don't try before you have praticed on cheap or damaged ones. It also voids the warranty, be careful. Waterproof eyepieces are obviously a no-no for that mod! Assuming one could unscrew the sealed parts, humid air would enter through the thinnest opening, and ruin the anti-fogging protection. I hope this is interesting even if you don't get to use the tip. I didn't know what I would find in there, nor did I know how I would fix the sloppy eyecup. Simply opening a bits drawer made me notice that piece of wire, bulb switched on inside my head. I had considered drilling the frame to insert a locking screw but what an awful lot more work and risk it would be! Somehow it escaped my mind that I also own a 24/82 Meade/Maxvision ocular that has a turning integral rubber frame and eyecup, but much firmer fortunately; I might do the same mod for it or not. And a 7mm Panorama, if a preliminary, partial takedown shows it can be done safely. I'll keep you posted.

Read much on Celestron but not so much on Meade these days. How do the big 2 compare and with other SCT makes?

Hello everyone, A couple of months ago I bought a 16" Meade ACF F8 OTA from a dealer in Europe to be used in my observatory. I'm now concerned that this OTA has a severe optical issue, as stars won't come completely to focus, I've tried time and repeatedly and the lower FHWM I've been able to measure in Maxim DL is 8.0. I've also tried to use it visually at magnitude 90x and I could not get sharp stars at all. This week I used a newly acquired artificial star and a ronchi ocular to do some tests an to check for collimation. Using the Atik Infinity camera, I've detected what seems to be a rough edge with its own diffraction pattern. This asymmetry is present both in focus and out focus on opposite edges respectively. All testing has been done with the scope acclimated to the outside temperature, no diagonals nor other optical elements are present. Also, the ronchi test shows potential spherical aberration and some zone aberrations, although we lack the experience to make a definitive diagnostic. I'm attaching some pictures below in the hopes that someone could tell me what's going on: Some pictures of the aberration infocus and outfocus. A picture using Maxim DL of a star at the "sharpest" point of focus, notice the tails of the star on the right hand side. A picture of M13 showing the sharpest point of focus. As always your input is much appreciated.

Hi All, I'm fairly new to stargazing and was looking for some help with my telescope. I've been happy with my Meade ETX 90 RA for a while until it stopped focusing. I've traced the problem to a broken plastic cog on the motor. Back in the day I would have popped into Maplin to get myself sorted but I don't have a clue where to get telescope parts. I live in West Yorkshire and it looks like the Green Witch in Birstall is closed down. Would anyone be able to provide some suggestions? Many thanks in advance!

I have been chasing a good collimation for a week now. When using high powered eyepiece they don't look like this below. The centration is the same but, it is filled with eye reflections etc. This is with a 4X Powermate and ASI 174 M/C camera. When I focus in on the star the Airy Disk is hard to see due to seeing I hope or I'm still not collimated fully. The first is the defocused star and the second is focused. Advice/comments are welcome . I'm seeking feedback on whether I have achieved a good collimation. My planetary targets were either down or oculted by objects.

Greetings, I've been involved in amateur astronomy for many years, and recently had the opportunity to purchase this starfinder scope from a gentleman who purchased it New in 1997. The scope has been unused for a ling time and was showing signs of neglect. He lost interest and just wanted to get rid of this and a meade 10" scope.so I picked them up for a pretty reasonable deal. The scope also came with the Meade magellan ll system, which had never been installed. One of the encoder gears had been broken. I have since installed the system, cleaned up the mirrors, repainted the tube inside and out, beefed up the mirror mount, and the spider and replaced the bolt that holds the secondary with a larger one, and put larger secondary adjustment screws. I also added a cooling fan to the mirror mount. The mount is solid on this beast, and has no problem carrying the weight of the optical tube. This was about the first part of july. Since then ive not been able to take it out for a try due to the monsoons here in Az. Its rained nearly every day, so needless to say i really cant wait to see what this scope can do. I named it the Monolith. I believe the name fits. Any of you buffs out there have one of these scopes? If so I'd like to hear from you.

After having used my Meade Infinity 102 several times now, the piece that has been the biggest impediment to observing is the mount. The main issue has been with altitude adjustment, both course and fine. There's some play in the course adjustment, about 1-2º worth, and the fine adjustment is a bit on the rough side. The azimuth control is ok in both course and fine adjustment. There's also the fact that the fine adjustments have a limited range which requires re-centering them about a few times every hour or so. I've tried various tweaks to the mount to no avail. At this point I'm not really inclined to put any more effort into improving the mount. It is usable and if I stick with this and am still observing a couple months from now, then I'll be looking for an upgrade. I want to stick with the alt-az design. I don't want to pay for goto capabilities. I'm currently not interested in imaging. Would the Vixen Mini Porta be too small for this scope? Would the Vixen Porta II be a more appropriate mount for this scope? Any other options I should consider?

A Meade LX200 14" SCT has become available on the used market near me. I am considering the purchase but have a question that I am hoping to get answered here. My main area of interest is imaging Planetary Nebula and Galaxies, would this setup be any good for it? TIA for any input and advice

I'v been interested in astronomy for a while and i am about to purchase my first telescope and have decided between 2, i'm not very good with the technical side of them so would like some advice on which would be better for me. I have copied the spec of each one from the website which is on currys, i appreciate any feedback.MEADE Polaris 114 EQ Reflector Telescope - £109.00Magnification 158 x Magnification 2 111 x Objective lens diameter 114 mm Eyepiece 1 6.3 mm Eyepiece 2 9 mm Mount Equatorial Coated optics Yes Waterproof Yes Fog proof No Box contents - 6.3 mm eyepiece - 9 mm eyepiece - 26 mm eyepiece - Barlow Lens x 2 - Accessory Tray - Autostar Suite Astronomy DVD MEADE Polaris 130MD EQ Reflector Telescope - £149.99Magnification 103 xMagnification 2 72 xObjective lens diameter 130 mmEyepiece 1 6.3 mmEyepiece 2 9 mmMount EquatorialMotor drive YesCoated optics YesTracking rates LunarBox contents - Meade Polaris 130MD Reflector Telescope- Eyepiece 6.3 mm x 1- Eyepiece 9 mm x 1- Eyepiece 26 mm x 1- Barlow lens x 2 - Electronic RA motor drive- Pre-assembled tripod with accessory tray- Autostar Suite astronomy DVD

Does anyone know if I'd be able to reuse the equatorial mount from the 114eq-d with a different OTA? I have the Polaris lying around since I have a better telescope but I'm looking to upgrade and not buying a new mount could shave off $100-$200. From my understanding it's only a matter of how much weight the mount can hold but I can't find that information anywhere. If anyone knows that'd be great. Thanks in advance.

Hi could anyone tell me how I can reset the atomic time on a LNT SMARTFINDER SCOPE for Meade etx 90. i upgraded to a LNT SMARTFINDER RED DOT SCOPE. But now I cannot set the time on the scope

Hi. Complete newbie to the hobby here. Just purchased a Meade Lightbridge 130 for my daughter as an upgrade to her Skywatcher Infinity 76. I'd like for her to see the rings of Saturn sometime with her new scope. Would getting a better lens improve her chances of a good view of the rings of Saturn? And if so, what lens would you recommend. Thank you

Hi all. Joined the formum last night after my first use of the Meade LX90 telescope. It was a decently clear night and managed to take a look at the moon but very little else.. Maybe I had massively high hopes of the performance of the telescope but I was very much under awed by the occasion. I couldn't afford a new scope so this was delivered used with a single 26mm eyepiece, no erecting prism. Also paid extra for a variable polarising moon filter. I tried my hardest to align the telescope but failed time and time again due to the fact that the stars selected by the telescope I couldn't really see.. I did a decent amount of research before selecting this telescope and have seen what it can do.. just isn't doing for me at the moment. So I would love anyone's input as to what I should do next. I assume I need more eyepieces. I get that from reading other threads on this forum. By the way.. reading the forum really encouraged me to join as you all seem amazingly helpful and so enthusiastic. I remember having a scope as a kid and it just made stars look a little bigger.. Hence I really hoped that this purchase would blow that experience out of the water.. Not yet.. but with your help and input I'm hoping I've made a good scope choice that will give amazing results in the very near future. I have three young kids and yes I bought the scope for me, but also for them too. I want to be able to point at the nights sky and say.. that star up there is actually Saturn... wanna see it's rings? Then show them using the telescope.. I will stop there.. thanks in advance for any help and advice you may give. Currently jimmystarblurredgazing.... Hipefully with your help and input to become... jimmystargazer..

For my 16" Meade ACF F8, I'll be buying a Moravian G4-9000 camera with KAF-9000 chip. The KAF-9000 chip is 36.7mm square, a big chip! on paper the Explore Scientific 3" 0.7 reducer/field flattener could work well right to the edge, but has anyone tried it with Meade ACF telescopes? Also, I'm wandering what is the light cone of the Meade 16" ACF F8, will I get a lot of vignetting with that chip? I have a friend who has tried a KAF-9000 with his Meade 12" ACF F8 with very acceptable results. Thank you for your time.

Hi all, I found an offer on Meade 10x50 Binos here. I've been investigating on purchasing a few extras (new finder, filters, binos, eyepieces) and these binos are well priced, so I need some expert's advice (again sorry!) . The brand and pricing looks very good but 1) I don't know much about binos 2) I don't know that seller (did anyone tried it before? ) 3) I don't know if this is a reliable gear at that price (any tip on these ? ) Despite I'm not looking for supermarket-level stuff, I'm not even looking for top of the range equipment, I can live with "budget" equipment that just does the job without special requirements. And if any of you recommends them and their seller I will be happy to place and order for that little price. Cheers Clear Skies

Back in this thread I was looking for a planetary EP, dismissing barlows on the grounds of an unrequired increase in eye relief and the faffing around involved. The forum faithful persuaded me otherwise and the imminent relase of the ES Focal Extenders at a price well below one of their EPs, had me flexing the plastic. The main reason I folded, was because these are not barlows. They are, like the Meade Tele-Extenders with which they share a common heritage, what is often refered to as a Televue Powermate clone. I'm not actually sure that the concept is actually a Televue innovation, but as TV have been selling more of them, for longer than anyone else, lets run with the assumption that it is theirs. The important bit, is that unlike a barlow, which extends eye relief, a Powermate/Focal Extender doesn't. Instead of there being two (sometimes three) elements in one group that create diverging light rays to achieve their magnification, the focal extender employs a second group of lens elements to turn the magnified diverging rays, back to parallel. This prevents the increase in eye relief. The disadvantages are three fold. For starters, four elements are never going to be as cheap as two. Focal Extender prices start roughly where mid to higher price barlows leave off. Second, with a barlow, you can normally unscrew the lens element holder from the barlow body, which is handy. If you screw these elements directly onto the front of the eyepiece, you get a 1.3-1.6x increase in magnification instead. Indeed a less mentioned effect is that if you screw in an extension between the barlow body and the element holder, you can get a greater magnification than the native 2x (or whatever) of the barlow. You can screw it into the nose piece of your camera adaptor to provide a magnification increase for DSLR imaging etc. Barlows are quite versatile. A Focal Extender's magnification is fixed by the relationship between the two lens element groups. Even if they unscrew, the fact that the light rays emerge in parallel (telecentric) from the second group, means that even if they were a foot further away, they would still only provide a 2x magnification. Finally, a Focal Extender moves the focus point inward by it's own focal length*, which may be an issue for scopes with limited inward focuser travel. This issue, I have only seen mentioned a couple of times, so it presumably a non-issue under most circumstances, as reported by most users. I'd love to add my own experience to the pot, but my ES Focal Extender arrived whilst I stood under crystal clear, Alpine mountain top skies with nought for company but skis, the cloud being anchored at home where the Focal Extender had arrived. T'was always thus. My point is that Focal Extenders are not necessarily superior to Barlows. If you're into a bit of planetary webcam imaging, or a glasses wearer suffering from tight eye relief EPs, then a barlow may well be a better choice than the addition of a shorter focal length EP. If, like me, you are purely visual and are looking to add some planetary flexibility to some UWA EPs with ample eye relief, then the Focal Extender is a better choice. I see a lot of 'buy 'x', you can't go wrong' type statements, but I personally think there's a bit more latitude in individual requirements, than statements like that allow. The ES 1.25" 2x Focal Extender cost $79 plus $15 shipping from the USA. Import duty added £31.31, making a grand total of about £87 delivered. I say about, because the vagries of exchange rates, plus Paypal taking it's foreign currency exchange cut fuzzies the total slightly, but it's definitely south of £90. That is about half the price of a 1.25" 2.5x Televue Powermate, but only about a tenner less than a UK sourced TV 1.25" 2x Barlow. The value of this deal is therefore very dependent on your requirements, as mentioned above. As also mentioned above, I've only been back in the country a couple of cloudy nights, so I'll add my viewing impressions later. In the mean time, here's some piccies coupled with first impressions of the product: The ES packaging has changed, Whereas the ES 82s arrived in a plain black box with an ample expanded foam, clamshell inner, the Focal Extender has cranked it up a notch. The hefty foam remains, but the box is much thicker card, that by nature of it's wrap around magnetic fixing, is also now a double thickness. Gone is the plain black, all surfaces now resplendent in artwork by Will Tirion, the base of the box carrying a history of his work. A nice touch to add to seriously improved packaging. I would also note that, the box is only a shade smaller than that which carried the hand grenade weight and portions of my ES82 30mm EP which is a LOT bigger. If the Focal Extender arrives damaged, it won't be the fault of the packaging. On the subject of weight, the Focal Extender, in common with the ES82s, feels pretty dense in the palm. The combined weight of it, plus the 11mm ES82 tips the scales at a not inconsiderable 520g. Half that of the 30mm ES82, but double that of the 11mm alone and so worthy of note to Dob users in particular. Come to think of it, the weight, combined with the leverage of the complete assembly may challenge lighter EQ mounts. Here's a piccie of the pairing relative to a Skywatcher 20mm Super Plossl, which barely registers on the same scales! Artificial light and the resulting image tweaking in GIMP, has rendered the sheen of the element coatings invisible. Close inspection through a Canon 50mm f1.8 as magnifier, shows the coatings to be entirely even and resolutely green in hue. If inspection in daylight shows otherwise, I'll add it to my first light report. Likewise, with only LED spots and hammer-head flash, it's hard to show the element groupings, but other details are clear. The lack of blackening to the filter thread is disappointing, in line with all of the ES EPs I have. Liberal application of a black marker will be required to amelioate reflections, although the acid test will be actual use. Hopefully Jupiter will still be around when the cloud clears... To complete this phase of the review, I see from my original thread that I pre-ordered the Focal Extender on the 21st of December in a pre-Christmas fit of fiscal bravado. It shipped, almost a month to the day, on the 22nd of January. Notification of the 'comandgeddit' from the PO sorting office, was recived on the 4th of February, which is within the 10 working days norm. What I find interesting is that the Focal Extenders finally appeard on the ES website, well after I had ordered mine. The example on their website is number 28. Talk about mine being hot off the press..... TBC. Russell *I stand to be corrected on this one and indeed any other points!

Would there be much of a difference in the viewing experience of the Meade Lightbridge 114mm and the Sky-watcher skymax 127 ( not goto ). I like looking at the moon, M42 and the Pleiades etc, with my 114mm. I'd really like to see Andromeda , but when I look on my iPad using Star Walk 2 it always seems to be in the west of the sky ......and I have a huge tree blocking that area. Would the likes of M42 be a lot better using the 127? I read somewhere that as you get older that makes a difference too ? Im 65 and just had 2 cataracts removed and can go about without glasses for the first time in 38 years !! Just need them for small print. Any advice appreciated. The 127 Im looking at costs £399 .......I did look at some of the "Goto's" but they seem to eat up batteries.

Hi I have a Meade sct and I’m a complete novice and was wonder where to install my 2x Barlow lens. Thanks in advance for help