Meade Infinity 102

[Ray of LIght]

That's too bad about your weather, hopefully will clear soon for you. Yep, the TV is beautiful alright! Where on my scope should I put my "powered by Tele Vue" sticker? That was a nice touch I think!

[Mak the Night]

42 minutes ago, Ray of LIght said:

That's too bad about your weather, hopefully will clear soon for you. Yep, the TV is beautiful alright! Where on my scope should I put my "powered by Tele Vue" sticker? That was a nice touch I think!

Yeah, it's gotta clear some time! Not sure you should stick anything sticky anywhere near optics to be honest. Some are on my EP cases, the rest are in a box. I think the TV 3x Barlow is the most impressive 1.25" Barlow I've ever seen, it's aesthetically subtle yet perfectly constructed in an understated way.

[Ray of LIght]

Too late for sticky! My Rigel Quickfinder is attached to my OTA via double sided sticky tape which comes with the unit. Doesn't seem to have caused any issues so I guess a little more won't hurt! Trying to get myself as better as possible. Tuesday and Wednesday night look good. I'm chomping at the bit now ?!

[Ray of LIght]

I think it may look good on one of my tripod legs instead of the OTA; the Quickfinder had to be on there, the sticker doesn't. Still haven't decided on the filter yet, IDK what would help me out the most. I really want this one more piece of equipment and then give it a rest for a little while!  

[Mak the Night]

I'm hoping for a break in the pants weather, but I would also like some decent transparency, when it's good I can see some objects, like M4, with the naked eye. There is a plethora of Messier Objects low in the south for me.

The f/6.9 of the Bazooka enables a 2.89mm exit pupil with a 20mm EP for 45x. It would be really interesting to see how the UHC-S performs at that magnification.

[Dave In Vermont]

3 hours ago, Ray of LIght said:

I think it may look good on one of my tripod legs instead of the OTA; the Quickfinder had to be on there, the sticker doesn't. Still haven't decided on the filter yet, IDK what would help me out the most. I really want this one more piece of equipment and then give it a rest for a little while!  

Really?? "...give it a rest for a little while"?? No-Ray - this is where ALL your money goes!

All of us astrophiles know that us with a dime will spend it towards an eyepiece, filter, Barlow, etc. - forgetting food and tax-payments! Unless our wives, hubands, sheep, - tie us to a chair and go to Havana with the cheque-book!

Or you could look into a second job.....

All the best, my friend -

Dave

[Ray of LIght]

Lol! You are correct my friend. Remember, the operative words are for awhile. I just took delivery of my Tele Vue 3x Barlow and an 18mm X-Cel LX so I am not giving up by any means. ? ! So Mak let me know how the UHC-S works out with the Bazooka. My scope is a f/5.9 so may not be a comparison but I am very interested in your information and progress. Talk in a bit. 

[Mak the Night]

I've only really used the UHC-S on my 102mm, f12.7 Mak, so I was limited to a 40mm EP (32.5x). The extra 28mm of the Bazooka certainly helps and it is a faster scope. I keep reading how 102mm Mak's are virtually as efficient as 102mm refractors for light gathering, but I don't really believe it. Plus Mak's are all pretty slow. The fastest one I have is the f/11.3 Omegon but that's only 90mm. There are even f/20 Mak's!

Your scope should get a 3.1mm exit pupil with an 18mm EP. With the right conditions, you may even be able to push to using a 17mm or 16mm eyepiece and still be only a fraction under a 3mm exit pupil. Depending on the seeing, it would be interesting how near a 2.5mm exit pupil you could get to with something like a UHC-S before the image became too dark.

I guess I want to push the envelope. I'm constantly told that seeing M4 with the naked eye is virtually impossible and I'll never get a decent image above 200x, but I saw M4 a couple of weeks ago with only my eyes and I've regularly been getting a good 250x with the Bazooka recently.

[Ray of LIght]

That should be good since I now have the 18mm X-Cel. Perhaps the Baader UHC-S may be my best option?

[Mak the Night]

As far as I can tell the Baader UHC-S and the Explore Scientific CLS Nebula Filter aren't exactly the same thing. Although I believe there is a similarity in their transmission curves. According to the ES blurb it ranges from 436nm to 536nm with a peak at 488nm with 98.3% Transmittance. Baader state: ' ... to achieve an outstanding transmission of over 97% across the entire passband, with total blockage of prominent light pollution lines. '.

Personally, if you aren't living near a city sky glow area, I'd go for the Baader.

[Ray of LIght]

There are small community street lamps and porch and security lights, do they count? I guess that is not city sky glow, right?

[Mak the Night]

1 hour ago, Ray of LIght said:

There are small community street lamps and porch and security lights, do they count? I guess that is not city sky glow, right?

Not really. I'm in a village about a kilometre from the nearest town to me, which is to my north east, I'm also at a higher altitude than it. I'm situated high on the edge of a glacial rift valley with mainly farm and woodland to my south and west. However, there are street lamps (some still sodium) in the streets immediately around me. Luckily, I can hide from those in a long back garden that has some 2.1 metre fences, large privet hedges and also some convenient trees in a couple of gardens to the north east of me. I'm several kilometres from the nearest city. So light pollution isn't a great problem for me.

Some people, especially those who live in large towns or in cities, suffer from quite bad light pollution though and regularly use light pollution filters, usually designed to filter the yellow light of sodium lamps, although these seem to be being gradually replaced with LED lamps which most standard LP filters can't actually filter well.

Large cities tend to produce a sky glow, from the hundreds if not thousands, of (usually sodium) street lamps which has a collective detrimental effect on the overall local light quality. This effect is known as 'city sky glow' or 'city light pollution', hence various filters being designated or marketed as dedicated 'skyglow' or 'city light suppression' (CLS) filters.

Combining UHC (ultra high contrast) filters with city light suppression qualities is a more recent development in filter marketing.

In fact, Baader actually market their Neodymium filter as the Moon & Skyglow-Filter. I'm sure it can block some street light emissions to a degree. No filter is a magic bullet for light pollution though. Unless you live in the middle of Las Vegas or next to the Blackpool Illuminations I'm not too sure of the efficacy of light pollution filters.

http://www.explorescientific.co.uk/en/Optical-accessories/Explore-Scientific-1-25-CLS-Nebula-Filter.html?listtype=search&searchparam=Explore Scientific CLS Nebula Filter

 

[Ray of LIght]

How about my situation with the private community street lamps, the front door lights and security lights (which go on and off with movement)? I already have the Neodyminum and Fringe Killer parked on my diagonal. Does my situation count as "light pollution" in your opinion? Do you think the Baader UHC-S would help me in my DSO observations? Thanks as always Mak!

[Mak the Night]

I suppose it is a form of light pollution but I'd hesitate to say any filter would help much with very localised lighting like security lighting. Any ultra high contrast filter will help with DSO observations but it's choosing the best or most compatible for the scope aperture in question.

[Ray of LIght]

Then, from your experience, and my research, it would be the Baader UHC-S. I'm sure I will be happy with it. My left  bicep is still blown out. I can deal with the bad back and shingles (forget the knee and shoulder and breathing), but the arm just adds to the fun. As soon as it improves at all I will be good (or better) to go. As you know, it is very frustrating to pass up good nights because of these kinds of issues only to deal with pants weather too! All will be well soon I do believe. At least I have a lot of my equipment in a row! Back in a bit. 

[Mak the Night]

I don't think you can go wrong with the UHC-S. Plus it has very compatible threads, mine threads into virtually all of my eyepieces. Interestingly, my TeleVue, Baader, Lumicon and Celestron filters all thread into my Omegon diagonals, which is something. My WO diagonal doesn't accept everything, although the Baaders are fine. Baader filters also thread directly onto TeleVue eyepieces.

[Ray of LIght]

You're right, my Neodymium and FK thread fine on my WO diagonal too, so the UHC-S should be great. Just trying to figure if I should, or need to, remove my other filters from my diagonal before using the UHC-S. And where to put it. My first thought is to thread it onto the eyepieces, whichever I am using. Thoughts/advice?

[Mak the Night]

1 minute ago, Ray of LIght said:

You're right, my Neodymium and FK thread fine on my WO diagonal too, so the UHC-S should be great. Just trying to figure if I should, or need to, remove my other filters from my diagonal before using the UHC-S. And where to put it. My first thought is to thread it onto the eyepieces, whichever I am using. Thoughts/advice?

I personally wouldn't stack it with the neodymium. I'd try it on its own first, then with the minus blue filter.

[Ray of LIght]

 

19 minutes ago, Mak the Night said:

I personally wouldn't stack it with the neodymium. I'd try it on its own first, then with the minus blue filter.

So, remove the neodymium, leave the Fringe Killer and add the UHC-S to the FK on the diagonal or to the eyepiece. If I understand corrrectly, lol! Obviously when I am not observing planets!

[Dave In Vermont]

Stacking filters can often dim the object you are trying to see too much, making the resolution rather vanish - along with everything else.

I know - I've tried. But who knows? You may get lucky and wind up inventing 'The Phaser!' Then you can practise your 'plausible deniability routine' on your neighbor - whose house just vanished.....

Dave

 

PS - And Good Morning, gentlemen.

[Ray of LIght]

35 minutes ago, Dave In Vermont said:

Stacking filters can often dim the object you are trying to see too much, making the resolution rather vanish - along with everything else.

I know - I've tried. But who knows? You may get lucky and wind up inventing 'The Phaser!' Then you can practise your 'plausible deniability routine' on your neighbor - whose house just vanished.....

Dave

 

PS - And Good Morning, gentlemen.

Thanks Dave; I have read, more than once, that the neodymium and FK complement each other and do not dim the object. Of course if that happens I can experiment accordingly. The same would be true with the UHC-S, which I will probably order Wednesday. No experimentation, no progress. And I wish I could make my neighbor vanish, except that since I live in a condo and my neighbor's unit is in the same building, I would vanish too!

[Dave In Vermont]

Sounds good to me. I don't know if I tried that combo - yet. FK & Neodymium, that is. With my enormous outlay of filters, it's hard to tell. No Phasers though...Rats!

I own a condo myself. Ran the Condo-Association for 13 years before I threw the files at my neighbor. Now he's begging me to take it back!

No Way!

Dave

 

[Ray of LIght]

Yeah, thankless job. 

[Mak the Night]

1 hour ago, Ray of LIght said:

 

So, remove the neodymium, leave the Fringe Killer and add the UHC-S to the FK on the diagonal or to the eyepiece. If I understand corrrectly, lol! Obviously when I am not observing planets!

As Dave states above, too many filters can darken the image considerably, and the UHC-S may be a 'broadband' filter but you certainly know you're looking through it. I personally didn't see any advantage of stacking it with a neodymium when I tried it. It should work OK with a minus blue/violet filter like the Fringe Killer but I'm not sure how much you'll need it with the UHC-S. Either way, I'd experiment a bit with various combinations until you find what suits you best. Oddly, I've been told that ultra high contrast filters can give good results on Venus. I've seen some colour differences without any filter in the surface cloud on Venus with the Bazooka (predominantly in twilight), but never with the 102mm Mak. Mainly you just see the phase with Venus. So it would be interesting to try it on Venus, although you may have to wait a while as Venus is near the Sun at the moment. Also, I'm not sure what maximum magnification the UHC-S can be effectively used with is. Mostly it would depend on focal ratio but I'd estimate up to around 30x in most conditions with the possibility of pushing near the 40x - 50x mark.

[Mak the Night]

Oh, and Good Afternoon Dave (I'm five or six hours ahead lol).