giro and 152/760

[John]

Maybe you are a "mak man" after all Jules ?

[nightfisher]

6 hours ago, John said:

Maybe you are a "mak man" after all Jules ?

I am John, but as said in a different thread, no one makes a Mak that i want with correct focal length and aperture, a 150 F9 would be the ideal scope, they are compact, easy to store, travel well, ED optics, okay narrow field but not a problem given my viewing restrictions  

[John]

2 hours ago, nightfisher said:

I am John, but as said in a different thread, no one makes a Mak that i want with correct focal length and aperture, a 150 F9 would be the ideal scope, they are compact, easy to store, travel well, ED optics, okay narrow field but not a problem given my viewing restrictions  

You can get 150 F/10's in the Intes Alter M603 - is that not close enough ?

http://www.apm-telescopes.de/en/telescopes/reflecting-telescopes-ota/maksutov-cassegrain/intes-micro-alter-m603-russian-standard-delivery

Expensive new but quite a bit less on the used market, if you can find one

[spaceboy]

On 5/13/2017 at 14:03, nightfisher said:

Stu, i will only sell it if i feel i want to do so  the 152 would be a better option for DSO

Didn't you have an ST150 some years ago Jules? I would imagine the Bresser would out perform the ST regards correction. As far as a better option for DSO's?? You have already had both refractors and Newtonian of this aperture in the past so you'll have an idea of what a 6" scope can offer so it's pointless me going over old ground.

As for the Bresser sitting on a Giro II I think it would be good for what a fast achro is designed for...... Low magnification wide field deep sky observing but maybe not ideal for higher magnifications. 

Regards the ED vs Bresser, other than a slightly larger fov I doubt the Bresser would perform significantly better than the ED120 under suburban skies. I found myself letting an EVO150 f/8 go because the ED120 offered better contrast on DSO's. While the EVO may have had a 30mm aperture advantage, DSO's seemed to separate from the background better in the ED so DSO performance was in my eyes very similar between the two scopes. The mounting demands of the 6" achro meant the ED was the clear winner for me. Needless to say an f/8 & f/5 are different beasts.

If you've now moved from planetary to DSO observing and don't want to use a Newtonian then your really not going to have a lot of choices beyond those you have already had in the past. You really have had an awful lot of scopes mate and you've never truly been satisfied with any of them. I can't help but feel your constantly going over old ground Jules. This may be why your experiencing some testing replies in your threads of late as many of us have gone over that old ground with you. Its as if your looking for the budget silver bullet of scopes when in truth there isn't one. You've been advised to the scope that suits your previously stated needs now your not happy with it because, as if over night your needs have now changed. That's all fair enough as we all change our minds but it appears you're regularly contradicting yourself.

There isn't a single scope that will perform amazingly on planets and DSO only scopes that will do one or the other. Unobstructed well corrected optics are ideal for planetary observing. Large, fast optics are suited to wide field deep sky observing. So the almost perfect middle ground scope would probably be a triplet apo refractor of 10-14" and focal ratio of say around f6.5. Not only would this be massively expensive but also require a substantial mount and no doubt observatory to house it in. Instead we amature astronomers often have to make compromises to suit our middle class earnings. In my case I cover planetary observing with a more than manageable well corrected refractor of 4.75". Anything bigger of similar quality is both out of budget and a challenge to mount. For this reason I have an 8" Newtonian. This serves two purposes. 1) On nights of good seeing the newt performs admirably on planets and easily resolves more detail than the smaller 5" frak. 2) it allows me to see far deeper than the refractor due to its larger aperture. Why have the ED refractor you may ask? Because it offers by far the most aesthetically pleasing views of the two scopes. It also for its aperture shows far better detail on planets due to its well corrected, unobstructed optics and subsequent high contrast for it. This is though not to be confused with the higher resolution offered in the larger newt. The frak also performs better on double stars and is easier to mount, cools quicker and has sharper stars across the fov compared to the reflector.

There are few on this forum who have only one scope to cover all their night sky interests. For you Jules it appears a 150mm MAK suits your planetary needs despite for some time wanting something different to replace it. As for DSO I don't know?? You've had a 6" f/5 refractor & 5", 6" & 8" f/5 newts all of which have seen your chopping block. We all figured an ED120 would be the middle ground for you but clearly this isn't giving you everything you want. Maybe it is time to try a large SCT with focal reducer for deep sky??? A word of warning though, this option may well end up costing more than what the ED did and you'll no doubt be left with even bigger regrets when having it sat to one side when the weather is poor.

HTH

 

[Stu]

I think you've said it all there Nick, agreed  

[nightfisher]

I see we started to make progress but I am back to feeling slightly victimised again

[nightfisher]

And remember I have stated I will be keeping the 120 on many posts so let's drop the subject, this is winding me up, all this has come about for asking one question, so maybe I won't ask questions no more

[Stu]

No need to feel victimised Jules. People are genuinely trying to help but struggle to understand how they can sometimes.

As said, let's move on, I hope you get some great views soon!

[spaceboy]

No one is trying to victimize you Jules and I'm sorry if you feel that way.

You must though surely appreciate how difficult it is for others to understand what exactly it is that drives your expectations. A new member who has no knowledge of the sheer amount of scopes you have had over the years would only go to comment on things you already know and there would be no real progress to be made. For those of us who know the long list of scopes you have had in almost all the formats available there leaves little to comment on other than trying to get to the bottom of what it is you expect to gain from constantly swapping scopes

I will be honest with you Jules and it has been mentioned in a couple of your previous threads that has kind of gone overlooked and that is that eyepieces also make up part of a scope. It seems to me that your constantly swapping out telescopes and never really finding a scope that suits your needs perfectly or that you have been left underwhelmed. The one constant though through out all this has pretty much been your choice in eyepieces. You have expressed in the past that you are against spending large amounts on exotic eyepieces and would prefer to stick to the more budget options. While I feel there are eyepieces to suit all budgets I also agree that there are some advantages to having better quality eyepieces. It would on this occasion make sense that this could well be the weak link and the reason why despite having had so many scopes that you have never really been able to find the right one.

I would also like to point out that in my post I was merely comparing a scope (bresser 152/750 on giro II) you have expressed interest in against a scope you already have (I'm only aware of you presently owning a 120ED and maybe a 102 MAK ???) on the same mount. As I have said before in other threads. If you want to or not to sell your ED120 it's totally up to you and that you should do what makes you happy. This is a different thread and I felt I was commenting appropriately so forgive me if it was interpreted any other way.

[nightfisher]

This is my final post on this thread, or any other thread that concerns my frac, so you can all read this, take from it whatever you decide is right, i find it some what stressful that i now fear posting a question regarding a scope, or a mounts capacity, and now we have delved into my eyepiece box with no mention from myself, is the next suggestion going to be "sell my ep`s and spend another grand on fancy ep`s that will show no more of the night sly than i already can view, just to set the record straight i have some very decent ep`s....Antares HD ortho`s, BST 12mm that gets universal praise, an 18mm ortho on route a good 15mm superview  and a 2" 42mm that works better than its humble price tag would suggest, plus some old slvertop plossl`s that also work pretty darn well, my EP`s work well on luna and planetary views, and double stars, i dont do DSO other than some clusters and a few Messiers, so my ep`s are right for me and not at fault, the scope is not at fault, maybe its not right for ME but that is now for ME to decided, i have said my piece, post whatever you like but i wont be reading it,

For the record i wont be posting what scope, or what mount, or what EP, because it will turn into a 120ED thread yet again

I wont be posting any viewing reports of using the 120 as it will turn wrong, and i wont be posting any luna images taken with this scope, i want no further mention of this scope, because due to speaking my mind and not heaping it with full and false praise, all these threads have added to the lack of enjoyment of this scope, i feel the darn thing is now cursed 

[Stu]

Jules, I'm sure this will fall on deaf ears, but here goes.

If you had posted that you didn't like the 120ED with a set of reasons then no one would have minded. Earlier in this thread we got to a point along these lines ie you gave an honest reaction to it, which I have no problem with and totally accept. The only issue is that there is no scope which matches your requirements and budget.

My issue has been the short, unqualified posts hinting that you are not happy with the 120ED plus the questions about other potential scopes, again with no qualification about why you are considering them (a point you accepted). I feel you are not happy with the amount you invested and would rather have a cheaper scope and to spend the balance on a parts for a drone. Again, no problem with that.

As Nick alluded to, new members may not have knowledge of your long history of trying a wide variety of scopes which are used for relatively short periods of time before being discarded. That means questions you post are viewed in context with what has gone before. As seen from F15Rules recent post, it can take time to get used to particular scopes, even very lovely ones, and the seeing conditions have a big impact on the results you get. Seeing has been pretty rubbish for most of us so even very nice scopes are under performing.

Personally I don't care whether you have a 76mm Heritage or a 150 TOA, my efforts have simply been to try to take your requirements and to help you get to a single scope solution which would suit your needs. You post on the forum, therefore we have to assume you want input to the decision?

You have discounted all the other options, so really it only left one choice within the budget you are prepared to spend. I don't think it necessary to withdraw from commenting on the scope, reviewing it and most of all posting images from it, I just don't get that at all.

Just crack on and use the thing and all will be well!

[nightfisher]

2 hours ago, Stu said:

Jules, I'm sure this will fall on deaf ears, but here goes.

If you had posted that you didn't like the 120ED with a set of reasons then no one would have minded. Earlier in this thread we got to a point along these lines ie you gave an honest reaction to it, which I have no problem with and totally accept. The only issue is that there is no scope which matches your requirements and budget.

My issue has been the short, unqualified posts hinting that you are not happy with the 120ED plus the questions about other potential scopes, again with no qualification about why you are considering them (a point you accepted). I feel you are not happy with the amount you invested and would rather have a cheaper scope and to spend the balance on a parts for a drone. Again, no problem with that.

As Nick alluded to, new members may not have knowledge of your long history of trying a wide variety of scopes which are used for relatively short periods of time before being discarded. That means questions you post are viewed in context with what has gone before. As seen from F15Rules recent post, it can take time to get used to particular scopes, even very lovely ones, and the seeing conditions have a big impact on the results you get. Seeing has been pretty rubbish for most of us so even very nice scopes are under performing.

Personally I don't care whether you have a 76mm Heritage or a 150 TOA, my efforts have simply been to try to take your requirements and to help you get to a single scope solution which would suit your needs. You post on the forum, therefore we have to assume you want input to the decision?

You have discounted all the other options, so really it only left one choice within the budget you are prepared to spend. I don't think it necessary to withdraw from commenting on the scope, reviewing it and most of all posting images from it, I just don't get that at all.

Just crack on and use the thing and all will be well!

Ha! so now i need to sell the stupid scope to fund drone parts FWIW no i DONT need to sell it to fund my other hobby

FWIW i wont be posting any other comments, pics or reports, for fear of it becoming another corrosive post

Yes Nick alluded to my scope history, dont we all have a long history of this and that when we have been in a hobby for many years

any way enough said, i dont want to see any further comments relating to me or the 120, game over