Mak 127 User seeks best EPs for Galaxy Detection & Globular-busting.

[SuburbanMak]

I am consulting the hive-mind here... 

I am a 127Mak user and for the most part I am using a Baader Mk 4 8-24 zoom for general observing, occasionally the dedicated 2.25 Barlow - really only for lunar/planetary. 

The widest field I can get on the Mak is 1.04 degrees with a 24mm 68 degree AFOV EP - I currently have the Baader Hyperion 24 doing this job. 

It’s notably better for locating faint fuzzies than the (narrower field) 24mm end of the zoom but I note the Hyperion 24mm gets patchy reviews.

Is there a “galaxy hunter” EP in this 24mm 68 degree category that’s going to give me notably better contrast/sharpness worthy of investing? (Or indeed a filter that’s going to make a more than marginal difference?)

Likewise with summer globulars rising I’m considering a purchase at the higher mag end beyond the Baader Zoom’s range (at the 8mm end the image does seem to get a bit mushy & with the Barlow I’ve not had much joy on stellar or deep sky targets - great for the moon though!).  

Been thinking about Vixen NPL or BST Starguider in this context so any experience welcome, or will it blow my socks off on globulars if I save up for a Pentax SMC etc? 

Lastly - is the Nagler 3-6mm zoom as good as fixed EPs? If so this might be the ultimate glob-busting pocket money saving target...

Any experiences, particularly from Mak 127 users, would be really great. 
 

Clear skies! 

Edited April 18, 2021 by SuburbanMak

[RT65CB-SWL]

How about the TeleVue 13mm Nagler? - I have type 1 & type 6 and use either one in my C6/SCT or 're-modded' ETX105. 

Lastly I find the TeleVue 3-6mm Nagler zoom is a superb piece of optical engineering, but at 50deg AFOV it may well be a bit limiting as well as tight eye relief. 
Using the FOV calculator in the Astronomy Tools section at the top of the page and using M13 as an example (image below) it is greater than >240x at 6mm and
less than <500x at 3mm, which is way to much for my ETX105.

<--- TeleVue 13mm Nagler and 3-6mm Nagler zoom FOV comparison.

Edited April 18, 2021 by Philip R

[jetstream]

13mm Nagler, 14mm ES 82 or 11mm ES 82 and screw that barlow on the bottom...IMHO.  Good advice above ^^^

[SuburbanMak]

16 hours ago, Philip R said:

How about the TeleVue 13mm Nagler? - I have type 1 & type 6 and use either one in my C6/SCT or 're-modded' ETX105. 

Lastly I find the TeleVue 3-6mm Nagler zoom is a superb piece of optical engineering, but at 50deg AFOV it may well be a bit limiting as well as tight eye relief. 
Using the FOV calculator in the Astronomy Tools section at the top of the page and using M13 as an example (image below) it is greater than >240x at 6mm and
less than <500x at 3mm, which is way to much for my ETX105.

<--- TeleVue 13mm Nagler and 3-6mm Nagler zoom FOV comparison.

Thank you for replying, really interesting.  As it stands I've been quite happy with the Baader's performance in the mid range (I'd say 18mm down to 10mm is its sweet-spot) so wasn't really thinking of doubling up in that range. Are are you saying you'd rather barlow a 13mm to get to a higher mag than buy a dedicated short focal length?  

Also would really value your opinion on an upgrade for that max field 24mm 68 degree - the one that keeps coming up is the Televue 24mm Panoptic. 

[John]

59 minutes ago, SuburbanMak said:

...Also would really value your opinion on an upgrade for that max field 24mm 68 degree - the one that keeps coming up is the Televue 24mm Panoptic. 

Dosen't the Hyperion 24mm already do that for you ?

In your 127mm mak-cassegrain I would have thought it would be doing a fine job.

 

[Don Pensack]

3 hours ago, SuburbanMak said:

Thank you for replying, really interesting.  As it stands I've been quite happy with the Baader's performance in the mid range (I'd say 18mm down to 10mm is its sweet-spot) so wasn't really thinking of doubling up in that range. Are are you saying you'd rather barlow a 13mm to get to a higher mag than buy a dedicated short focal length?  

Also would really value your opinion on an upgrade for that max field 24mm 68 degree - the one that keeps coming up is the Televue 24mm Panoptic. 

There are alternatives in that size (like the APM/Altair Ultra Flat Field 24mm), but if you don't wear glasses, it's the 24mm Panoptic.

I used one in the same scope for several years and it is a great combination.  A 32mm Plössl will give the same true field at a lower power with a larger exit pupil and brighter image, which could be important for use of nebula filters.

[SuburbanMak]

2 hours ago, John said:

Dosen't the Hyperion 24mm already do that for you ?

In your 127mm mak-cassegrain I would have thought it would be doing a fine job.

 

It does indeed, I am just wondering if there's a high-end option that would give an appreciable upgrade - the answer is probably "not as much as getting somewhere dark and/or having more aperture". 

 

 

[jetstream]

44 minutes ago, SuburbanMak said:

It does indeed, I am just wondering if there's a high-end option that would give an appreciable upgrade - the answer is probably "not as much as getting somewhere dark and/or having more aperture". 

 

 

While nice views can be had with smaller apertures, I find around 8" really starts to open them up. A 200mm f6 SW dob maybe? It could be cheaper than throwing a bunch of money at eyepieces for this IMHO.

[SuburbanMak]

2 hours ago, jetstream said:

While nice views can be had with smaller apertures, I find around 8" really starts to open them up. A 200mm f6 SW dob maybe? It could be cheaper than throwing a bunch of money at eyepieces for this IMHO.

It’s a good point - the more I read the more I think money is better spent on diesel to get to a properly dark site.

 I’d love a big Dob-bucket but it just doesn’t fit with where I live & the kinds of short notice opportunities I get to go out observing right now, one day though...

[SuburbanMak]

3 hours ago, Don Pensack said:

There are alternatives in that size (like the APM/Altair Ultra Flat Field 24mm), but if you don't wear glasses, it's the 24mm Panoptic.

I used one in the same scope for several years and it is a great combination.  A 32mm Plössl will give the same true field at a lower power with a larger exit pupil and brighter image, which could be important for use of nebula filters.

Thanks Don - especially the Plossl suggestion, a filter + Plossl might be an interesting and cost effective experiment to see if I am teasing out the most from the aperture I can

[John]

3 hours ago, jetstream said:

While nice views can be had with smaller apertures, I find around 8" really starts to open them up. A 200mm f6 SW dob maybe? It could be cheaper than throwing a bunch of money at eyepieces for this IMHO.

I agree with this.

Meanwhile your Hyperion 24mm will be allowing your current scope to show all that it can.

 

[SuburbanMak]

2 hours ago, John said:

I agree with this.

Meanwhile your Hyperion 24mm will be allowing your current scope to show all that it can.

 

Thank you - darker sites and more time at the eyepiece it is then  

[RT65CB-SWL]

On 19/04/2021 at 11:35, SuburbanMak said:

Thank you for replying, really interesting.  As it stands I've been quite happy with the Baader's performance in the mid range (I'd say 18mm down to 10mm is its sweet-spot) so wasn't really thinking of doubling up in that range. Are are you saying you'd rather barlow a 13mm to get to a higher mag than buy a dedicated short focal length?  

Also would really value your opinion on an upgrade for that max field 24mm 68 degree - the one that keeps coming up is the Televue 24mm Panoptic. 

TeleVue Nagler's have an 82deg AFOV and Panoptic's have a 68deg AFOV. 

A Barlow lens with a removeable front element may work. Though I rarely use use my Barlow lenses with my C6 or ETX105, (the plus side is that it will be a little lighter weight-wise, as you will have removed the body). I tend to use the Astro-Engineering 'MagniMax' [1.6x}... part number: AC555 with a 1.25" e/p nosepiece.

[SuburbanMak]

In the end I’ve plumped for sticking with what I have in the Baader 24mm & adding a budget higher magnification with a Baader Classic Ortho 6mm. 

Also having a go with a Baader Neodymium LP filter - see if that makes any difference generally. 
 

Thanks all for the sagely advice! 

[Basementboy]

I'd be interested to hear how you find the Baader Neodymium LP filter – from what I've read, LP filters don't make much appreciable difference in the age of LED?

[johninderby]

It’s a mistake to think of the Baader Neodynium as just a light polution filter. It’s actually a great lunar / planetary filter. My most used all round observing filter. 

[Tiny Clanger]

On 19/04/2021 at 18:40, SuburbanMak said:

It’s a good point - the more I read the more I think money is better spent on diesel to get to a properly dark site.

 I’d love a big Dob-bucket but it just doesn’t fit with where I live & the kinds of short notice opportunities I get to go out observing right now, one day though...

Yep, I've not chipped in here earlier, because altho' I have a 127 mak, I don't choose to use it when I'm looking for faint fuzzies, because the slight aperture increase afforded over the 127 mak by my 150 heritage dob makes a surprising improvement in what can see.

Heather