OK, I need confirmation...

[Takahashi]

...that I'm buying the right kit, and in case I've missed anything.

My main aim is to do a lot of (primarily wide-field) AP, and general visual when I'm not committing to "film", so :

EQ6 Pro : mount.

WO 110 AP0 : as main astrograph.

WO Megrez 72 : as guider, and secondary astrograph.

QHY5 : attached to Meg as guide-cam, via ST4 to mount, and USB to laptop.

Canon 500D : main photo-cam

A couple of dew-tapes & controller, power tank, several LPR filters.

Is there anything I have missed that will make me go "You ******g idiot!" when I realise, or anything I should reconsider? I know the 500D might not be ideal, but I can't resist the temptation of it's HD movie capability, especially as it's now almost half it's original price.

In case you were wondering... I'm not in the habit of splashing-out so much on so many bits at the one time, but the way things have worked out, this is the most sensible option for me at the mo.

Thanks,

Ivor.

[JohnC]

Looks good tome Ivor.

We seem to be heading in the same direction.

Best regards

John and Dawn

[Takahashi]

Thanks John, yep, very similar setup you have there, although you have gone the extra (painful ) step to the 130 APO...! I had thought about it myself, but it would have been nigh-on impossible without getting into dangerous financial territory. The 110 was actually an "upgrade" purchase idea from what was originally going to be an FLT98.

BTW, how do you find the 40mm Erfle through your Meade refractor? Do you get much curvature? I thought I was in for goldfish-vision with your old 32mm, but it's actually perfectly fine.

[JohnC]

Seems fine to me, quite impressed really.

Just setting up with three hyperions and a barlow, as i feel this will be adequete for my needs. When i had about 12 eyepieces i just seemed to spend all the time swopping from one to another and not getting the actual observing in!!

Are you parting with the 300D?

Mine has a fault on it and i am thinking of getting a replacement.

[RobH]

Get yourself a Bahtinov mask for focusing each scope too.

Cheers

Rob

[Takahashi]

Yes, I know what you mean about the eyepieces! "Option overkill" is a term my friend often uses in reference to the amount of plug-ins that are available for certain music creation software... and it applies here just as well. You end up spending so much time faffing about with the different ones, you get nothing of any substance done...!

Are you parting with the 300D?

Not sure... probably not - my sister has already expressed an interest in it. If she doesn't, I might continue to use it as my day-cam, and get the 500 modded. Maybe... Not sure. Everything's kind of in limbo right now until I get properly set-up.

[Takahashi]

Get yourself a Bahtinov mask for focusing each scope too.

Cheers

Rob

Well remembered Rob! I had a template all ready for printing and mounting, but for the 6" Skywatcher... I'll need to do the same for these new ones now.

How well do you think I'll be able to focus via live-view or the laptop via USB? Does it come anywhere near the oft-cited accuracy of the Bahtinovs?

[Rossco72]

If you're using a DSLR you might want to think about the TMB field flattner for the 110....

[Whippy]

If you're using a DSLR you might want to think about the TMB field flattner for the 110....

I was going to mention that too. How are you going to mount the scopes? And I'd recommend some of the sturdier dovetails such as the ones made by ADM to eliminate flexture in your setup.

FWIW, the 110 is a very nice scope, but the 98 is better optically. You say you're primarily going for wide field but the 110 with it's 770mm focal length doesn't really make it a wide field scope (the M72 will cover that), it will give you a field though that will enable you to frame quite a few of the medium sized objects nicely. Enjoy it .

Tony..

[Takahashi]

If you're using a DSLR you might want to think about the TMB field flattner for the 110....

I'd thought about that, although it may have to wait... I'm all spent after this... It will be No1 on the priority list thereafter though, unless I can somehow wangle a deal.

[Takahashi]

How are you going to mount the scopes? And I'd recommend some of the sturdier dovetails such as the ones made by ADM to eliminate flexture in your setup.

Hi Tony,

The mounting plan is this :

WO DT plate (long version) for the 110, an Ambermile 220mm DT for the 72. The 72 will be suspended in 2 x 150mm (outer diameter) rings by 6 suspension bolts, and both scopes clamped onto an Ambermile 320mm DT bar, on the EQ6. Should be sturdy enough, I hope.

FWIW, the 110 is a very nice scope, but the 98 is better optically.

That is interesting... I know the older 110 used to have an oil-spaced triplet, and the new one is air-spaced, as is the 98... is there any real difference other than the 110's objective being made (as far as I know) by TMB?

[Whippy]

Your're right about the older 110's, the lens cells were oil spaced and made by TEC. IIRC they were also f6.5 instead of the f7 that the newer cells are designed by TMB. The TMB versions use a lower grade of ED glass than the FLT 98. The FLT's lens cell is designed (and I also believe built) by a Russian whose names escapes me right now.

That's not to say the 110 is a bad scope, far from it. I owned the Zenithstar version which optically identical to the FLT110 and it got plenty of use both observing and imaging. The 98 on the other hand is just that bit better.

Tony..

[Takahashi]

aargh! Now I'm undecided... again!

Do you think the (slight) aperture increase from the 98 to the 110 warrants the extra £300+ ? That was the main reason I switched from the 98, but if the glass is of lesser quality...

[Whippy]

Unless you're planning on doing a lot of visual observing with it, then the aperture doesn't matter (even then, 12mm isn't going to make a huge difference). What does matter is the focal length (which determines the size of the field of view) and the focal ratio (which determines the speed). The 98 is slightly faster (f6.3)and has a shorter focal length (618mm) while the 110 is slightly slower (f7) and is longer (770mm).

Either scope will do you nicely for imaging or visual, if you've already ordered the 110 then stick with it, you won't be disappointed .

Tony..

[Takahashi]

Either scope will do you nicely for imaging or visual, if you've already ordered the 110 then stick with it, you won't be disappointed .

I should be ordering in the next 5 days or so, and yep, I'll probably stick with the 110. I mean, I will be doing a fair bit of observing as well, so the li'l Meg can cover the wide® field work. However... if my financial calculations turn out to be a bit ambitious (not unusual), I may have to revert to the 98. lol... That almost sounded like a bad thing... "Oh no, I can only afford a William Optics FLT98 APO... my world has ended". I should think myself lucky, regardless of what I get.

Guys, thanks for the help... I'm fairly certain that no matter what I get, the selection of goodies I have in mind will undoubtedly suffice. That said, I will always appreciate any other advice!