I think some people have reported a great deal of success with some of the Kasai Pico/Omegon MightyMak scopes under 90mm for AP, but both the Pico and MightyMak 90mm versions seem to have some problems with visual though.

Explanations have been varied, many claim it's collimation, but there are also claims that the telescopes have oversized or badly placed baffles.

The overall build quality isn't the same as the Synta Mak's, a lot of plastic is used in the housing, and nobody seems to know who the OEM is.

They are a bit faster (around f/11) than the Synta and can be quite sharp between 40 ~ 60x, much after that isn't particularly good though.

They're overpriced compared to the Synta models as well if you take build quality into considration (Orion, Sky-Watcher) and IMO should be around half the price of the equivalent Synta model.

The accessories with the Omegon were quite poor. The carrying case was decent enough, but the supplied diagonal was entirely plastic with a cheap mirror.



This plastic housed 25mm Kellner came with it. The eye lens is plastic. Even the Sky-Watcher reversed Kellners are better than this.

 

Starting in Firefox version 52, you will also see a warning message when you click inside the login box to enter a username or password.

This is what I get every time I log in and I'm using FireFox.

 

It's just because the site isn't deploying secure socket layer (https), browsers feel the need to tell you if the site isn't totally encrypted these days. Mozilla obviously haven't ironed the bugs out of this Firefox version yet. I stopped using Firefox a while ago, I can only imagine what will happen when Mozilla finally drop XUL support later this year.

Vivaldi can show this message:



If you aren't entering really sensitive information you should be OK.

https://myip.ms/info/whois/209.188.87.12/k/3923366254/website/astronomyconnect.com

Pale Moon, OTOH, is a bit old school and merely informs you that the site isn't encrypted:

 

I think most modern Maksutov scopes are technically Gregory-Maksutov types.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Gregory

 

I get that before I login - and after I log out. It seems to indicate there are things like tracking-cookies crawling about, and 'spiders' sniffing about the site. But this doesn't concern me as I'm running onboard software-programs to keep such buggers out of my system - as everyone should be these days. If you're not or not sure, you need to upgrade your defenses - anti-virus, anti-spyware, malware, etc.

And thanks' for posting the images, Ziggy! That's exactly what I was, and am, loooking for!

Nice!

Dave

 

Try this:


Note the address-bar? I think that's what Ziggy means.

Dave

 

Good read- enjoyed that background, thanks!

 

You're welcome. It's possible James Gregory invented the very first 'Cassegrain' telescope.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Gregory_(mathematician)#Gregorian_telescope

 

One thing I like about CdC is that it gets the position of the GRS right.



I've just been viewing the GRS at about 140x.

 

I keep meaning to run a few comparisons on that - sounds like fun!

I've been enjoying setting my copy up to my usual esoteric standards - visually and otherwise. Now that I've figured out how to do such...

I put up a thread in the Dark Lord's Manor. It was very well recieved. And now (again) the 'Mod-Squad' is tripping over themselves to fawn over me. It's utterly creepy! I think my posting two favorite quotes in my About Me profile may have had a wee bit to do with such - One was the definition of 'Fascism' by President FDR during WWII. The other was a promise by Anonymous to relentlessly come down the throats & computers of those who deserve it!

<evil grin>

Dave

 

CdC is relatively straightforward on Windows. Over the years that I've used it most of the small bugs have been fixed. If I was going to drive a telescope from an observatory with a computer I'd probably use CdC. It's not as pretty or realistic as some other programs but don't let that fool ya! lol

 

You're welcome Ray. Once I'd acquired a Vixen mount the StarMax was a no brainer for me as its dovetail mounts to the left of the mount head. Being 90mm it is very easy for me to actually place it into the mount with one hand.

It copes with lunar observing as good as the 102mm Skymax, which is basically what I got the Orion for. Although sometimes I can just discern Jupiter's GRS. Jupiter is rapidly approaching opposition in April at the moment though (7/3/17) so with the right conditions can be good.

You might be able to use a Newtonian around 5" for lunar/planetary like I use the Bazooka. I think Orion do a Synta 130mm equivalent of the Bazooka. They also make a slightly shorter Space Probe with a parabolic mirror and Sirius Plossls lol.

http://www.telescope.com/Orion-SpaceProbe-130-EQ-Reflector-Telescope/p/9851.uts?keyword=space probe

If you're only looking at the plane of the ecliptic, usually south, it can be manageable.

 

It's been some years, but I agree utterly - CdC is likely the best for running scopes & gear with. Or at least a coin-toss up against TheSkyX (it was 'TheSky Level 4' back-in-the-day). Have you ever used the ThSkyX, Mak? It's also very 'clean & neat' like CdC, except for 2 major differences:

1. It has as many 'whistles & bells' as a professional could want, if you bother to find where they are and how to set them up. The instruction-manual is a weighty tome indeed.

2. It isn't free. The 'Serious Astronomer' version (which I run, as do most serious users - hence the name), costs $149.00 last time I looked. I talked with Tom Bisque and explained what I did, and he suggested I go for that version - even though I made it clear that I could easily afford to get the 'Professional' version ($349.00). I liked that level of honesty from him - though it was also a tad disturbing to my fragile, tattered-balloon that is my poor, widdle EGO!

And I have a slew of others that have popped-out of the woodwork over the days & nights, some horrid - others underrated and sweet.

You make a good, somewhat occluded point: That 'not pretty or realistic' can be an indicator of the best for practical applications of these programs! Though I haven't plugged Stellarium into my USB-t0-Serial-Plug stuff lately, I've heard it works very well indeed these days. Whereas it used to be terribly complicated & buggy. Do take TheSkyX out for a spin should a chance present itself.

I just tried to upload a screenshot (as I've done dozens of times without a hitch), and it gave me an ERROR flag:

The following error occurred
There was a problem uploading your file.

Screenshot (196).png

Guess I'll try later. Maybe George is playing with his keyboard in the ol' Back-Room.....

Dave

Ah! I think I've got it working now.....?

 

I think Chevalley's ethos is to produce good no frills software that can run on almost anything. It runs well on Linux on a light notebook for instance. I've added a few catalogues on Windows, but it still runs very light. Also, it's fairly easy to use, unlike a lot of French software. The French probably code the best astronomical software in the world, but, like all French software, its technical brilliance is often mitigated by its complexity (I'm thinking about you too VideoLan!). Software development is huge in France and the government invests heavily in it. I think a lot of astro software is also influenced by the CNES (Centre national d'études spatiales) as well.

2. It isn't free. This is the bit that bothers me and why I haven't tried it yet. Says the person who has just ordered another Barlow lol.

Firefox and Gecko based browsers have difficulties uploading to this site sometimes.

 

Behold the BARLOW-JUNKIE!

What 'flavor' Barlow did you throw-down for this time, Mak?

I, on the other (guilty) hand, just cleaned-out an older Antares aluminum-case and sliced-out some stray foam-rubber. Now I'm busily putting all my filters into it and positioning them in their new, dedicated, nesting-spot. Now it's off to hunt through the wilds of my deepest, darkest Eyepiece-Cases for filters I have hiding in them.....

Behold the FILTER-NUT!

Not Sayin'

 

Oddly, I was thinking about getting a small aluminium Antares eyepiece case.



I kept seeing these Meade #126 x2 two and a half inch Barlows everywhere. They look very compact and I've heard good things about them. They're supposedly good with scopes of f/5 and faster. I really wanted to compare it to the Baader 2.25x, so I thought I'd get one. There is also a 3x version. I've also ordered an inexpensive Solomark 'Moon & Skyglow' filter just to compare it with the Baader Neodymium. I'll probably end up as a filter nut and a Barlow nut lol.

 

I'm just finishing-up my crawl through Filtertopia, and ran into a few relevant entities while on my tour. I found one of your favorites - #82A Light Blue - as well as my oft-suggested #80A Blue. My Astronomik UHC, which threw me as it's missing it's normal BIG-BOX that Astronomiks' usually come in. This one came in a diminutive rectangular creature with a handmade label. I need to go find & copy a transmission-band chart of these.....I'm also scratching my head over a Baader UHC-S filter. I need to run a side-by-side band-chart on the Baader UHC-S and the Astronomik UHC. At first lightbulb-test/glance, they look to be very similar but.....

You have any idea(s) on how to get rid of a 'ghost-file' that settled into my Documents Folder on my Desktop? It's on what appears to be a Notepad page and consists of the begining to a Monty Python quote-line from one of their sketches. It swears it's not there. It can't be deleted. It can't be moved elsewhere. It's name can't be changed for more than a moment - as soon as you touch it or affect it in any way, it's back to it's original, partial name.

I tried a Command Prompt del. * with wildcard on name and all - then it claims it's open in a non-existant .dat file:

C:\Users\Dave\ntuser.dat

And can't be deleted. Stick of dynamite, perhaps? There goes the phone again - same number. Claims it's from the Sherriff's Office Fund and tells me I have to give 'em my credit-card number - or I'll be arrested immediately! Probably ISIS doing a little good, old American-style fund-raising. Spoofed called-I.D. number. At gunpoint.

'Ta,

Dave



Astronomik UHC



Baader UHC-S

 

I'm pretty sure the Baader is more of a broadband filter than a narrowband like the Astronomik. IIRC discussing this with the pillock is why we're all here and not on the Starwhingers Lounge lol. The Baader UHC-S seems to have an odd reputation and many discount it as being poor or not having the same efficacy as regular ultra high contrast filters. From what I can ascertain the Baader has a filter curve similar to many city light reduction filters combined with a less aggressive UHC filter that is specifically designed for smaller apertures. The upshot of this is that it can have some efficacy with apertures of five inches or less. This is my experience anyway and I've had some success viewing M42 on a 102mm Mak utilising a 40mm Plossl (32.5x, 3.14mm exit pupil). I've also had some success with the UHC-S on other emission nebulae (M20, M8 inter alia) with a 130mm (5.1") Newtonian. I have standard Lumicon filters, including the UHC, and I find it a little aggressive for a 130mm reflector scope even though I live in a Bortle 2/3 area at 152 metres above MSL. The Baader UHC-S however will even improve (64.2x, 2mm exit pupil) viewing nebulae at narrower exit pupils on larger apertures (130mm Newtonian) than the 102mm Mak. Admittedly a Mak isn't an ideal scope for DSO's. I remember the pillock started the argument when I recommended the Baader UHC-S to Ray for exactly the reasons I've stated above in that it is more suited to apertures of 150mm or below. I still stand by this asseveration and honestly believe the Baader UHC-S would be very effective on the ST80 for instance, where a conventional ultra high contrast filter would be a bit aggressive for an 80mm refractor. I intend to try the UHC-S with the ST80 in the summer when I have a richer field of DSO's, particularly in the south.



Not sure about your stubborn file. Is it set to Read Only? SUPERAntiSpyware has a super file delete function for very stubborn files.

http://www.superantispyware.com/

The Meade Barlow looks competent enough. The element doesn't look removable, neither does it look like the drawtube can be unthreaded, but the element itself looks quite good. It appears quite similar to the Baader and they are very similar to look through with an eyepiece.



It's taller than I realised, I often find it difficult to convert old fashioned to metric lol.



The Meade #126 element is larger and looks better quality than the standard Synta Barlows.



The Barlow above is one of the first I owned and it's had a lot of use. I'm pretty sure they're Synta (it was actually out of an old AstroMaster Kit). It's pretty decent though for an inexpensive achromat. One thing I've discovered about the Meade is that it didn't have enough back focus for a small fast (f/3.9) 3" Newtonian. It seems to work on everything else though. The Meade #126 didn't vignette even with 25mm & 30mm Plossls, so resembles the Baader in that respect.

 

Tried the SUPERblabla - looked good! But I knew it would fall flat on this bugger. And did. Found another demon-file that had creeped in. That's nice. Killed same myself - nothing I'd ever loaded. Must have piggy-backed in on something else and promptly gone into hiding. But the "ghost" remains there/not there. It has 0 kb. size and doesn't register as being there! How do you remove that which does not exit? A paradox from HELL!

Speaking of... Dug out my older Baader Moon and Skyglow Filter. It's pre-Neodymium - so it's like a typical broadband light-pollution filter. I'll keep it as a souvenir and side-by-side teaching aid. As for your asessment of the Baader UHC-S, that's what I vaguely remember. Regards the straight-out UHC "being too aggressive for smaller apertures" - I'd try this out myself - and will - before I take that leap. I never bought into the "Narrowbands can't be used in scopes under.....<fill-in-blank>. The numbers keep dropping on such "laws." Try & See is my philosophy.

Such is why I am a Filter-Nut!

Nice looking Barlow! Once I finish-up swimming in my sea of peripherals here, I'll snap a few pics. of some of my older Barlow-goodies I've modified. Fun!

Nap-Time here in Ghost-Ville!

BOO!

Dave