Thanks for clearing up the mystery-of-the-mount, Ray. So we're dealing with a separate animal - Synta v. Meade. I'll keep hunting.....

A good AltAz is hard to find - everyone seems to want EQ's. And then beg to be shown how to use it. My guess is this is why so many nice telescopes end up collecting dust in the back of musty garages.

'Til later,

Dave

 

Well fudge! Just as I was about to pull the trigger on a GSO 2", 86.4 focuser for my 90 (badly needed!) Agena is sold out! Guess I'll have to wait- what- about a year?

 

Perhaps not, Zigg:

http://www.scopestuff.com/ss_frc2.htm

There's always more places than one! And ScopeStuff.com is a favorite of mine. The owner, Jim, is a really great guy who will bend over backwards for you. And his prices, like Agena, include shipping, too.

Check out his website. I'd suggest packing a lunch and maybe a tent. It's easy to get lost in there. He's got things for things you've never even imagined!

http://www.scopestuff.com/

You'll like it,

Dave


P.S. - Forgive my memory - but what model telescope do you have? I'm assuming it's a refractor, yes? I can't even remember my own telescopes ½ time!

 

Yeah, an AstroView 90 with an 86.4 flange diam. I have ScopeStuff shortcutted to my desktop and he does have one so I'll be looking @ him come $$day! Thanks!

 

I think it's easier for OEM's to make relatively competent inexpensive EQ mounts. My Synta EQ2's do the job quite capably and were not expensive. At high magnifications an EQ is definitely easier to use.

A good alt az isn't that difficult to find, but a good inexpensive one is hard to find.

 

I have one of this same model on one of my refractors - and it lives up to all the rave reviews from various websites. That's why I have these GSO Crayfords on 4 telescopes. And a single-speed GSO 1.25" on my older (2000-ish) 200mm F/4 Newt. I went so far as to remove my JMI MotoFocuser's from two of them. No need - the focus is truely that smooth and scalpel-sharp.

Another +++ for you, Zigg, ScopeStuff and Jim are from Texas. How convenient! But he ships at Warp 9 regardless.

When I was 12, I got my first serious telescope: A 3" F/15 refractor from Edmund Scientific. I didn't know it at the time, but the optics were the same as would be in a Unitron - which I yearned for the most (but my parents' would have killed me for selling their house from under them to afford). So the telescope was terrific! But it came on the all-time worst EQ-mount known to man! It nearly made me quit astronomy altogether. And I knew how to use it! I cringe even thinking about that thing, even to this day.

You're quite right, Mak - a good & cheap AltAz is few and far between. The nicest one I could get recently is a Vixen-branded Porta II. Up from there, they want you to buy the tandem-models out there - for two scopes side-to-side - which look like something ripped out of the plumbing in a multi-unit apartment (flat) building. But I guess most are quite nice.

Back to the Salt-Mine,

Dave

 

He couldn't come, apparently he was using an AZ3 when the crappy altitude control fell on him knocking him out. lol

 

The Porta II's nicely engineered, but you have to pay if you want a sturdier tripod, which I think it needs. Mounting the scope to the side solves a lot of centre of gravity problems. Although this can have some drawbacks of its own.

I think Ray nailed it when he said the lock washer probably wasn't doing its job on the AZ3. From what I can see of Ray's alt-az, it is similar in design to the AZ3, but it's almost certainly not Synta built.

There are no reports of Meade Instruments alt-az mounts having drift problems that I'm aware of. As a design, if the component parts are doing their jobs properly, there's no reason why it shouldn't hold a 3 ~ 5" short bodied refractor or Cassegrain firmly. All it takes is something like a poorly designed lock washer and it will drift.

The AZ3 didn't drift so much as throw itself overboard tied to a lawnmower lol.

 

If I had one of these mounts in front of me, I could likely come up with a simple and inexpensive fix of it's drifting problem. And if I couldn't - then I know who could: Pete Peterson in Rhode Island.

Hey there, Ray?

There's an ingenious engineer named Pete Peterson not too far from us. And a really nice go, too! The Meade LX-series of SCT's came/come with a plethora of design errors. Not their optice - they are superb - but their excellence crashes & burns at the first turn! I know. I've had both a LX200 and an Lx90. The optics more than adequately make up for this - but one should be prepared to roll up their sleeves and use tools! Too scary for people reading this? Buy a Celestron. But they, too, have their idiots in the designer-room.

I've chatted by phone to Pete, and he helped me fix a bug while installing one of his kits he sells to bring the design glitches up to snuff:

http://www.petersonengineering.com/

I ended up writing some ad-copy for him as a result (his idea, not mine). I'll bet he could suggest something available from any good hardware-store to address the problems we've been discussing (which I'm now calling "The Sermon on the Mount") - He's VERY GOOD! If I may be so bold and say - I'm no slouch, myself, but Pete leaves me in the weeds miles back!

Anywhose - I'm was only using using the AZ-4 I have for my Maksutov, before I migrated to the Porta II. My only other AltAz is being occupied by my ST80. Both and small scopes. The Maksutov has a center of gravity close to the center of the stubby OTA. This likely minimized any drifting from becomming problematic. And the other one, what Orion called an AZ-4, is pictured below holding on of my ST80's. Not the AZ-4 we usually associate the name with now.



And this thing was discounted to rock-bottom as it wouldn't even handle the ST80! The altitude-clutch slipped if you so much as breathed on it! Rated at 10lbs - not able to support 10 ounces. I fixed this glitch easily. Now it's nice. And I'd bet extremely rare - most of the others sold are likely in the back of peoples' garages, forgotten about. But your Meade-mount sounds like something I'd love to disassemble and examine! Meade's problem-children seem to be confined to the LX-series only. I have 2 LXD55 EQ mounts from Meade, and I like them. Though most people tossed them for the newer LXD75, which came out less than a year later! Marketing-Gimmick 101! Everyone now wanted the '75 - over the perfectly good '55.

I also have a Meade AR5 (5-inch) achromatic F/9.3 refractor, the optics of which are sweet indeed.

Have you ever checked out the Max Planck Institute For Astronomy? It's out of Germany and a full English version is one mouse-click away. They have some excellent articles and news, IMHO. Have a link:

MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR ASTRONOMY

http://www.mpia.de/en/news/science-releases

Well back to evil doings! Have fun!

Dave


P.S. - Another great day tomorrow, weather-wise, Ray. How's the UK doing, Mak?

 

Cheers for the Max Planck thing Dave, that looks interesting. We had the hottest day of the year yesterday and around midnight I didn't even need a coat.



I got to give the Bresser 5.5mm Plerfle and the cheapo Skygeek filter a test again for a while. I was all set to see Europa transit when a lot of clouds came! Honestly, 15 more minutes and I'd have seen it. The BBC weather mendacity Android app say there might be light cloud tonight.





I guess I'll need a really good Barlow to see Europa like this below lol.



I also tested my 6mm GSO Plossl with the Baader helical and discovered that it is really pushing it for back focus. This was a bit of a disappointment.



The 6mm Vixen works really well though and I rate Vixen NPL's as good as TV Plossls.



I've had to replace the drawtube on my 6mm Vixen with this smooth brass one as the original had a defective thread making filter threading impossible. The 6mm NPL I ordered to replace it had a similar defect! I think it's an old Meade drawtube, either way, it does the job. You can see it here compared to the 8mm NPL drawtube. NPL undercuts are wide and shallow and are not usually problematical. They're also brass. I'm not sure why the GSO 6mm won't focus with the helical, I suspect its 5mm eye relief may have something to do with it. I don't recall having the same problem with 6mm Celestron Plossls. The 6mm AH ortho' also works fine and that has a 4.91mm eye relief. The 6mm NPL has a 3mm eye relief!

 

Lucky you had a spare one in your favorite format - no ring-catching indents to foul-up. I've only had one major disaster with that: A 2" 2X Barlow (GSO) whose 2" - 1.25" included adapter became hopelessly mired in. It wouldn't allow me to budge the thing. I finally had to rip it out with blind force.

It was a total loss. Replaced it with a spare WO one I had on hand.

We're holding here at 76°F. currently. I haven't checked the radar-maps yet, but we've been overdue for this. But the trade-off is a persistent overcast sky. But we'll take it! So it should head for the coast and blow over to you in a day or three. How's your weather down on LI, Ray? I hope it's at least as nice!

'til later,

Dave

 

Yeah, it was when I got a 17mm Celestron Plossl caught in a TeleVue 3x Barlow for half an hour that I realised there was definitely something wrong with using undercuts with compression rings. Never again!

It's gone back down to 12° C here, probably the wind chill factor.

I might try to get out at midnight to see the GRS and the conjunction. Sometimes Jupiter's good to view in the vicinity of the moon. I've replaced one of the slo mo cables as the plastic sleeve had broken a bit and would catch sometimes on the OTA somewhere. I've also altered the RA setting by 1°. For some reason I set it a degree higher. I wondered why it tracked oddly lol.

 

Actually the Wind Chill Factor - we New Englander's know and dread - shouldn't register on the thermometer, so arrive at you need a wind-speed indicator - Anemometer. Then you factor this reading into a formulae that I've shelved in cob-webs of my mind.....

As to the undercuts, it was made all the more awful for me as I'd just bought and received the 2" Barlow/Adapter. And the now-deceased adapter had a retaining-bolt in a bore-hole midway down it's body - a weird custom-job I'd never seen before! And while my spare WOs' one fit fine, it looked strange. But into the trash flew the stock-adapter. This was the only problem I'd had with the newer goods from GSO. But it was a good one!

My temperature tomorrow is predicted at 22°C. So it's cooling off again. Rats!! Then around 15°C. for several more. But it's getting there. Everyone here agrees that this Winter's been particularly obnoxious, but no one can specify why! Myself included. I am so tired of wandering about town while wearing a big bag of bird-feathers which is my Winter-Parka.

Bah! Hibernation ends...

Dave

 

It wasn't too cold out, although I had to wait until 02:30 until this:



Turned into this:



When I got a glorious 20 mins or so of almost crystal clear clarity with really good transparency. I only had three eyepieces with me ... and three filters.



From left to right; Solomark Moon & Skygeek, TS Optics (GSO) #82A Light Blue and Baader Neodymium.



The eyepieces were the 6mm NPL, 5.5mm Bresser and 5mm TSO HR giving 150x, 164x and 180x. I think the neodymium gave the best and most naturalistic view, but I expected that. The Solomark probably gave a tiny bit more background contrast and imparted a more blue colour but the GRS was very easily discerned with both filters, again, probably slightly more naturally with the Baader. The equatorial zones were fairly well defined with both the Solomark and the Baader. I thought that the EZ, NEZ and SEZ inter alia were probably a little better defined with the #82A however. Although with the TS Optics Light Blue filter the GRS became more indistinct compared to the other two. Overall, the Baader Neodymium gave the most subtle view but the others were interesting none the less.



Not only does the EQ track better now I've adjusted the RA, I've replaced this with an undamaged one.



Planetary images by CDC, SN7 and GIMP

 

This is the third 6mm Vixen NPL borker I've had delivered now, and this particular eyepiece was from a different retailer to the previous two. The thread and bottom of the drawtube are visibly marked and damaged in this jpeg. This is the same as the others. The damage isn't just cosmetic as it renders the threads unusable. I've never seen this on a Vixen eyepiece before, they're normally high quality and the filter threads are very well made usually.



I'm guessing they are all from the same batch.

 

That looks pretty bad, alright. Yet you keep trying! I hope the next is 'the charm.'

Maybe Vixen can hire you as their spokeman - "They're ALL broken, but I keep buying them! They're THAT good!"

But, well, maybe not. From different vendors, too? If I may ask, how much do these cost over there? Me thinks I'll take a look around here, and check out some reviews.

Good Luck!

Dave

 

All Vixen prices tend to vary somewhat over here. From 15mm and below they are between £44 ~ £35 ($43.75 ~ $54.97). Longer focal lengths are a bit more expensive.



I decided to keep the first borker (above) as I put a new drawtube on it. It's either an old Meade or Kasai drawtube I'm not sure. NPL drawtubes are unique though and incorporate a lip at the top. You can see above the absence of the lip leaves the housing exposed. NPL's have high quality glass and I can't tell them apart from TeleVues, in fact, I rate the 15mm NPL as slightly better than the TV 15mm.



They are weirdly built however, with what appears to be some form of semi-rigid plastic utilised in their construction.



Above are the 30mm, the 25mm and the 15mm. All NPL's longer than 15mm have odd plastic twist-up eyeguards. You can see the guard twisted (snap-lock down and up) up on the 30mm and in the down position on the 25mm. The exposed body housing is metal, probably aluminium. The 15mm has a fixed plastic eyeguard although the silver coloured part of the housing is aluminium. The drawtubes are almost certainly chrome plated brass but they seem lighter than comparable brass tubes.



Above is my just delivered Solomark 6mm Plossl, it was two quid cheaper than the 6mm Celestron Omni and a pound more than the Sky-Watcher 6.3mm Plossl. Whether the 'Solomark' (there is no brand name on the housing) will focus with the Baader helical or not remains to be seen. The build quality seems quite good with a brass smooth drawtube. It came supplied with two dustcaps but not the 'Comes with sturdy plastic case-proect the eyepiece from dust and moisture' (sic) mentioned in the advertising. The filter thread works fine and the baffling looks good. The rubber eyeguard is the softer type (which I prefer), not unlike Meade or GSO eyeguards as opposed to the stiffer rubber used on Synta eyepieces. I rarely use eyeguards on EP's less than 20mm though. Preliminary daylight tests in an f/11 Mak show a sharp clear image. It will be interesting to see how this compares with other similar Plossls.



https://www.amazon.com/Astromania-1...&keywords=solomark+6mm+plossl#customerReviews

It looks suspiciously like this 'Astromania' 6mm Plossl on Amazon USA.



These types of inexpensive Plossls often come in for a lot of criticisms on many forums. Yet the build quality looks as good as, if not better, than some better known equivalents. I doubt they cut the mustard in scopes faster than f/6, Celestron and Sky-Watcher Plossls are advised to be used with scopes slower than f/6 for example. Ever since I accidentally confused a 12mm Omni Plossl with an 11mm TeleVue Plossl in my f/13.8 Mak I've wondered about these less expensive Plossls.

 

I got a notice in my snail-mail today some folks might be interested in: University Optics, out in Ann Arbor, Michigan is having a sale on orthoscopics made by Masuyama in Japan. If you like/love orthoscopics - it's surely worth a look:

http://www.universityoptics.com/

UO is an excellent, small outlet that I've used for many years without a glitch (problem, Mak), only good experience. I have their website in my 'Favorites' list.

In brief, Mr. Masuyama is cutting back production to one run per year. And this will be the end of the year. So once these are gone, they're gone. The sale covers the 2016-run.

Happy hunting!

Dave

 

The Masuyama EP’s are available here too. They look good, although I don’t know how useful they’d be to me.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ja...uyama-ultra-premium-japanese-2-eyepieces.html

I had a session on Jupiter and the Moon this morning. The transparency enabled me to get 300x on Petavius and the Sea of Crises for a short while, although I mainly stayed at 225x.



A lot of the lunar viewing was unfiltered although I did use the Solomark Moon & Skygeek for a while.



I actually observed Jupiter first, then returned to it later. I watched Io appear from behind the planet and then again later until the GRS appeared. Jupiter reached transit before the Moon did and I wanted to give the Wratten #80A another chance on the 130mm 'Bazooka’ as Jupiter is just past opposition and was rapidly approaching transit.




I was never totally satisfied when using an #80A before, although thinking about it, I was primarily viewing Jupiter either rising low in the east or setting low in the west when using the #80A. And, as far as I can recall, nowhere near opposition. I assumed it was the low transmission rate combined with a 13cm aperture that was rendering it less effective. Plus, the twilight was probably a factor.



But I pondered what you said about the efficacy of the contrast with the #82A and it started me thinking. Which isn’t so easy now as I’ve had brain damage lol. So I had a bit of a prolonged session with the #80A and compared it with the Baader Neodymium. I was pleasantly surprised that the 80A really did seem to reveal slightly more detail in the North Equatorial Zone and region. I believe this was because of the contrast and the 30% transmission helped with the overall glare and brightness of Jupiter itself. So I’m a convert now!



Then I went ape-crackers and ordered a set of (1.25") Baader coloured filters.

Lunar and planetary images by courtesy of VMA, CDC & GIMP