From what I can gather focal reducers don't seem successful on Mak's. I've never tried using one though, so I really can't say. I believe they can be used to good effect on some SCT's. Most Mak's are above f/10 though and probably just don't respond to a reducer well. There are custom built f/20 Mak's made here in the UK (Orion UK I think). Now, that's a slow Mak!

 

Started observing at 23:00 BST until around 02:30. Waxing Gibbous Ascending. 95.3%, 352.3 S azimuth, 25.4° altitude (Capricorn).



Although overall seeing was below average the transparency was far better than last night and magnifications of 257x and 300x were easily achieved. SW Explorer 130M, 4mm, 5mm SW UWA’s, 6mm AH, 7mm Fujiyama orthoscopics, 2x TeleVue Barlow. Baader Neodymium filter, TS Optics Blue 82A and ND96-0.6 filters. All magnifications used: 180x, 225x, 257x and 300x.



Schroter’s Valley was still very nicely illuminated near the Terminator. Darwin, Pythagoras and Grimaldi were all very distinct and clear. A huge amount of very clearly defined detail could be seen between Grimaldi and Lamarck.



I spent a considerable time at 225x (4mm SW UWA) on the bright surface away from the Terminator with a neutral density filter and a Wratten light blue filter. Mare Crisium was quite clear with both the ND and blue filters.



Copernicus also responded well to the blue filter and much detail could be teased out considering the phase.



Images: VMA, GIMP, PhotoFiltre 7.

 

I've been further daylight field testing the ST80. The WO bino's seem a bit heavy and tend to rotate in the diagonal. They will achieve focus though with a GPC.



The WO Amici prism with the helical works well, even combined with a Celestron X-Cel 2x Barlow (seen here with a 25mm Vixen NPL).



The (now unborked) Orion 9x50 RACI sits well on the OTA with an EQ2 mount.



The Baader Semi Apo filter seems very well contrasted with a very natural image. Considering my eyepieces are usually virtually married to my Baader Neodymium filter I think the Semi Apo will work well.

It's still a cool looking little frac (can't say the same about the weeds in my lawn) lol!

 

Thanks Ray. Standing and observing is very tiring and potentially dangerous for me. I have to stand/crouch usually to use the finder. Once I'm in the vicinity I can tighten the clutches and use the slo mo for fine tweaking. I can roll the OTA in the rings as well as turn the diagonal. It's a lot of shagging about when you can only really use one arm well though lol. With this I should be able to sit fairly comfortably once I've acquired the target.

In the last jpeg you can see the Right Ascension axis (marked RA on the mount) which is pointed at Polaris (OK, I had to guess in daylight lol) and set at about fifty two degrees, twenty seven minutes latitude. The scope is at about fifteen degrees altitude (declination) as I was focusing on a TV aerial at the time. Looking north is hard work with the Bazooka but quite easy with the ST80 it appears. No doubt something will bite me in the jacksy.

This was just a short test to make sure the new O rings were sitting in the dovetail correctly. I've discovered the entire dovetail can twist on the thumbscrew attachment. It used to do it with the Mak as well. I have to make sure it's tight enough. I'll have to experiment further looking up at the zenith. I've a feeling I may have to raise the tripod leg height slightly to look at the zenith. The great thing about EQ mounts is that once you have acquired the target you can sit down and just occasionally turn the RA slo mo.

I did consider the Fringe Killer and stacking my Neodymium with it but after some reading on the Baader filters I decided the Semi Apo was probably the best option for a 3.1" scope. IIRC a 15mm EP only gives you 40x. I'm not so sure the SW UWA's Barlow that well as they have a Smyth (basically an integral Barlow) lens in the draw tube. This may produce ghosting on bright objects. I'm thinking of getting the 2.5mm for the ST80. It will give me 160x.

 

That's a very good looking telescope! Especially on the EQ-mount. Very cool indeed.

I've rarely pushed-up the magnification to 160X or more on mine. Around 133X is about it - thus far. But the Moon is still available for this fun, along with my TV-Barlows & 2.5X PowerMate.

Have fun -

Dave

 

Thanks Dave, it seems to do well on the EQ2 that was originally for the 102mm Mak. I have a feeling my TV Barlows/Powermate will be a tad heavy sitting in the diagonal. I have some decent shorties though.

 

On my broken Orion Alt.Az. - mount I fixed, my ST80 often has a 2" WO dielectric-diagonal, a TV Barlow, and my 8 - 24mm Baader Zoom-EP. No problems with this amount of weight. Or my 1rpd. 30mm 2" EP that weighs even more than Baader Zoom - and my 2" GSO Barlow.

Before I fixed that Orion-mount, it wouldn't hold so much as an orthoscopic EP.

Enjoy!

Dave

 

Yeah, I reckon the EQ2 mount I've set up should easily deal with the overall weight of the ST80 OTA, 9x50 finder etc. I'm more worried with tall heavy eyepiece combinations rotating in the diagonal itself. I don't have a great deal of range in my right arm and hand, although a fair bit of dexterity has come back. 18 months ago I couldn't move it at all.

 

Spent about 90 mins up to Transit (01:16 BST) observing the Moon. Transparency wasn’t bad but there seemed to be a lot of water vapour in the air. I still got a pretty good butcher’s at much Terminator detail at 150x, 225x, 257x and 300x.



Petavius was nicely crisp although it’s about a day early for any good Rimae Petavius shadowing. Mare Fecunditatis was nicely clear and a great deal of detail could be seen around the central mountain in Langrenus.



Mare Crisium was quite spectacular with ghost craters and craterlets easily perceived. Wrinkle ridge was very well defined and distinct mare surface features. Endymion also shadowed well on the western rim.

 

Yes, that could pose a problem with the stock visual-back and focuser. I'm using the Crayford I splurged on, which has a double-bolt mechanism to hold the diagonal with it's compression-ring. My problems are more centered on not tightening the focuser draw-tube enough to haul a heavy load upwards from zenith. But that's my own doing - not the equipment!

You really will love that little scope!

Dave

 

I think I have a decent collection of light eyepieces that can be Barlowed well. Both Barlows here are good quality, the 2x Omegon (Barsta) is outstanding. A shorty 3x may be a future purchase to consider though. The 2.5x TS Optics (GSO) is also very good quality (both apochromatic).



Apart from the TeleVues, the others were originally acquired for my 90mm MightyMak which has a 1000mm f/l. A 400mm f/l is a bit of a challenge but I can get magnifications ranging through 167x, 80x, 67x, 53x, 27x and a fair few others with these eyepieces alone. All of the EP's are high quality including TV Plossls, Hutech and Kokusai orthoscopics, a Baader BCO, 15mm Antares Masuyama clone and a 10mm Baader Eudiascopic.

 

Fascinating thread chaps. As I share some of your kwipment, hope you don't mind if I tag along...

F'rinstance, the ST80 I just treated myself to seems a delightful little thing. Before, I was using a 90 Mak as my easy grab, but with mixed results with my skies - too much focal length v small aperture I think. Still, great on Ol Luna and hopefully on M42 when it clears my east-view chimneys...and will be a little stunner when I get it to a dark(er) site. Tho I am sorely tempted to get a 102 Mak for the planets etc.

The ST80 is a little darling thus far - only had two nights with it! I'm awaiting a device so I can mount it onto an EQ2 I had knocking about ( but, be still my beating wallet, a Vixen Porta Pro alt az, is whispering sirensongs in my ear).

Hey ho, the Small Aperture Club eh?!

 

Wow, we have a lot of similarities ghostdance. I had a 90mm Mak (Omegon MightyMak) on a tabletop Dobsonian as my grab'n'go. I came to the same conclusion about the 90mm Mak, even though mine is f/11.3 I still think 1000mm is too long a focal length for the aperture. I have a 102mm Mak (Sky-Watcher Skymax) and it is indeed superb for planets and the Moon. Pretty good on easy Messiers like M42 as well. I'm awaiting some Astrozap dew bands for my ST80 and its 9x50 finder as it is the time of year the dew event horizon sneaks up quickly lol. The ST80 is definitely more stable on an EQ2 than the EQ1 that is usually supplied with it. I can't wait for first light with my ST80.

 

This thread is possibly establishing a new competition in the astro-world: Who has the smallest & easiest telescope to use & carry. More power to us!

Ghost: You also have a new ST80? That proves it! I LOVE it! These scopes do what I like the most - large starfields and hunting nebulae like the North American Nebula.

Smaller telescopes are signs of liberation,

Dave

 

I'm pretty sure both Orion finders have the same feet, mine do. As you can see, both fit the ST80.



I've been doing some feasibility studies and although the EQ2 mount will be fine for targets in the plane of the ecliptic and possibly to a 45° declination anything near the zenith is going to prove problematical.



I'll also probably swap the EQ2 2kg counterweight for the EQ1 counterweight which is only a kilo. The 2kg weight shown in these pictures seems to be too heavy for the scope. Although I only have the 6x30 finder on in these pictures. Earlier I had the 9x50 mounted on the scope.



I've had to raise the tripod leg height to enable being seated as I observe. Which means I'll probably have to stand and crouch to observe lower targets. As this is physically very difficult for me I'm going to have to order an alt-az mount, otherwise it means changing the tripod leg length every time I change to or back to the zenith. I can actually observe targets at or near the zenith fairly comfortably with this set up. I can reach both slo mo controls with my left hand and it feels generally alright but manipulating the OTA/mount combination seated is not as easy as I thought. Changing to the smaller EQ1 counterweight with the EQ2 mount could improve that though.

To be honest Ray, I don't know if 1x magnification matters much in a finder. I don't know if the foot on the GSO will fit your scope though. Orion stuff is a bit overpriced anyway if you ask me. If the GSO finder fits the shoe on your scope it should be OK. A lower magnification in a finder is not a bad thing, it could even be beneficial as you may see more stars in the FOV and more easily determine location.

 

Hey Mak, Dave and Ray, venerable founders...

MTN, your rec for the 102 leaves my wallet uneasy but my lil grubby heart happy. I toyed with the idea of a 127 to replace the baby, but...too big even tho it's small if that makes sense. I've only had two evenings with my (Orion themed) ST80 thus far - it's greyer than a vicars underwear drawer here lately - but ooooh those nice wide panoramas, as Dave said. Tho the Milky Way is just a memory for me. Ain't no such thing in inner London I'm afraid!
I've set my EQ2 finally. Now to wait twitchily to see how it goes with some starry stuff...Can't wait for M57 with my UHC and the ST

Ray, I have the Orion 9x50 RACI, and the SW ( it's all Synta under the paint) 6x30 RACI. They both have the same foot so no mount problems. I didn't get on with the Orion rdf, so got a Quickfinder and about to buy a Vixen XY as it has a very different alignment I believe (loosen one knob, align and tighten: simplicity...we'll see).