Recommendations, for impossible to meet criteria

[notFritzArgelander]

I find that my 90mm and 102mm Synta Mak's can take up to 40 minutes to properly attain thermal equilibrium. The 127mm Mak can take a fair bit longer. 15 minutes is extremely optimistic for a 127mm in my experience.

With forethought in the form of cold soaking prior to intended use the wait time is reducible to zero. It depends on initial versus final temperature.

Well, leaving it outside permanently might address the problem. Taking a cold shower before observing seems an unusual discipline.

Permanently outside is not necessary. Putting it out on a porch before dinner is adequate. I think YOU need a cold shower.

[notFritzArgelander]

It's not that expensive either. Their Mak's are a bit unusual in some respects but they have a good reputation.

I dunno, 6,000 GBP? Not that expensive?

Maybe I'm missing something?

https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/OMC/omc140maksutovca.html

Yes, you're missing the original link which led me to https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/OMC/omc200maksutovca.html

That starts at over 6,000 GBP.

[Shorty Barlow]

I dunno, 6,000 GBP? Not that expensive?

Maybe I'm missing something?

https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/OMC/omc140maksutovca.html

Yes, you're missing the original link which led me to https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/OMC/omc200maksutovca.html

That starts at over 6,000 GBP.

You're saying that I'm the missing link? lol

[notFritzArgelander]

Maybe I'm missing something?

https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/OMC/omc140maksutovca.html

Yes, you're missing the original link which led me to https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/OMC/omc200maksutovca.html

That starts at over 6,000 GBP.

You're saying that I'm the missing link? lol

I'm saying that earlier today your link led me to the OMC Deluxe 200mm Mak and now it leads to the 140.

[Shorty Barlow]

With forethought in the form of cold soaking prior to intended use the wait time is reducible to zero. It depends on initial versus final temperature.

Well, leaving it outside permanently might address the problem. Taking a cold shower before observing seems an unusual discipline.

Permanently outside is not necessary. Putting it out on a porch before dinner is adequate. I think YOU need a cold shower.

Well, if you put it out on the porch before consuming a 45 minute dinner, eat the dinner, take a cold shower, then start observing you should be OK.

[Shorty Barlow]

Yes, you're missing the original link which led me to https://www.orionoptics.co.uk/OMC/omc200maksutovca.html

That starts at over 6,000 GBP.

You're saying that I'm the missing link? lol

I'm saying that earlier today your link led me to the OMC Deluxe 200mm Mak and now it leads to the 140.

You're running Vista aren't you?

https://ubuntu.com/desktop

They're you go! You'll thank me one day.

[notFritzArgelander]

Well, leaving it outside permanently might address the problem. Taking a cold shower before observing seems an unusual discipline.

Permanently outside is not necessary. Putting it out on a porch before dinner is adequate. I think YOU need a cold shower.

Well, if you put it out on the porch before consuming a 45 minute dinner, eat the dinner, take a cold shower, then start observing you should be OK.

That is an insane exaggeration.

[notFritzArgelander]

You're saying that I'm the missing link? lol

I'm saying that earlier today your link led me to the OMC Deluxe 200mm Mak and now it leads to the 140.

You're running Vista aren't you?

https://ubuntu.com/desktop

They're you go! You'll thank me one day.

Nope. Wrong again.

I never ran Vista. I run MacOS, Win10, and Ubuntu already. So there!

[Shorty Barlow]

Permanently outside is not necessary. Putting it out on a porch before dinner is adequate. I think YOU need a cold shower.

Well, if you put it out on the porch before consuming a 45 minute dinner, eat the dinner, take a cold shower, then start observing you should be OK.

That is an insane exaggeration.

I live in a temperate oceanic climate. I regularly lunar observe with Maksutov scopes. I was using my 90mm earlier. I took the Mak into the garden where the outside temperature is about 5º C. I'd say it took the Mak around 25 minutes before the image was stabilised to my satisfaction. The 102mm isn't used so much for twilight observing as I can't fit a bright enough reflex sight on it. For most nocturnal observing it takes around 30~40 minutes depending on the time of year. On average the 127mm Mak takes at least 35 ~ 45 minutes to cool down to get a well stabilised image. On really cold nights I've known it take over an hour.

[Shorty Barlow]

I'm saying that earlier today your link led me to the OMC Deluxe 200mm Mak and now it leads to the 140.

You're running Vista aren't you?

https://ubuntu.com/desktop

They're you go! You'll thank me one day.

Nope. Wrong again.

I never ran Vista. I run MacOS, Win10, and Ubuntu already. So there!

Vista taught me an important lesson. It taught me to run Unix.

[notFritzArgelander]

Well, if you put it out on the porch before consuming a 45 minute dinner, eat the dinner, take a cold shower, then start observing you should be OK.

That is an insane exaggeration.

I live in a temperate oceanic climate. I regularly lunar observe with Maksutov scopes. I was using my 90mm earlier. I took the Mak into the garden where the outside temperature is about 5º C. I'd say it took the Mak around 25 minutes before the image was stabilised to my satisfaction. The 102mm isn't used so much for twilight observing as I can't fit a bright enough reflex sight on it. For most nocturnal observing it takes around 30~40 minutes depending on the time of year. On average the 127mm Mak takes at least 35 ~ 45 minutes to cool down to get a well stabilised image. On really cold nights I've known it take over an hour.

I've observed from temperate oceanic, subtropical and high desert climates. My MK66 is fit for use in a half hour. Putting the scope on a porch or outdoors eliminates the wait.

[notFritzArgelander]

You're running Vista aren't you?

https://ubuntu.com/desktop

They're you go! You'll thank me one day.

Nope. Wrong again.

I never ran Vista. I run MacOS, Win10, and Ubuntu already. So there!

Vista taught me an important lesson. It taught me to run Unix.

I vaguely recall a brief exposure to Vista on a client's machine. That was nasty brutish and short. Linux and Unix (not the same) are nice and I use them for scientific computing, though I let my Unix machine go before my move. One solution does not satisfy my needs so I use the mix of MacOS, iOS and Win10 switching devices in the course of a day.

[Shorty Barlow]

That is an insane exaggeration.

I live in a temperate oceanic climate. I regularly lunar observe with Maksutov scopes. I was using my 90mm earlier. I took the Mak into the garden where the outside temperature is about 5º C. I'd say it took the Mak around 25 minutes before the image was stabilised to my satisfaction. The 102mm isn't used so much for twilight observing as I can't fit a bright enough reflex sight on it. For most nocturnal observing it takes around 30~40 minutes depending on the time of year. On average the 127mm Mak takes at least 35 ~ 45 minutes to cool down to get a well stabilised image. On really cold nights I've known it take over an hour.

I've observed from temperate oceanic, subtropical and high desert climates. My MK66 is fit for use in a half hour. Putting the scope on a porch or outdoors eliminates the wait.

Yes, once taken outdoors from indoors it has to 'cool down'. Which can take up to 45 minutes depending on the outside temperature difference. 30 minutes is a fair (possibly optimistic) average time for a 127mm Maksutov to cool down after being taken outside in the summer months. In my experience Maksutov scopes ranging between 90mm and 127mm can take longer on colder nights after being taken from a centrally heated house. 40 minutes would be a good average for my 127mm, especially in summer.

[Shorty Barlow]

Nope. Wrong again.

I never ran Vista. I run MacOS, Win10, and Ubuntu already. So there!

Vista taught me an important lesson. It taught me to run Unix.

I vaguely recall a brief exposure to Vista on a client's machine. That was nasty brutish and short. Linux and Unix (not the same) are nice and I use them for scientific computing, though I let my Unix machine go before my move. One solution does not satisfy my needs so I use the mix of MacOS, iOS and Win10 switching devices in the course of a day.

I thought Unix was a generic term for anything descended from BSD, but I'm not a computer anorak. I think Linus was originally going to call Linux something rude but ended up with a contraction of something like Linus Torvalds Unix-like operating system. The penguin was apparently inspired by the bloke who created Wallace and Gromit.

[notFritzArgelander]

Vista taught me an important lesson. It taught me to run Unix.

I vaguely recall a brief exposure to Vista on a client's machine. That was nasty brutish and short. Linux and Unix (not the same) are nice and I use them for scientific computing, though I let my Unix machine go before my move. One solution does not satisfy my needs so I use the mix of MacOS, iOS and Win10 switching devices in the course of a day.

I thought Unix was a generic term for anything descended from BSD, but I'm not a computer anorak. I think Linus was originally going to call Linux something rude but ended up with a contraction of something like Linus Torvalds Unix-like operating system. The penguin was apparently inspired by the bloke who created Wallace and Gromit.

Well we are drifting way off thread topic but functionally UNIX and Linux are very similar. At the command line they differ. Nevertheless one can easily play with the shell to translate commands. (With apologies to the OP for topic drift.)

[Sky Tinker]

So definitely need the erecting prism. This would be https://agenaastro.com/william-optics-1 ... gonal.html and used in lieu of the image diagonal you linked. It also sounds like the prism diagonal https://agenaastro.com/baader-1-25-90-a ... 56150.html will improve the image and is a worthwhile purchase? What about eyepieces, are there any I should get in addition to those that are included? Anything else, like filters? Of course, I will also need to get the necessary items to attach my DSLR. Anything to be aware of or are all Canon t-adapters the same?

This is a comparison between the apertures of an Amici/erect-image, and a star-diagonal...

The aperture of an Amici prism is smaller is due to the design and manufacturing difficulties, particularly in the larger sizes like the William Optics and the Baader. Now, you can use an Amici at night, for the sky, but when you're observing smaller, brighter objects, you may see the Amici-line, and caused by the prism; an illuminated streak stretching across the object...

Amici line3.jpg (6.63 KiB) Viewed 1967 times

I don't know if the WO or Baader would exhibit that, but the cheap ones certainly do. Physically, you can't see the Amici-line of a prism with the eye; only a camera will reveal it...

Click on the image to enlarge it.

I know nothing about astrophotography with a DSLR; my apologies.

There is no general purpose filter to get in the beginning. Those are had as you progress in the pastime, and according to your specific needs. For example, if you find the Moon too bright for your eyes, then you might choose a Moon-filter. Also, if Venus and Jupiter are too bright, washed-out, making it difficult to see any details, then you might want a variable-polariser. Such would work for the Moon as well. Then, there are filters for teasing the details out of deep-sky objects; for nebulae, also general light-pollution filters...

https://www.prairieastronomyclub.org/us ... y-objects/

In any event, you'll want to take your time in choosing filters.

Telescopes with long focal-lengths, like a Maksutov or Schmidt, do not require corrective and therefore costly eyepieces, like certain Newtonians do. You can choose eyepieces that are well under $100 each, and for sharp, pleasing views; the cheapest of the cheap even, like this house-branded wide-angle...

https://agenaastro.com/agena-12mm-wide- ... piece.html

...or this eyepiece made from a pair of binoculars... https://telescope-warehouse.com/shop?ol ... g-eyepiece

That's the nice thing about long-focus telescopes. Now, I'm not suggesting those, not at all. They're only to give you an idea of the telescope's frugality.

One eyepiece that you may want to get straight away is a 32mm Plossl, for your lowest power and widest view of the sky. This one is, arguably, second best to a Tele Vue...

https://agenaastro.com/gso-32mm-plossl-eyepiece.html

It sells out regularly, but then AA gets them back in stock soon afterwards. There were over ten available when I got my own a month or so ago. Now they're down to six.

There are more eyepieces out there in the marketplace than you can shake a proverbial stick at. Choosing eyepieces can be akin to getting a pair of prescription-eyeglasses. Yes, it can be that serious. Do you wear eyeglasses, and would you need to wear them whilst observing. The Orion kit comes with wide-angle 23mm and 10mm eyepieces. Aside from the 32mm Plossl, you may wish to observe with the included eyepieces before considering others.

[Sky Tinker]

A word on zoom-oculars...

This is my Meade 8-24mm zoom-ocular(left), and compared to a kit-32mm Plossl...

Meade MZT8-24 - comparison2b.jpg (32.84 KiB) Viewed 1961 times

Zoom-oculars serve two purposes; most importantly, in determining which separate, dedicated eyepieces you would like consider in future. The zoom is like have multiple eyepieces in one; sounds promising, no? That's why it's so much larger than the 32mm Plossl. When using the zoom, if you find that the 16mm is your favourite, then you might want to get a dedicated 16mm eyepiece, and so on. The zoom serves as a teaching tool in that.

Secondly, a zoom is convenient. Instead of hauling out a box full of eyepieces, just grab the zoom, and away you go...

https://agenaastro.com/meade-8-24mm-zoom-eyepiece.html

I like the Meade better than the Celestron, as it has more detailed markings on the barrel for the focal-lengths. In any event, both are made in the same factories overseas.

Now, a zoom is not really intended to take the place of a set of eyepieces, as individual eyepieces have wider fields of view, and improved sharpness. There are better, more expensive, zooms out there, and choosing one of those is at the user's discretion.

[Shorty Barlow]

I vaguely recall a brief exposure to Vista on a client's machine. That was nasty brutish and short. Linux and Unix (not the same) are nice and I use them for scientific computing, though I let my Unix machine go before my move. One solution does not satisfy my needs so I use the mix of MacOS, iOS and Win10 switching devices in the course of a day.

I thought Unix was a generic term for anything descended from BSD, but I'm not a computer anorak. I think Linus was originally going to call Linux something rude but ended up with a contraction of something like Linus Torvalds Unix-like operating system. The penguin was apparently inspired by the bloke who created Wallace and Gromit.

Well we are drifting way off thread topic but functionally UNIX and Linux are very similar. At the command line they differ. Nevertheless one can easily play with the shell to translate commands. (With apologies to the OP for topic drift.)

I believe you.

[Baurice]

I have a 127mm Maksutov, also made by Synta under the Skywatcher brand. I haven't used it this year, as I have been busy with my DSLR. All you need with a DSLR is a tripod and, preferably a zoom lens. A slow motion release cable also helps, as you can take shots without making the camera and tripod vibrate.

You might like a peek at my blog:

https://sungazer127mak.blogspot.com

[Shorty Barlow]

This is a comparison between the apertures of an Amici/erect-image, and a star-diagonal...

diagonal types4b.jpg

Not all 1.25" and 2" Amici prisms have smaller apertures. I have Baader Zeiss Amicis that have apertures as large as conventional diagonals. I don't see the disadvantage in a smaller aperture diagonal for viewing bright planetary objects or the Moon.

The aperture of an Amici prism is smaller is due to the design and manufacturing difficulties, particularly in the larger sizes like the William Optics and the Baader. Now, you can use an Amici at night, for the sky, but when you're observing smaller, brighter objects, you may see the Amici-line, and caused by the prism; an illuminated streak stretching across the object...

Amici line3.jpg

In my experience (I own a lot of Amici prisms) there is no difference in aperture with most of the 1.25" Amici prisms, although the actual prism sizes vary. The Baader Zeiss are the exception of course. What design and manufacturing difficulties are there exactly with larger Amicis? As long as the roof edge is made well diffraction spiking can be kept at a minimum whatever the actual size of the prism. A long time ago most Amici prisms were only intended for diurnal viewing and so didn't need to be made to higher tolerances. Today even the Synta and GSO Amicis are phase coated and manufactured so that the diffraction spike isn't hugely distracting most of the time. It is impossible to totally eliminate the spike but I've never seen it viewing the Moon even with a poorly constructed prism.

I don't know if the WO or Baader would exhibit that, but the cheap ones certainly do. Physically, you can't see the Amici-line of a prism with the eye; only a camera will reveal it...

Amici lines.jpg

It depends what you mean by 'cheap ones'. I have several Synta (Sky-Watcher, Orion), GSO and other resin-bodied 1.25", 90º Amici diagonals, including an Antares. They were all roughly the same price. They are all identical in performance except for the Antares which has a better brass drawtube and nosepiece but the prism isn't in the same class as the other resin bodied diagonals. Consequently the diffraction spike is much more pronounced on it. The original WO Amicis with the helical focuser units had different prisms to the newer helical versions as the prism focal plane is different. Although I can detect no real difference in performance between the older and newer models. Oddly, the new WO's seem to have an identical focal plane to the GSO resin bodied diagonals. This may be indicative that WO now source from GSO. The WO and Baader mentioned above are 45º and white light, not really intended for astronomical viewing, as such, they don't necessarily need to be constructed as well. The 90º WO Amici OTOH has more capability and the diffraction spike is much less apparent on bright stars or a bright Venus for example. And I can tell you this from direct experience with these prisms.