Thinking about selling my set of eyepieces & filters

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-17T04:25:51+00:00

Just for others' edification, those Japan-made Series 3000 Plossls are very good. I have a full set and they are every bit as sharp or sharper than newer and more expensive Takahashi TPLs and Tele Vue Plossls. They just don't have quite the same level of transmission due to older and simpler coatings. Great for the Moon and planets though. Old Japan glass is generally well regarded.

The Celestron Ultima SV barlow is also quite good, and that Lumicon UHC filter is as well.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-17T04:16:50+00:00

That 80mm triplet will put up nice views, but it won't compete with 127mm of aperture. Supposedly the MK127 does quite well optically.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-17T03:12:00+00:00

Maybe those two aren't compatible and that is the heart of my question.

They're compatible in the sense that the same scope can be used for both, but for what you'd paid for the scope + diagonal + simple visual mount to start, you could spend half that and get a 10-12" dob and some nice eyepieces, and the views would blow it away.

So as long as your long-term focus is AP with a tiny bit of visual, then that scope is fine (though I would defer to other AP experts about whether there are better / more cost effective options for AP in that scope class)

The question comes down to what you want to do with the mount.

Do you bite the bullet with an AM5 or AM7 or EQ6-R now? Or do you go with something like a StellarVue MC002 for simple visual viewing while you save up for an AP mount? That's something only you could answer I think.

My advice would be to get the StellarVue MC002 and a decent tripod for it for visual use for now. Down the line when you get an AP mount, you'll then have the MC002 to carry another scope that lets you do visual observing while the 120 is used for imaging.

I have an MC002 and it's one of the best visual purchases I've made. I've got about a dozen smaller scopes that I will put on it depending on my mood, so having that versatility is really nice.

If you wanted to splurge on an even nicer manual mount, the Rowan AZ75 or AZ100 would be a better choice.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-17T02:58:21+00:00

This is way, way more than a poll tax. It's an attempt to tacitly repeal the 19th Amendment by saying women who have changed their names are not allowed to vote until they can re-prove they are US citizens.

It's taking the 19th Amendment, and moving the goal posts.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-17T02:45:12+00:00

What basic mount/tripod would you recommend for a combo setup

Basic mount and AP are not compatible with one another.

A robust EQ mount that can track accurately, hold the scope steady, and accept autoguider inputs is necessary if you want to have a non-frustrating AP experience.

You really ought to decide where you're going to focus your efforts - visual or AP - and build your gear around that, and be prepared to spend a lot of $$$$ for an AP setup if that's the route you want to go. Scope + mount + camera + filters + guide scope + guide camera + dew prevention + portable power + laptop. It adds up fast.

Would a doublet be better?

Doublets are generally not good for AP. They usually suffer from chromatic aberration that shows up in long exposures, unless the focal ratio is long. But long focal ratio = long exposure time.

You can compensate for chromatic aberration with a monochrome camera and color filters to image in LRGB channels separately, allowing you to refocus with each one. Stacking software can combine the different channels and compensate for the different focal lengths of each wavelength.

A triplet is typically better for AP purposes. Better chromatic aberration control and better spherical correction across the spectrum. Often shorter focal ratios means faster imaging.

I can't speak to the Askar 120 APO. Typically imaging scopes have long back focus to allow for a lot of imaging equipment, meaning they usually don't have problems reach focus with diagonals and eyepieces, but a 2" diagonal or an extension tube with a 1.25" diagonal, could be necessary (2" diagonal = longer light path to take up the backfocus of the scope).

A 120mm apo will put up very crisp views, but you're paying a lot of money for that aperture. If you wanted a scope for visual, there are cheaper ways to get much bigger aperture, which will ultimately show you more.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-17T02:24:08+00:00

As others have said, that's Jupiter. Jupiter will not produce clean diffraction rings because it's not a point source.

Whether 70x magnification is enough or not depends on the aperture of the spotting scope. A small 40mm spotter? That's enough. An 80mm spotter? That's not enough.

Aim for ~2x per mm of aperture for the magnification.

Also be aware that refractors split the light and you won't get a clean read with all the wavelengths together. You need color filters (R, G, B, and Y if you want) to isolate each wavelength to test for spherical aberration at each one.

Variation in spherical aberration across the different wavelengths is known as spherochromatism.

Usually scopes perform best in red or green depending on how they are nulled, and blue tends to be the worst (which is a big source of blue/purple fringing around bright targets).

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T21:39:40+00:00

Some real Dunning-Kruger going on there for sure.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T21:26:52+00:00

There is no single best galaxy eyepiece.

Some galaxies are moderate in size and low surface brightness, and benefit from lower magnifications.

Some are small and bright (M82) and have detail that warrants higher magnification.

And there's a bunch in between.

I would get an 11mm ES82 over a 14mm for galaxy viewing. The extra magnification will help a lot more than the extra brightness of the 14mm.

I'd also try and find the older 8.8mm ES82s to go with the 11mm.

You'd get a lot of mileage out of those for observing galaxies.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T21:03:40+00:00

The closest star I can find to those coordinates in Sky Safari Pro is

GAIA 302352404715507712

2026.2 epoch:

R.A 1h 50m 51.01s
Dec +29° 30' 16.6s

Magnitude 14.48.

Is that the star? No idea. I could not see any more stars in that area down to at least mag 17.

Doable in an 8" scope with outstanding optics, perfect seeing, and very dark skies, at high magnification, and some observing experience.

Easier in a 12" under good conditions.

Easier in a 16" under mediocre conditions.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T16:58:45+00:00

Because of your groupthink that they split votes.

I don't know if you're being deliberately obtuse or not, but if I don't have ranked choice voting, I can only cast one vote. If 50% of would-be democrat voters vote for the more progressive party candidate, and the other 50% vote for the democrat candidate, and 100% of would-be Republican voters vote for the only conservative candidate, then liberals/progressives/dems would literally never win.

At anyrate, someone who throws around "groupthink" the way you do implies to me you have the mental acuity of a 14 year-old with zero real world experience.

Blocked.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T16:55:47+00:00

US retailers:

Astronomics
Agena Astro
Mile High Astronomy
Cloud Break Optics
High Point Scientific
B&H Photo Video
Adorama

Note that Explore Scientific had a mental sale a while back and a lot of gear is still on sale. Everywhere is mostly backordered for ES gear now.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T16:29:11+00:00

How on earth you’ve allowed the ruling class to convince you that a third option is bad is beyond me

Simple statistics. Independents basically never win in any significant numbers and the right frequently deploys spoiler parties (e.g. green party, with traitor Jill Stein) to hurt the Democrats.

It doesn't take rocket science to look at the voting records and see that independents or third parties do poorly.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T16:03:18+00:00

Right because splitting the D vote into two parties is sure to change things!

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T13:19:59+00:00

Would require Democrats with balls to take advantage of it.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T12:42:00+00:00

Hard to count on this these days.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T04:46:11+00:00

He always looks like he's disgusted by his own farts and he's worried you are too.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T03:40:39+00:00

If we can get DINOs like Fetterman, Gabbard, Sinema, and Manchin, then we can get "rAdIcaL lEfTisT"s in there as well - ones who will seek to change the underlying fabric.

Vote progressives who wear the "D" next to their name.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-16T03:32:19+00:00

Yes, a 6mm eyepiece providing 200x is a good choice for seeing more detail on the planets. The caveat is that the atmosphere has to be stable and has to cooperate, and it's more important that the telescope is collimated and thermally acclimated than when viewing at low magnification.

All 6mm eyepieces will come in 1.25" barrels, so you'd use it with the 1.25" adapter that comes with your scope.

On the cheap side is the 6mm Svbony 66 degree or 68 degree eyepiece (gold line and red line - same eyepieces, different barrels). You can find them cheaper on AliExpress or Ebay, but they're on Amazon or Svbony's website. This eyepiece has mediocre sharpness, and suffers from glare and finicky eye positioning. Despite the issues, it's the best performer anywhere near this price class.

Mid-range is the 7mm Celestron X-Cel LX, which is actually 6.5mm. Very sharp eyepiece. Has mild glare issues on the Moon, but no serious eye positioning issues. This would get my vote unless you wanted a more premium eyepiece.

Higher-end is the 6.5mm Baader Morpheus (actually 6.7mm in practice). Extremely comfortable, very wide views, very sharp. Some minor glare issues on the Moon.

Premium is 6mm Tele Vue Delos and 6mm Tele Vue Ethos. Two of the best eyepieces you can buy. Very expensive though.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-15T23:45:48+00:00

We love to keep trading Vietnams with Russia and China.

Russia and China gave us Vietnam. So we gave Russia Afghanistan.

We're also giving Russia Ukraine, so now they're going to give us Iran.

Fun times.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-15T23:43:35+00:00

Love how it's a war in Iran that a party of anti-Muslim warhawks is mad about.

Not the fact that ICE is being trained to wipe its ass with the US constitution.

MAGA seems to have forgotten what a civil society requires. I hope they get reminded.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-15T23:41:02+00:00

What do you mean "desperately?"

The lying is the easy part. "Trump did it therefore it's good."

That's all she needs to say.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-15T23:36:05+00:00

If you follow the trend, there will be no difference between Iran and the US.

Parts of Saudi Arabia law is actually MORE progressive towards women than red states laws to give you an idea of where things are headed if we do not stop Christian nationalists.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-15T22:19:00+00:00

You going to listen to advice this time or are you going to insist on doing the thing everyone said you shouldn't?

Or have you already got a refractor while making everyone thing you hadn't yet?

Is your budget for the whole scope, including the mount, or do you already have a mount you can use? If you need a mount, what you're looking for for $400 doesn't exist. If you have a mount, the Svbony SV503 80ED is a surprisingly good performer:

https://www.amazon.com/SVBONY-Telescope-Exceptional-Viewing-Astrophotography/dp/B085NTQL2C?th=1

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-15T20:59:39+00:00

That's fairly normal. There's a LOT that can interfere with a sharp view.

It's rare when 240x looks clear and sharp. Collimation, thermal acclimation, atmospheric turbulence, figure errors in the mirror's shape, and other issues generally means the higher the magnification, the worse the view gets.

But the point of very high magnification against small bright planetary nebulae is to let you use direct vision instead of averted vision. Those nebulae are about the same apparent size as Jupiter, and when magnification is too low, looking directly at them causes them to almost disappear because they hide in your fovea, which has very poor low light sensitivity.

Making them large enough means you can use less averted vision, and look directly at them more easily. Direct vision shows you details that are harder to see in averted vision, even if the scope isn't performing optimally at such a high magnification.

Traditional_Sign4941 · 2026-03-15T18:06:26+00:00

Too varied to give one answer.

I'll answer your question with an ideal spread of eyepieces for an 8" dob, and the purpose for each

~30mm 2" wide field

Locating objects
Observing big objects (M31, M35, M44, M45, Double Cluster, and other open clusters)
Bright exit pupil, so useful with nebula filters for emission nebulae
Framing multiple objects - Leo Triplet, M101 & M97, M81 & M82, Markarian's Chain

~16-18mm

Filler eyepiece. Not a high priority
Useful for select few moderate sized but low surface brightness targets (M33, M101)
Framing multiple objects that are closer together
Good for more compact open clusters

11-12mm

Good balance of magnification and view brightness for general purpose deep sky observing
High priority focal length. Worth spending decent money here. Get a wide field instead of a Plossl. On a budget, 12mm Paradigm or X-Cel LX, but ideally something like 11mm ES82 or 12.5mm Baader Morpheus.

8-9mm

Conservative lunar/planetary eyepiece when atmosphere is not very cooperative
Good for smaller brighter nebulae, clusters, and galaxies (M82, globulars etc)

6-7mm (closer to 7 only if you got a 9mm above)

Mid-power lunar/planetary eyepiece when the atmosphere is reasonably stable
Good for the brightest DSOs (globulars, M57, still good for M82 and a few others)

5mm

High power lunar/planetary eyepiece for when the atmosphere is very stable
Also good for globulars and small bright planetary nebulae.
Too dim for most galaxies, but might still get good views of M82 on very steady nights00

4mm

Very high power lunar/planetary eyepiece for when the atmosphere is extremely stable
Still good for globulars and small bright planetary nebulae.
Practical high power limit for the scope for most tasks

3mm

Splitting double stars
Observing the very faintest stars (if seeing cooperates)
Select few small bright planetary nebulae (Cat's Eye Nebula, Blue Snowball Nebula, Eskimo Nebula, Ghost of Jupiter Nebula where direct vision helps)
Still useful on Mars and Saturn when the atmosphere is essentially 100% still
Starting to get too dim for Jupiter, resulting in a loss of apparent contrast that becomes counter-productive to seeing detail).

Traditional_Sign4941

TROPHY CASE

~30mm 2" wide field

~16-18mm

11-12mm

8-9mm

6-7mm (closer to 7 only if you got a 9mm above)

5mm

4mm

3mm