Posts Made By: Dan D DuBal

Delightful report, sir, as always. I'm glad to know that at least one of us has been out there traipsing around in the dark dark darkness.

If the next week or so allows, I'll try and get up into the high country and get boggled. There's nothing like a 7-mag. sky to drop your jaw with DSOs. I'm sure both Penlight and Midi Mak will make the trip, but I might just get a little goofy and bring along little Jason, as well.

Remember: it's not how big your eyes are... It's how big your eyes GET. 8O 8)

Best regards.
-Dan

Hi, Mike.
How about the old 40mm Megavista (aka UO 7/70)? Do you have any experience with it in the f/5-f/6 range -- especially relative to the MK70? There's reason to believe that the 34mm & 40mm Axioms are, in actuality, reborn/rebranded examples of the ol' Megavista & UO big'ns.

Cheers.
-Dan

The only dumb questions are those never asked.

Once you've logged in, look for a "User Profiles" hotlink on the left side of the screen (from the "My Account" screen, for example). Once you click on "User Profiles," you'll be able to enter the member's last name & first name info. This should lead you to *their* User Profile, and, at that point, the rest should follow simply. If any hangups or confusion, just let us know.

Cheers.
-Dan

Wow. "Quick" is right!

Very buzz-worthy, sir. Thanks for sharing.

...Astounding.
Hats off to you, Mr. Davis. You're responsible for two of the more memorable Lagoon images to ever bug my eyes and drop my jaw.

Many many thanks for sharing.

Cheers & drool.
-Dan

That's simply outstanding, Jim. As the photo was loading to my screen, the first two things I noticed were both the exceptional contrast & the sharpness of the star images. Your photo is superbly balanced and beautiful.
Thanks for sharing!
-Dan

If the choice were mine, I'd opt for the 80mm Zenithstar. Even if the 66mm apochromat cost $300, I'd choose the 80mm Zenithstar. Sub-three-inch apochromats define a niche that's simply too narrow and "cute" for my tastes. There are plenty of alternatives to a fast 66mm apochromat, many of which are more versatile, will show greater detail, and cost much less. If carry-on portability and wide-angle views are musts, the 80mm Zenithstar, its "twin" the Orion Express, and the Stellarvue Nighthawk (w/rack-&-pinion focuser option) all fit the bill, cost less, and will outperform the 66mm Zenithstar "apo."

Seems the "basic" Megrez is now the 80mm f/7 triplet and costs hundreds more than any of the afore-mentioned scopes.

Best wishes and luck.
-Dan

D&G Optical (www dot dgoptical dot com)

The 2-inch format is certainly not necessary. Unfortunately, none of us can predict whether or not you'll be wanting a wider field. (If I had that kind of foresight, I'd be rich! ) However, I can offer my own personal experience and perspective.

I have three refractors in the f/5-f/6.7 range. Two of them are 2-inch capable (75mm Pentax & 80mm Stellarvue), but I've never felt the need to maximize either scope's field of view. I have had the opportunity to feed both scopes with 35-40mm wide-field 2-inch eyepieces; and yes, the views were indeed wonderful. However, when I want expansive views of star fields and clusters, I always seem to reach for one of those handheld "twin refractor" systems, otherwise known as binoculars.

15x binoculars with 70mm objectives and ~4.5-degree fields are easy to find and fairly inexpensive. Even wider fields can be had (albeit at 10-11x) in the 50-70mm aperture range. Several 10x50s yield 6.5-degree fields. Sure, some refractors can yield fields a little wider in the 10-15x range, and they can yield a little more magnifcation at similar fields of view, but that slight advantage can end up costing a pretty penny (depending on scope &/or eyepieces).

For some folks, a good pair of wide-field 70mm binoculars is just the ticket. -And, as a bonus, they allow the use of both eyes.

Cheers & best wishes.
-Dan

That's Vallis Alpes, or the Alpine Valley. As for its morphology, it's likely a graben.

The only depth estimate I can recall is ~2000 meters, but I don't remember the source.

Cheers.
-Dan