Posts Made By: Larry Stedman

My new used 10mm XW came with an instruction sheet that explains that the inside of the barrel has had "matting" applied to enhance contrast... and that screwing in filters may remove "a small amount of paint".

I started to put a filter on during this morning viewing session-- then remember the caution. I tried putting the filter on the end of a T-adapter, an extension tube, and a polarizing filter holder, but none of them would work in bringing the eyepiece to focus.

So, what is one to do?

Should I ignore the caution and take my chances?

I've used filters with older XLs and when I checked today the insides are still grey and the area where the filter screws in looks similar to that further up the barrel. But the XW's inside is black not grea so it may using a different application.

------

P.S. I did have to laugh. Elsewhere in the sheet, under a bolded Warning it says

"Do not place the eyepiece under direct sunlight. (Doing so may cause fire)."

Hmm... is that the old magnifying glass effect? Is it the eyepiece or what's underneath it that will spontaneously combust? Is someone at Pentax playing mind games on us? Don't try this at home, folks!

Figured this should go here even though it may only involve Macs.

I decided to try setting up an RSS feed for the classifieds for reflectors. I'm using Safari. I thought--"Great, it will only display today's new scope ads, so that, at a glance, i can see what's been added." And I can even control length (titles, titles plus a line or two, etc.)

Alas, even though I can set up the feed, it comes up empty when I click on bookmark folder (open in tabs)--or shows yesterday's ads when I click directly on the bookmark. Sometimes, when I hit refresh, it will show the right things. Sometimes when I click Today, it still won't show the right things.

My RSS link is this: feed://www.astromart.com/rss/classifieds.asp?classified_category_id=12

Anyone have any ideas on fixing this? (I'm new to RSS so it could be something really simple that I've gotten wrong. Or maybe a browser cache problem?)

(And, yes, for just doing this, it's easier to simply use the old-fashioned method-- look at the reflectors category. But if RSS gets set up right, then one could combine various search interests and have a one-page display of anything new that matched particular items being searched for.)

Just wanted to let you all know that I've resurrected my Bennett Catalog web page, including two downloadable spreadsheets of the objects.

Whether beginners or veterans, we're often looking for new lists of deep sky objects to observe. The Bennett Catalog, while of recent vintage, includes several classics and many NGC delights worth sampling. You can think of this as "old wine in new bottles"!

Here's the background on the web page (reprised from an old post) and the link to it. The web page also has Hubble Space Telescope photographs of a couple of the Bennett objects and links to web sites about Bennett, his famous comet, and the catalog.

------------------------------------------------

Two summers ago, Astronomy magazine published a "new" DSO observing list: the Bennett Catalog. (It's a compilation of prior lists by Bennett.) The catalog appears in the article "A southern-sky Messier catalog" by Michael Bakich, July 2006, pp. 76-81.

While the object lists were developed in South Africa by comet hunter Jack Bennett, most of the objects are viewable by observers living in the Northern Hemisphere.

I received permission from Astronomy magazine to distribute adapted versions of the catalog. I took their PDF document and converted it into two Excel spreadsheets--one with the full catalog and the other a somewhat streamlined version for Northern observers, even those at high latitudes.

The streamlined spreadsheet retains all objects with declinations more northerly than -40. That list has 100 objects! I've titled that part of the catalog the "Bennett 100". The other file has the full 152 objects. I've set these up so that you can sort by declination to account for your latitude and observing horizon.

The files are .xls documents, but can be opened in AppleWorks and NeoOffice, too. Both are simple files with columns for Bennett number, Messier/NGC number, type of object, constellation, magnitude, RA, and declination. The Bennett numbers are those from the original Astronomy magazine article.

The documents are ordered by RA. I've added several columns that break the RA into hours and minutes and Dec into degrees and minutes for sorting purposes.

I've created a web page where you can fetch them. It's

http://home.stny.rr.com/lstedman/

Enjoy!

The rust on my PST is getting worse. I rummaged the old threads here on PST rust and replacements... one tantalizing thread dealt with before and after impressions of the views through the rusted originals and new replacements, but ended up being more about Meade's responsiveness in replacing old PSTs (still very helpful info!).

Probably not a big enough N to claim a consensus, but is it the case that the replacement PSTs give brighter views, but with less contrast?

I'm tempted to send mine in, especially as solar activity is beginning to pick up, but my views are still quite good, and it sounds as if the replacement views might not be as good, so maybe I should wait!

What do you all think, especially those of you who have had their PSTs replaced? Are your views as good as they were originally? Better than your rusted views?

Ran into some intriguing issues with the search function. I searched for 6" and 8" under reflectors, and even expanding the search to over the past year, it didn't find anything! Then, as an alternative way of finding such scopes, I tried f/6 and f/8, but that didn't work, either! (I made sure to turn ON include sold/found items.)

I can understand the system skipping searches for a single number or character (likely too many hits), but 6" or 8" should be common enough search terms, so it'd be good if they would work.

Even adding brand names didn't always help. "Discovery 8" or Discovery 8" didn't find a listed Discovery 8". "Discovery 12" fails to net the Discovery 12.5 scopes. Even though the scopes exist, the search function reports "No classifieds found". A caveat or disclaimer --or, tips--could help there!

Aperture search terms with more than 1 digit, however, do work. 10" finds scopes, for example; also, so do f6 and f8. (Although the terms f6 or f8 obviously won't find scopes listed as f/6 or f/8.) Even the single, stand-alone inch mark (") works! Although that returns too many hits to be useful.

I also discovered that searching for "inc" does not return anything with "inch"!

Am I missing some option or trick that would enable me to find 6" or 8" scopes? Thanks for any help!

Thanks for the heads up.

Too bad the linking didn't work. I checked the Reviews part of the board, search for "Antares" and also "ultrawides" and didn't find the review!

Is buried under some other title? Or is part of the paid part of that site?

If the eye relief works for you with the 22mm Panoptic, you're getting a superb eyepiece! Some with eyeglasses find it fine, while others with eyeglasses find the eye relief tight (having to press up against the eyepiece to see the whole fov) . OTOH, I found looking at a more recent 22mm Panoptic that the eye relief seemed fine (perhaps my frames changes rather than the Panoptic!). And, if you don't wear eyeglasses, none of this will matter.

I owned both the 22mm Panoptic and the 21mm Pentax and did head-to-head comparisons in a 7" Starmaster f/5.43 dob. Contrary to a major review, and many people's experience, I found somewhat better transmission in the Panoptic than the Pentax. Globulars glittered more; galaxies showed more clearly. (Strange, as the Astronomy mag review had it the reverse.) The crispness across the field of view was virtually identical. (I ultimately sold the Panoptic and kept the Pentax because its eye relief was ideal, the most comfortable eyepiece I've owned.)

It also should be noted that Televue is well regarded as a company for standing behind its products and, if one of their eyepieces is damaged, repairing them for a modest cost. That, too, makes the Panoptic attractive.

So, rest assured, you're getting one of the best eyepieces every made. If you haven't owned a high quality, wide field eyepiece before, you're going to be amazed at the glorious views of the starry heavens it provides!

I have a 2" 32mm SWA which is excellent. Led me to sell my 30mm 1rpd eyepiece, another good 2", but the Burgess is lighter.

Also have a 17mm WA, nice lightweight, small eyepiece, but the eye relief is a bit tight (I like 18mm-20mm). It gave a better view in an Astroscan than a 20mm Expanse, so it can handle fast scopes pretty well.

The Burgess pricing is so low that it's worth buying just to try them.

As evidence their eyepieces do not correct the entire fov in fast scopes, Televue sells the Paracorr to help fix the coma inherent in speedy mirrors. While most swear by it, people do differ as to how much improvement they feel it makes and whether it is worth the $ and balance issues.

As long as you have reasonably decent eyepieces, focus on what you can see and not on the problems in what you see!

Enjoy the views rather than fixate on their flaws!

Yes, I'm trying to remind myself.

Mike, interesting you should mention eye relief on these... every now and then I think I should get the 27mm (which Rick Singmaster recommeded to me). But eye relief matters.

I really like the comfort (and quality) of the Pentax line.

How does the eye relief on the 27mm compare to other eyepieces that you like for eye relief? You wouldn't happen to know its eye relief spec would you? Sounds as if it must be < 20mm of the Pentaxes.