Jump to content

  •  

CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.

Photo

Baader Travel Companion or AP Stowaway

  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

#51 Gavster

Gavster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 882
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2014

Posted 12 March 2019 - 02:50 AM

When i push my (and others') scopes to see their capability, i often get the mag up to about 50X/inch. So for the baader perhaps ~180X which is a 0.5mm exit pupil.

I seem to find that it pulls out the differences in the quality of the optics from that point. Of course, perhaps my eyes are so bad that i need that image scale to 'see' those differences that others can see at lower mags. But it would be great to hear your thoughts at these mags.

 

ps. Gavster was it you that bought an AP130GTX like me from Skypoint?

I find a 0.5 exit pupil pushing it for me due to eye floaters but I can give it a go. I have a 3mm and 4mm delite and a 3.5mm Pentax XW. Using the same eyepiece would give slightly different exit pupils and magnifications or I could match the magnifications but use different eyepieces (eg 3mm delite in Baader and 3.5mm Pentax in Stowaway).

Yes I got my Ap130gtx from Skypoint which was also where I got my Stowaway.


  • Traveler_82 likes this

#52 nicknacknock

nicknacknock

    A man of many qualities, even if they are mostly bad ones

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 13,722
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Nicosia, Cyprus

Posted 12 March 2019 - 03:03 AM

I got E & F (E visible all the time, F coming and going) with a Nagler 7mm at 87x last Friday with the AP92.

 

Another neat observation on the same evening was of IC342 (think of it as a fainter version of M33) in Camelopardalis. Altitude at the time of observing was 27° and yes, the scope optics provide excellent contrast on faint objects.


  • Sasa likes this

#53 happycamperjohn

happycamperjohn

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 292
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2010

Posted 12 March 2019 - 04:36 AM

I find a 0.5 exit pupil pushing it for me due to eye floaters but I can give it a go. I have a 3mm and 4mm delite and a 3.5mm Pentax XW. Using the same eyepiece would give slightly different exit pupils and magnifications or I could match the magnifications but use different eyepieces (eg 3mm delite in Baader and 3.5mm Pentax in Stowaway).

Yes I got my Ap130gtx from Skypoint which was also where I got my Stowaway.

I own and know all of those eyepieces very well. The difference in mag would about 17X between each scope if you use the 3mm delite in both, and about 12X if you did the XW and Delite. I reckon for the sake of 5X difference, keep it simple and use the 3mm Delite in both? Yes, it's not perfect, but the results would still be intriguing to me. If you saw absolutely no difference at all on a lowish contrast object (even a mountain range), then that says something about the higher mag scope already. Perhaps you could even swap the diagonal with the eyepiece as well?


Edited by happycamperjohn, 12 March 2019 - 04:38 AM.


#54 Gavster

Gavster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 882
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2014

Posted 12 March 2019 - 05:13 AM

I own and know all of those eyepieces very well. The difference in mag would about 17X between each scope if you use the 3mm delite in both, and about 12X if you did the XW and Delite. I reckon for the sake of 5X difference, keep it simple and use the 3mm Delite in both? Yes, it's not perfect, but the results would still be intriguing to me. If you saw absolutely no difference at all on a lowish contrast object (even a mountain range), then that says something about the higher mag scope already. Perhaps you could even swap the diagonal with the eyepiece as well?

It’s more the exit pupil difference that seems a bigger factor with using just the 3mm I think. But given the differences are quite small using the same eyepiece and diagonal seems the simplest thing to do.

Are you considering getting one of these scopes?



#55 happycamperjohn

happycamperjohn

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 292
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2010

Posted 12 March 2019 - 07:18 AM

It’s more the exit pupil difference that seems a bigger factor with using just the 3mm I think. But given the differences are quite small using the same eyepiece and diagonal seems the simplest thing to do.

Are you considering getting one of these scopes?

Yes, not a perfect comparison, and i definitely take your point re exit pupil. But yes, keeping as many things constant would help - given that you don't have 2 eyepieces of the same line that can give exactly the same highish mags.

 

And yes, i'm apparently quite high on the AP92 list but have also been thinking about the Baader. What i love about the Baader is that you can unscrew the extension and get it down to 39cm for ultimate carry-on length. And if the folk at baader are creating lenses to a similar finish as AP (I don't know the answer to that question btw.) then it makes the Baader a better fit for me. The fit? A very portable/flyable high quality triplet that can do planetary if pushed.

 

Thanks!

john


Edited by happycamperjohn, 12 March 2019 - 07:21 AM.


#56 Gavster

Gavster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 882
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2014

Posted 17 March 2019 - 07:16 PM

Ok so some clear skies and a direct side by side comparison as per the photo.

In summary, it is clear that both these scopes are fantastic visually. I’m delighted with both of them and it took a good deal of concentration to draw out any differences at all.

That being said I did get some differences...

First up was Plato and its craterlets. Given the largest cratelet is around 1.5 miles in diameter these are a challenge for a sub 4 inch scope. I got two cratelets in both scopes which I thought was pretty good. I was using a 3mm delite so around 190 to 200x magnification. The contrast with the Baader was ever so slightly better making the 2 craterlets stand out a bit more obviously as a white dot on the crater surface. It took several switches between the scopes to reach this conclusion. In the tv85 I got hints of the larger craterlet (still very nice views in the tv85 - I think I have a good one).

 

Then on to Tegmine to see if I could get the triple split (1.1 arcminute so I was going below the Dawes limit on both scopes). Both scopes gave lovely tight star shapes. In the Stowaway the close double looked like an elongated star. In the Baader the close double had more of an hourglass look to it, and at times it seemed to separate. The tv85 maybe showed a very slight enlongation in the tight double.

 

Finally on to the double double. Still with the 3mm delite and this was very straightforward in both scopes. The stars were extremely well controlled and defined. On this object I had a clear preference for the Baader. The star shapes just seemed tighter and more solid with less airy disk visible.

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • 485B8C31-6217-4825-B72D-5E3F514741F4.jpeg

Edited by Gavster, 18 March 2019 - 12:25 PM.

  • rustynpp, moshen, plyscope and 9 others like this

#57 happycamperjohn

happycamperjohn

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 292
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2010

Posted 17 March 2019 - 08:26 PM

Thanks so much for that @Gavster - two really top notch triplets obviously. There are quite a few great reviews of the Baader (yours included), but the reviews are never usually comparitive. So this shootout is very useful to me.

 

The Plato comparison is interesting - i guess it could be argued that the magnification difference "might" just have accounted for the difference in contrast if it was so small. And i guess you could also argue that the tiny difference in Dawes limit for the 95 versus the 92 "might" account for the slightly better separation in the Baader (although greater mag in the AP would have perhaps aided a bit). But, from a practical perspective, I've also got a 3mm delite and some HRs and i'm never going to be able to match mags and exit pupils exactly at these powers. I guess my Leica Zoom could dial in exactly, but then we are talking about miniscule differences anyway.

 

However, as a fellow AP owner and having lived the quailty that comes out of AP, this small comparison is a very good indication of the quality of the Baader. Much food for thought...

 

Thanks again Gavster!

 

cheers

John


  • Tyson M likes this

#58 Moondust

Moondust

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 682
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2006

Posted 18 March 2019 - 10:33 AM

Very nice comparison, two really nice scopes, one with slightly more aperture. I had my Stowaway out last night specifically for the moon since it was hanging high overhead which is very unusual and it was a comfortably cool night with no wind. This was my first opportunity to set up additional mounts so that I could do a direct comparison with my 3 other scopes, a very sharp Vixen 80mm achro, an overachieving AT 72 ED2 and last but not least a very sweet AT 102 ED that gave me some really nice views of Saturn and the Great Red Spot of Jupiter last summer, first time in my life I saw it as an obvious beautiful salmon color.  I let the scopes all sit for a good 45 mins before observing to allow them to acclimate to the outside temperature and also to allow the moon to become even more well positioned. The Stowaway buried them all, even the larger AT102 couldn't hang with it. It was really amazing some of the rediculously thin rills I was about to pick out invisible in the other scopes and I took note of  2 tiny craters in Plato with the Stowaway which I couldn't decern at all in 2 of the other scopes. They would pop in and out of the AT102 with averted vision but were constant in the Stowaway with direct vision. I have always had problems spotting the Plato craterlets in the past even with larger scopes. To sum up, the Stowaway is an awesome little instrument for scanning the surface of the moon. You are very lucky to have two of the best grab and go telescopes known to mankind. 


  • entropyorganizer, moshen, Gavster and 2 others like this

#59 gnowellsct

gnowellsct

    Hubble

  • *****
  • Posts: 16,321
  • Joined: 24 Jun 2009

Posted 18 March 2019 - 10:51 AM

I was viewing the trapezium at quite decent mag to get the e and f star (about 120x). How high mag would you suggest?


E and F are seeing issues. They are much fainter and when the seeing is bad tend to disappear into the nebula as they get smushed out.

There is also a train the mind issue. The first time I saw e and f I had never seen a double where the companion was so much fainter. You might have been seeing them and not processed it. (They're not doubles but it's the same idea.) For me I'd been looking and looking and "not seeing" till a friend said "they're right there" and then they were obvious.

People in southern latitudes have an easier time because orion rises much higher.
  • Tyson M likes this

#60 Paul G

Paul G

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,870
  • Joined: 08 May 2003
  • Loc: Freedonia

Posted 18 March 2019 - 11:46 AM

E and F are seeing issues. They are much fainter and when the seeing is bad tend to disappear into the nebula as they get smushed out.

There is also a train the mind issue. The first time I saw e and f I had never seen a double where the companion was so much fainter. You might have been seeing them and not processed it. (They're not doubles but it's the same idea.) For me I'd been looking and looking and "not seeing" till a friend said "they're right there" and then they were obvious.

People in southern latitudes have an easier time because orion rises much higher.

That is my experience, too. In really stable seeing E and F are easy in a Stowaway, in unstable seeing I can't see them in my 10" Mak.


  • Moondust, gnowellsct and BGazing like this

#61 Gavster

Gavster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 882
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2014

Posted 18 March 2019 - 12:15 PM

E and F are seeing issues. They are much fainter and when the seeing is bad tend to disappear into the nebula as they get smushed out.

There is also a train the mind issue. The first time I saw e and f I had never seen a double where the companion was so much fainter. You might have been seeing them and not processed it. (They're not doubles but it's the same idea.) For me I'd been looking and looking and "not seeing" till a friend said "they're right there" and then they were obvious.

People in southern latitudes have an easier time because orion rises much higher.

Just to clarify, I wasn’t asking about what magnification to use to view E and F, rather I was asking what level of high magnification would the poster like me to use when making a comparison between the Baader and Stowaway. To which the answer was around 200x (0.5mm exit pupil, 3mm eyepiece). Which is what I did smile.gif

 

I agree with the training the mind comment. I’ve seen E and F numerous times in a range of scopes. The best view I’ve had so far was in very good seeing with my TEC160FL where the trapezium actually looked like 6 bright, clear stars. I’m now better able to tease out (the more tricky imo) F star when previously I think I would have struggled.

 

I enjoyed using the scopes side by side last night on my Panther TTS-160 Mount. It made the comparisons much easier even with some small seeing variation (hence me swapping between the scopes regularly so that I was making the comparison with the same seeing conditions). This was the same approach a few weeks ago when I made a brief comparison of the scopes on the trapezium, albeit with lower magnification (and probably less good seeing conditions).


Edited by Gavster, 18 March 2019 - 12:27 PM.

  • gnowellsct and Tyson M like this

#62 happycamperjohn

happycamperjohn

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 292
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2010

Posted 18 March 2019 - 06:07 PM

Just to clarify, I wasn’t asking about what magnification to use to view E and F, rather I was asking what level of high magnification would the poster like me to use when making a comparison between the Baader and Stowaway. To which the answer was around 200x (0.5mm exit pupil, 3mm eyepiece). Which is what I did smile.gif

 

I agree with the training the mind comment. I’ve seen E and F numerous times in a range of scopes. The best view I’ve had so far was in very good seeing with my TEC160FL where the trapezium actually looked like 6 bright, clear stars. I’m now better able to tease out (the more tricky imo) F star when previously I think I would have struggled.

 

I enjoyed using the scopes side by side last night on my Panther TTS-160 Mount. It made the comparisons much easier even with some small seeing variation (hence me swapping between the scopes regularly so that I was making the comparison with the same seeing conditions). This was the same approach a few weeks ago when I made a brief comparison of the scopes on the trapezium, albeit with lower magnification (and probably less good seeing conditions).

Yes @Gavster, that's exactly what I meant, and exactly what you did smile.gif.  What a great community this is - that you are happy to do this for someone half-way around the world. I'm indebted to you. Although I suspect you were pretty chuffed to have 3 awesome refractors on the go at once!

 

ps: I've ordered the Baader.

 

cheers

John


Edited by happycamperjohn, 18 March 2019 - 06:38 PM.

  • Gavster likes this

#63 JimP

JimP

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,411
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2003
  • Loc: USA

Posted 18 March 2019 - 07:44 PM

Ok, what mount do you use when you travel? The scopes are easy.

Jim

#64 25585

25585

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,952
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 18 March 2019 - 08:17 PM

I wonder how well a Borg 90FL and 89ED would fare in competition with the AP, Baader and TV trio. 



#65 happycamperjohn

happycamperjohn

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 292
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2010

Posted 18 March 2019 - 08:57 PM

Ok, what mount do you use when you travel? The scopes are easy.

Jim

Not sure if you're addressing this to Gavster or myself, but for me i've tried a few. I am exclusively push-to and visual - but don't mind encoders. When i'm doing micro-travel with my TV60 i use a Sirui VA-10 Fluid Head - which is just perfect. but with the 80-90mm class i've got a Lapide Modified Teegul which i use for car-trips. The Lapide has been my favourite mount for years, and although it is a bit heavy (about 3Kgs) it's everything i want in a mount. For further afield, i'm now experimenting with the VAMO Traveler (about 1Kg and can be dismantled). I flew interstate with it, my scope and all accessories in a carry-on daypack - nice. I'm also interested in trying the M1V but for some strange reason, 'have always been wary of skinny column extensions...



#66 Gavster

Gavster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 882
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2014

Posted 19 March 2019 - 02:49 AM

Ok, what mount do you use when you travel? The scopes are easy.

Jim

I find the choice of travel mount easy as well smile.gif

The Sky-Watcher AZ gti with a gitzo carbon tripod works really well with my Baader, Stowaway, Tak fc100df and Tak Epsilon 130d. Although this mount appears small it supports 4 inch and under scopes (If they are not too long) with very limited vibration and settle time. I’ve got one of the newly released ADM clamps wending it’s way through U.K. customs at the moment. This will sort it’s only weakness imo. I’ve taken this mount abroad several times and it’s been a very reliable performer.

For a manual mount the Vixen porta 2 with vixen tl130 tripod would be my choice.

 

Attached Thumbnails

  • 63A07A66-F026-4EFF-A361-BF84A612DA17.jpeg
  • F07FE054-F580-410D-BF69-FE4E86574D43.jpeg

Edited by Gavster, 19 March 2019 - 02:56 AM.

  • rerun, Paul Morow and Colin exraaf like this

#67 nicknacknock

nicknacknock

    A man of many qualities, even if they are mostly bad ones

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 13,722
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Nicosia, Cyprus

Posted 19 March 2019 - 02:57 AM

For a manual mount the Vixen porta 2 with vixen tl130 tripod would be my choice.

 

Talk to me about the stability of the Vixen TL130 with the Stowaway smile.gif

 

Edit: Say when extended to e height of about 110 cm to 120 cm



#68 Gavster

Gavster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 882
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2014

Posted 19 March 2019 - 03:27 AM

Talk to me about the stability of the Vixen TL130 with the Stowaway smile.gif

 

Edit: Say when extended to e height of about 110 cm to 120 cm

Nick, I haven’t used it for a while (az gti all the time currently for my smaller scopes) but I recall I found the tl130 fine with my Tak fc100df (which is longer than the Stowaway albeit similar weight). The gitzo carbon tripod is clearly better but significantly more expensive. If you have a good photo tripod then getting the adapter to fit it to the Vixen porta 2 head would make sense, but otherwise I’m happy with the tl130.

I’m guessing you weren’t impressed when you used the tl130? Looking at my photo above it does appear that I didn’t extend the lower thinner legs completely but got it to a height I was comfortable with. 



#69 nicknacknock

nicknacknock

    A man of many qualities, even if they are mostly bad ones

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 13,722
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Nicosia, Cyprus

Posted 19 March 2019 - 03:30 AM

I don't have the TL130, but I am thinking about it. I do have a very good photo tripod, rated to 30 kgs, but I was not happy with it.

 

I do think it was because I did not use the steel tips on the tripod legs, so I have switched to those and I will test again in a few days...



#70 Gavster

Gavster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 882
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2014

Posted 19 March 2019 - 03:32 AM

I don't have the TL130, but I am thinking about it. I do have a very good photo tripod, rated to 30 kgs, but I was not happy with it.

 

I do think it was because I did not use the steel tips on the tripod legs, so I have switched to those and I will test again in a few days...

Ok I understand! So as not to divert the thread, I’ll send you a pm.


Edited by Gavster, 19 March 2019 - 03:33 AM.


#71 nicknacknock

nicknacknock

    A man of many qualities, even if they are mostly bad ones

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 13,722
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Nicosia, Cyprus

Posted 19 March 2019 - 03:34 AM

A bit of a custom job would make it usable with the DM-4 which is 3-8/16"



#72 JimP

JimP

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,411
  • Joined: 22 Apr 2003
  • Loc: USA

Posted 19 March 2019 - 01:25 PM

Great!! Thank you very much!

 

Jim



#73 happycamperjohn

happycamperjohn

    Mariner 2

  • -----
  • Posts: 292
  • Joined: 24 Apr 2010

Posted 21 March 2019 - 12:34 AM

HI Gavster,

 

Quick question. How would you compare the AP/BAADER focusers now that you have tried them a bit? I believe you can put a FT on the baader and i haven't made up my mind yet...

 

cheers

John



#74 nicknacknock

nicknacknock

    A man of many qualities, even if they are mostly bad ones

  • *****
  • Administrators
  • Posts: 13,722
  • Joined: 20 Feb 2012
  • Loc: Nicosia, Cyprus

Posted 21 March 2019 - 12:55 AM

John,

 

In an email exchange with Thomas Baader, he confirmed that they can fit a FeatherTouch focuser on the Baader (for an additional cost of course ;) )


  • happycamperjohn likes this

#75 Gavster

Gavster

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 882
  • Joined: 07 Mar 2014

Posted 21 March 2019 - 02:39 AM

HI Gavster,

 

Quick question. How would you compare the AP/BAADER focusers now that you have tried them a bit? I believe you can put a FT on the baader and i haven't made up my mind yet...

 

cheers

John

I only do visual observing so can’t talk about suitability for imaging (not sure if you do imaging). But I’m quite hard on my focussers liking heavy ethos, binoviewer and afocal night vision setups. For example I’ve replaced the Takahashi focuser on my Tak fc100df with a feathertouch since I much prefer the FT. 

However, I’ve been very pleased with the Baader focuser. I had an initial issue where I had to adjust slightly the fine focus knob so that it didn’t graunch against the course focus knob. But now that has been sorted it’s been just as good as the AP FT focuser imo. I certainly haven’t considered changing to the FT for 700 or so euros.


Edited by Gavster, 21 March 2019 - 02:40 AM.

  • nicknacknock likes this


CNers have asked about a donation box for Cloudy Nights over the years, so here you go. Donation is not required by any means, so please enjoy your stay.


Recent Topics






Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics