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

Optical designs, exit pupil behaviour and eye positioning issues.

  • Please log in to reply
40 replies to this topic

#1 25585

25585

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,349
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 26 January 2020 - 06:49 PM

My unfortunate & expensive experience with all TV eyepieces, except the excellent Delites & 3 long FL models, is that some factor or factors in TV's optical designs, makes eye placement & exit pupil behaviour difficult. Other makes & ranges also have such issues, but some do not.

 

I would like to know, why & what causes those issues that TV etc. have, and equally how other designs avoid them intentionally or by difference.

 

At John Huntley's & Starman1's suggestion, I have started a new thread.

 

 

 


  • punk35, John Huntley, Sarkikos and 2 others like this

#2 Asbytec

Asbytec

    Guy in a furry hat

  • *****
  • Posts: 16,349
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2007
  • Loc: Pampanga, PI

Posted 26 January 2020 - 07:05 PM

...makes eye placement & exit pupil behaviour difficult.

 

I would like to know, why & what causes those issues...

 

What behavior and issues are you referring to? SAEP or other darkening in the field? One of my suspicions (chatting with Don) is generous eye relief might allow some of us to position our eye too far inside the exit pupil, even with the rubber eye cups extended, causing some issues. 


Edited by Asbytec, 26 January 2020 - 07:10 PM.

  • payner and eros312 like this

#3 25585

25585

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,349
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 26 January 2020 - 07:06 PM

The question above I posted in the Radian thread, that range being an example...

 

Some eyepieces in a range can be fine, then unexpectedly stop being so. For me all Pentax XWs were OK, until the 7, 5 & 3.5mm. No Radians were. All Delites and Morpheus, Vixen LVWs and both ES92s are fine.

 

These "findings" are over 30 years & all manufacturers. 

 

I



#4 TOMDEY

TOMDEY

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • Posts: 5,644
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014
  • Loc: Springwater, NY

Posted 26 January 2020 - 07:29 PM

I'll dip a toe in and then back away... here are some of the considerations:

 

>What you describe is comfort in addressing and using the telescope... very personal and variable among individuals

>the Exit Pupil is the image of the Aperture Stop formed by all downstream glass

>the ASTOP is usually the edge of the primary lens or mirror

>the exit pupil looks like a little circle floating behind the eyepiece, where you must plant and dwell your eye's, for the duration

>the pupil may be aberrated, making eye placement even more challenging, otherwise manifesting ~kidney bean~ etc.

>mechanical structure can also exacerbate or aid eye placement

>glasses and facial structure will favor some eyepieces over others

>generous eye relief (backset of pupil from glass) is favorable, but too much can make the pupil hard to find and maintain

>other ergo contributors are important and often overlooked (chair, ladder, hand-holds, eyepiece angle, other eye, distractions...)

 

Your description sounds like what you are having difficulty with is wide field accommodation, rather than the Brand itself. But, it's tempting to blame it on the brand, especially when it's a relatively expensive one. The wide fields require a gradually-learned agility in pupil placement. The usual centering matters, but added is sensitive fore-aft, as well. To see the entire field illuminated, with a 90o Apparent Field Of View (AFOV) requires that you maintain your eye as accurately fore-aft as laterally! That's a tall order, something that not many of us understand, let alone master! I'm guessing, that with some ergo adjustments and practice... you will gradually get more comfortable with the premium eyepieces.    Tom


  • punk35, John Huntley, Asbytec and 5 others like this

#5 ngc7319_20

ngc7319_20

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,079
  • Joined: 25 Oct 2015
  • Loc: MD

Posted 26 January 2020 - 07:52 PM

My $0.02... The size of your personal eye pupil will be a large factor.  Lucky folk with 10mm or 7mm maximum eye pupils will have less trouble than folks with smaller maximum eye pupils.  Viewing bright targets -- daytime or moon or bright planets, etc., will close down the eye pupil and make the problem worse. Both placement problems (x,y position), and spherical aberration of the exit pupil (aka kidney bean effect) will seem worse if you have a small eye pupil.


Edited by ngc7319_20, 26 January 2020 - 07:54 PM.

  • Jon Isaacs, Sarkikos, Defenderslideguitar and 1 other like this

#6 John Huntley

John Huntley

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,357
  • Joined: 16 Jul 2006
  • Loc: SW England

Posted 26 January 2020 - 07:56 PM

These things vary person to person.

 

I find the ES 92's tricky to use in terms of finding and holding the exit pupil. The 12mm especially so but I've held on to the 17mm and I'm trying to get used to it.

 

I have no issues with the Ethos range though (I've owned them all apart from the 10mm). I've owned most of the Tele Vue ranges at some point but the only ones that stick out as a bit challenging to use would be the Nagler T1 4.8mm and 7mm, the Wide Field 15mm and the Nagler T5 16mm. The Nager T5 31mm took a little getting used to but now it's a big old familliar friend smile.gif

 

I have owned and used quite a few eyepieces by other brands that were quirky and a few (surprisingly few really) that were downright poor.

 

Thats just my experiences though. Yours are obviously different, as will be the next person, and the next and so on.

 

The much lauded Pentax XO could be targetted because it's practically unuseable by those who need to wear glasses when observing but that does not make it a poor eyepiece - it's one of the very best in fact.


Edited by John Huntley, 26 January 2020 - 07:57 PM.

  • alnitak22, Defenderslideguitar, 25585 and 1 other like this

#7 alnitak22

alnitak22

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,505
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2011

Posted 26 January 2020 - 07:58 PM

My unfortunate & expensive experience with all TV eyepieces, except the excellent Delites & 3 long FL models, is that some factor or factors in TV's optical designs, makes eye placement & exit pupil behaviour difficult. Other makes & ranges also have such issues, but some do not.

 

I would like to know, why & what causes those issues that TV etc. have, and equally how other designs avoid them intentionally or by difference.

 

At John Huntley's & Starman1's suggestion, I have started a new thread.

Since TeleVue occupies a very high rung on the eyepiece ladder in terms of market share, it’s quite evident that whatever difficulties you have had are not the norm. I myself have had zero issues with any TeleVue eyepiece and for that matter, with almost any ocular from any maker.


  • Paul G and 25585 like this

#8 ButterFly

ButterFly

    Messenger

  • *****
  • Posts: 429
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2018

Posted 26 January 2020 - 07:59 PM

The 41 Pan and the 3-6 Nagler are good contrasts.  With one, eye relief issues dominate, and with the other, eye placement.  Eye relief is the range where eye should be in the toward and away direction to enjoy the corrections and the whole field of view.  Unfortunately, as the corrections get better, this range tends to get smaller.  One's eyes, and especially the eye sockets, have a huge impact with the large user side diameter eyepieces.  The 41 Pan takes some getting used to with its large diameter and huge eye relief.  It doesn't take much eye reilef error to lose some field of view with it, both inward and outward.

 

The Nagler zoom, on the other hand, is very tight on eye relief.  You pretty much need to be right on it.  Eye placement in the left right up down directions is much more difficult to maintain there.  Generally, the larger the exit pupil with respect to the eye pupil, the less of an issue this is.  The 3-6 zoom tends to give me small exit pupils so the placement issues dominate there.  For a given eyepiece, you can see this by comparing the placement when looking at dim things vs. Venus, for example.  The bright things will constrict your eye pupil, which should make placement easier.

 

Most eyepieces are somewhere between these extremes.  Eyepieces have to be designed as off the shelf items, so they can't be tailor made to your physical characteristics.  The assumptions the designers make, as well as the corrections applied, affects how widly adapatable they can be.  Think of the 1980s style eyeglasses that were common not too long ago.  Those needed a lot more eye relief than is common today.  I try to hone down the eye relief distance as best as I can.  That minimizes the eye placement issues, such as kidney beaning, as well.


  • John Huntley, 25585 and j.gardavsky like this

#9 alnitak22

alnitak22

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,505
  • Joined: 12 Feb 2011

Posted 26 January 2020 - 08:26 PM

The 41 Pan and the 3-6 Nagler are good contrasts.  With one, eye relief issues dominate, and with the other, eye placement.  Eye relief is the range where eye should be in the toward and away direction to enjoy the corrections and the whole field of view.  Unfortunately, as the corrections get better, this range tends to get smaller.  One's eyes, and especially the eye sockets, have a huge impact with the large user side diameter eyepieces.  The 41 Pan takes some getting used to with its large diameter and huge eye relief.  It doesn't take much eye reilef error to lose some field of view with it, both inward and outward.

 

The Nagler zoom, on the other hand, is very tight on eye relief.  You pretty much need to be right on it.  Eye placement in the left right up down directions is much more difficult to maintain there.  Generally, the larger the exit pupil with respect to the eye pupil, the less of an issue this is.  The 3-6 zoom tends to give me small exit pupils so the placement issues dominate there.  For a given eyepiece, you can see this by comparing the placement when looking at dim things vs. Venus, for example.  The bright things will constrict your eye pupil, which should make placement easier.

 

Most eyepieces are somewhere between these extremes.  Eyepieces have to be designed as off the shelf items, so they can't be tailor made to your physical characteristics.  The assumptions the designers make, as well as the corrections applied, affects how widly adapatable they can be.  Think of the 1980s style eyeglasses that were common not too long ago.  Those needed a lot more eye relief than is common today.  I try to hone down the eye relief distance as best as I can.  That minimizes the eye placement issues, such as kidney beaning, as well.

Again, it’s hard to speak in absolutes about things. For instance, the Nagler zoom is very tight on eye relief? I don’t find it tight at all. My 4 UO ortho is tight for me. May not be for someone else. Neither do I have the slightest difficulty with eye placement with the zoom. YMMV.


Edited by alnitak22, 26 January 2020 - 08:27 PM.

  • Paul G likes this

#10 punk35

punk35

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,264
  • Joined: 26 Jan 2005
  • Loc: Adrian Michigan

Posted 26 January 2020 - 08:28 PM

The link Don just provided in the Radian thread is very informative, and probably relevant to this thread as well. It’s worth taking the time to read. 
popcorn.gif


  • Defenderslideguitar and 25585 like this

#11 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 81,722
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 26 January 2020 - 08:53 PM

My $0.02... The size of your personal eye pupil will be a large factor.  Lucky folk with 10mm or 7mm maximum eye pupils will have less trouble than folks with smaller maximum eye pupils.  Viewing bright targets -- daytime or moon or bright planets, etc., will close down the eye pupil and make the problem worse. Both placement problems (x,y position), and spherical aberration of the exit pupil (aka kidney bean effect) will seem worse if you have a small eye pupil.

 

:waytogo:

 

I agree. My dark adapted pupil is large and at night, I don't seem to have eye placement issues, I seem to naturally find the right location with any eyepiece, a 4 mm Plossl to a 41mm Pan. A large dark adapted is a large target..

 

During the day, some eyepieces give me trouble, generally at small exit pupils.

 

Wearing eyeglasses might make placement more difficult, I don't know but they add another layer of both complexity and glass. Progressives would seem to add to the challenge.. 

 

Jon


  • j.gardavsky likes this

#12 havasman

havasman

    Voyager 1

  • ****-
  • Posts: 10,292
  • Joined: 04 Aug 2013
  • Loc: Dallas, Texas

Posted 26 January 2020 - 08:59 PM

My unfortunate & expensive experience with all TV eyepieces, except the excellent Delites & 3 long FL models, is that some factor or factors in TV's optical designs, makes eye placement & exit pupil behaviour difficult. Other makes & ranges also have such issues, but some do not.

 

I would like to know, why & what causes those issues that TV etc. have, and equally how other designs avoid them intentionally or by difference.

 

At John Huntley's & Starman1's suggestion, I have started a new thread.

I suggest that there is no such thing as "exit pupil behaviour". Exit pupil = eyepiece focal length / scope focal ratio. It simply is what it is. Eye placement, on the other hand, is a matter of individual performance that can be subject to individual capabilities, habits and preferences. Eye placement can render some exit pupil sizes unsuitable for some users trying to use some eyepieces. The defining equation shows that for an eyepiece focal length the scope used has critical influence beyond that of the eyepiece maker.

 

I am absolutely no TV fanboy but my experience with their eyepieces and other makers' designs does not support the contention that there are brand-specific characteristics that render eye placement more or less difficult. Designs certainly can ease some folk's locating the exit pupil. Vixen LVW, Televue Delos, Pentax XW and other eyepieces designed to provide longer eye relief than average can, for some, make eye placement easier. For others including me, the opposite is true. I do not care for long eye relief ep's and find them more difficult to use due to the lack of reference provided by light contact between the eye cup and my face. That lack of reference contact makes maintaining eye placement more difficult for me with LER designs but that has nothing to do with the exit pupil itself.

 

I find your quest flawed due to inherent flaws in the underlying premise(s).


Edited by havasman, 26 January 2020 - 09:01 PM.

  • Paul G, John Huntley, eros312 and 1 other like this

#13 clivemilne

clivemilne

    Ranger 4

  • *****
  • Posts: 359
  • Joined: 13 Jun 2011
  • Loc: West Oz

Posted 26 January 2020 - 10:47 PM

One aspect that (arguably) doesn't get the traction it deserves is the influence of an individuals physiology.

 

Case in point;

 

Don has deep set eyes and has no trouble seeing the field stop in a Docter eyepiece whilst wearing glasses.

 

I don't have deep set eyes yet find the Docter unusable when wearing glasses.

 

The reason is simple...

 

I'm long sighted so my glasses compensate by converging the light bundles as they leave the eyepiece.  This shortens the effective eye relief of the eyepiece.  

 

Luckily, I don't have astigmatism so I only have LER eyepieces (Morpheus) in my kit for the benefit of other people.

 

I find for me personally, the Ethos is a comfortable as it gets so is my number 1 choice.

 

I guess the take home message is that: Your mileage will vary.


Edited by clivemilne, 26 January 2020 - 10:50 PM.

  • 25585 likes this

#14 jeffmac

jeffmac

    Viking 1

  • -----
  • Posts: 835
  • Joined: 01 Aug 2014
  • Loc: Triad area, NC

Posted 26 January 2020 - 11:47 PM

And sitting while observing, may make an eyepiece that is "hard to hold the exit pupil" all of a sudden seem down right easy to do so.
  • John Huntley, eros312, havasman and 2 others like this

#15 Ernest_SPB

Ernest_SPB

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,373
  • Joined: 13 Nov 2010
  • Loc: St.-Petersburg, Russia

Posted 27 January 2020 - 12:18 AM

In my many tests I do not see any special in eye pupil artifacts TV eyepieces comparing to other brands eps with the same FL, AFoW and eye relief. E.g. Naglers vs. Explore Scientific 82-deg. or Ethos vs. 100-deg. eyepices of another brands.

 

From point of view optical design we have only the following set of critical parameters: AFOV, exit pupil diameter, eye relief, SA and CA in exit pupil, and a set of auxiliary parameters, like: geometry eyecup, last optical surface curvature sign, observer's pupil diameter (level of night adaptation), off-axial light beam vignetting level. And I do not see any special in the listed parameters of TV eyepieces.

 

So it looks like in start topic is result of comparison eyepieces with different AFOV, eyerelief and FL. 


Edited by Ernest_SPB, 27 January 2020 - 12:22 AM.

  • Jon Isaacs, John Huntley, eros312 and 4 others like this

#16 Starman1

Starman1

    Vendor (EyepiecesEtc.com)

  • *****
  • Vendors
  • Posts: 44,124
  • Joined: 23 Jun 2003
  • Loc: Los Angeles

Posted 28 January 2020 - 01:47 AM

I can relate a story:

I had a hard time using the Delite eyepieces at first.

I liked using them with the eyecups in the down position but I couldn't maintain the exit pupil.  I would not only drift in too close to the eyepiece and get blackouts, but also had difficulty holding the exit pupil laterally.

It seems the size of the eyepiece did not lend itself to stabilizing my head position by having the rubber eyecup touch the side of my nose.

It was too far from my face for my nose to touch.

So I raised the eyecup one line, and that helped a bit.  2 lines and the eyepiece was getting easier to use.  3 lines and the rubber flipped up and Eureka!  I could easily hold my head laterally at the exit pupil

and I had no tendency to drift too close.  I had, essentially, modified the eyepiece to work well with my face shape and eye relief preference.  The eyecup touches my nose at that height, and I get the additional benefit of a bit more

shielding of peripheral light.

 

This is the same problem I seem to have with all long eye relief eyepieces that do not have adjustable eyecups.  I had a problem with the XWs until I raised the eycups, too.

But, I don't have any issue with lateral placement of my eye on any of the larger diameter eyepieces, like the Ethos, because when I use them I always locate my head with the contact of my nose against the side of the eyepiece.

And the slightly shorter eye relief pulls my head in toward the eyepiece.

 

And, if there is even a trace of SAEP, where maintaining pupil position is a lot more critically important, if the size of the eyepiece doesn't perfectly match your head, it can be a problem.

 

And different people have different curves on their corneas and different depths to the pupil behind the cornea.  These can play havoc with eye placement if the exit pupil is small or the eye relief is long.  See Clive's comment in post #13.

 

I found that the effective eye relief of the Pentax XWs was, on average, 3mm less than the TeleVue Delos.  It doesn't really surprise me that a lot more people have issues with the Delos in terms of eye placement.

I recall the TeleVue Radians had very long eye reliefs as well, so they were more temperamental in eye placement unless the pupil guide was used (that lateral placement issue again).  The eyecup of the Delites

has that pupil guide essentially built into the eyecups so, not surprisingly, people make very few comments about eye placement issues with those eyepieces.

 

And exit pupil size can also determine sensitivity to SAEP in an eyepiece.  In an f/5 scope, a 5mm eyepiece yields a 1mm exit pupil.  In an f/10 scope, it yields a 0.5mm exit pupil.  If the eyepiece has a trace of SAEP, it will be more noticed in the f/5 scope than it will in the f/10 scope.  Many of the widefield designs in the market in the '80s had serious amounts of SAEP, yet they didn't get bad reps because most of the scopes were f/10 SCTs and f/15 Maks.  And most refractors were doublets and f/9-f/12 was common.  So the exit pupils were tiny.

 

All of this points out that personal ergonomics will influence one's opinion of an eyepiece.  I try to stay away from exit pupil discussions and ergonomic issues like the size of the top of an eyepiece because they

interact so differently from one observer to another.  Then there are personal preferences, and that is another can of worms.


  • Paul G, Jon Isaacs, John Huntley and 4 others like this

#17 MitchAlsup

MitchAlsup

    Skylab

  • -----
  • Posts: 4,164
  • Joined: 31 Aug 2009

Posted 28 January 2020 - 03:34 PM

I suggest that there is no such thing as "exit pupil behaviour". Exit pupil = eyepiece focal length / scope focal ratio. 

While it is true that the size of the Exit Pupil is as you describe, the pupil may not be a single plane, and might extend several millimeters. as described:: https://www.telescop...berration_2.htm

 

This extension might make it difficult to hold your eye's pupil centered on and coincident with the exit pupil volume.


  • Asbytec likes this

#18 rowdy388

rowdy388

    Soyuz

  • *****
  • Posts: 3,655
  • Joined: 09 Apr 2013
  • Loc: Saratoga County, NY

Posted 28 January 2020 - 04:07 PM

I think we're all just unique samples of one when it comes to eyepiece comfort. My preferences seem to change from one night to another even. Maybe that's why my eyepiece case is filled with an eclectic set rather than one brand or model eyepiece.


Edited by rowdy388, 28 January 2020 - 04:07 PM.

  • 25585 likes this

#19 Asbytec

Asbytec

    Guy in a furry hat

  • *****
  • Posts: 16,349
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2007
  • Loc: Pampanga, PI

Posted 28 January 2020 - 07:30 PM

I'm still curious of the "behavior" the OP is seeing. It probably relates to eye positioning on the exit pupil, but what effects is the OP seeing that drove him to ask the question? 



#20 starcam

starcam

    Apollo

  • *****
  • Posts: 1,105
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2007
  • Loc: MD

Posted 28 January 2020 - 09:52 PM

When you go to the eye doctor, are your eyes perfect or slightly off shape. I had a friend his eyes were oblongish.



#21 25585

25585

    Fly Me to the Moon

  • *****
  • topic starter
  • Posts: 7,349
  • Joined: 29 Aug 2017
  • Loc: In a valley, in the UK.

Posted 29 January 2020 - 07:04 AM

I'm still curious of the "behavior" the OP is seeing. It probably relates to eye positioning on the exit pupil, but what effects is the OP seeing that drove him to ask the question? 

Unsteadiness of position, sensitivity to movement of and eye placement are a couple.



#22 Jon Isaacs

Jon Isaacs

    ISS

  • *****
  • Posts: 81,722
  • Joined: 16 Jun 2004
  • Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA

Posted 29 January 2020 - 08:41 AM

Unsteadiness of position, sensitivity to movement of and eye placement are a couple.

 

How do think your eyeglasses enter into the equation?

 

Are they single prescription for distance or are they progressives?

 

For me, trying to observe with my glasses on is a nightmare.

 

Jon



#23 ascii

ascii

    Vanguard

  • -----
  • Posts: 2,110
  • Joined: 04 Jun 2016
  • Loc: Orlando, FL, USA Approximately 28.5ºN,81.5ºW

Posted 30 January 2020 - 12:40 PM

How do think your eyeglasses enter into the equation?

 

Are they single prescription for distance or are they progressives?

 

For me, trying to observe with my glasses on is a nightmare.

 

Jon

I frequently wear my eyeglasses at the eyepiece.  I have no serious trouble with my DeLites, 22T4 Nagler, or Agena 70° SWA's.  They have anywhere from adequate to generous eye relief. Anything shorter than about 19~20 mm of eye relief cause me to take off the glasses.
 

The only minor problem is that my eyeglasses are either progressives or bifocals. The progressives introduce some off-axis astigmatism and focus shift, just as in normal use.  The bifocals work better overall, except for near the lower edge where the line and reading section interfere slightly with that portion of the field.


  • Jon Isaacs and 25585 like this

#24 Paul G

Paul G

    Cosmos

  • *****
  • Posts: 8,673
  • Joined: 08 May 2003
  • Loc: Freedonia

Posted 31 January 2020 - 05:46 PM

Unsteadiness of position, sensitivity to movement of and eye placement are a couple.

FWIW, those are all your behaviors, not the eyepiece's.


  • Jon Isaacs, John Huntley, ares53405 and 3 others like this

#25 Miranda2525

Miranda2525

    Vanguard

  • *****
  • Posts: 2,043
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2016

Posted 01 February 2020 - 06:30 AM

FWIW, those are all your behaviors, not the eyepiece's.

Yea, but some eyepieces are more difficult to use than others. IMO, it is a "personal" thing. Some really like shorter eye relief, while others detest it and some really like the longer eye relief, and have no problems using long eye relief eyepieces without any aid, or eye cup, and they get along fine with them.

 

Personal preference comes to mind. grin.gif

 

As for speaking about Televue eyepieces, I have used many and I can personally say that only a few have given me slight eye placement problems. I would say "very few"  though.

 

IMO, Televue is a great company. I would say that some others are equal. The 17mm Nagler Type 4 is a very comfortable eyepiece, but the field curvature in it turned me right off of it. The 20mm XW did the same !!!

 

Pentax XW's (Except for the 14mm and 20mm due to field curvature)

Explore Scientific 92's 

Nikon NAV-HW

Baader Morheus

Vixen LVW's

 

Televue is the leader IMO when it comes to internal blackening / baffling and other designs tho. I think the Delos and Ethos are the best one can buy. The quality in those are amazing. Pentax XW eyepieces are right up there too.


Edited by Miranda2525, 01 February 2020 - 06:43 AM.

  • Paul G and 25585 like 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