Alexander Avtanski wrote in message ...

Is it good enough for regular deep-sky observing -
nebulae, galaxies?

Certainly. It was the first detailed atlas that I used, and it
worked just fine. The cartography is fairly crude, the number of
DSOs charted is modest, and only the Messier objects are labeled.
But if you know the RA and Dec of the objects you want to look at,
it certainly shows enough stars to find them.

Uranometria or Sky Atlas 2000 do much the same job with vastly
better cartography and labeling. SA 2000 doesn't show as many stars,
though, and Uranometria costs a lot more.

When it comes to observing variable
stars, are the charts detailed enough not only to be
used to find the star in question, but also to allow
reasonable magnitude estimation - do they generally have
enough comparison stars with plotted magnitude around?

Of course! That's the whole point of this atlas -- that's what
it's designed to do.

- Tony Flanders