John

My finders come off my dob when it's not in use and go back on when I put the scope out. Mostly they stay aligned but sometimes I re-adjust the optical one on Polaris. I like it to be pointing precisely where the scope is even when a high power eyepiece is in the scope. If you leave the finder on the scope and bump it even slightly when moving the scope, it will need re-aligning anyway. I think that is why finders have quick release bases ?

It's not perfect by any means but I'm a heavy user of the Skytee II and have been for a number of years now. The stock dovetail clamps should certainly be upgraded ASAP as mentioned above. The 2 sides of the mount can point independently from each other. The slow motion knobs can be replaced with the same sort of flexible cables that Skywatcher and Vixen mounts use. I rarely have 2 scopes on mine. I would agree with @johninderby that 10Kg is a more realistic load limit. This scope is 9.5kg but quite long: I think I was pushing the Skytee II a bit too far here though !

What sort of budget do you have in mind ?

If I had your scope and your current eyepieces, I would be looking for a 6mm to give 200x. Very useful and usable high power. Do you have anything with lower power than the ES 12mm ? - if not I think you have a niche or two there that might need filling. Eyepieces that give more than 250x will not get a lot of use whereas the ones I mention above will

How long does an upgraded PC remain "state of the art" ?. A few months perhaps ? How long does a Takahashi go on being a superb, top end performing scope ?. 50 years plus I would think.

I would probably do the same but I would not use low cost UWA's (~80 degrees) in an F/4.7 scope. Manufacturers seem to be able to pull off a decent 60 degree field these days for a moderate cost. That said, I could quite easily live with a set of Tele Vue plossls plus a 2.5x Powermate for the higher powers in such a scope

My guess is that it might be something to do with the focuser upgrade. If the replacement unit is lower in profile than the one that it replaced, the drawtube will need to be racked out further to get eyepieces to focus. I've marked the key distance on the image below. If this was a bit longer when the original focuser was installed, that would explain what is happening.

For use in what scope ? (it could make quite a difference on the choice)

That's why I use an illuminated reticule finder alongside my 50mm RACI.

Neptune can be seen with 30mm binoculars / finders so an 8 inch SCT is more than enough. It's just a tiny blue/green disk though even at very high magnifications.

Personally I don't find filters make a big difference to the Cat's Eye or Blinking planetary nebulae. They can make the central star in those nebulae harder to see though ! The Veil Nebula is becoming better and better placed now and that's where the O-III will really earn it's keep.

I'm sure that there will be no shortage of opinions when you are ready

I've seen the same written about achromats, even quite fast ones

It gets worse when the popular media get hold of it Similarly "supermoons" etc, etc.

With a small scope and depending on the levels of light pollution M31 might look something like this: You need to use your lowest magnification. This time of year is not great for observing galaxies - it does not get properly dark.

I hope this is not going to descend into a CN type thread ???? - if we are going to start dredging out old test results I think I'll bow out ...... My eye tells me that the Skywatcher ED120 objective is excellent and I've had the TMB/LZOS and Tak FC100 to compare it against for the past 4 years.

I keep intending to post something on this, having owned both the Tak FC100-DL and a Skywatcher ED120 for 4 years now. At some point I am intending to downsize my equipment stocks but I will find it very difficult to pick which of these scopes stays and which goes

The double double would be an easy split when the conditions are half decent. Shows that they were not and probably accounts for the mediocre views with the 5mm BST Starguider as well. The difference between your 200mm F/5.9 and the 300mm F/4.9 should not result in a "cliff edge" drop in the BST Starguiders performance. It will be more subtle than that and only really discernable in the outer 20% of the field of view really. While eyepieces such as the Morpheus are a bit better you are into the law of diminishing returns from the Starguiders upwards I think. The big step is from the stock EP's to the Starguiders.

Yes. I've seen it with my 6x30mm finder scope. It is a very small disk though - even at 200x you will only see it as a tiny blue/green spot. Clearly not a star though, when observed at those magnifications. I have even managed to see Neptune's brightest moon, Triton with a scope. Generally it needs my 12 inch dobsonian but I have managed to spot this faint little point of light with my 130mm refractor as well. Lots and lots of magnification needed for that challenge !

Or the collimation is off to the extent that the light cone hits the plastic surround ?

For a crazy few minutes I was thinking of buying @carastro's scope and then making a pair of giant binoculars from the two scopes But, divorce is very expensive I hear .........

The trouble is Baz, you get a sort of "domino effect" when you get one particularly nice eyepiece in your collection ........ it's a slippery slope

With F/5 scopes I rarely use anything longer than 31mm in focal length. More often it's a 21mm which seems to do better on DSO's from my back garden.

Of course things go the other way if you get a taste for a 100 degree field of view