John

Reduced light pollution makes a lot of difference when observing deep sky objects. Hardly difference any when observing the Moon, planets and double stars.

It's difficult to be precise but my guess is that he would need something like 150mm get anything like the views your 80mm will show of deep sky objects at your location

Of course when he comes to your place, his 150 will outshine your 80mm by quite a margin !

Edit: then you will want to upgrade, then he will and so on and so on !

Is that the Gibraltar 5 Cleetus ?

I'm going to be there on Friday - hope to see FLO friends there

Imagers tend to prefer GOTO systems with both axes driven. The simple single axis drive system is handy for high power observing for not many £'s.

I've used good quality plossls and orthos in my F/5.3 12 inch dobsonian and they have worked very well. Your F/10.75 refractor will pose no challenges to such eyepieces

If you want a low cost single axis drive (RA) for the EQ5, Telescope House have one branded Orion in their clearance sale currently:

https://www.telescopehouse.com/offers/clearance/truetrack-singlel-axis-drive.html

55 minutes ago, Fo_Cuss said:

....Those eyepiece designs were created in a distant era.

 

So was the design of a long focal length achromat refractor like your 93mm f/10.75.

Well executed plossls and orthoscopics will serve very well in such a scope

Friday for me. Family stuff happening at the weekend.

2 minutes ago, Anthony1979 said:

Ive decide on the Eq-5 now... Its looks more sturdier pls i can and the motors at a later date thank you everyone 

A good decision I think. An undermounted scope is very frustrating.

Length has more impact than weight mostly but there are exceptions when the optical tube weight is close to the mount limit.

With the weight of your scope I don't think it's possible to say with any certainty whether or not the star discovery mount would be able to handle it

For low to medium magnifications it might do OK but become less easy to use with higher powers. 

6 hours ago, kirkster501 said:

Looks like a complete write-off weather wise in the UK from the long range forecast.....  as per ususal with any exciting astronomical event.

I'm glad that I managed to get a glimpse of the last one !

Still got my fingers crossed for Monday though.

Personally I would go for either a Telrad or a Rigel Quikfinder to use alongside the supplied optical finder and then think about upgrading the optical finder to a righ angle correct image one in due course.

I use the word "Personally" here because I feel that finders are a personal preference thing. Over the years I've found having a right angle optical finder alongside a Rigel / Telrad works best for me with my dob. Others will find different approaches work best for them. No right or wrong answer really other than that you do need a finder of some sort on the scope !.

Maybe the suggestion of going with what comes as stock with the scope then seeing how your preferences develop is the most sensible option ?

1 hour ago, joe aguiar said:

Yes it sells on that mount but the eq version is f5 the dob version is f8 so u should put  it on a eq5 or gonna have lots vibrations.

Joejaguar 

I've assumed that Anthony1979 is talking about the F/5 150P optical tube. I agree that the F/8 tube as used in the Skywatcher Skyliner 150P dob would not be suitable on the mount.

In terms of optical performance I don't think the Bresser would be better than the Skywatcher and £110 can be a lot of cash if you are starting out.

One of the joys of dobs is that they can be modded over time to improve how they work but the Skywatcher 200P dob is very useable straight from the box in my view.

Skywatcher sell that mount with an F/5 150mm newtonian on it so I'm sure it would be OK for visual observing at least. Not for imaging though.

I expect the Earl of Rosse had a servant or two at the bottom end of the scope to tilt the primary while he was observing a star.

Adjusting the secondary must have been risky though !

If it is going to be used for deep sky photography, an 8 inch newtonian needs a more stable mount than the EQ5. At least an HEQ5 and preferrably an EQ6.

For a strong start to visual observing I think your shopping list is fine. I would get a Telrad if you can - it will make finding things easier than just using the stock 50mm optical finder.

I've lost count of the number of happy owners of the Skywatcher 200P dobsonian that we have on this forum. I was one not so long ago and found the scope excellent

The Tele Vue Apollo 11 is not the only commemorative piece of kit celebrating the lunar missions though. Hasselblad have one and for just under £7,000 you can have one too

As I said earlier in this thread, I've found that my simple cheshire eyepiece delivers results that check out when the scope is star tested (the acid test for me) so thats what I stick with now.

On 31/10/2019 at 17:23, omo said:

I thought you said you would not be taking it to bits, good to know the development is progressing though. Trying to hold off asking at least one question till you both get enough time to derive your conclusions

Sorry I missed this comment.

I was specifically asked to replace the worm bearings on both axes by Rowan Astronomy and followed their instructions when I did so. Otherwise I am resisting the temptation to tweak and adjust the mount. I don't want any of my ham fisted efforts to impact the performance one way or another !

While on the subject of performance, poor weather conditions have meant that I've simply not been able to get out and observe at all with the AZ100 over the past couple of weeks. In fact a quick dash out with binoculars is all that I've been able to do astronomy-wise generally

Just one good clear session of 2-3 hours would be great - I'm crossing my fingers and toes !

When you check that the laser collimator is itself collimated, 10m is a good distance and the laser unit needs to be rotated just around it's long axis with no other motion. A simple "V block" can help with this. Something like this will do the job:

https://www.thingiverse.com/make:334814

Assuming that the laser is now collimated accurately itself, if the laser spot is missing the central mark on the primary this means that the tilt of the secondary mirror needs to be adjusted. Once you have done that and the laser spot is right in the centre of the primary mirror, you then move on to see if the returning laser is striking the centre of the 90 degree target built into the laser collimator. If it is not then primary tilt adjustments are needed to get it central. It's important to do the secondary tilt first followed by the primary tilt.

Then star test when you get a clear night.

Edit: trying to get different collimating tools to agree with each other can be a thankless task !. I tend to stick with the method that results in an accurate star test and stay with that. For me that has been a cheshire eyepiece but a laser collimator can do a good job if properly collimated and if the correct order of steps is followed.

For the last transit we had solid cloud but I popped a scope out just in case and it did clear for just a few minutes so that at least I can say that I saw Mercury crossing the Sun.

If I get any views around 1st and 2nd contact plus something when the planet is crossing the disk, I'll be pleased. Certainly not expecting long clear spells !

25 minutes ago, gorann said:

Well, that is what I have right now, Usually works well on my camera chip windows and small filters, but I would like to try something stronger especially for the front lenses of my telescopes.

Maybe your dust is more stubborn than mine ?

I find the hand held "hurricane blower" is very effective. I would not use anything that involves propellant in case anything other than air finds it's way onto the optical surface.  

My hand held and operated blower provides a lot of air force up to a few cm from the nozzle and keeps every thing portable and simple.

I've used this for years on refractor objectives, mirrors and eyepieces and it's 100% safe and successful.

I reckon one of the main points of a product like this is that it gets people talking about the company. There is this thread here and a couple of long and active ones on Cloudynights and I expect similar threads running on Ice in Space and other forums around the world.

The profits on the sale of the 300 units (thanks for the correction ) will be relatively "small beer" I suspect.