jonathan

The factories have probably been closed or running on skeleton staffing for a few months now. I'm sure if the CCP could then they literally would staff the factories with skeletons!

For anyone considering buying Celestron or Skywatcher (or others made in the same factories in China), I would say might want to expedite your plans as there could be uncertain times ahead, not only in terms of China's manufacturing (some companies might decide to move elsewhere, maybe not Celestron or Skywatcher but ones that provide small parts) but also exchange rates and inflation, which are likely to go crazy once the dust settles on the pandemic (or before). If factories or manufacturing moves to a neighbouring country there could be a period where there are delays and quality control issues as things get settled, also the workforce expertise might not be quite up to speed straight away. There may also be things like higher tariffs or trade embargos. Just a thought.

One thing you can do for free (or relatively cheaply), after you have acquired a 90 degree diagonal, is to get yourself as comfortable as possible at the eyepiece, relax, and enjoy the view. It can be a skill in itself to find the best observing position, that's why many astronomers invest in their seating arrangements as carefully as their mount and telescope. There are various observing chair types available, some are similar to ironing stools with an adjustable height seat pad on a rack of sorts; I acquired a drummer's stool from a charity shop for about a fiver I think which adjusts up and down on a giant thread, I find it comfy and very easy to use as it can be sat on in any direction (there is no back) and is also very easy to get on and off. Being comfortable at the eyepiece should allow you to observe without touching the scope, however focusing will still be a problem as far as vibrations are concerned, unfortunately the remedies involve financial investment in more kit. Main options include a heavier-duty mount / tripod (which could cost a few hundred, extra for motorised or goto), rubber pads under the tripod feet (provides only a slight improvement, so I'm told), or an electronic focuser, however this may add too much weight and cause your mount to struggle seeing as it's likely already at or over it's carrying capacity; keep in mind that if you add weight to one end of the telescope, e.g. the eyepiece end, you would need to rebalance the scope either by moving it forwards in the mount (if that's possible) or by adding some weight to the front of the scope, if the scope is unbalanced in the mount then it will struggle to slew and track, if the scope weight passes a certain threshold the mount will struggle all of the time. Driving the scope from a DC source other than batteries will help but it won't cure the underlying problem.

Mine requires 6v so anything that can provide 6v and probably 1A minimum should be fine (add up the volts provided by the batteries). As for plugs and sockets, the power goes into the hand controller (on my one anyway) so I think a standard fit 5mm or so round DC power plug, tip positive (be sure to check this for yourself!). You could probably use one of those generic wall socket power supplies, however if you're outside in the winter be sure to have adequate waterproofing on any mains extensions, dew is your enemy. I run mine from a small 6v lead acid battery, lasts a long time and is much easier to handle and charge than a bunch of D cells in that fiddly battery holder (looks like something from 1960s Star Trek). Only caveat is that I had to make my own connectors and leads, and buy a battery charger that does 6v lead acid batteries.

The provided Mak should work well for bright targets such as planets and star clusters, you could later potentially fit something like an 80mm refractor to give high contrast wider field views (which shouldn't break the bank, an 80mm OTA should be quite cheap to buy without a mount).

KISS - Keep it simple, stupid! If you want to photograph planets, buy equipment for photographing planets. If you want to photograph DSOs, buy equipment for photographing DSOs. While I'm sure it's possible to photograph both with one piece of kit, neither will be optimal and you'll hit snags and compromises when you try pushing in one direction or the other. Check out the book Making Every Photon Count, it should tell you everything you need to know to get started. I think the more you go down a specialist route (e.g. photographing Saturn or Jupiter), the easier you may find things. Later you may be able to re-purpose some of the equipment you acquired to other target types, but I think you will find it easier to have two sets of equipment with perhaps some cross-over parts.

I also have the 8SE, I found the Celestron single arm tripod and mount were at their weight limit so it's not really possible to add more gear (such as steeltrack focuser, 2" diagonal, additional finder scope) without moving to something like an HEQ5 Pro mount and heavier duty tripod (e.g. 2" steel tube legs). Also, the 8SE does not benefit as well from high quality high power eyepieces, as at f10 it is a slow scope, better suited to medium-range eyepieces (12+mm) although the scope itself will provide decent magnification down a narrower field of view (can be very good for bright planetary viewing on good seeing nights). The 8SE also requires quite a bit of dew control, in my experience, so I have both a large dew shield and dew heater tapes on the OTA and also eyepiece and finder (nothing worse than having your eyepiece fog up just when things are getting good!)

My first comet since Panstarrs a few years ago, though this one was much easier for me, once I'd found it I discovered I was even able to see it naked eye through my bathroom window! Through binoculars I can make out just one tail pointing almost straight up towards the two lower stars from Ursor Major (I think).

The water droplets may be (mostly) pure, however as you say there might be dust on the surface that the water interacts with to create smears or water stains etc. Also be wary of taking your scope outside if people are likely to be letting off fireworks, or if there's a forecast or chance of dust or sand particles being blown across from the Sahara or nearby fields (which might then fall onto your scope during the night).

In theory water droplets formed from the atmosphere should by definition be pure, although don't quote me on that.

The best battery option in my opinion is a 12v leisure battery, could also be called a gel or deep cycle battery, they are designed to be used through nearly their full capacity typically inside a caravan, this means that you can run as many gadgets off it and slew with wild abandon with no worries of running out of power. These will be available from a motoring shop and come in various sizes, you'll probably only need a relatively small one (think small or medium size car battery). Might want to get a rigid tool bag with a good handle to carry it in as they can be heavy. Regular 12v lead-acid car batteries use a different chemistry to leisure batteries, they are designed to give a short burst of power (to start a car engine) and then trickle charge from the running engine, if they are discharged beyond 50% they can be permanently damaged and their capacity degraded. Typically this is what will be in a Power Tank and those emergency starter batteries. I use a leisure battery if I am going out to a dark site with my NEQ6 Pro, never have any problems with power. Whatever battery you decide to get, be sure to get a decent battery charger, a smart Ring charger would be my choice to keep the battery in good working order.

I used Baader Solar Film to make filters for my binoculars (following the instructions provided), fun to use for a quick view if there are any large sunspots. I keep the filters safe in a small round plastic food container, it's very important to check that the film isn't damaged before each use.

Sometimes different coloured filters can help bring out detail in planets such as Jupiter, you might be able to discern different cloud bands with different filters, some may just improve contrast. As already said, keep looking and concentrating and the detail should come to you, but don't blind yourself if the planet is too brilliant to look at, use a moon filter to dim it down a bit (there are variable moon filters available, a fixed Neutral Density moon filter might be too much for the detail). Of course, using a coloured filter means you will get a tinted view of the planet, it's mostly just so that you can see different details. The same method applies to nebulae, there are specialist filters recommended for that purpose.

I've been impressed with the views from my Celestron Travel Scope 70mm, the tripod it comes with is useless but on a good firm camera tripod or Alt-Az mount it is a fine travel scope, very easy to handle, carry and store, and works well for bird watching too (with a 45 degree erecting prism diagonal). Depending on where you buy this scope from, it comes with both 45 degree and 90 degree diagonals. In your budget you could easily afford this scope as your travel / bird watching option and buy a larger scope for closer moon watching. Don't forget to buy a moon filter as well to cut down the brightness on bright moon phases.

When you say you manually slewed it, do you mean with the hand controller or by releasing the clutches / pointing the scope with your hands? It may be that you must not release the clutches on your scope, and only use the hand controller. I think some mounts do keep track of manual slewing (by releasing the clutches) but I don't know enough about it to say which mounts do or don't do this.

My advice, regardless of what scope you go for, is to look at the tripod and mount it sits on (unless you go for a dobsonian, that is mostly a visual-only instrument though). The tripod legs need to be substantial to avoid vibrations, I think in your budget you should be able to find a setup that includes 1.75" tubular steel legs, I can't recommend anything that comes with light-weight square section aluminium legs as they are just not as rigid in my experience. Bundles usually place a scope on a mount and tripod that is almost at it's carrying capacity for that particular scope, so check the weight of the OTA (Optical Tube Assembly, the scope itself - might need to look at the product specifications without the mount) vs the maximum carrying weight of the mount. You could mix and match your own mount + OTA to ensure you get something that will be solid and less affected by vibration, this is particularly important for imaging. As an example, a 150 / 6" reflector should sit quite happily on an EQ3-2 mount with a 1.75" tubular steel legged tripod (Celestron CG-4, if you can find one) for visual use, likewise a 6" SCT should have no trouble at all; there is now a Pro GOTO version of the EQ3-2, however things get more demanding for astrophotography as you'll likely want the HEQ5 Pro once you start adding a camera and wanting finer gearing for precise guiding and needing a steadier mount, all of which eats into a large part of your budget. You might want to consider starting with a less demanding visual-optimised setup to start with and then look at a more dedicated mount (such as the popular HEQ5 Pro) for astrophotography use later.

Avoid poorly described or dusty looking lots (unless you really know what you're looking at), any self-respecting astronomer who has looked after their equipment won't let it get dusty or not be able to answer basic questions.

The Celestron 70mm Travel Scope I have came with an optional additional 90 degree diagonal for night time use, I don't know what options are currently available for the 70 or 80mm Travel Scopes but there certainly used to be different bundles available. I have to say the 70mm Travel Scope refractor is an excellent little scope, super sharp and portable. I may need to investigate a decent alt-az mount as my astronomy tripod, nice as it is, doesn't provide any kind of slow motion tracking facility (I'm not into computerised mounts).

Depending on your reason for wearing glasses, have you tried taking them off to look in the eyepiece? I have good close-up vision (only need glasses for distance) so looking in binoculars or an eyepiece does not require my glasses, simply removing them temporarily allows me to get my eye right up to the glass for the best view. Personally I like the Explore Scientific eyepiece range, but if you want a really good high magnification eyepiece then how about the Pentax 3.5? It is a large, heavy eyepiece though, check suitability before splurging the cash!

It is certainly true that more complexity adds more things that could go wrong! I like to stick to the old addage 'Keep It Simple, Stupid', or 'KISS'. If you can achieve something using 5 items then why use 10? Telescope manufacturers do not always use the best electronics, it sounds like the wifi module may be one of those cheap last minute add-ons that is there to sell the telescope more than anything else. I know from experience that that Celestron NexStar 4SE is a solid scope, although I am not a fan of the single-arm mount and GOTO system (it is added complexity, and you will be very limited when adding accessories to the 4SE scope or using a different scope with the mount), it might help you as a beginner to get into the hobby. Keep in mind that with GOTO you are spending half or more of your budget on the electronics and not the telescope, and they require a learning curve to use correctly (and they can go wrong!) You might like to take a look at a couple of alternatives: https://www.celestron.com/products/advanced-vx-6-schmidt-cassegrain-telescope and https://www.celestron.com/products/omni-xlt-150-telescope The Omni XLT 150 has no GOTO system, it comes as a fully manual system (you have to align it to the target yourself, then use the slow motion control knobs to keep the object in view), however you can add a motor to it for automatic tracking. Personally I like the simplicity and reliability of this kind of system, there is very little that can go wrong, so there is more time spent finding and viewing objects rather than pressing buttons. The 150 Newtonian Reflector is a solid performer, simple and easy to manage. It should not suffer from dew as much as the Schmidt Cassegrain design (the front glass plate collects dew quite easily when the temperature drops), and it is a fast scope (low f number) meaning that it should provide sharper views at high magnification when used with high quality eyepieces; the Schmidt Cassegrain design is a slower scope (high f number) which means that high quality high magnification eyepieces do not work as well. There is more to it than that, but this is a simplified explanation of the practical difference in scope design. This telescope bundle also comes with the CG-4 mount and tripod, which are excellent in my opinion, very steady and reliable. The thick steel tubular tripod legs are brilliant, and the CG-4 mount will comfortably take a wide range of telescopes up to about 6" diameter. This is a telescope and mount that you would probably want to keep, that is why I would recommend it to you. It will require a learning curve to use correctly as it is fully manual, but it's like learning to ride a bike - once you learn it is easy and you won't forget.

Sunspots is exactly what I thought the dimming could be, though I wouldn't have gone for one huge one like that, more likely a large cluster. All stars no doubt have minimums and maximums like our own, so why not have a random and maybe rare sudden mass grouping of sunspots?

There was a feature-length documentary about the discovery of a large meteor on a collision course with the Earth made in the 1970s, think it had Sean Connery in a leading role, very interesting. Now what was it called.... something like "Meteor" Point is, we've been here before many times. I just feat that mist and rain might hamper that chap's early warning efforts, anywhere in the West of Britain is surely not the ideal place for an observatory.

Be careful what you wish for. Although at first it might seem like a vast improvement, the actual thing that would make any lamps vastly better for the environment and night sky is shielding; some street lamp designs are good, some are as bad or worse than the old orange lights. Some LED lights are so much more powerful than the old orange lights that the light is simply reflected back from the road surface, resulting in a different spectrum of light pollution but one that is still noticeable none the less. I think our village LED street lamps could easily be 1/3 dimmer than they are and still provide adequate lighting to see by without any additional lights or torches, and the shielding could be better too. We have a golf driving range just outside the village (to the South, annoyingly) which is floodlit for all those late evening golfing sessions, fortunately I can't see the range itself but I can see the skyglow from it, that uses white lights which are probably LEDs pointing at about a 45 degree angle down, so plenty spills horizontal and upwards too. There is only a certain amount of light required for drivers and pedestrians in built up areas and at junctions, it doesn't need to reach every corner of every gutter, cars have lights after all and cyclists are still required to have reflectors and lights on at night. Frankly it's like padding the sides of the roads with cotton wool, I think as a society we should remove some of the cotton wool and accept that being out and night requires us to be more alert and use our eyes rather than rely on fake daylight 24hrs a day. I heard one idea a while ago, why not dim or turn off the street lights entirely in rural areas after 11pm or midnight, as soon as the traffic has died down to a minimum; who is going to be needing that light for 98% of the time? Nobody. Anyone walking or cycling can carry a torch. Burglars aren't going to be bothered either, since when do they ever come in through the front door anyway?

I would prefer the Astromaster 130EQ as a good starter setup, it is an f5 scope so you should be able to get the full benefit from high quality eyepieces (which need not cost the earth, look at the BST, Celestron X-Cel or Explore Scientific ranges), the Celestron EQ mount should be reliable and the tripod has tubular steel legs which I prefer to the square aluminium type. After you've got used to the scope for a while you could look at replacing the red dot finder with a 9x30 straight-through or a right-angle corrected finder, that should make finding small or faint objects easier, and buy a middle eyepiece somewhere around 14mm to compliment the supplied 20mm and 10mm. I don't think you would need a barlow lens to begin with, personally I never use one. Later, as funds allow, you might want to acquire a 25mm eyepiece and perhaps replace the basic 10mm with maybe an 8mm (almost anything is going to be better than the supplied 10mm). Enjoy!

If nothing else works, surely a pair of 200mm tube rings would do the trick?