Cosmic Geoff

The problem could be anything from bad connections to a faulty handset.  Since you got it from an estate sale, there is no guarantee that someone hasn't opened it before you and fiddled with the insides.  Are you using an adequate +12v PSU?

You can buy replacement handsets, but i suspect this could cost more than you paid for the whole thing.

I have never used heaters with my SCT.  You can make your own dew shield out of foam mat or cardboard if you want. I'd rate a dew shield as an essential #1 accessory.  If you have plenty cash, the new aluminium dewshield looks very good and is compatible with the Celestron heater ring.

Planets can be a disappointment if viewed visually, looking small and over-bright.  It's best to use a lot of magnification, which makes them look bigger and dimmer. They may look blurry at high magnification, but at least you can see some detail.  I tried 5 and 7mm eyepieces on Mars once or twice when the seeing was good, but that's an extreme. Generally a 8 or 10mm eyepiece would give enough power for your scope.

You could get a zoom eyepiece, which will either suit you or indicate which fixed eyepieces you need to buy.

Also check the collimation of your scope - if it is not spot on, performance will suffer.  It should be OK on a new scope but you never know...

I dragged myself out of bed on the morning of the 20th, for what the forecast claimed would be a clear night.  There was cloud around, which gradually got worse, but I secured my first Jupiter and Saturn images of the season.

CPC800, ASI462MC, ZWO filter wheel with UV/IR cut filter, ZWO ADC,  videos of 5000 frames, gain 350.

I've seen an observatory mounted 16" LX200, which had a non-adjustable wedge, probably the norm for this class of instrument.  

12 hours ago, WolfieGlos said:

So if I went for the 585, I would need a 2x barlow to match the pixel size as you say. But if I went for the 224 (3.75um) I would need a 2.5x barlow. Albeit this wouldn't really be suitable for DSO imaging unlike the 585.

I have taken a large number of DSO pictures with an ASI224MC, basically because I had one already and did not want to spend loadsamoney on a more suitable DSO camera.

8 minutes ago, WolfieGlos said:

Thanks for the pointers, and those are some great pictures on your flickr! One thing I want to ask; what's the reason to aim for a pixel size one fifth of the focal ratio? If I were to take my scope, I'd be looking for a pixel size of 1.4 - much smaller than both the ASI 224 and 585.

The reason for such guides is to match the pixel size to the resolution of that aperture of scope.  The focal ratio here includes the effect of any Barlow lens etc.  For example, a 2.9um pixel size  used with a f7 scope and x2 barlow would be about right. 

For planetary use  the FOV will normally be restricted to keep the resultant video to a manageable size.  A large sensor is not entirely wasted as it is useful for finding the planet and centering it. It will also be advantageous if you also want to use the camera for deep-space imaging.

2 hours ago, Clarkey said:

Not sure this is really true. I cannot find much in the sky - but even I can find planets. (Typical Astrophotographer - if in doubt plate solve😂)

The GoTo is more to keep the planet in the FOV when you have narrowed the region-of-interest for taking a video.   It drifts off quicker with solar system align than with 2-star align, which suggests that tracking with a poorly aligned equatorial or a  manual mount will not be much fun.  Also useful for finding Neptune. 🙂

If starting from zero, you need a GoTo mount, a telescope of medium to large aperture, and a planetary camera. My last purchase was a ASI462 with 2.9um pixels. This camera is already superseded.  If you already own an ASI120MC or a ASI224MC, that will work.  Note that the smaller pixel cameras do not require such extreme effective focal ratios as recommended for larger pixel cameras. 

Most serious planetary imagers use a SCT of 8" or larger, or a Newtonian of similar aperture. 

11 hours ago, eslley said:

Hi everyone!

I have a supatrak mount for a while and now it stopped to work. The hand controller keeps blinking the buttons 'set' and 'go' and I'm unable to move the mount. Do anyone have any idea of what is going on?

Thanks!

With the similar GoTo mounts from Celestron, a common cause of failure was that the mount firmware got corrupted and needed to be re-programmed via the handset connection.  I have no idea how you'd reprogram a Supatrak mount. Good luck with that. ☹️

Buying fancy diagonals will give a marginal, perhaps un-noticeable gain in performance over stock types.  If you pay more, the gain is mainly in better construction, longer coating life etc.

If you want more performance for visual astronomy on a budget of £500, the obvious answer is to buy a 8" or 10" Dobsonian.

The Moon images look over-exposed and the focus is not good. 

I suggest some research on the advanced controls for your smartphone's camera. Can you manually control the focus or exposure? Can you lock it at focus on infinity?

Note that the size of the Moon is about 1800 arcseconds and the size of Venus (at present) is 41 arcseconds.  

You have still not told us what camera you are using.  If you are taking a photo through the eyepiece and the image is visually in focus, then the camera image should be roughly in focus. But if you are using a smartphone it may be trying to use its own autofocus & auto-exposure, and for all we know  it's trying to image the insides of your telescope.

A true image of Venus taken through this scope with a 20mm eyepiece will probably be on the small side. 

11 hours ago, Kon said:

Someone was getting really nice images with the 462mc and a #47/ir block filter so it's not completely unresponsive. 8pm is getting quite low on horizon and it will lose more signal. Have you tried daylight, 6-7?

Edited 11 hours ago by Kon

I made the observations (images) on 7 July above at around 4pm with Venus at its highest.   I could try yesterday's experiment again with the Sun near the meridian. 

I suspect that  OSC camera response divided by corrector plate attenuation results in a major loss of UV signal.

I am thinking of trying a Blue filter next time I get the chance.

The choice of eyepieces you could buy is very wide.  The 10mm often supplied in scope kits is not great. The 25mm may be more acceptable, likewise the Barlow lens. 

I'd suggest you try using the scope for a few nights before shopping for accessories. 

6 hours ago, phantomgod_06 said:

Oh I see, so what do I do to get the proper image?

Focus the image.  And maybe reduce the exposure time.

Today I tried another experiment I had been wanting to try but had been prevented by clouds.  At around 8pm I exposed the ASI462 camera to some blue evening sky, via the filter wheel but without a telescope, to measure the relative response through various filters., using Sharpcap Histogram. 

Taking the exposure time with the UV/IR cut filter as 1, the exposures with the UV filter was x72 and with the IR-pass filter x2.9.

So what can one conclude from this?  It seems that the long exposure with UV is caused by the low relative response of the camera and/or there not being much UV in the first place.   There is probably some UV cut in the Mak and SCT previously used but it is not clear how much.

If you already have a 130mm reflector, and have a limit of £500, that rather limits the possibilities.  For viewing planets you want maximum aperture, so £500 worth of Dobsonian would give the greatest aperture for your money.

Any sort of scope other than a short focal ratio achromat will serve for planetary viewing, but a Newtonian gives the greatest performance per £.

If you want to see lots of planetary detail, try imaging. It often shows far more than a novice observer can see. Not cheap or instant, but satisfying.

As a retired electronics engineer, I am wondering how a mount could be powered by 12v AC (clearly indicated in the photo above by 12v ~) and by +12v DC?  With AC, the speed could be locked to the mains 50 HZ, but with DC, some sort of intermediate circuitry to control the motor speed should be present.   However, the second 12v connection, with two small round holes, is clearly not keyed for polarity.   Isn't there a user manual anywhere?

A step-down transformer will be required to supply 12v AC from the mains. 

The choice of eyepieces is very wide. Any of the 1.25" barrel size should be usable. What is your budget? A typical price for a decent but non-exotic eyepiece is £50, and you might want a set of 3, plus a Barlow lens if you don't have one.  Plossl eyepieces will work in your scope and may be cheaper.

Today I finally was able to make the trial on Venus I wanted to do a while ago, but was frustrated by clouds.  I took some images with Venus at its greatest height in the afternoon, with a SCT.

CPC800, filter wheel, Astromania UV filter, ZWO IR-cut, ZWO IR pass filter, ASI462MC

UV exposure 5.8ms, visible exposure 0.032ms, IR exposure 0.112 ms.   Note that the UV exposure is 180x the visible-band exposure.

While an exposure of 5.8 ms wouldn't be so bad for imaging Saturn at night, the result here was dismal.  The IR image turned out the best.  The SCT apparently does not perform better than my Mak in UV.

4 minutes ago, Xxjrhxx said:

but I just did a mental price of sandstone blocks x 4 which would be $800aud, due to high winds and flooding here so need reenforcement for optimal height viewing.. I’m not completely opposed to it, we are building a with new outdoor open area but there will be a shed and house either side so will be obstructed

You need a clear view to the North (for planets and northerly objects) Other directions are less important.  Why $800? Can't you use building blocks which are pretty cheap, if ugly? Maybe build a viewing platform high enough to deter the animals?

Be aware of overall dimensions if you are thinking of buying an 8" Newtonian.  The Dob version will require you to stand for viewing objects near the zenith, and crouch to view near the horizon.  If you put it on a tripod, and fully extend the legs, you should be able to stand for observing objects near the horizon, but if you aim it at the zenith the eyepiece will be  about 7 feet off the ground, and maybe in an awkward position as well - really not good. But if you don't have board fences around, you don't need to extend the tripod legs. SCTs with their short tube and eyepiece at the back are more user-friendly in practice (but more expensive).

The 5" scopes will not show you as much as a 6" or 8", but at a dark skies site will still show you lots of stuff.

I second the comments about mounts. A lot of the entry level scopes come with what I call a 'wobblemount', while what you actually want is a tripod that looks as if it was made with scaffolding poles.

Another option is to buy a small Newtonian, either as an OTA or as a mini-Dob, and put it of a solid tripod like the AZ4-2.  A small Newt would be more expendable than a 6" SCT should the livestock kick it over. 🙄

I suggest you regard your first scope as something to test the waters with, rather than a lifetime purchase.  Keen amateur astronomers often trade up, or acquire a collection of scopes.  

Without referring to the instruction manual, I think that when these messages appear (which are essentially for information) you have to escape out of the setup routine to a choice of objects or utilities, otherwise it takes you back to the alignment routine.

The pictured Omni looks like mine. I found I could screw the nosepiece onto ZWO cameras.

I suggest that the Celestron Powerseeker 127 is not worth much investment for upgrades.  See this review:

Celestron Powerseeker 127 EQ review | Space

one of many critical reviews.

I had hands-on of a similar instrument at the local astronomical society and found it almost unusable.