Cosmic Geoff

It seems that you want something of reasonable aperture and also portable for visual use, and are also interested in imaging.

If operating from a city (with light pollution) and occasionally from a remote site ( with limited time) I suggest you really need GoTo if you are going to find much to look at.   A smaller scope, say 6" to 8" aperture would show you enough to keep you amused for quite a while.  You appear to have discounted SCTs (maybe because you didn't try one, unlike the Dobs), but a used 8" GoTo SCT would be within your budget and would be lighter and more portable than a GoTo Newtonian of the same aperture. It would also be easily adaptable for planetary imaging by attaching a planetary camera.

Equatorial GoTo would be a liability for visual use, as an alt-azimuth GoTo is much easier and quicker to set up and does all that is necessary.

You should regard imaging as a totally different project, and I would suggest that rather than plunging into serious deep-sky imaging you start by trying EVAA (q.v.) with a small refractor, a suitable astro camera, and either an alt-az or equatorial GoTo mount.   It might come as a shock to you to discover that even a 4" achro refractor, a ASI224MC camera and an alt-az mount will show as much or more detail on a deep-sky object than the big Dobs you crave. 

The mooted 200mm Newt on a HEQ5 is a beast you wouldn't want to transport further than your back garden, unless you are really keen to use it in a dark-sky area.  It would also be time-consuming to set up, and a beast to use, with the eyepiece potentially getting into awkward and near-inaccessible positions.

4 hours ago, alacant said:

Here is the -hopefully provisional- solution... Yes, I've touched the water supply elsewhere in the property, y nada.

If using a water pipe as an earth in a modern property, you should check that you have copper pipe all the way to earth, and not a section in blue plastic..

Reflections of the sun etc from double glazing reveal that the glass is quite distorted.

My house has some original Victorian glass and the view through that looks wonky even to the naked eye.

22 minutes ago, Dave Quick said:

Guys I seem to have found the problem. I shifted my attention away from the camera to my laptop. I always keep the webcam on my laptop covered with tape. I removed that tape and although I have no clue how this would all tie together, that fixed the problem..One for the books for sure...

That makes no sense either.  Unless you were selecting the laptop camera in Sharpcap (as one can), instead of the ASI120.

As an ASI120MC owner and Sharpcap user, I'd say that this doesn't make sense.  Clearly you want the ASI120MC to work with the telescope.  There are quite a few reasons why it might not: 

You have set a totally wrong exposure time.

The camera/optical trail is not in focus. If it doesn't work, how can you focus it?  Focus is critical - even bright objects like Jupiter can disappear if not in focus.

Some physical barrier eg flip mirror or dense filter, is blocking the light path.

Unreliable cable connections.

You are probably expecting too much. I looked at several planets a couple of nights ago with a C8 SE with the following results, using mostly a 25mm eyepiece.

Venus: small dazzling disk, no detail. Could just make out the phase.

Mars: bright orange dot, no detail, could just make out some phase. 

Uranus: faint dot, just distinguishable from a star (no diffraction rings).

Moon: nice detail, lots of large and small craters visible.

I started doing planetary imaging (which you can do with a C8 SE) some years ago, as it was the only way I could see significant detail on the planets.   To see any detail visually, you need the right high-power eyepieces and some observing experience.

You have the manual, yes? So look up where to find the tracking rate in the handset menus (sidereal, lunar rate, etc).

Also select the highest slew rate (Rate, 9) and see what happens after.

A 10" reflector should give great views in Bortle 3 skies if working properly.  You have two eyepieces. You have not mentioned the mount (I assume it has one?) or the finder scope - you need one and it has to be lined up with the main scope - best done in daylight.

You don't need anything else to get going.  

36 minutes ago, Astro74 said:

Do you mean it won’t show more detail than the 102?

The 120 will have a larger image scale, which might or might not translate into slightly more resolution depending on its chromatic aberration, and the quality of seeing, especially nearer the horizon.  For the typical EAA target, resolution won't be a priority.

If high resolution is really a priority for you, you will need a much bigger aperture, an apochromatic, mirror or catadrioptic scope, and a better mount, in short a whole rabbit hole of expense. 

14 hours ago, Astro74 said:

Be good to know what people think of the 102 vs the 120 and whether he 120 would cope on the azi gti mount 

The 120 will give a slightly larger image scale, but a narrower field of view, and be 70% heavier.  More to the point, it will not show fainter objects in EAA mode than the 102, if the focal ratio is the same. 

2 hours ago, Astro74 said:

Thanks for this ..however after speaking to Rob Ince (local expert) I’ve deceive to go for the StarTravel 102 refractor which will suit my needs and budget perfectly- thanks again! 

I was tempted to suggest the Startravel 102, which is what I use for EAA, but I thought you were intent on buying a much more expensive ED scope.  I also use the ASI224MC with it.

What is your budget? What fast focal ratio small telescopes do you have already?

What is your budget for a camera or do you have something already?

I see no reason why a 6" CC on an AVX would not work.  The AVX should support the weight easily, and even if it is 'jumpy' (why?) the 'lucky imaging' method used for planetary imaging will tolerate a lot of movement.  The balance point of the OTA will probably be near the back end but I don't see why this should be a problem either.

Your collimation looks "good enough for galaxies".  

I have only collimated visually. AFAIR you need to use a high powered eyepiece and put the star (e.g. Polaris) slightly out of focus and see if the diffraction rings look deformed.  A very small tweak (e.g. 1/8 turn) on one of the 3 collimating screws on the secondary holder is enough to make a difference, if the collimation is slightly out. 

If the collimation is very far out, stars can look like a badminton shuttlecock, and a lot of trial and error, and re-aiming the scope may be needed to get it right. 

You have to enter the focal length into the settings. Also get a sharp focus and make sure the exposure is long enough to get enough stars. If it won't solve, nudging the telescope to a different position may work. With a 102mm f5 refractor the platesolving should work very well.

I have an EQ-5 garden mounted on a Sky-watcher tri-pier (search for 'pillar mount').  It works well, and being able to start from Park is a huge gain in convenience over having to set up and align each time. No need for an expensive pier foundation or mount-pier adapter. I keep the telescope indoors.

There is (or was) a variant of the Sky-watcher tri-pier that takes the EQ-6 mount.

I saw the SW CQ350 Pro at the Practical Astronomy show. Looked like a big mount.

Strictly speaking the 6 SE is the telescope + mount. The telescope is a C6.  I see no advantage in mounting the C6 on the AZ-GTI rather than the SE mount, which is the same as the 8 SE mount. (The C8 weights abut 6Kg).

14 minutes ago, starsailor70 said:

I use binoculars with my spouse and for her it works great. However, I can never fully merge anything I look at, in spite of perfect focus,

Maybe your binoculars are out of collimation - a common problem with binoculars especially if dropped or knocked. 

As stated above, the problem is in the power supply. 

As a safety measure, you could earth the mount, either by wiring it to a stake in damp ground or to the earth of the mains supply.  I earthed my multi-satellite dish (powered via mains-powered boxes) to a water pipe, just to be safe when I was messing about with it on the flat roof. 

If earthing the mount causes a fuse to blow, congratulate yourself on a lucky escape.

On 26/02/2023 at 18:07, tezz said:

No hole.

The cost of someone to do it all is to much.

The first room is were a laptop will go.

The second room is were the scope will go.

So there is a very small chance of vibration.

very small chance of vibration? That remains to be seen - unless you have an update?  I have found that even with paving slabs laid on soil, if one's foot presses on the same slab that a tripod leg is resting on, it causes a disturbance at the eyepiece.  I would expect that If you have a telescope and a human at opposite ends of a raised wooden floor, the vibration transmission would be significant.  Some DIY observatory builders go to the lengths of isolating a concrete pier foundation from a cast concrete floor slab.

But if you are sticking to the plan you originally indicated, of observing remotely from inside the house, the flexing floor should not be a problem.

9 minutes ago, Blueearthling said:

I've already got a nexstar 6se. What are my best options? Will it be possible to observe solar flares? I'd like an orange colour rather than white.

You can buy a ready-made full aperture filter for the 6 SE, for observing in white light.

To observe flares you need a narrowband filter. If you want to use the 6 SE you will need a full aperture energy-reduction filter and a narrowband filter. It might be easier to just buy a solar scope made for the purpose (wallet warning ☹️). 

1 hour ago, Wageslave said:

Someone upthread very kindly posted this. Are these legs what I need?

Possibly. If you posted a clear picture of the leg attachment points on the one you have got, we could answer with more confidence.  Some DIY might still be required.   You could measure up yours and send the seller a question. That might help you decide if it's worth an investment of £35.45.

So the telescope is in fact a 4 and a half inch reflector with a focal length of 900 mm(?).  That it was made in Japan is a plus.  Options are to have somebody make up a set of three legs, or figure out how to attach it to a ready-made tripod. Both will require some DIY skills.

Ideally you should find someone familiar with astro telescopes, who could assemble the telescope and check it over.

In theory the scope could be mounted on a different mount using scope rings and a dovetail (q.v.) but I suspect this would be well outside your budget.

Be aware that the EQ-5 Synscan is a popular mount that works well (I have one) wheras some reviews from EQM35 owners are very negative.

A few photos would help us see exactly what you have and give us a clue as to how to mount it on a tripod.  The telescope itself may be worth keeping - it might even be quite decent.  If you got this for a fiver, the cost of a decent mount for it may come as a nasty shock.  

Don't buy a cheap and cheerful scope from Amazon - asides from further enriching a billionaire, it is unlikely to be better than what you've got.

Tasco 60mm worth checking out? - Classic Telescopes - Cloudy Nights