Cosmic Geoff

If you don't have the Nexstar or Nexstar+ user manual, I suggest that you download it and study it.  It should be easy to get the alignment to work, provided you enter the right data.  You will have to set the location, which may take a careful study of the instructions and the menu system.  Many people get the format wrong, so check that the Lat/Long location you have looked up is in the same format that the mount uses. (or set on the nearest city.) The same remarks apply to setting the date and time.  (24 hour clock, time zone =0, daylight saving =no) To check the mount is working, select one-star align and align it on a bright star.

Alternatively, select solar system align. If it does not offer you the options of using the Moon and Mars in the next few evenings, you have done something wrong.

Do NOT try upgrading the software.  This is not usually necessary, is a fiddly process, and can end in tears.

Finally you need to power it from a proper power supply, not 8x AA from Poundland.🙂

15 minutes ago, Cboillo said:

 Thanks for the advice, this is what I should do then

I suggest you get a power supply that more closely resembles the sealed lead acid powered 'astro power tanks'.  Either an actual astro power tank, or something like this: https://www.halfords.com/motoring/battery-maintenance/jump-starters/4-in-1-jump-starter-594335.html

  This contains a 12v sealed lead acid battery.

Or one of the LiFePo astro power tanks - more robust and longer lasting than sealed lead acid, and designed for powering Astro mounts.

What does the manual say?  AFAIK astro mounts are designed to work from a nominal 12v DC, or from a six-cell lead acid battery which could be up to 13.8v when fully charged and just disconnected from the charger.  The mount is unlikely to blow up when subjected to a modest over voltage, e.g. 16v.

But the 16v from the car booster will be subject to a +/- tolerance so could be more than +16,  Personally, if I had spent around £1000 on the mount, I would not risk it - I'd use a more suitable supply.

There is a good database of double stars and other stuff at virtualcolony.com/sac/   You can search by constellation, brightness difference, etc.

Also look for the Washington Double Star catalog if you want a professional list that includes everything.

30 minutes ago, Andy ES said:

read in the book that at first use it might take a while for the GPS to download relevant info?

It will not download GPS info if you just turn it on. You have to go into the setup as far as selecting an alignment mode, and then wait, IIRC.

I am pleased for you that you had a First Light without any problems.  If you know your stars, you will find that a two star auto align is even quicker, with the GPS setting the time and location for you.  I found it useful to have a red dot or similar 'finder for the finder' to get the optical finder and OTA pointing accurately enough for alignment stars to be found in the optical finder.

I suggest you look at the thread 'What can I expect to see'? in the Beginners Observing section here.

What you can see with a given telescope depends on a number of factors asides from the quality of the main components.  The starter eyepieces supplied with many of the outfits are not very good, particularly the 9 or 10mm.  Some skill and experience in observing is also required.  With my 127mm Mak I managed to glimpse the Great Red Spot only once or twice, but in a processed image I took with the same scope, the GRS is as obvious as the nose on your face. 

To see the ultimate of planetary detail, it helps a lot to use a binoviewer so you can employ both eyes, but these are a significant expense and it can be difficult to get them to focus with scopes other than Maksutovs or Schmidt-Cassegrains.

18 minutes ago, Sam270 said:

At the end of the article the Celestron astro-fi 130 is suggested as an alternative, however on paper the specs seem virtually identical? - more confusion!

If they are both 130mm Newtonians, the specs are likely to be much the same, and they might even have come from the same Chinese factory.

Lots of people will suggest you get a big Dobsonian, but once you have mastered it, a proper GoTo mount (not the Starsense phone app)  is a major asset that will enable you to do more with your scope and find more faint and non-obvious objects.  With your budget you could get a smallish scope on a Goto mount, making a portable package you can take out to a dark spot.  A smallish scope of good quality should show you the Cassini division under the right conditions (and eyepiece upgrade).

I still regularly use the 127mm Mak and SLT mount I bought several years ago (clouds permitting) despite now having other instruments.

I'd assume that the OTA is a write-off.  The Starsense should be OK if it has no visible damage.

You can try the diagonal in another scope.

First, I have found that I need to use a dew shield with a Mak or SCT unless the humidity is low.  I have never bothered with a heater band and can only recall one night when despite the dew shield, the corrector plate dewed up aftter a while enough to interfere with observing.  Photos of SCTs in use will show you how to place the dew shield (basically extending forward from the front casting).

If you keep the outfit in a garage, by the time you 'fool around' for 20 mins or so setting it up it outdoors, it should be cool enough.

After use I take my telescopes indoors and let them dry out naturally, with round plastic dust covers in place.  Dew is pure water so it should all disappear without leaving a residue, and if the manufacturers were doing their job the finish should not take any harm.

Two points here: I had a 200p newtonian on a manual EQ-5 and I thought it was horrible. It was big, and I found that there was no leg extension that would let me view low objects over the garden fence and also view the zenith. The stright-thru finder was hard to use. The eyepiece often got into awkward positions. In fact I disliked it so much that I soon bought a more expensive C8 SE GoTo SCT outfit.

Getting the Newt operational was for me a four-lift operation: the tripod and mount, the counterweight and spreader tray, the OTA, and the other bits such as eyepieces and observing notes and a rest for the observing notes.  If you persist in buying the 200p and EQ5 or the 200mm Dob, which is of similar bulk and weight, I strongly recommend you get a 4-wheel camping trolley or similar on which you can load up all the stuff and wheel it out to your observing site.

This caught my eye in 'recent posts'.

One does not hear much about Dobsonians installed in observatories.  Asides form the practical isues mentioned above, if you look at the total cost it is probably cheaper to put a SCT in a substantial observatory than to install a large Newtonian.  Similarly if you are going to that expense you might as well include a proper fully capable mount. There is a college observatory in a campus near here with a 16" SCT on wedge Goto mount in it.  This seems to be the typical college observatory set-up.

The Nexstar 3-star alignment can fail if one of the stars you pick is not bright enough to be in the shortlist of alignment objects. The solution is either pick brighter stars,  or do a 2-star align wich is just as accurate (but you have to know your stars.)

3 minutes ago, Damien2904 said:

...& since I have read some great reviews about the Skymax 180. Only thing is that no mount comes with, however I'm wondering if I could use the Sky-Watcher AZ GTi WiFi Alt-Az Astronomy Mount? 

ROFL.🙂  The recommended mount for the Skymax 180 Mak seems to be the HEQ5. Note that the cooldown time for the Skymax 180 is said to be quite long, so it's best kept in a cool place.

Both scopes would be good for planetary viewing and imaging.

A Heritage 150p should be a sound starter, and if you decide you later want GoTo, or astrophotography kit, you can add to your lineup later on. Just be aware that astrophotography can be a massive investment in time, effort and money.

The Star Discovery is a cut-price 6" Newtonian on a GoTo mount. If that is what you want, fine.

The 80ED is not cheap, and has a small aperture.  Most people buy them for deep space astrophotography, so far as I am aware. For planets and DSOs you really need more aperture.

The AZ4 is a good solid mount for general grab'n' go use.

If you are thinking of spending in the region of £660 for the scope and mount you could cast your net a bit wider.

Do you want GoTo?  Or a plain manual alt-azimuth mount?

Having suffered the deficiencies of straight-thru finders, I would recommend a RACI finder, plus  a red dot finder or a simple sight to act as a 'finder for the finder'.

18 hours ago, Quicksilver said:

I have heard that the supplied Celestron 13 and 40 mm Plossel’s are not great.

Where? Some people will tell you that any eyepiece costing less than £300 is not great.  I use the kit 25mm Plossl and a 15mm Celestron Omni Plossl with my C8. Bear in mind that the C9.25 has a long focal ratio so is not demanding of eyepieces.   But I do not suffer from astigmatism.

For planets I use 8mm (or a zoom) and have tried a 5mm.  If you have the budget, it is worth getting a binoviewer (amazing on the Moon, helpful on planets.)

I have a 32mm 1.25" Plossl which I rarely use. It has plenty of eye relief.

You will also need a dew shield (which you could make yourself.)

If you want to go the 2" diagonal route, that's up to you - it's your money - but add up the cost of a 2" visual back, 2" diagonal and 2" eyepiece and ask yourself what sort of widefield scope you could have bought with that money. 

You should not find the Nexstar GoTo system hard to learn - I  got observing objects the first evening I had my new 127mm Mak out of the box.

I mostly use the original 25mm Plossl, a 15mm plossl and  8-24mm zoom eyepiece with my C8 SE.   You could also get a 32mm plossl which will give a wider field at low cost.

My Zoom is not perfectly parfocal and the zoom mechanism is very stiff.

The Orion Stratus eyepieces look expensive. If you are on a budget you should forget them and stick to plossl and other eyepieces in the £50 range which will be adequate for a f10 'scope.

You can make a dew shield yourself from cardboard, or foam matting, and put the money saved towards an eyepiece.

So far as I am aware, the Celestron and Sky-watcher 127mm Mak OTAs are essentially the same.  As for the mounts,  I prefer to use a handset as I feel it is more reliable as you don't have to deal with the vaguarities of wi-fi.  I remember working in a lab where they had to rip out the wifi connections to the laptops as other gear there interfered with it.

Re software, I prefer the Nexstar system as it seems more user-friendly. You don't for instance have that Synscan bother of having to align the mount north before you start.  And it has a useful 'solar system align' feature.

Re the tripods, the SLT tripod is quite wobbly and I try to avoid its use as far as possible, by putting the 127mm Mak on a totally different and more solid mount/tripod, or using the SLT mount with a sturdier wood tripod.  I suspect the other lightweight mounts cited are not a whole lot better.

I hope this helps.

Do you mean, can you move the finder base that is bolted to the telescope tube? I would not try if I were you.  Without knowing what is on the other end of the screw, you could have a nut bouncing around inside the scope, and you would also have to drill new holes, which would release swarf inside. 

BTW, I recognise the finder in the link. I bought one and was not impressed with it. It would not turn on at all until I inserted a small piece of foil packing, and then it was too bright.  I currently use it as a coarse finder for the optical finder on one of my scopes. To attach it further forward, maybe you can use double sided sticky tape with one of the bases in the finder kit.

I paid £650 for my C8 SE which was a bit scratched on the paintwork and had some dents in the legs but otherwise fine and no bits missing.

If this one looks like it will clean up OK, use your judgement on whether you want to put in an offer.   If the corrector plate is not cracked, it should be OK if it will clean up. To bring it up to the completeness of the standard package you will need to buy a prism star diagonal (which I do not see in the photos) a 25mm plossl eyepiece, and a long power lead to plug into a cigarette lighter type outlet.  That will cost you up to another £100.  The knob for securing the eyepiece tray does not show in the photos either.

I don't recommend buying an eyepiece kit - it is best just to buy the eyepieces etc that you actually want/need.

In addition to the above mentioned, you will need a power pack (many options) and a dew shield (which you might be able to make).

Used Celestron SCT outfits often sell at a large discount compared with the r.r.p. of a new one (typically 50% off), but the current scarcity may push up prices.

I have a 102mm Startravel as an alternative to my C8.  It functions as a grab'n go (I can carry it in one hand) and as a widefield viewing scope, and (with a solar filter in front) as a solar imaging scope - all tasks for which the C8 is unsuited.  But I mostly use it for EEVA live-stacked imaging - another task that does not work well with the C8.   I use it on a AZ-4, or a SLT GoTo mount.

The AZ3 is not a great mount, and will limit what you can do with your proposed purchase.

Have you read "Making EveryPhoton Count" by Steve Richards, available from FLO? It's the essential guide to deep space imaging.

A C6 SE is not the most suitable tool for deep space imaging.

The C5 is a nice scope.  You may be able to get the mount working, but many people would regard it as obsolete.  You could put the C5 OTA on a modern mount of your choice. The C5 is relatively light, and there are many options, including GoTo mounts.  The wedge is also obsolete, as a modern alt-azimuth GoTo will find and track without the need of a wedge, and if you really want an equatorial mount you could buy a German equatorial.

You mention 'pictures'.  A telescope of this design is well suited for taking images of planets, using a planetary video camera and some processing, but it is not really suitable for deep sky imaging.