Cosmic Geoff

If you are electro-phobic and do not want to pay for a LiFePo power tank, a car engine starter would be best buy.  You can get splitters to power items other than the mount.  A laptop would be a power hog, but I rely on the internal battery of mine, even though the endurance is very short.  I don't use dew heaters, as I have only rarely experienced the need with a dew shield in place.   Dew intensity may vary from one part of the country to another.

The dome head screws at the rear (and front) of the scope are for attaching accessories. If the holes are not blind, and you need longer screws, take care that the screws do not project inside, in case they snag something.  

On the subject of attaching things, ADM astro accessories make a series of neat looking bars, guide scope rings and suchlike for attaching things to SCTs.  IIRC there are 'mini dovetails' you can bolt to the OTA via radius blocks and which accept various attaching devices.

You should not need much instruction for setting up your scope for visual use. Just read the manuals.🙂

14 hours ago, Mysteron said:

So spoke at length with Orion, replaced the main board, no change, replaced the PSU, no change, tried to upgrade the motor firmware but not able to comunicate with the controller

Which piece of hardware have you not swapped out?

In a Celestron Nexstar SLT mount, there is a common error code meaning 'drive not responding' which is usually caused by the motor drive firmware in the mount becoming corrupted.

You have downgraded the controller firmware but now cannot communicate with it?

As a general comment, not necessarily aimed at you, a lot of people assume that they have to perform firmware upgrades, or treat it as the first resort if anything does not work as expected.  They may be led astray by the perpetual security upgrades of Windows, Android, etc.  But look it another way: when did you last upgrade the firmware in your car? or your washing machine, or your electric toothbrush, or a VCR, or your burglar alarm?  The sensible course is to read the small print of what the upgrade is supposed to fix, and if it does not fix an actual problem that you are experiencing, and the kit works, then leave well alone.

I assume you tried downgrading the software back to the configuration that worked and that did not fix it?

In fairness to Celestron I should mention that the C6SE was presumably designed to be used with its handset rather than wifi.  And that most speciaised software, including astro, is written for MS Windows only.

I have been wary of WiFi since I worked in a lab where it was installed for our laptops, and then they had to rip it out because the stuff in the lab interfered with the wifi and jammed it.  And now my home wifi has slowed for some reason and it takes hours to transfer planetary imaging results from my laptop. I'm looking for a spare network cable. 😕

Your telescope is f10 and so will work fine with Plossl eyepieces, which are relatively inexpensive. But buy a recognised brand and not just the cheapest.

Also, as others have said check the barrel size before buying anything.  You can buy adaptors for 0.965" to 1.25" but that is only good for higher powered eyepieces (shorter focal length, smaller lens elements).

If you do have a 0.965" barrel focuser you will find it difficult now to buy eyepieces in that size that are any good, other than old ones.

15 minutes ago, Dakuwaqa said:

It looks like you’re right about the 4SE! I’ve just looked at the 127mmCelestron Nexstar Mak SLT. Its priced about the same as the 4SE which is interesting. Would no what the main differences would be ?

The 4 SE is a Maksutov and has an aperture of 102mm.  Unusually, instead of having a separate diagonal it has a flip mirror for camera or eyepiece built into the back end.  The 127mm Mak obviously has  a larger aperture.  The 4 SE and 5 SE have the same mount which can be tilted up to work in a wedge or equatorial mode (not a very useful feature IMHO). My impression having seen them in a showroom was that the SE models had somewhat sturdier mounts than the SLT or the near-identical Skywatcher equivalent, but don't quote me.

See here: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes.html

or get my first serious and GoTo outfit, the 127mm Celestron Nexstar Mak SLT.  The Nexstar system is IMHO easier to operate than the Sky-watcher Synscan.  If you get a handset GoTo rather than a WiFi Goto, that's one less thing to set up and one less thing to go wrong.

The 4SE has not been discontinued as far as I know, but there may be supply problems.  The 4SE probably has a more stable mount than some of the other entry level GoTos.

I don't know anything about the Starsense smartphone system, but the original Starsense is affected by twilight or poor quality sky conditions; something to bear in mind.

Here is a pretty view of M82, taken on 12 Dec with 102mm f5 achromat, ASI224MC camera, SLT mount.

Live stacked, 16 frames, total 138 secs.

Here is a live-stacked EEVA image (14 frames, total 174secs) taken with 102mm f5 Startravel achro & ASI224MC camera on SLT mount.

The 9th magnitude comet is the smudge toward upper right of the frame.  It's small and dim.

The original idea of the Dobsonian was that you could build the whole thing yourself from junk parts.  Offering them for sale as factory-made retail items is a more recent development.

The Eq3-2 is the kind of mount you would use if you wanted an equatorial mount.  

If you want a manual alt-azimuth there are various mounts that might work, but check the tube clearance.

I would suggest that rather than maxing the budget you start with a modest setup and replace or upgrade it as your interest develops.  My most expensive and capable scope is one I would never have considered buying when I re-started my interest in astronomy a few years ago.  I bought a supermarket refractor and have gone through several upgrades and changes of interest since.

Beware the word 'compromise' - outfits designed for visual are rarely suitable for astrophotography in any form. A case in point is the C8 SE - r.r.p. £1600 - a great OTA for visual observing and planetary imaging, but with a mount designed for portability. On the SE mount it is difficult to use the C8 for planetary imaging and useless for deep sky astrophotography, for which the OTA is not well suited anyway.

Also decide whether you want to start with the most basic form of mount (Dobsonian or manual alt-azimuth) or start with a GoTo mount that will allow you to find faint and obscure objects quickly and easily. In other words, do you think the fun lies in looking for objects or looking at them? You will no doubt get conflicting advice on this issue.

For £500 you can afford a very adequate Dobsonian, or a GoTo outfit which still has enough aperture to keep you entertained for quite a long time.  If you can find anything in stock. 😂

The 114az linked to could prove under-whelming in practice.  The Moon will look interesting, but with the two eyepieces supplied, planets will look like dots.  What else of interest you can see with it depends on whether you live in a dark skies area or in a town. Astronomy is not a cheap hobby and £150 will not go far.

The Forum sponsor FLO has a beginners telescope section where they show what telescopes they could supply for beginners - if they had them in stock.  If you buy from them or other astro specialist you will get much better after-sales service than if you buy from a High Street chain.

4 minutes ago, Venzen said:

Are people just trying to achieve a wider field when moving from a 1.25 to a 2. Is that the only reason to use a 2?

I assume this is the principal reason. It might also provide a sturdier attachment for some accessories.

There is not much wrong with the Celestron #94115A 1.25" prism diagonal optically.

I think you should pay attention to the advice you are being offered here.  I used to have a 203mm Newtonian on a manual EQ-5 and as a visual scope it was horrible to use.  It will also be challenging to use for deep space AP, by most accounts. And regardless of what somebody told you, it does take time to get the gear outside and set it up.  I find it takes half an hour to get an alt-azimuth outfit outside and set up for imaging - and that's without the added complication of polar alignment.

Dobsonians have their limitations, but the setup consists of: Take out base. Take out OTA. Take out accessories. Start observing.

If you have a decent DSLR, you cam do wide field astrophotography with it - just attach it to a mount.

I never bothered buying a 2" diagonal for my C8 for two reasons:

Didn't feel I needed one, as I could live without the widest field view of a relatively small number of objects, and I have other scopes.

The cost - add up the cost of good 2" diagonal, 2" visual back and 2" eyepiece and you could buy a useful widefield OTA with that money.

Yes, a 2" diagonal would be mechanically sturdier but I have not found that an issue so far.

I suggest you wait till you have used your scope package rather than rushing to purchase.

I made an 8" telescope from scratch when I was a youth.  Sadly I do not remember all the details, but I think it had a square section wooden frame with a thin skin over it.

8 hours ago, Venzen said:

So there is no need to buy Starsense if you have Skyportal?

Did you mean "So there is no need to buy Skysync if you have Skyportal"?

Starsense is an auto-align system; the other devices aren't.

That's up to you and the depth of your pockets.

I have Starsense on a C8 SE, making up a package that can be carried outside and got going within minutes, and the Starsense is worth having to save the faff of doing a star align manually.

I have another Nexstar scope with GPS, which takes about half an hour to get outside and assembled and ready to start imaging. With GPS, the star aligning process is very easy and quick compared with the total setup time, and adding Starsense would offer little.

I'd have GPS on any mount if it was priced at the actual cost of a GPS chip and not at £180 or so.

The hard part is finding the right patch of sky, and then finding Pluto among all the stars in the image.

FYI I managed to image Pluto using a ASI224MC camera on a 102mm f5 Startravel and SLT alt-az GoTo mount,  and also used plate-solving and an online star map.  If you do not have GoTo, then good luck.

1 hour ago, Venzen said:

What about camera suggestions?

For planetary: ZWO ASI224MC

For deep space: your DSLR, or a specialist astronomy camera.

1 hour ago, Venzen said:

I know I'll need a 6.3 focal reducer, right?

Only if you intend to do some serious deep space astrophotography that requires a reducer.  Given that neither the OTA nor the mount you have proposed might be ideal for this, you could hold off on the focal reducer and think about buying a separate deep-space imaging rig later instead.  By most accounts, starting deep-space imaging with a small refractor would be much easier.

You will need a dew shield - if you can't get one quickly, you can make one.

Other stuff can wait.  You could, for instance, get a 32mm eyepiece for a wider visual field, or swap out the straight-thru finder for a RACI (right angle correct image) finder + red dot finder pairing, which would make it easier to aim the OTA when acquiring alignment stars or re-acquiring an imaging target.

27 minutes ago, Milzy said:

At the moment its the sky watcher 130 eq2  so pretty standard, decent planetary images and also some dso would be nice. The reviews for this scope seem to say perfect for planetary and SOME dso but I'm fairly new to this so all the help is appreciated.  Also its pretty compact unlike a big Dobsonian.  Looking to spend upto a £1000.

The ETX 125 is not an upgrade in terms of aperture.  Also Meade do not have a great reputation for customer service, it seems, going by previous posts here.

If you want a GoTo Maksutov or SCT there are some options from Celestron, or pairing Skywatcher OTAs and mounts, or you could buy one of the new  6" aperture "Classic Cassegrain" and pair it with your choice of GoTo mount, all for under £1000.

I'd call the 5 SE a 'mature' design.   Some people are still using 40 year old examples of the larger C8 optical tube assembly.

For planetary imaging the prime requirement is a large aperture, coupled with a well-behaved tracking mount and a large range of focus.

Unless your Sky-watcher 130 is particularly awful, you could keep it and place it on a better mount of your choice.  But unless the 130 is modified you may have difficulty getting cameras to focus with it.

DSOs, particulary galaxies, are best seen from a dark skies site, and a large aperture is  also a distinct advantage.

I am suggesting the EQ-5 because with its 9Kg (visual) load capacity and choice of drives it offers more flexibility and future-proofing than a smaller mount.  It will definitely accept the size of dovetail used with the SLT mount. As will the EQ3-2 and the AZ-4, etc.

The Nexstar 8SE is a visual scope in a portable setup. You can do planetary imaging with it, but it's a pain to do because there is too much wobble and backlash in the mount, and you would soon be wanting a mount upgrade.  I find that I have to actively guide to keep the planet's image on the cropped region-of-interest even with a short 60 second video run.

Since you can obviously afford the extra, I'd suggest the C9.25 on the AVX.  Despite some negative comments about this mount's suitability for deep sky astrophotography, it should be perfectly adequate for planetary imaging and general visual observing.

I'd quite like a C9.25 myself, but I'd need another mount and...