Cosmic Geoff

It seems likely that a RA drive unit can be found for your mount, but don't expect too much of the result.  A motorised CG-3 may only be suitable for hands-off visual observation or elementary lunar or plantary imaging.  So far as I know, the CG-3 is a relatively lightweight mount.  Some serious imagers use a telescope similar to yours mounted on an EQ-6 mount (q.v.).

Also be advised that your 'scope may not come to focus with the camera at all without some modification.

The refractor vs reflector argument has been flogged to death in various threads of the SGL forum over the years. 🙂  It comes down to a matter of personal preference as well as economics.  Refractors are thought of as the classic 'scope, and don't have a central obstruction, but in larger sizes are stupidly expensive, and heavy. Reflectors and catadroptics in medium and larger sizes have many practical and cost advantages.

I like to compare a Victorian 8" refractor (yards long, mount weighing tons, housed in an observatory the size of a chalet) with my modern 8" SCT, which can be picked up and carried complete with its mount.

6 hours ago, bayarealondoner said:

 

Lastly, i'm guessing that the mount in the link below that comes with the 80ED is just as bad as the one that comes with the 8se

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1060553-REG/sky_watcher_s20160_80mm_proed_apochromatic_refractor.html?ap=y&smp=y

You guess correctly - it does not look like a serious imaging mount.

The C8 SE is a fine visual scope outfit, and if pushed it can be used for planetary imaging.  But if you want to do serious astrophotography, you should buy something else.  For deep space imaging, you want a completely different scope on a better mount.  For planetary imaging, a C8 will do fine, but you would soon feel the need of a more stable mount with less wobble and backlash.  As for a C8 SE on a wedge, don't even think of going there.  I suggest that you read the book "Making Every Photon Count" before you waste your money on buying unsuitable kit.

And before you ask, there is no outfit equally suited for visual and imaging. To avoid an unsatisfactory compromise, think of  choosing one or the other, or 1 mount + 2 'scopes.  Though ideally it would be better to have two mounts as well, as a Nexstar SE mount would be far easier to deploy for a bit of visual than a Synscan EQ-6 equatorial mount.

See here:

And here: https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/598018-celestron-edgehd-screw-sizes/

Don't force the screws. If you get the right thread they will turn easily and not jam partway down.  My C8 has Imperial screws but I believe some may be metric.

Try a dew shield without the dew heater. It is essential to use a shield with a Mak or SCT in conditions where there is any chance of dewing up.  In my location I have found the dew shield to be sufficient 99% of the time (no heater).  Trying a heater tape without the shield would be unconventional, I think.

You do not have to spend money on a shield. The bought ones look smart, but I made mine from cardboard as nobody else ever sees them operating and I don't care what they look like.

22 minutes ago, falcrum said:

And how can I know that mount is compatible with my telescope? 

You won't, without looking at the details.  Serious mounts attach to the telescope with a standard 'Vixen dovetail' system, while entry level telescopes are attached to their mount in a variety of ways.  Looking at a picture of the Celestron 50az, you might need to make up some kind of adaptor.  In principle, you could obtain a dovetail bar and fix it to your scope with tube rings, but this system is not normally used with such small diameter scopes.  I would suggest seeing if a more substantial camera-style tripod would work, or try making a mount, or consider upgrading the whole outfit.

GoTo or no GoTo is a personal choice. 

A few notes: GoTo does not equal wifi. You can use a handset.  The ease of setup varies hugely depending on the exact design and software - setting up a Nexstar alt-az mount with GPS is quick and easy, while an equatorial Synscan (without GoTo) will be much more demanding.

GoTo is particularly useful for finding faint objects and/or finding objects in urban skies.  I have experienced the frustration of having an 8" manual Newtonian and being able to find hardly anything with it.

A GoTo mount is not necessarily an astrophotography mount. If you want to do astrophotography, buy a telescope and mount suitable for astrophotography, otherwise you wil be limiting what you can do in this direction.

At the entry level, mounts may be manual, motorized or GoTo (and often rather wobbly). Beyond that, you can buy well-made manual mounts, and a few mounts, notably the Sky-watcher EQ3-2 and EQ-5, are still available in a choice of manual, driven, and GoTo form, but otherwise makers assume that you will want GoTo on a heavy duty mount.

I should not have thought it was difficult to find something, if you pick the right search term or look on astro supplier's websites. Try "Sky-watcher car battery adaptor" or "Celestron car battery adaptor."

With a Canon 300D you can check the focus while looking through the viewfinder.

Typically with a standard Newtonian the camera will not go far enough in, and the standard fix, drastic as it may sound, is to shorten the tube/ move the main mirror up, pushing the focal point further out. This is done in the imaging-ready 'PDS' models from Skywatcher.

A Barlow may help, but don't ask me how or where you are supposed to fit the Barlow with the camera mounted to the focuser by a T-ring.

I assume you refer to the C6 SE + wedge.  I hope you are not expecting too much of this setup.  The C6 SE is a visual scope outfit, and if you manage to image anything with it, that is a bonus.  I have the same 6/8 SE mount and IMHO it is not good enough for any serious imaging - too much backlash and wobble.

A lot of people try to put these fork mount SCTs on a wedge with great hopes and a while later give up and buy a proper Equatorial mount.  It has also been said in this Forum that the reason used SCTs are often available at a deep discount is that people buy them for deep sky imaging and then find they are not really suitable for this role.

Welcome to the forum. Here are some reasons for giving the Galileo a pass:  Not a well known make, cheap so may not be of good quality, has a manual equatorial mount that many newbies find troublesome, used so no warranty and a newbie may find it hard to sort out any minor 'issues'.

I would suggest that you set a budget and concentrate on models recommended here that are cheap but not a waste of money.  A lot of entry level telescopes are cheap but do not provide a happy user experience and possibly put off a lot of people from persevering with the hobby.

A common recommendation here for beginners is the Skywatcher 130mm Heritage table-top mini-Dobsonian,  which has a simple mount and most of your money goes to the optics, which are of good quality.  A similar model is sold in the USA under different branding.

Be aware that astronomical equipment does not come cheap compared with some other consumer goods and if you want a good quality telescope, well mounted, and with quality accessories, the cost escalates alarmingly.  Bargains are available in the used market but you need to know what you are buying and how to sort out any 'issues'.

I would not rely on the Latitude scale shown in the photo. The latitude scale on my EQ5 seems to be a degree or two off. You need to do a polar alignment.

Alternatives? Depends on whether you are determined to get a large GoTo Dob or are prepared to consider other alternatives.   Compared with other designs, GoTo Dob outfits do not seem to get used for much other than visual observing, which is fine if that is all you want.

Buying a smaller outfit would leave you more funds to  buy something else if (like another recent poster here) you buy a 'scope outfit with one thing in mind and then find your interest takes you in another direction.  Even a smaller instrument would give you plenty of amusement before you run out of things to look at.  

A SCT, while inherently more expensive, would be much more compact and lighter, and also offer more potential for planetary imaging.  They are often available used at a large discount,  reportedly because people buy them for deep-sky imaging and then find that they are not well suited to this role.

I'm pleased that you have pinpointed the problem.  I'd definitely use balls described as 1/4" if I were you. 

Yes, it does seem you have a problem with the azimuth bearing area.  As I said, it should be free enough to move with minimal force and spin through an angle under its own momentum.  If you search around on Cloudynights and elsewhere you may find some discussion of the issues.

These instructions tell you how to replace failed nylon bearing balls with steel ones:

https://nexstarsite.com/download/CPCHowToReplaceFactoryOriginalNylonAzimuthBearingBalls.pdf

But if you just need to inspect, the procedure is essentially the same.  In my case, slacking off the 45mm centre nut sorted the problem.

Depends on whether you want to just run the mount or an assortment of dew heaters, laptops, focusers, etc etc as well.  Anything that provides the right volts and amps should work.  Be aware that some PSUs (like the Nevada) will permit you to reverse the polarity, with terminal results!  Your Halfords power tank could be life-expired, as lead acid cells don't last very long.

I use an engine-starter as a DC battery power supply and it works fine.

A couple of tips:

Run the DC power lead through one of the lift handles to stop it flopping about and breaking the connection.

Slacken the azimuth clutch off and spin the mount/OTA around though 360 degrees. It should carry on going under its own momentum.  If it is binding, this will affect the tracking and you may also hear the gear whine changing as it slews.  This is a known issue and can be fixed by opening up and adjusting the mount.

A curious omission. You could use your actual latitude and longitude instead, e.g. Baghdad is 33°20'26.09"N, 44°24'3.17"E

I never heard of this brand before, so wondered if these models were any good. Here is a reassuring review: https://www.amazon.com/product-reviews/B00DBXBIK4?ref_=fsclp_pl_nr_2

In answer to the original question, a 127mm Mak would be better than a 102mm Mak, but if you can't afford the bigger one...  A 102 mm Mak should have a useful performance and work well on planets, showing some detail, and also work well on double stars and the like.  How much you see will depend on your observing skills, the 'seeing', and the quality of the eyepieces you get with it.

Few people have any complaints about the Chinese- made Maks from Celestron, Sky-watcher and Bresser, and the Levenhuk apparently comes from the same Chinese factories.

I bought an 8" SCT GoTo for half what it would have cost new. It was like new, and it came with a boxfull of valuable accessories.   I had the impression that this was the going rate at the time.

If I was buying a 17 year old SCT with a powered mount, I think I'd offer on the basis that the OTA could be OK, but the mount was of little or no value.

Have you checked the weight of a CPC1100?

I made a full aperture solar filter of conventional design, using Baader Astrosolar film, for a 127mm Maksutov.  The filter was sandwiched between two pieces of cardboard stapled together, each with a 125mm hole, and securely glued on one side to a cardboard ring which fits over the telescope tube.

Afrer some use, I found that the filter was wrinkling and doming out as a result of the pistoning action and trapped air when pushed onto the OTA.  Not too worrying, till a gap appeared at one edge, allowing solar light through. 😲

On dismantling it, I found that the film was only pierced by one staple, and was otherwise free to slide.  I stuck the filter edges in place with some adhesive tape.

Further to the above, some mounts are much easier to align than others.  An equatorial mount requires a polar alignment (mechanical) to be performed before the star alignment (electronic).  An alt-azimuth GoTo mount just requires the star alignment.

Then there are plate-solving accessories, of which Celestron's 'Starsense' is the leading example, which image and recognise sections of the night sky, and proceed to automatically perform the star alignment.

GPS, either built-in or as an accessory, will substantially ease the alignment process by automating the entry of date/time/location, a tiresome procedure which newbies in particular often get wrong.

WiFi schemes in which the user's tablet or phone replaces the handset, or a scheme where a laptop replaces the handset, are becoming increasingly common. Whether this helps or hinders usability is a matter of personal choice.

Finally, the GoTo software packages from different manufacturers differ significantly.  IMHO the 'Nexstar' system is easier to use than the 'Synscan'.

So all GoTo systems are not the same - it is far easier and quicker to align, for instance, a Nexstar alt-az mount with GPS than a Synscan EQ  mount without GPS.

Try the smartphone first. It probably cost more than your Heritage 130 did. 🙂

if you own a DSLR, you could try that.

Ideally you should use a planetary video camera and process the video to get a sharpened picture.

For under £100 (new) you will not get a good planetary camera, but there are various cheap ones for as little as £10 or so that may satisfy you for the present.  I have tried two cameras before settling on an ASI224MC.  You could look for a Datyson T7C, said to be a cheaper clone of the ASI120MC, or try secondhand.

It will also help if you can put your 'scope on a mount that tracks.

I imaged this late on 6 Aug with a 102mm f5 Startravel refractor, Celestron SLT mount and ASI224MC camera.  I used GoTo to aim the telescope, then plate-solved to check position and re-aim the telescope. 

On plate-solving again it was clear that I had found the nova, as it showed on the platesolved image as a non-catalog object whose position exactly matched the co-ordinates for the nova.  The lightly processed image is shown below.