Cosmic Geoff

I sympathise with your problems to a degree - I have an EQ5 Pro Synscan (an upgrade from a manual mount) and have never got it to work to my satisfaction.

I did not have much trouble with inputting the correct data, as it does prompt you. I only had trouble occasionally mis-reading the display font characters.

For the UK, time zone is zero and (in August) daylight saving time is 'yes')

The instructions do not highlight the start position, which is an essential piece of information. The 'scope should be ON TOP OF the mount, pointing to the pole. (yes, in this position the dec. shaft does block the polar scope light path).  I always attach the scopes to this mount with the scope facing West and the clamp knob(s) facing upward.

Trying to access a Moon below the horizon suggests the wrong data has been input. However note that while a Celestron Nexstar will not display below-horizon planets at all, IIRC the Synscan does, only to display a warning message when you try to Go To them.

To be frank, I have found the Celestron Nexstar alt-az GoTo mounts far easier to use than the EQ5 Synscan.

I hope this is of some help.

A Two inch 40mm eyepiece would give you a wider field. I was assuming you had only a 1.25" diagonal.

20 minutes ago, StarGazingSiouxsie said:

Let's say I centre a bright star in the 32 or 40mm eyepiece. I then change to a higher magnification eyepiece, say a 15mm, as part of the fine tuning part of calibration - generally speaking, could I expect to see the target somewhere in the FOV of the 15mm? (Assuming tracking is all OK, I had target edad centered in the 32 or 40mm eyepiece, etc) IE I wouldn't have to start searching for the target again? Or ?? 

This is correct. An object fine centred with a 40mm eyepiece will be roughly centred in a 15mm eyepiece.  But this might entail switching from 2" to 1.25" fittings, unless you have higher powered eyepieces in the 2" size.  Or you could invest in a cheap optical finder.  As I wrote elsewhere, you should only have to calibrate from scratch once, so little point in buying an eyepiece just for this.

I always use a 25mm eyepiece for both the calibration (occasional) and initial viewing of the object (every time).

This is not something you need to worry about too much.  You are directed to pick a named star from a list, so just pick one that sounds familiar (and preferably bright and not too near the horizon), and the software will do the rest, hopefully pointing the 'scope close to the bright star you selected.  For instance, Arcturus is bright, and currently at a convenient altitude soon after dusk.

If your scope has a finder other than the Starsense, and you have pre-aligned it with the main scope in daylight, that will make the calibration easier to do.  If you want to use Solar System Align at any time, you will need a finder other than the Starsense.

1 hour ago, StarGazingSiouxsie said:

3. Don't try to use Vega as a calibration star without fiorst checking your visional back + diagonal will clear the bottom of the mount when approaching the zenith.....

If the diagonal does not clear the mount, be aware that the OTA tube is NOT meant to be balanced; it is meant to be pushed as far forward in the clamp as it will go.  See the stock sales pictures of your scope.  There should be no problem aiming at the zenith with the stock 1.25" diagonal and 25mm Plossl eyepiece, only if you have attached bulky accessories (camera, etc) on the back end. 

A 40mm eyepiece will give you no more field than a 32mm within the confines of a 1.25" barrel.  Remember that, barring major accidents, you will only ever have to do this Starsense calibration once.  Periodic recalibration is recommended, but in this latter case the calibration star should be much easier to find.

You should use the handset for your next attempt, not the apps. Trying to use the apps at the outset is to try running before you can walk.  But watch out for the gap in the printed instructions.   In the FIRST TIME SETUP: CALIBRATE CENTER, at the end of para 2. you need to press ALIGN before following the rest of the instructions. (para. 3.)

If an alignment does not work, I always switch off power, switch on and return the telescope to the start position.  The manual is vague about what the start or index position is, but I always start mine with the tube horizontal and pointing due south. 

Yes, the mount will track automatically with the Starsense handset attached, defaulting to Siderial rate.   All GoTo mounts will track automatically AFAIK.

I assume you did not get the Nexstar handset as you bought the Starsense in a bundle with the 'scope.  Actually I prefer the Starsense handset to the Nexstar one, as it has menus of deep sky objects arranged in order of decreasing brightness.  Not so good is that you have to wait till it's fairly dark for the Starsense to work (align), or do a Solar System align.  The C8+Starsense is a handy outfit for quick deployment, as you can carry the whole assembly outside in one lump and get the self align going in minutes.

Do you still have the C9.25 on order, BTW?

I upgraded a used EQ5 I bought a while ago with a Synscan kit I bought earlier this year.  I did not have any problems, except that the fitting instructions are a bit vague. I had to search online for more detail of part of the process.  The result should be the same as the GoTo version of the mount.  If you want to save money, used EQ5 Synscans come up for sale from time to time.

9 hours ago, Team Lang said:

Any equipment needs to be affordable, this is a new hobby and finding another is not an option and yes I know I bought a POS but there has to be something other than over insure it and hope it gets stolen

Sadly,  astronomical equipment is not cheap and the lowest priced scopes available from department stores, Amazon, etc include a lot of rubbish that beginners will find under-performing, frustrating and hard to use.  The cheapest items from leading brands may be no better.  It is possble, with the right advice, to find equipment that is of decent quality and relatively inexpensive.  See, for instance, the 'beginners' section of forum sponsors FLO.

Bargains can be had on the second-hand market, but this can require the ability to tell a good one from a dud, an ability to make adjustments to unfamiliar kit, and some luck.

I don't know if it is possible to improve your Bushnell by adjustment or buying accessories, but ask us.

I think, with respect to the terrestrial use, you are proposing to do something which will work on paper, but not in the real world with a real atmosphere between telescope and target.   In theory, you could fit a Barlow lens to the Meade and get a 4m focal length. However, I have performed imaging of low altitude planets with an 8" SCT and found that the atmosphere is the limiting factor, and that adding a x2 Barlow to the imaging train is not helpful.    Many amateur astronomers find that there are nights in which reducing the aperture of their telescope improves the image.  In daylight, the warmth of the Sun will make matters worse than at night.   Single images will, I anticipate, be completely useless for your scheme, and you should consider the 'lucky imaging' video method used by planetary astro imagers to reduce the effects of atmospheric shimmer and distortion.

I have never heard of an 8" spotting scope, only a 5" (the Celestron C5) I wonder why that is?

re the mount you cite, it is not ideal for terrestial use, but you would be able to swivel the Meade's diagonal to get an upright image.  A SCT with its large focal range should be able to focus on relatively close objects.  But really you want a smaller telescope on a manual alt-azimuth mount.

Just look at the object's RA and Dec. You will soon learn what objects are likely to be viewable or non-viewable at any given time.

1 hour ago, Elio_C said:

So you're absolutely sure it wouldn't be a better investment to just get better lenses for my current scope? 

Not if it as bad as the other poster says.

1 hour ago, Elio_C said:

Actually, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think in in the southern hemisphere it's rebranded as the skywatcher heritage mentioned above? It just doesn't have the collimation tool and I don't think the eyepieces are achromatic, (Super brand kelner design) which is very annoying. 

Apparently the Heritage 130 and the AWB Onesky are essentially the same.  I assume that like the Heritage, the Onesky can be remounted on an astro tripod mount.  Or stood on a camping box?

This is typical of kit eyepieces.  If you expect the manufacturer to include two quality eyepieces and increase the price of the kit by  $100 AUD, that's not going to happen.  In other words, the kit eyepieces are meant to get you started while maintaining an attractive lower selling price.

Until you have received the kit and used it with the stock 25mm eyepiece (which isn't bad - it's a Celestron Plossl unlike the anonymous eyepieces in cheaper kits), and the 9mm X-cel LX, I'd urge you to not even look at listings of other eyepieces.

My opinion of 2" eyepieces on the C8 SE is that while they will gain some extra field of view compared with the lowest powers that fit in a 1.25" barrel, once you have paid for a 2" visual back, a 2" diagonal and a 2" eyepiece, the total bill may cause you to reflect that you should have bought an additional widefield telescope instead. Others may not agree...  In any event, don't go there before trying a 32mm 1.25" Plossl. That will give the max field of view that fits in a 1.25" barrel.

Don't consider the wedge.  A number of imagers have adopted a wedge with enthusiasm, then afer a while given up and bought a German equatorial. There was a discussion about this on the Forum not long ago.

5 hours ago, Shore Diver said:

As far as I can tell, this is what is causing the sliver of light. The tube that runs through the inside of the body is slightly skewed so that it does not perfectly align with the silver reflective dot on the front of the lens. Is this a problem? Or fixable? Forgive my lack of terminology, but I don’t know all these parts yet... 

Don't ask us. If it looks faulty, get your supplier to deal with it. It's their responsibility.

Another possiblility is that the eyepieces are not very good.  'MA' eyepieces are not the sort of thing one would buy in the aftermarket, and the eyepieces supplied with kits are basic, cheap to manufacture to keep the kit cost down, and just intended to get you started.  The same applies to the Celestron kit eyepieces.  When I upgraded from the 9mm eyepiece that came with my 127mm Mak, I found an immediate and obvious improvement.

It is possible that the Meade needs collimating, but Maksutovs rarely if ever need adjustment.  It would be prudent to check with a star test in case you got a bad one.

11 minutes ago, Elio_C said:

Anyway, there's not really any tables there so a dobsonian would definitely not work. A beginner scope with a mount that I can set up there would be ideal. 

Can you detatch your Dob from its table top mount and attach it to a tripod mount or camera tripod? There might be a screw hole on it that will engage with a camera holding screw.  The Heritage 130P Dob has a standard dovetail on the tube which means it can be taken off the Dob mount and fixed to almost any astro mount/tripod.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/heritage/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html

Some basic reflectors have a fixed primary mirror to eliminate the need for collimating (and cut manufacturing cost).

3 minutes ago, Elio_C said:

So to really get an eyepiece that matches the scope for better viewing, I would need to get a really expensive elaborate one? 

In theory, yes, but your tabletop reflector may not be up to it, so you could try a Plossl (usable in any future refractor purchase) and see if that helps.

As I wrote already, if your budget is restricted, the best course would be to upgrade to the 130mm Heritage Dob, which has significantly more aperture than any of the refractors you are considering.

In telescopes other than the beginner class, f4.4 would be considered a severe focal ratio, requiring a multi-element eyepiece rather than a 'H' Huygenian or a Plossl. For more information, you'll need an expert, or to read the small print in eyepiece listings.

Decent? Look at this: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/sky-watcher-evostar-90-az-pronto.html

or this: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/skywatcher-evostar-90-eq3-2.html

And these are nothing fancy, not ED or apochromatic and the mounts are not powered or GoTo.

53 minutes ago, Elio_C said:

I currently just have the H20mm and SR4mm and a barlow 2x that came with the scope.

I'd say that these eyepieces are junk.  At least invest in a decent eyepiece suitable for a f4.4 focal ratio reflector and see how that goes. That might cost $AUD 100, but you can transfer it to any 'scope you buy later. 

Ideally you should upgrade to the 130mm Heritage Dob, or to a decent refractor with a decent mount. Money spent on another cheap beginner scope is likely to be money wasted.

If Mistac is still with us, perhaps he could clarify what he has bought?

"Starsense" is familiar to us as a 300 UKP accessory which automatically aligns a GoTo telescope.  So far as I can make out, the same technology is being applied here as a smartphone app via the built-in camera to recognise the piece of sky the smartphone is aimed at.

Then what? I assume the telescope has to be manually moved so that it is pointing at an object of interest. How exactly does that work?

And is this scheme really any good? There are reviews on Amazon, but nobody has written it up on this forum and I am not aware of any of the specialist astro retailers stocking it.

A note for anybody posting about Meade telescopes: please include at least the aperture in your post as it is not obvious from the model name.

Apparently this one has an aperture of 90mm.   What Shore Diver describes could be normal for a telescope of this aperture, especially if it has not had time to cool down to outside temperature.  The planet is very low and the 'seeing' at this altitude will be bad. Maksutov telescopes in general need a dew shield to prevent dew forming on the corrector plate - telescopes of this design are notorious 'dew magnets'.  It may be worth trying alternative eyepieces as with other makes of telescope the kit eyepieces supplied as starters are of poor quality.

Even with an 8" SCT I cannot see a lot of detail on Jupiter.  I confess to not being a very skilled visual observer, but I cannot see much more than a bright disk and a couple of cloud belts.  Imaging with the same 'scope reveals more. 

Take care. Don't mess with it until it's yours and you are sure it is out of collimation.  If it is seriously out, a star test will look awful, maybe like a badminton shuttle. If you are in doubt, just hand it back to its owner as-is.

6 minutes ago, Elio_C said:

Anyway, if you're still kind enough to be with me, I'm wondering what the best (or average) refractor telescopes are that are within $100 or so of my price range are and some pros and cons? 

Preferably fracs with higher f/ ratios, but if that's not possible in my price range then there's nothing I can do about that. 

$250 AUD will not go far when buying astronomical equipment.  If you don't want something overly compromised, consider spending more (how much did your smartphone cost? 🙂)  The problem with refractors is that they do require a decent mount, typically costing as much as the 'scope.  The mount for a Dobsonian, on the other hand, costs very little.  The oft-recommended 130mm Heritage Dob would be within your budget.

Just as an example, my 102mm f5 Startravel is a short-focal ratio achromat, with a 2" focuser and 1.25" adaptor and has metal rather than plastic parts.  Nothing fancy, quite well made, but it costs 165 UKP (around 300 AUD) here, without any mount.   The Skywatcher Evostar range looks like a longer focal length variant.

19 minutes ago, hms_furious said:

Thanks again (I really do mean it).

Am I right in that a barlow isn't much use on this telescope?

Are there any EPs that help with DSOs? I know this is only good for smaller DSOs due to the field of view, are there any wider angle ones that would be useful?

 

Yes, a barlow is not needed as a good 8mm eyepiece will give you all the power you need with this scope.

You can get a wider field with a 32mm 1.25" Plossl eyepiece, or a slightly higher power eyepiece with a wider field specification (= more expensive).

Great deal for £50.  The mount looks the same as my Nexstar SLT.

TBH, the long 102mm scope looks a bit much for that mount. As well as being long, it may be exceeding the weight recommendation. I have used mine with a 127mm Mak (more wobbly than I liked) and a 102mm Startravel, but felt motivated to get a used EQ5 mount (not powered) and I also got a spare mount "bowl" and fitted 3 wooden legs for a permanent and less wobbly garden mount.   You could try something similar if you are handy with tools.

Ideally you want a better class of mount, (e.g. EQ 3 manual, motorized or  Synscan) but this will sadly cost, even second-hand, more than you paid in the first place.

Most people use an external battery or PSU with the SLT.  You will get a better performance too if you replace the 45 deg diagonal with a 90 deg star diagonal, even a cheap one.

I have used a terrestrial 45 deg diagonal for astronomical targets. While it handily presented the Moon the right way round, it definitely had an inferior optical performance on critical astro targets. For daytime use ony.