Cosmic Geoff

I can't advise you about the vertigo. But I can advise you about mounts. I agree about the EQ-2 being too wobbly. An EQ3-2 would be a lot more stable, and is available as a manual mount or a GoTo, and you can get non-GoTo RA drive or RA & Dec two-axis drive kits for it. A slight caution about the EQ3-2 GoTo: GoTo can be great, but equatorial mounts can be a headache for novices, and ditto getting to grips with GoTo systems, and if you combine the two together... Alt-azimuth GoTo mounts are much less trying, but you would have to look at lesser known makes like Ioptron, as the entry level alt-az GoTo mounts that might take your scope will not be a lot more stable then the EQ-2. Ideally you should try to borrow a GoTo outfit or a better manual mount and see how you get on with it, before spending more money on something that may not fix your problem.

A small error in elevation would not cause your problems. The Celestron Nexstar software does not have any elevation setting at all. There has been a lot of posting here about Skywatcher GoTo problems; I suggest a search.

Any Goto mount should do this. But if budget is a problem, you do not need Goto for this. An equatorial with RA drive should suffice.

I have done planetary imaging with a C8. Which mount? If you want to do the job properly, you should use your HEQ5. If you want a seperate cheap mount, then it's up to you what you go for. The requirements for planetary imaging are not severe, as it does not matter much should the mound shake a bit during the video run. So an EQ3-2 will probably work (I assume you have checked the weicht of the C8 OTA against the rating of the EQ3-2 for visual use). An EQ-5 would, one assumes, be better. GoTo or RA drive? Using a mount with RA drive will actually work once you get the planet in frame. I briefly used an RA-drive EQ-5 with the C8 and it worked okay. But a GoTo mount gives you a choice of slow motion speeds on each axis. The SE mount commonly bundled with the C8 is not really up to the job - too much wobble and backlash. The CPC800 variant on the other hand is a great planetary imaging setup - very solid mount and really smooth and almost backlash-free.

Filters have obvious uses for imaging, but I can't remember when I last used a filter for visual observing.

I don't know the story of your C8 SE but they come with a decent Celestron prism diagonal, #94115A. I have not noted any odd reflections caused by this diagonal. I bought a Circle T prism diagonal for my 127mm Mak and have not noticed any issues with that either.

If your whole setup cost only £160 you probably will not be wanting to invest in an ADC (around £120). Correcting in software does not work as well as using an ADC - there's a technical reason for this, I'm sure. Planetary imaging is a field where giving it a go may be more instructive than a lot of theory. I have no idea how well a smartphone would work - I only note that some smartphones have several cameras in them and cost more than a lot of folk's telescopes. 😀 If you look through the Planetary Imaging section of the forum you can see what hardware the more ambitious imagers actually use.

I also got some colour fringing on my Mars images with the planet at over 40 degrees altitude, but took it out with the colour align feature in Registax6. I am relieved to know that I am not the only imager to encounter this. I originally assumed I would get a better overall result without the ADC.

Try it in practice, and you will find that the atmosphere is the main limiting factor, though the effect of 'seeing' will be less extreme with a 4" than with, say, an 8" telescope. Jupiter and Saturn are currently low, so from the UK you will be trying to image through a lot of unstable atmosphere, which also causes some chromatic dispersion. Often a Barlow, though theoretically advantageous in most cases, gives no improvement in practice. The use of an atmospheric dispersion corrector (ADC) is advised. It is worth investing in a decent planetary camera rather than the cheapest, as the difference in performance can be significant.

I set up my CPC800, with ASI224MC camera in the early hours to get some Mars images. There was cloud about but mostly Mars was in the clear. I did not use an ADC as Mars was at an altitude of 44 degrees, but the barlowed colour images stil needed a tweak of colour alignment in processing. Larger images are with x2 Omni barlow lens. Monochrome image taken with infrared pass filter. 5000 frame videos, best 20% processed in Registax6, and Photoshop Elements. Mars now has an apparent diameter of 19", getting closer to its opposition size. The South Polar Cap seems to be getting smaller. The surface features at 0430 AM BST match well with the Mars Mapper.

I had my C8 SE out for some visual observing but did not get much done (full moon). There was some action at Jupiter so I put the ASI224MC and the ADC on to take some images. 5000 frame videos, processed best 20% with Registax6. The result was better than I expected with Jupiter at an altitude of 14 degrees. The image shows the Great Red Spot, some nice cloud detail, the shadow of Io and there ought to be a transiting Io there somewhere.

Trust me, using control buttons is no more of a hardship than reaching for a manual slow motion knob. There are various GoTo mounts that incorporate extra encoders so that you can unclamp the axes and move the mount manually without losing the GoTo star alignment. The feature is called 'Freedom Find' and suchlike IIRC. Whether this feature is available on heavy duty mounts I couldn't say, but it seems to be increasingly offered on mounts intended for entry level and lighter duties. It's a feature I have managed fine without, so far.

IIRC it might be possible to update the Vixen Super Polaris to GoTo by exploiting its similarity to the EQ-5. The Synscan upgrade kit costs around £300. If this appeals, search this forum for relevant and confirmatory posts. For the same or slightly more money however you could buy a used EQ-5 Synscan. I suggest you buy and read the book "Making Every Photon Count" (available from FLO) before you spend a lot of money on unsuitable kit. I suspect that the Vixen is not particularly suited to astrophotography other than planetary imaging. I'm sure the EQ-3 would not be adequate to mount a long 4" refractor. Whether even an EQ-5 or equivalent would be adequate for your future plans depends on how seriously you want to get into astrophotography. Unless you are constrained by cash or storage space, I would advise keeping the Vixen and its SP mount regardless.

I did not see much point in transferring my Starsense to my CPC800. Since the mount has GPS, all you have to do after erecting the scope is a 2-star align, which is quick and easy to do. As for parking it between uses, read the small print, as AFAIK if you kill the power you will have to do the star alignment again.

Re your headline - don't buy on the basis of what eyepieces and accessories are bundled with your telescope of choice. With entry level telescopes they can be assumed to be cheapies of poor quality and intended to just get you going. The 9/10mm eyepieces are particularly poor. If they did bundle decent eyepieces with the kits, the kits would cost a lot more and you would be deterred from buying. The three telescopes you cite are radically different, and I suggest you think more about what you want to do, and with what sort of telescope. You also should think about how you want to mount them, and why. I have the Startravel 102mm - it's quite well made, but is a widefield telescope and not really suited to viewing at high magnification (e.g. not great on planets or the Moon). Under some conditions it shows noticeable chromatic aberration and field distortion. I have used mine for EEVA imaging. Mine came with a 45 deg. prism not suitable for astronomical use. I also have the Celestron 127mm Mak - it's a good quality scope that I really like and intend to keep. Works well at high magnification (if you buy a good quality eyepiece) The Orion will give you lots of aperture for your money, but what about the mount? If it's a Dobsonian, that will be cheap and simple. But people would not spend ££££ on expensive GoTo mounts if a cheap and simple mount did everything.

It may not be the cause of the problem, but 1.5 amp output seems rather low for a telescope of that size, when one often sees 5 amp recommended for the larger mounts.

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.

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.

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."