Cosmic Geoff

I see that this is a Newtonian reflector on an equatorial mount. That is a pretty generic arrangement, so you should try again to find a helpful setup video, or try to find and download a .pdf of the instructions for the PS1000.

The first thing to do is to take it outside and adjust the finderscope as michael8554 describes.

If you need to know what the various knobs on the mount do, twiddle them and see...  One knob should give a slow motion about the lower (RA) axis if you lock the RA clutch, and another should give a slow motion about the upper (declination) axis if you lock the declination clutch. If you free the clutches you can swing the telescope at will.  With the clutches free, make sure the counterweight is attached and the telescope etc roughtly balances about each axis.

Now you should be ready to look at something in the night sky.  If you want it to track by moving the mount around one axis rather than two, you have to do a rough 'polar align' but this is not essential for a first look.

A budget of £100-£150 does not go far when buying astronomical kit. A lot of the telescopes in this price range, even some from leading brands, can be of poor quality and be difficult to use. The Americans call these "hobby killers".  So you should pay careful attention to the advice given above.

Good video. It should help any newbie who buy one of these.

I have a Startravel 102 f5 which seems to be the same telescope, and I have an ASI120MC camera. Actually I have mostly used the superior ASI224MC with this scope, plus a SLT alt-az GoTo mount.  The results don't match what some can do with expensive gear, but I was pleasantly surprised with what it could do from my urban backyard.

Highlights include:

Image of starfield including an identifiable Pluto

Image including a faint galaxy I couldn't see at a dark sky site with my C8

Images of a couple of comets too faint to find visually here.

Image of M33 - never seen it visually from anywhere

Some pretty images of star clusters and globular clusters.

Some of the above are posted in "EEVA Reports".

Scope nerds may note that the Starquest 102 has a dovetail bar screwed to the tube, while the Startravel has the conventional tube rings + dovetail bar;  probably a longer bar.

The 10 mm eyepiece gives a higher magnification than the 20mm.

The finder scope is intended to help you get objects into the field of view of the main scope. You may have to align the finder (on a distant object, in daylight) so that both scopes point in the same direction and the same object shows in the middle of the field of view of each.

The Barlow will increase the magnification of each eyepiece by x3.  How useful this is, you will have to find out for yourself. 🙂

This is a very small and low-cost scope, so don't expect it to do too much.  The Moon should look impressive through it, though.

Thought it worth refreshing this thread, as I bought one and it was DOA.  With the button cell fitted (plus side outwards) it would not turn on.  Not an unique experience, apparently.

I could see that the negative contact, a flat disk, was flush with the surrounding insulation, which did not look good. Obviously the central disk needs to be higher than the insulation so that the flat button cell will make proper contact.

I did not want to send it back, which would have been a problem anyway as I am self isolating.  So I fixed a small piece of folded aluminium foil over the central contact, securing it with a small piece of sticky tape extending to one side.  Now the device turns on OK.

As some have commented, the circles are rather too bright.

6 minutes ago, Bc0428 said:

But most low cost mount is not rigid and will be shaky for DSo photography, is this the case for Az gti? Is it a good mount in general? Thanks!

I am getting the impression that what you really want to do is DSO photography, and that visual observing and planetary imaging are optional extras.  I have not seen an AZ GTI mount.  It seems to be popular, and can be used as outlined above but will not be a full substitute for a heavy duty imaging mount like a HEQ5. 

As for the filters, I looked up the IDAS D2, which according to the published info offers some relief from LED pollution. But it is expensive, and not a cure-all.  Before committing to spending a lot of money, you should confirm that DSO imaging will be worthwhile from your location.  A 60mm refractor will be underwhelming if only usable as a visual scope at your location.  You should obtain and read the book "Making Every Photon Count" which imagers recomment to all imaging newbies.  It might save you from spending money on unsuitable kit.

5 minutes ago, Bc0428 said:

if not, I could still use the scope for other spotting 

does this make sense or am I being foolish?

Which scope? It would make sense to buy the C5. It is available (here) packaged with several different GoTo mounts of varying degrees of stability. Or you could buy the C5 OTA only + a heavy duty mount also suited to future use on deep space astrophotography.

With (for example) the C5 SE package, which has an alt-azimuth GoTo mount, you could do visual observing of objects less affected by light pollution, and also have a go at planetary imaging.  Alt-azimuth GoTo mounts are less of a bother to set up and use for everything other than long exposure deep space imaging (which they won't do).

CLS filter - note that if your local light pollution is caused by white LED lighting, no filter will block it, as these lights have a continuous spectrum. Light pollution filters only worked with the older sodium or mercury lights.

I have seen galaxies with my 127mm Mak (~ same aperture as a C5.) But if you live in an area with light pollution, you will not see many.

I would not call the C5 'perfect' for planets.  For its aperture, it is well suited for visual and imaging on planets.  But a larger aperture SCT (8", 9.25" etc) would be better...  You will also need a dedicated planetary camera and maybe an ADC (atmospheric dispersion corrector) which could cost you several hundred pounds extra.  I won't say that you cannot image DSOs with it, but particularly with light polluted skies it could be a challenge. (and you would need a solid equatorial mount and maybe guiding).
It would be wise to look into whether you can do deep sky imaging effectively in your skies with the z61.  For visual its use would be limited though you would get some nice views of star clusters.

Your Heritage will show you some of the brighter galaxies under the right conditions.  I have seen some with my 127mm Mak and 102mm Startravel.

A red dot finder is actually better for finding faint objects than an optical finder, as you can aim it at the area where the object is. With an optical finder you will not be seeing anything and so will find it hard to tell where the scope is aimed unless some stars show.  The optical finder is only useful when you can see somethng in it.  Both types have their uses.  If you really want to swap the finder, this should be easy if your scope has the wedge-shaped 'Synta' mount point. If so, a Skywatcher 6x30 finder will slot straight in.

If you look on the website of forum sponsor FLO you will see that £100 does not go far when buying astronomical equipment.  As suggested above, on a limited budget you could get the Heritage 130p or invest in a decent pair of 10x50 bimoculars.

You can buy new telescopes for around £100 but they will be of poor quality and generally disappointing.

How much did you spend on your smartphone?😀

Your request is a little too general for a specific answer. 

Do you want/can afford a GoTo mount?

Visuals on deep sky objects requires a large aperture.

Some setups which fulfil your other requirements will be useless for deep sky astrophotography.

Requirement for planetary imaging is similar to visual, but different from deep space imaging.

What do you want to prioritize?

I think you should download the specification and product description sheets and read them.

You can buy any of the Celestron scopes without the Starsense if you shop around. The Starsense is an accessory which some dealers are bundling with the high priced scopes. Or you can order the Starsense separately at any time and attach it yourself.

Briefly, the Starsense automates the alignment part of the setup procedure. It eliminates a tiresome operation and saves some time. Whether this is worth £300 in your currency is up to you.

12 hours ago, cloudsweeper said:

For me, GPS and one- or two-star alignment is quick, easy, and effective.

One of my outfits has built-in GPS and Nexstar+.  The GPS reduces the setup effort by half, to just doing a 2-star auto align and I don't feel the need to have the Starsense on it as well. I mostly use the handsets for controlling the scopes rather than introduce another level of complication and potential failure.

2 hours ago, Geoff Barnes said:

Sorry for being off topic but I noticed you had 999 "likes" @Cosmic Geoff so I took the liberty of getting you the 1000! 

Thanks!

5 hours ago, JOHN BENNETT said:

I think the main question I have relates to the eyepieces mentioned in your replies. The use of 6mm and 7mm EP's gives 187x and 216x with no barlow. Is this because the barlow has a detrimental effect on image brightness and is it better to use the EP alone ? Also I note there is mention of some pretty expensive pieces using six or 8 elements with wide AFOV and reasonable eye relief. What particular EP was used for the photos of the moon and Saturn? The Skywatcher kit included a 10mm EP no doubt of dubious quality ( they sell for $10 in OZ ). Which suggests maybe I should consider investing in a quality EP such as the Baader Hyperion 8mm or a Luminos both of which provide wide FOV and about 20mm eye relief. In Australia these cost approx A$200. The Luminus has an adapter for direct connection to the T ring which would be a useful asset. I realise I am jumping ahead a bit but I like to research the issues ahead of time

Barlow: your scope has a long focal ratio, so the use of any Barlow will tend to be overkill.  (I don't use one with my 127mm Mak). You can reach the highest useful magnification by using eyepieces of practical focal lengths.  For the same reason, while you could use expensive multi-element eyepeices, you will find that particularly at longer eyepiece focal lengths, inexpensive Plossl eyepieces will work pretty well.  The 10mm Skywatcher eyepiece is unlikely to be of good quality though, and should be upgraded.

Let's be clear: you do NOT use an eyepiece for serious planetary astrophotography. Instead, the planetary video camera replaces the eyepiece.   In general, a DSLR is not used for planetary imaging, and planetary cameras have small sensors and high video frame rates.

2 hours ago, Squire said:

I'm not sure if the telescope will be going back, the self auto align doesn't work, and aligning to 3 stars failed 5 times before I gave up. (luckily jupiter & saturn were easy to find this morning). but I would like to get some accessories that would work on a replacement as well (keeping the same size 1.25 lens).

What self auto align? I assume you have the Nexstar system. There is a two-star auto align, where after you align on the first star, the mount will swing to near the second alignment star of your choice, where you have to centre the 2nd star and align on it.  The 3-star (3 object) align is no more accurate than the 2 star, but relieves you of the need to know the names of what you are aligning on.  It can fail if one of the stars is not on the prime list of alignment objects (not bright enough).

You should persevere with the Nexstar system.  IMHO it is a bit easier to use than Skywatcher's Synscan.

I suggest you look in the 'Planetary Imaging' sub-section of this forum and see what the imagers getting great results are actually using.

Briefly, the eyepiece magnification is not really relevant to imaging these planets. Also, getting the best eyepiece view takes some skill and experience. And yes, these planets do look quite small even at the highest usable magnification. A 102 Mak is on the small side for planetary imaging, though you will get a result. You should use a dedicated planetary imaging camera rather than a DSLR.  Once you have mastered the techniques, you may well find that the results surpass what you can see visually.

The Bresser camera you cite is not equivalent to a DSLR. It appears to be a video camera designed for planetary imaging - the basic principle being to take a video and then process it to get a single image with the atmospheric shimmer edited out. For its maximum exposure, you'd need to find a data sheet.  Given the price, I would not expect more than modest results from this camera.

26 minutes ago, Crignog said:

It's an equatorial mount and I'm going to be buying the RA motor drive for tracking, so that should enable longer exposures?

In principle, yes, but as the Starquest appears to be a lightweight budget mount, don't set your expectations too high.

23 minutes ago, shazstars01 said:

Starsense Autoalign

I also have a question on Starsense Autoalign. Would it be advisable to use it on the refractor for any sort of star alignment? I have read it's much more important on the SCTs especially if you are starting out, but on the refractors the star alignment is much more simple. My understanding is the Starsense is purely for plate solving/star alignment, it is not an auto-guider camera.

I am not sure if you have understood what the Starsense actually does. Apologies if you do.  It points its camera (and attached scope, etc) to various points of the sky, resolving stars and doing plate-solves, till it has calculated an alignment and declares that it is ready. Essentially it automates the 2-star/3 object align you would have to do manually if you did not have the device.  Reports indicate that not everybody has happy experience of it, but when it works it is a great convenience, eliminating a tiresome procedure and instead allowing the owner to fetch some more gear while it does its thing.

Whether it is attached to a refractor or a SCT does not seem relevant as the scope is passive while the Starsense is running.  It is not possible to get a feed out from the Starsense for any other purpose such as imaging or guiding.

15 hours ago, shazstars01 said:

1. The size comparison. I have read that the size of the AVX mount + tripod setup is considerably larger than the SE/Evo mount + tripod setup. Has anyone seen any pictures comparing size? I have tried for a while on Google but nothing. Sadly at the moment with lockdown I can't even go to any local scope shops to see in the flesh/check weight etc. 

2. The moving and setup comparison. I have read that it's recommended to not move the AVX mount + scope + tripod (say from my living room to the garden), rather each time it would need to be dismantled and re-assembled. Whereas with the SE or Evo, it's a simple move with scope + mount + tripod all attached. 

I'm not sure what you mean by 'size'. Fully extended the AVX will take up a fair amount of space. But if you check the spec you will see that the AVX is pretty heavy and I imagine to get it indoors you would at least take off the OTA, take off the spreader tray, take off the 11lb counterweight, fold in the tripod legs and lug its 46lb weight indoors. Propped against a wall it will not be taking up much floor space.

I would not like to move a fully assembled AVX + scope even a couple of feet.  As well as being really heavy it will have stuff up top that might swing around and whack you or get damaged. Only sensible if you can get it on wheels as a few other people have done with heavy setups, and have a clear run to a garage. The leg spread will be too wide to get through a standard door.

15 hours ago, shazstars01 said:

1. The size comparison. I have read that the size of the AVX mount + tripod setup is considerably larger than the SE/Evo mount + tripod setup. Has anyone seen any pictures comparing size? I have tried for a while on Google but nothing. Sadly at the moment with lockdown I can't even go to any local scope shops to see in the flesh/check weight etc. 

2. The moving and setup comparison. I have read that it's recommended to not move the AVX mount + scope + tripod (say from my living room to the garden), rather each time it would need to be dismantled and re-assembled. Whereas with the SE or Evo, it's a simple move with scope + mount + tripod all attached. 

There's lots to learn.  I used to have a similar setup, but not GoTo.

If you want to view anything near the zenith, you will have to retract those tripod legs.  And if you have occasion to use the finder near the zenith, it makes things much easier if you replace the straight-thru finder with a right-angle or RACI type.  And, in common with other larger scopes with higher powered finders e.g. 9x50, it is helpful to add a red dot or suchlike wide angle finder to get the scope roughly aimed and the sought object into the finder field.

My Nexstar 127 SLT has been relatively trouble free. Asides from "wrong input data" a possible cause is low battery voltage or bad connection at the power plug. It is much better to use an external power pack rather than using internal dry batteries.

If you know your bright stars, it is quicker to use an auto 2-star align, and this seems just as accurate as the skyalign.

To answer some of your questions:

Unless you have the mount permanently set up, you will have to polar align each time you set up. But how accurately? For general visual observing or planetary imaging a rough align should suffice, but for long exposure deep space imaging it should be polar aligned as accurately as you can get it.

For the kind of observing and imaging I do, I have regarded polar alignment and equatorial mounts as a nuisance to be avoided if at all possible.  However a solid mount like the AVX should cover all bases in the planetary and deep space long exposure imaging departments. (note that you don't need an EQ for planetary imaging as a Goto alt-az will work just fine).

The Nexstar 6 SCT is a fine instrument for visual observing and planetary imaging, though for the latter you could consider going up a size to the C8.  But you would struggle to use it for deep space imaging, and all the advice points to using a small APO or ED refractor for this.

I have the Starsense attached to my alt-az mounted C8, and have found it a great help in avoiding annoying faff each time I set up.

In short, if you don't want to do deep space imaging you could go with the C6 Evo, but if you do want to do deep space imaging you should think in terms of a heavy EQ mount and a small APO or ED scope.

I have wondered about alt-az Goto mounts in this range in the past.  It seems that there isn't anything other than an Ioptron AZ Mount Pro or a Skywatcher AZ-EQ5GT, which cost twice as much as a 6" Mak. Or you could look out for an unwanted Celestron C8 SE or Evolution mount.

In the absence of any mount, the most sensible budget option would seem to be the EQ3 Pro Synscan, at around £400, which supports 7Kg (visual).

Beginners frequently express an interest in astrophotography.  With equal frequency we have to point out that attempts to do astrophotography with budget visual telescopes are doomed to disappointment.  The requirements for deep space astrophotography are quite different, and much more exacting for the mount, where it has to hold the telescope and camera completely steady for long periods of time with a high degree of precision.  A heavy and expensive GoTo mount is the basic requirement. Planetary imaging is another ballgame with different requirements, and if you look at what planetary imagers actually use, it is mostly large aperture SCTs.

Many Newtonian telescopes will not bring a DSLR camera to focus unless the telescope is specially modified for astrophotography (PDS).  If you buy the Skywatcher 130PDS, apparently this is is suitable for astrophotography if mounted on an EQ-6 mount or similar.

I have taken a lot of short exposure & live stacked images using alt-azimuth GoTo mounts and planetary cameras, but this is because that was the kit I had rather than by planning.

I suggest you forget about astrophotography for the present, and read the book "Make Every Photon Count."