Cosmic Geoff

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."

I don't know how keen you are on the 200p/ EQ5 combo, but I had this configuration for a while and I didn't like it.  The mount seemed adequate for visual use, but with the legs fully extended the eyepiece was too high at zenith (around 7ft!) and got into awkward positions, and with the legs retracted it would not see low objects over a 6ft fence.  I found it very difficult to find anything with it and felt it really needed a GoTo, but was not willing to spend that much on it. But the few DSO's I managed to find looked great through the 200P.

£450 does not seem cheap - there is a brand new 200p/EQ5 on Ebay for £519.

I have since disposed of the OTA (for a very low price 😦), and have upgraded the EQ5 with a Synscan kit at a cost of around £300 for another project, but have not tried it outdoors yet for various reasons.

I have a Startravel 102mm (which I think costs rather more than £165 these days) and a Nexstar SLT mount, and have used this combo with an ASI224MC planetary camera to image a few galaxies - essentially this is an EEVA setup. With live stacking and exposures measured in seconds, I produced some images that accurately imitated the visual view through my 203mm SCT - in other words, faint fuzzy grey blobs, looking nothing like the images captured by other people's long exposures.

To do much better than this, I expect you would have to spend the neccessary budget on a serious mount and scope, as advised (often) in this forum and in the book "Make Every Photon Count." Trying to do deep space astrophotography on the cheap is almost certain to lead to disappointment.

My experience of small refractors is limited.  I had a 70/700 mm refractor I bought at a Lidl store for very little money.  The objective lens, I eventually concluded, was no good, and the mount & tripod (a EQ-2 clone) too wobbly for my liking.  I also have a 70mm vintage Ross which does everything a 70mm telescope should, but is long, heavy and requires a mount in the AZ-4 or EQ-5 class.  So my advice is: avoid the cheapies and be prepared to spend a bit more for a quality instrument on a decent mount.

For reference, my 102mm f5 Startravel comes with some chromatic and other aberrations but is nicely made with metal parts rather than plastic. They cost around £230 for the telescope alone (no mount).

10 hours ago, newAstronomer said:

21 hours ago, Ricochet said:

 

So even a Skywatcher Telescope N 150/750 Explorer BD EQ3-2 would be out of the question for astrophotography?

Neither the telescope nor the mount (without drives) is particularly suited to astrophotography.  Trying to do astrophotography with inadequate kit will merely lead to disappointment. You need to decide priorities. Either aim for a visual outfit for 300 euros, or  choose a lightweight GoTo mount for 300 euros and mount a DSLR camera directly on it for some widefield imaging.  Have a look in the Imaging sections of this forum and see what kit the successful imagers are actually using.

Just to echo what has been written above, the Celestron Nexstar Evolution 9.25 is a fine outfit for visual use, and with a camera like the ASI224MC (not a DSLR), you can successfully do planetary imaging with it.  In this role any slight lack of stability in the mount is not critical.

Re accessories, you will need some additional eyepieces and possibly a dew shield, but no need to rush into buying accessories before you have given the scope a good tryout. (IIRC the Evolution does not need an external power tank).

As for deep space imaging, as has been remarked, the Evolution 9.25 is not suited for this (regardless of what the manufacturers may suggest) and if you want to do this, you should read "Make Every Photon Count" and then buy some completely diferent (and equally expensive) kit.  One telescope does not fit all uses.

Dobsonians have their fans, but as you are already aware, you have to do all the finding and tracking yourself.  People have taken photos with them, but if you want to image you should buy something that is suitable for imaging.

As a beginner, you should avoid EQ mounts unless you particularly value the ability to track an object using a RA motor.   Otherwise, an equatorial only comes into its own for deep space astrophotography (an expensive exercise) where it is essential to avoid field rotation on long exposures.

Some people like small refractors, but you should be prepared to pay a bit more for a good one.   I have had two, a department store one which was very cheap but the objective lens was no good, and a vintage 70mm Ross which does everything a 70mm scope should, but is very long and heavy and requires a substantial mount.  The modern ED and APO refractors are much shorter.

Like many of us, you will probably end up owning more than one scope, so pick something and get started.🙂

The EQ-1 is a very lightweight and wobbly mount. Since it is broken, that is the perfect excuse to bin it (mount and tripod) and upgrade to something better within your price range. You should then find that your telescope is easier to use and you may see more with it. Scopes can be attached to any modern mount via tube rings and a standard dovetail. If you don't have a suitable dovetail you can buy one of a suitable length and bolt it to the tube rings in your photo.

PS I think I have the same scope as you, and I use it on a SLT GoTo mount with stiffer wooden legs, or an AZ-4 steel legged mount.

The Skywatcher MC127 is similar to my Celestron 127mm Mak and should be a fine scope.   As for the mounts, some of these mounts may leave the Mak rather under-mounted.  Not sure what to suggest except that you view some mounts in a showroom and give them a poke. 🙂

The EQ-5 Synscan GoTo mount is a fine piece of kit which will mount the Mak very solidly, but it's not cheap or particularly light, and you are unlikely to be needing an equatorial with this telescope.   As has been mentioned above, the MC127 and ASI120MC (and an alt-az or EQ GoTo mount) will do well for planetary imaging, but will not be good for DSO imaging.

For serious DSO imaging, you will need an entirely different, and rather expensive outfit. "Make Every Photon Count" is the standard reference.

The Celestron C8 SE is a very adequate visual scope so the Evolution Edge HD version should be even better.  The Starsense does save time and bother when setting up. From what I have read, the Hyperstar conversion is really not for 'basic' imaging, and once you have got it to work you will not want to swap between this and visual mode.

You will want some eyepiees to supplement what comes in the retail kit, and no doubt you willl get plenty of advice on this, but for a f10 scope the choice of eyepiece is not that critical.

My C8 SE worked with a Nexstar handset, Nexstar+ handset and Starsense handset. I don't know about the USB version.

2 minutes ago, JackTaylors9 said:

Ahh I understand now! So in order to get a greater FOV I need a larger aperture than 76mm. Preferably one that has a 2” focuser?

No, the aperture is not relevant.  You need a telescope with a shorter focal length (faster focal ratio) and/or longer focal length eyepieces.  There are telescopes on the market with a shorter focal length than yours (700mm).  You don't necessarily need a 2" focuser as with some configurations you will hit the minimum useful magnification even with a 1.25" barrel (though faster focal ratio scopes often have a 2" focuser, eg my 102mm f5 500mm focal length Startravel refractor has one).   To understand about minimum magnification you need to read up on exit pupil.

Or if you want a really wide field, you could get a pair of binoculars.

41 minutes ago, JackTaylors9 said:

Ive been looking at wide angled pieces, I’ve found a 1.25” SWA 70 degree wide angle piece and thought that could be good for my scope. Would that suffice for ‘hunting’?

Which eyepiece exactly, and what focal length is it?  Whatever it is, it will not give you more FOV than you can get with a 1.25" focuser barrel. It will only give you more FOV than a simpler eyepiece of the same focal length.

I think you should hold off buying any accessories till you have some experience of using the scope.  A 76 mm scope (with central obstruction) is on the small side for looking at galaxies and gaseous nebulae, and it would really be better suited for looking at bright objects like the Moon and planets, double stars and some globular clusters and star clusters.  UHC or OIII filters can be effective for looking at gaseous nebulae, but they are usually employed on telescopes of larger aperture.

In principle, a wide angle eyepiece could be useful, but such devices are relatively expensive compared with the original cost of your telescope kit.  Be aware that your telescope comes with a 1.25" focuser, which limits the maximum field of view you can achieve regardless of what eyepiece you buy.  In this case an inexpensive 32mm Plossl or a 40mm 1.25" Plossl will both give roughly the same field of view and the maximum achievable.  The focuser diameter limits the FOV of the 40mm eyepiece.

Welcome to SGL.

The point of the original Dobsonian design was that people could make their own telescope from materials to hand, rather than buying one of the high-priced equatorial mounted telescopes of the time.  But time has moved on, the 'Dobsonian' has become a commercial ready-made design, telescopes (now mostly made in China) have become far cheaper relative to average wages, and only a few dyed-in-the-wool enthusiasts still make their own telescopes.   As has been mentioned, if you have to buy in components, it could cost more than buying a completed instrument.

30 minutes ago, Sam23 said:

Thanks.

Costing it up, I think the 150PDS and EQ5 GOTO might be a bit out of my price range....especially since its my first beginner telescope.

Are there any alternatives around the £400 - £500 mark? Such as maybe the Celestron Nexstar 130 SLT?

The Nexstar 130 SLT is a reasonable choice as a beginner scope outfit for visual use.  I have a SLT mount and can assure you that it is entirely unsuitable for astrophotography of any sort.  You need a much more substantial mount for any sort of astrophotography..

You mean the CPC800? This is also available from UK astro suppliers (along with +12v power packs).

It's a nice scope, but the substantial fork mount makes it rather heavy.  It's not something you could readily take to a site away from home. The rigid mount and heavy duty tripod make it very suitable for planetary or lunar imaging, and it also works fine for visual observation. The GPS relieves one of some of the fiddly work of setup.  If you want a lighter outfit, or need an equatorial mount for advanced deep-space astrophotography, Celestron have other options.

The stub mount in the first photo looks like it is for the basic Celestron red-dot finder, supplied with some Celestron SCTs. If you buy another it will fit straight on and be adequate for setting up GoTo.  If you want something better, a Celestron straight or right angle finder should bolt straight on.  Other finders e.g. a Sky-watcher 9x50 RACI (a good choice) can be used if you can figure out what bracket/shoe to buy.

By the way, 'Starbright XLT' is the name of the optical coating, not the name of the telescope, which looks like a C8 SCT.