Alan64

I contacted Astromania via e-mail on August 8th, 2021. On the following day, August 9th, I received this reply... It was a 50/50 chance prior to opening the box. It was either going to be the good, new reticle...or the bad, old reticle... ...the new reticle, with the clock-markings for Polaris, and reputedly more accurate. I now have two, new, differing polar-scopes for this mount.

I have an EQ-1, and one that I "hyper tuned"... The wooden legs help a bit for stability. Leaving the tripod's legs in their retracted position also helps. The C90 Maksutov there, on the right, seems comfortably perched upon it. An EQ-1 is actually better designed and manufactured than an EQ-2, the latter being the next step up in size. From an EQ-1, the next step up is to an EQ-5, I dare say. The mount is really only suitable, and fun to use, with rather small telescopes, like that C90, and this 50/600 achromat... The mount that one is perched upon is an AZ1-class mount, and the alt-azimuthal equivalent to an EQ-1. Yea, and this 70/300, the wee tyke, would most decidedly have a blast spending quality-time upon an EQ-1... Don't throw the mount away. Set it aside instead, packed within a box or other, and revisit it in future, with a smaller telescope attached of course. An EQ-1 is also ideal with just a camera attached, and motorised. But in order to motorise it, without burning up the motor, the mount oft requires adjusting.

Hello Prabal, Have you removed the mirrors and cleaned them yet? That must be done very carefully. I don't see any flaking of the surface. You might just be pleasantly surprised, in a good way, after you clean them. Simply research "cleaning Newtonian mirror" online.

I was able to wrangle a spare mount-head from Meade, under warranty, for the wonky DEC-shaft I had detailed previously, and that includes that part of the mount-head in addition. I will try swapping that out, first, but I'm going to stick with my original solution if the other proves defective as well. At present, however, this EQ-2 is on the "back burner", so to speak, way back. It has been more difficult than my EQ-1 which has been completed, aside from a very slight adjustment I wish to make to the worm/worm-block in relation to the RA worm-gear.

Hello, I think it's wonderful what you're trying to accomplish here. Have a look at this computerised push-to kit... https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1540261-REG/celestron_22460_starsense_explorer_dx_102.html You would use a "smartphone" to locate objects to observe, and by pushing the telescope by hand. If you can collimate, or learn to collimate a Newtonian... https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1466512-REG/sky_watcher_s11705_heritage_130mm_f_5_tabletop.html/?ap=y&ap=y&smp=y&smp=y&lsft=BI%3A514&gclid=CjwKCAjwmeiIBhA6EiwA-uaeFY0j1SZfB8Vk06e9jOdckMEcqZMLXt4eVghtu9hAsgWYARLIn1b9tBoCtvMQAvD_BwE Whichever kit you decide to choose, not necessarily those two, we can also suggest eyepieces and accessories to enhance the experience.

I do hope you get the telescope collimated to where you might enjoy powers in excess of 300x, and not just on the Moon. The 200P-DS is a really nice Newtonian.

I am so very happy to have the honour of replying to you here, as I think it's wonderful what you're trying to achieve. You do want a motorised mount for taking images and videos. There's no question about that, although it is possible to do such without a motor, and as I have done. An alt-azimuth mount is easier to use, over the EQ-2 equatorial mount that comes with the Sky-Watcher kit, but the only motorised alt-azimuth mounts are those like the Celestron SLT, which are computerised go-to mounts. They are more costly, and have a learning-curve. The SLT, however, does not allow for manual motions, by hand. The Sky-Watcher EQ-2 does, but an equatorial has learning-curve as well. An EQ-2 mount-head may arrive needing adjustment, and before attaching a motor-drive. The go-to alt-azimuths usually do not require adjusting upon arrival. RVO suggested well, in your case, and per your budget. There is this go-to alt-azimuth... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth-astronomy-mounts/sky-watcher-az-gti-wifi-alt-az-mount-tripod.html That one features "Freedom Find", which will allow you to use the mount manually. It is wi-fi enabled, to control the mount with a "smartphone". You can bypass using a "smartphone" by purchasing a hand-controller separately. You then attach the telescope of your choice. Then, there is this, with that same mount, but with a 130mm f/5 Newtonian... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/sky-watcher-explorer-130ps-az-gti.html Keep in mind that reflectors, Newtonians, and Maksutovs, require collimating, aligning, at times; a Maksutov, the least often. Then, there is this go-to kit, but without being able to control it manually, like the SLT... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/az-goto/skywatcher-explorer-130p-synscan-az-goto.html

Get another box, naturally, of course.

No problem, as you have eleven more in the box.

You simply eat out the centre until it fits over the knob.

I just checked the width of my own, and they are M4 screws. In theory, you can have them as long as you want, a kilometre long even, as long as they don't flex or sway into the view.

I have a 150mm f/5 Newtonian, and manufactured by the same company, Synta. My own is one of Synta's basic models, and with a plastic 1.25" focusser... But the interior is nigh the same as your own. One thing that can help make collimating that much easier, is to replace the three secondary set-screws with thumbscrew-like screws... The set-screws are at M4 or other, I'm not certain. You simply take one to your local hardware, have it sized, and get three of the other type. You'll then have finger-tip control whilst adjusting them, and in using a tool only to tighten them afterwards. In that the secondary-assembly gives the most fits, we want to make adjusting same as easy as possible.

Again, please, do not consider an eyepiece-kit. That is a 10" Newtonian on a Dobson-style alt-azimuth base. All Newtonians, of all sizes, must be collimated, checked initially, then maintained on occasion thereafter. Have a look at these collimating tutorials for a "Dob" or "Dobsonian"... https://www.astro-baby.com/astrobaby/help/collimation-guide-newtonian-reflector/ ...and... http://www.schlatter.org/Dad/Astronomy/collimate.htm ...and another... https://garyseronik.com/a-beginners-guide-to-collimation/ The tools required... https://garyseronik.com/collimation-tools-what-you-need-what-you-dont/ I would suggest the Cheshire and/or collimation-cap. I use both to collimate my Newtonians, and to double-check the alignment of the system. This is an example of a Cheshire, and a superb one at that... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/other-collimation-tools/stellalyra-premium-cheshire-collimating-eyepiece.html This, an example of a collimation-cap... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/other-collimation-tools/rigel-aline-collimation-cap.html You may certainly consider ordering smaller items like that from the UK. My apologies, as I didn't make merry mention of that before, and when suggesting the 10". It's a bit on the exotic side, and in requiring somewhat exotic, and therefore more costly, eyepieces. It's also more difficult to collimate, at f/5. Have a look at this one... https://www.ozscopes.com.au/skywatcher-6-dobsonian-telescope.html That's a 6" f/8 Newtonian, and slated to be back in stock in early September. It would be easier to collimate, at f/8, and less-expensive eyepieces, like the ones within the eyepiece-kits, would play well with the telescope. It's a classic telescope, enjoyed by many over the past several decades. Instead of an eyepiece-kit, it's best to get eyepieces and accessories one or two at a time. For example, you can start off with one 32mm and one 12mm Plossl... https://www.bintel.com.au/product/bintel-plossl-eyepieces-1-25-inch/?v=322b26af01d5 ...and a 2x-barlow... https://www.bintel.com.au/product/bintel-barlow-2x-1-25-inch/?v=322b26af01d5 If you stick with Newtonians, over the years and decades, you can move up to a 12", a 16", a 20", or this one... That's a 72". Just imagine what you might see with that.

Hi Ash, and welcome. Enjoying astronomy may be done in many different ways, and Slooh does seem to be one of them. There are two membership levels. I would suggest the "apprentice" level, and to get a sense of what the program might offer. It is also possible to have your own computerised telescope outside your home, and then view what it "sees" on a screen indoors. I wish you success in your pursuit of the stars above.

I have finally decided on a solution for the 3mm gap, between the time-dial and date-dial of the RA setting-circle assembly... Previously, I had made two, 0.040"/1.01mm thick, aluminum washers for the latitude(altitude)-axis... ...but at the time, the order came with two of those sheets. One is unused, and it would be a shame to just set it aside for something unknown in future. However, I need three circles for a 3mm spacer, and the three epoxied together into one. I've now reordered same, from the same seller, and for the third circle required. There will be no bronze washers for this, I'm sorry to say. Now, I could've gotten a 3mm-thick sheet, but it would've been more difficult to cut, and would've cost a little over twice as much as the 1mm-thick sheet I just ordered. Then, I have the other 1mm-thick sheet left over from the first order; waste not, want not. Something special is on its way, for the mount, but I can't reveal what it is quite yet. At this point, it's up in the air, literally.

Paul, that is the clamp for your RA-axis. Make certain that you screwed the brass bolt all the way in, first. After that, you then attach the lever in its best position. I'm thinking that you have already done so, and yes, yours seems to be exactly as my own was, slop in the lever when unlocked. What you need is 0.005" aluminum or brass sheet. In height(yellow), you cut a piece from the bottom of the threaded fitting to the top, and in width(green), to halfway round the fitting... You'll need to measure all of that, the height and circumference. Then, insert the shim into the hole, all the way in until it almost touches the button(red). You don't want the shim to touch the "button", nor for the shim to rise above the edge of the hole. You then press it into place, into the threads of the hole. You want to begin seating the shim into the threads, and for the bolt to complete the seating afterwards. Add a bit of grease to the hole and threads of the bolt. You then insert the brass bolt and screw it in slowly, all the way down, then all the way back out. You may add grease to the hole afterwards, carefully, over the seated shim and threads of the other half of the hole, all round, then reinsert the bolt, then the lever. Done. Brass... https://hobby.uk.com/sheet-metal-brass-005.html Or... https://www.amazon.co.uk/PRECISION-METALS-250-Brass-Metal/dp/B002ZSGDVU/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=k%26s+metal+brass+.005&qid=1628749309&sr=8-4 Brass may be a bit more difficult to seat, when pressing it into the sides of the hole initially. Then screw in the bolt slowly. Brass may be more durable, and therefore, nicer. But if you want to play it safe, and easy, get the aluminum. Aluminum is within my own, but I may try brass in future. Aluminum... https://www.amazon.co.uk/Metal-Roll-12X30-Aluminum-005/dp/B0006N6W4Y That is the exact same pack of brass, and roll of aluminum, that I have. If it's still too loose, then go all the way round the hole with the shim, but without the ends overlapping. You can try all manner of widths: halfway round, 3/4 round, or all the way round. You can even use two layers, if necessary. For example, one all the way round, then one 1/4 round, halfway round, or 3/4 round, but those partial widths should be placed behind the first one that runs all the way round. Round and round we merrily go... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT4_k_w7ka4 Please update upon your success, whether yea or nay.

If you reside in the U.S., Surplus Shed has lenses, cheap, cheaper than cheap, and onto which to practice your painting techniques... https://www.surplusshed.com/search_lenses.php They're cheap enough to get two, a plano-concave, and a double-convex.

Incidentally, that kit is cheap, relatively, and good.

If I were an instructor, I would hand out the following telescope kit to all of my students, one for every two, or three of the wee tykes, knowing what they need best of all, rather than what they think they need. I would expect nightly reports, daily, and on their progress. They would be expected to do it all, including taking the telescope and mount completely apart, and putting them back together, yet in better shape than they were in before. I would be hard, immune to their otherwise harrowing pleas, with a strap in one hand, and a screwdriver in the other... https://www.saxon.com.au/saxon-1309eq2-velocity-reflector-telescope.html.html

Oh, I've had that mount for almost twenty years now, the one onto which the Celestron is mounted. It's my largest alt-azimuth. I'm close to replacing its plastic washers, within the two heads, with bronze washers. The one supporting the Meade is my smallest. I have only those two alt-azimuth mounts, and a few equatorial mounts.

It's this one, and that I had purchased in 2016... https://www.celestron.com/products/astromaster-70eq-telescope It has a very good doublet-lens, which is why I'm wanting to get a better focusser for it. With that one, there is very little if any false-colour to be seen when viewing brighter objects. I prefer long-focus refractors, and for that reason. Also, the long focal-length plays well with my eyepieces. Meade is, or rather was, Celestron's competitor, and just after Orion bought the company and its assets last June, I was able to get another 70mm f/12.9, a Meade, just the OTA, and to replace the Celestron if I can't get another focusser for it. This Meade's focusser is standard, traditional...

By the way, it appears that your focusser is a 2". With a 2" star-mirror diagonal, you can get a 2" 38mm 70° eyepiece, and for an immersive, wide view. I have one 2" eyepiece, only, a 32mm 70°, but it rarely gets used. It's a bit of a keepsake, as my late father had seen the galaxy in Andromeda for the first time through it...

My bad, and my apologies, as I think that the draw-tube of yours is of metal, aluminum perhaps, silvery and sort of a frosted finish.

No, it won't affect the views, I hope. The reason I say that is because I don't like my own... It looks like a sports car, no? <vroom vroom> It has tongues... Say ahhhhhhh... It's an odd, proprietary design, and I can't render the draw-tube straight and true, and with no slop. As a result, it's not lined up, collimated, with the doublet-lens at the front of the optical-tube. I've been meaning to contact Celestron, and to ask for a normal, standard, traditional focusser from their "PowerSeeker" refractor line. I can improve those, but not those of the "AstroMaster" refractors. I would be smoking-hot over that denuded draw-tube, but as long as you're happy with it.