Alan64

I don't know if this would apply to an "Edge HD", but here it is nonetheless...

By all means, get yourself a telescope. In that there is an appreciable amount of hesitation, take baby-steps in entering this, our hallowed pastime. Start with a kit like this one... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes/sky-watcher-mercury-707-az-telescope.html ...and for little outlay, in the beginning. Then, you can go from there. I started out, at the age of eight or so, with this 60mm... ...albeit in direst need of restoration, and forthcoming. I saw my very first object with that one, Saturn, and with my late father, side by side. Indeed, it was that very telescope that got me hooked.

The good thing about a bad situation is that such almost always ends up in hindsight, in the past, and then there you are with the thing of your dreams.

You could, I say you could transform it into a "Dobsonian", for ease of use; that is if you wouldn't miss the mount's tracking ability. I say that as I need to do the same with this 8" f/5 Parks Optical... They, too, came with a bullet-proof equatorial, in kit-form, back in the day, although up to 2005 or so before Parks went under... However, I had ordered the OTA only, at a custom-f/5. Its mirror is exemplary as well, and the tube of fibre-glass.

Yes, those at right are at 66°, and should play well with a/the Maksutov.

At the higher powers, there are those who prefer observing just a single object, the one they were after. Then, others like a bit of real-estate surrounding the object, at times encompassing two to three objects within the view, but that requires wide-angle eyepieces, and up to 70° or more. Another, and most pleasant aspect of our telescopes is that they do not require corrective, therefore costly eyepieces. I can use quite inexpensive eyepieces with my own, wide-angle ones even, and for a good viewing. This 10mm 70° won't work with my 150/750 Newtonian, too narrow a view, and to where I thought it was assembled incorrectly. I almost took it apart. Fortunately, I finally used it with my 90/900 and 70/900 achromats, and discovered it was not defective after all; reasonably-sharp, wide views through both telescopes... I've had that one for many years, and it will work great with my Maksutov, once I get round to it.

That's a perfect, proper finder-scope, and the mount is a go-to. I'm in the process in cobbling one together for my own, and from this 70mm f/4 achromat... As it arrived, it was only a 30mm, but I now have it opened up to 70mm, and as it should've been from the factory. I can't use a go-to myself, as I have far too many trees.

Hi, I have an ES 127/1900 Maksutov; same as the Bresser sold in Europe. What I like about it is that I can insert what is considered a lower-power eyepiece for most telescopes, and I'm there, at a medium or high power. I doubt if I'd need a barlow with it, but I expect I will try, and max out the aperture. As you go up in power, the image will darken, but 127mm of aperture is ample in its own right, and for observing a wide range of objects. Your Maksutov has a focal-length of 1500mm... 1500mm ÷ 6mm = 250x, and reasonable to expect a decent image on occasion. The main troubles are the atmosphere and keeping the object in view. Patience is key, and in waiting for the seeing to steady, then to see what few have ever seen. You won't break the telescope in pushing up the power. With my own, I plan on using my 4mm, which will give me a power of 475x, but only on very few objects, just for fun. For peace of mind, you'll want to ensure that the telescope is collimated, spot on, and that the optics of the telescope, also the eyepieces and optical accessories, were made well at the factory. The latter may be ascertained simply by conducting star-tests. Once you know that those are at least acceptable, then the atmosphere is the only other worry. A go-to, or motorised-only, mount is a great help in keeping the objects in view at the higher powers. Lastly, if you haven't already, you'll want a dew-shield to protect the meniscus, there at the front end, from dew, dirt and pollen. The shield will also serve to block out natural(the Moon) and artificial sources of stray light, all whilst attempting to observe the dimmer of objects. My Maksutov...

Celestron loves any vendor who carries and advertises their products. Read reviews of the ones in question before deciding, is all.

Well, I was quite far off the mark; my apologies.

When I "Googled" reviews of the establishment, I saw this right off the bat... "Did you mean: 'Samsung' Electronics reviews" It's a shame B&H Photo doesn't have an "Add to Cart" button for it... https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1605873-REG/celestron_12092_1_nexstar_evoution_9_25_telescope.html I may be wrong, but I think this is the first time Celestron has offered their 9.25" on the "Evolution" mount. I was wrong, as it's been available since at least 2015. Don't order it from Amazon, Adorama, Focus Camera, et al. High Point Scientific is good.

If you're close to Australia, there are quite a few astronomy shops there. These go-to kits are good for the planets and double-stars, and a respectable number of deep-sky objects as well... https://www.ozscopes.com.au/meade-lx65-5-mak-cassegrain-telescope.html https://www.ozscopes.com.au/celestron-astro-fi-6-schmidt-cassegrain-telescope.html For galaxies, you want at least a 200mm aperture... https://www.ozscopes.com.au/skywatcher-8-go-to-dobsonian-telescope.html Then, the bigger, the better... https://www.bintel.com.au/product/bintel-bt302-b-12-inch-dobsonian/?v=322b26af01d5

No, there's no need to rush out and get extra eyepieces and accessories, not in the beginning. Choosing eyepieces is not that far removed, as when getting prescription-eyeglasses. Each should be carefully considered before purchasing, and with the telescope's characteristics and the user's needs in mind. Eyepieces are fully one half of the experience. You can't use a telescope without them, nor the eyepieces without the other. The goal is to ensure that there are no weak links within the optical path, and for the clearest, sharpest images possible. You shouldn't need a barlow, but a 150mm aperture can realise up to 300x, if conditions are right, and for glimpses of what few people have ever seen. Up to 150x to 180x should be routinely possible, as it has been with my 150mm Newtonian. At f/10, the telescope will not require corrective and expensive eyepieces; for example... https://agenaastro.com/eyepieces/1-25-eyepieces/shopby/agena_wa.html Why, I got this 8mm eyepiece, salvaged from a pair of binoculars, for less than $10... I then took this afocal-shot of the Moon through it, through a difficult f/5 reflector.... Although, the live view, with the eye, is always sharper than that through a camera. Observing the north star, Polaris, is good practice, as it doesn't move, there in the sky. There is its much smaller, dimmer companion to discover and see. The larger planets will make for a fine show throughout the coming summer. The latitude ranges from 31° to 37° north there in New Mexico. Here, I'm at 34° to 35°, and the planets rise well up above the horizon for a good showing. The southern sky in the summer makes for excellent hunting, and for a variety of objects. Then, there will arise the desire to take snapshots of this, that and the other through the eyepieces, with a "smartphone" or other. Great fun, that is; of the Moon and other, brighter objects.

A 6" Schmidt has a focal-length of 1500mm, and a bit difficult with which to find one's way in the sky with a manual mount, although with the "StarSense" feature in addition, that should make things a bit easier. You may want a 32mm Plossl, and for the lowest power and widest view of the sky... https://agenaastro.com/gso-32mm-plossl-eyepiece.html It's not discontinued. It simply sells out often, then replenished. I finally got one myself... Schmidts, and Maksutovs, due to their longer focal-lengths, need a bit of help to guide them. This will be the largest view of the sky, through the 32mm, as the telescope comes... Not a lot of real estate to be seen at the lowest power(47x), but these types of telescopes do allow for greater ease in realising high-powered views of this and that, up close, and that's what having a telescope is all about. Else, you'd use a pair of binoculars. There is also Celestron's focal-reducer, which will reduce the focal-ratio from f/10 to f/6.3, also the focal-length from 1500mm to 945mm, and for lower-powered and wider views... https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/202121-REG/Celestron_94175_f_6_3_Reducer_Corrector.html/?ap=y&ap=y&smp=y&smp=y&lsft=BI%3A514&gclid=Cj0KCQjwvr6EBhDOARIsAPpqUPFVjD1t72csdblt8vRn7qo_9aRe9bVS3zoycStWcTDRvvdEzOEloI8aAvljEALw_wcB There is also this third-party alternative... https://optcorp.com/products/antares-f-6-3-sct-focal-reducer?gclid=Cj0KCQjwvr6EBhDOARIsAPpqUPFsImu7s9zUVW6AKO1iLavDhjaeXzueuiDoNt9rT5uUXnu3DDmna4AaAuFZEALw_wcB Still, it is at the higher and highest powers of which a telescope's aperture is capable where gasps of "Wow!" and "Look at that!" are heard. A dew-shield is not an option, but an absolute necessity, and to the point where they should be included with the kit, or to be suggested within any listing at minimum... https://farpointastro.com/shop/farpoint-dew-shield-celestron-6se-sct/ I got one for my 127mm Maksutov straight away... Now, there in New Mexico, dew may not be a problem so much, as it is here in my region, but the dew-shield will not only protect against wind-blown soil, sand or other, but will also shield the front of the telescope from stray, artificial, and natural(the Moon), sources of light whilst observing.

Yes, low-power observations are easiest, the lower the easier, but a telescope, in the first place, is for seeing faraway objects up close, else you would use a pair of binoculars. Per its focal-length, your C5 is ideal for observing at the higher powers. It's at the higher and highest powers where "Wow!" and "Look at that!" are exclaimed aloud, and where you see what few people have ever seen. I use the lower powers to scan areas of the sky, for hunting. Once I think I've found an object of interest, I increase the power. But when you increase the power, the view of the sky narrows. Also, the object moves more quickly out of view when looking through the eyepiece, which is why wider-field eyepieces are preferred. In addition, the views are less steady at the higher powers. Bumps and knocks are also magnified, along with the object, and to where it looks as though an earthquake is occurring. Ideally, the telescope should be mounted rock-steady, to minimise those effects; on a go-to mount even. I can't use a go-to, as I have far too many trees where I live. My 127mm Maksutov is at f/15, and with a whopping 1900mm focal-length. Even a 40mm or 32mm eyepiece provides a narrow view with that one, but I'm planning on mounting a large optical finder on it, and to help the telescope "see" better, for as it arrived it's blind as a bat.

There are these, and with a modest increase, to 60°... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bst-starguider-eyepieces.html There are many others, of different designs and marques, but not necessarily sold in the UK. Some can even be found on eBay, but you have to know your stuff. Teleskop Service in Germany sells some goodies as well. Now, that's not to say "eyepieces over filters". That all depends upon your needs, or desires, and for you only to decide.

My apologies for responding so late. You have an assortment of Plossl eyepieces there. Those are the minimum nowadays for good viewing. However, you may wish to consider eyepieces with wider fields-of-view. Plossls permit an AFOV of 50° to 52°. Not bad, not at all, but with the f/10 focal-ratio of the telescope, you can get eyepieces from 60° to 70°, for not too much more expense compared to a Plossl, and still enjoy quality views. Telescopes with longer and longer-still focal-lengths do not require corrective, more costly, eyepieces, and for satisfactory observations. If you haven't gotten one already, you may also consider a dew-shield for the telescope, and to keep moisture(dew), bugs, dirt, dust, and pollen off of the corrector-plate at the front of the telescope, the "lens".

Bump 'n' nudge is the name of the game with a Newtonian-Dobson, or "Dobsonian". The larger the aperture, the longer the focal-length, and the more often you will have to play said game. Orion(of California) and Sky-Watcher "Dobsonians", both of their parent-company, Synta of China, have in recent years been equipped with go-to systems, motors that provide automatic tracking. On the bright side, I have read that users do become adept at the manual motioning over time.

I would suggest a 1.25" 32mm 50° Plossl, and for the widest view possible. Your GSO "SuperView" 20mm that you have already offers a view almost as wide, but not quite. The 32mm(yellow) and the 20mm(red) compared... I have this GSO 32mm, and it's very good... https://agenaastro.com/gso-32mm-plossl-eyepiece.html It's a hot-seller, routinely going out of and into stock. Currently, there are only 5 left. Also, for the sharpest images, especially at the higher and highest powers of which the 5" aperture is capable, ensure that the Newtonian's collimation is as accurate as possible.

I have an ES/Bresser 127/1900 Gregorian, spot Maksutov. The Sky-Watcher is the same type. The iOptron is a Rumak Maksutov. It's heavier, with a larger secondary-obstruction, and requiring a longer acclimation period. Any obstruction will degrade an image; the larger, the worse. Such may be inconsequential or negligible whilst observing DSOs, but for the Moon, and the planets especially, the smaller the obstruction the better. Also, the iOptron is said to provide a flatter field-of-view. There is also the Bresser150/1900 to consider as well.

Oh, how lovely, a rain-gauge, however what a dreadful portent.

Just a few decades, and longer ago, quite a few telescope kits came with wooden tripods, even those kits that were small and inexpensive... That's my very first telescope, a 60mm achromat, and in direst need of restoration. Wood dampens vibrations better than aluminum, and perhaps steel as well. But in this day and age, after our seemingly having been jettisoned into the future, wood is out, and aluminum and steel are in. It seems as though wood for these kits has become scarcer, therefore more costly; or, its omission in the interest of conservation. I don't need a whole tree for my wooden tripods... Before I had rediscovered and restored the wooden legs for the tripod on the left, I had been considering cobbling together a larger wooden tripod, and from a surveyor's tripod; new or used, no matter, as long as they were of wood... A bit of DIY work, yes, yet worth the effort in my opinion. Newer surveyors' tripods also come with legs of fibreglass, and that can be preferable over aluminum and steel as well.

If I'm not mistaken, it's called a T-adaptor, the threads being T-threads.

This is the area on your 660 in question... The red-dot unit is fastened to its mounting stalk, and with that screw on the side of the unit most likely. If the stalk is missing, let us know. With these entry-level telescopes, the manufacturer is going to provide a good telescope. In the case of the 660, that refers to the doublet-lens at the front of the telescope... That's one of my own 60mm refractors. However, the eyepieces and accessories that come with these kits oft fall short of one's expectations. The images will only be as good as the weakest item, the weakest link, inserted into the light-path of the telescope, whether an eyepiece, diagonal or barlow... The atmosphere plays a part in that, too. At times, it can make one think that there's something wrong with the telescope when there isn't.

The original red-dot finder bolted on two studs rising up from the telescope's tube... If your new finder is the same as or similar to this one... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/finders/celestron-starpointer-red-dot-finderscope.html That's a replacement for a bad finder. You remove the old one from the mounting stalk, if possible, then attach the new one. If that's not the finder you purchased, we will need to see which one you did get. Then we'll go from there.