Alan64

I suppose that depends on how large of a telescope. For about 50 years, behemoths were produced in California, like this 300mm f/5 for example... ...and yes, they were quite costly. If you look closely, that particular sample came with a right-angle finder-scope; fancy that. But then, John Dobson came along, saving the day, and by putting that particular manufacturer out of business. That manufacturer eventually offered "Dobsonians" of their own making, but it was too little too late. If one desires a Newtonian larger than a 200mm f/5, then it is best to have it mounted upon a Dobson alt-azimuth. Incidentally, Dobson did not invent the mount that bears his name. No, rather it was another who invented the mount, and long before Dobson... Nonetheless, there is one thing an equatorial can do that a rocker-box cannot, and that is to cause an object to remain perfectly still there in the center of an eyepiece, and as if time itself had stopped.

Before John Dobson came along with his rocker-box, Newtonians were routinely mounted upon equatorials, for decades. Equatorial mounts track objects far better than rocker-boxes, if such is of great importance to the user. Observing at the higher powers is what a telescope is for in the first place, and where ease in tracking is paramount.

The EQ-5 is a manual equatorial, which can be upgraded with a single motor for the RA(tracking only) and inexpensively, or a go-to kit, in future. The EQM-35 is a smaller EQ3-class go-to mount. A 200mm instrument would be out of the question. A 150mm would be doable for visual and casual imaging, yet with a 130mm as the ideal.

In the long run, you'll be glad you had gone with the HEQ-5. Incidentally, you can buy that mount separately, as well as a 150P-DS, if you feel that the 200P-DS might be too large.

Indeed it does. I believe it to be an EQ3-class, and per Bresser's own website.

http://www.scopestuff.com/ss_fm30.htm ...although a bit pricey. I'd want the aforementioned for my Maksutov.

I can't help but to want to bypass the usual fare, and then to wonder as to viability of this 70mm f/4 achromat. With a 32mm eyepiece inserted, 9.4x... https://www.barska.com/30070-225-power-starwatcher-telescope-by-barska.html

That one appears to be just as long as my 6" f/5 classical-Newtonian... In the case of your own, the design was perhaps lengthened to minimise coma at least; and yes, spherical primary-mirrors do exhibit such.

Hmm, Telescope House has the mount listed as an EQ-2. It does appear to be an EQ3-class equatorial rather.

Hello, and welcome, To answer your questions... 1. You may want a variable-polariser... https://agenaastro.com/celestron-variable-polarizing-filter-1-25-94107.html That way, you can adjust the level of brightness/dimness, when observing the Moon, Jupiter and Venus. In the case of the planets, the filter would allow you to see their features better, and more pleasingly. There are many DIY mods that can be performed on a Newtonian, and to improve its performance within said environment. A 6" aperture is capable of 300x, under ideal seeing conditions, particularly when observing the Moon. The planets will have to make do with less magnification, say, 200x or so. Of course, that will depend on a number of factors: seeing, collimation, et al. 2. At f/8, and with a focal-length of 1200mm, your lowest power, for hunting the dimmer, deep-sky objects, will be limited to 38x, and with a 32mm Plossl. I'm afraid that that's not what you'd call a low-power suitable for the hunt, but it is what it is, and will have to do. In hindsight, the Sky-Watcher 6" f/8 Newtonian-Dobson comes with a 2" focusser, which would have allowed for a larger view of the sky with a 2" 32mm or 38mm eyepiece... https://i.imgur.com/zZtDa3w.png ...so much for that. 3. The planets become interesting at around 150x. 1200mm÷ 150x = an 8mm eyepiece. You may want wider-angle eyepieces, especially for the higher powers. At f/8, you can choose from among quite a few that are under $100. This one would produce 185x with your telescope... https://agenaastro.com/meade-series-5000-6-5mm-hd-60-eyepiece.html 4. https://astrozap.com/collections/solar-filters/products/baader-solar-filter?variant=8277637922860 You would want the 174mm-184mm, and per the measurement I just made of my Orion 6" f/5... Incidentally, had I to do it all over again, I would've gotten a 6" f/5 with a 2" focusser; spilt milk that is. You can't be too careful when observing the Sun. Take all precautions, and then some. 5. At 48x, with your 25mm eyepiece, there are quite a few deep-sky objects to observe. Some may want more magnification; others not. I would suggest downloading Stellarium... https://stellarium.org/ It's a great planetarium, and it's free. Enter your location and it will show you what's in the sky, day and night. Be sure to toggle the deep-sky object icon... You can plan an evening's observations with the program. Cheers,

I neglected to mention... I call my Celestron 127/1000, albeit at f/8, my Celestron "C5", a C5 being a 127mm f/10 Schmidt-Cassegrain. The former is an economical alternative to the latter. Therefore, in the case of your 150/1400, its higher-priced equivalent is this one... OTA... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/optical-tube-assemblies/celestron-c6-xlt-optical-tube-assembly.html Kit... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/se-series/celestron-nexstar-6se.html As for being of better quality, I can't really say.

There have been times that I wish I had, but I didn't. Nonetheless, I think it's important to do so.

I have a 127/1000 "Bird Jones"... It came with an EQ-1 mount, which is the very smallest equatorial on the planet. Consequently, it will be mounted upon another of my mounts. Your 150/1400 would be best suited upon an EQ3-class equatorial, if you wish to retain that type of mount for ease in tracking. For tips on how to improve its performance... https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/340294-celestron-powerseeker-127eq/ After I had done all that, it's a gem, and a keeper of keepers. I did not collimate it with a laser; rather with passive tools, a collimation-cap and a Cheshire with cross-hairs. That's the key to an exacting collimation... ...and the key to not having to replace it in future.

I use aluminum sheet and slats to strengthen plastic... There I had converted a three-vane cowling to a single-stalk. J-B Weld epoxy is used as the adhesive. EQ-2 equatorial mounts are plentiful on the used market, and require a bit of DIY to get them to where you would want them to perform, like a well-oiled gyroscope. I have one that I've almost completed... ...and using bronze-washers and needle-thrust bearings. Very little outlay is required, throughout.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gl6F12DWI7o The primary-cell is completed.

The primary-mirror has now been secured into its cell with five globs of clear-silicone, and spaced...

Where's the hardware now... I think I can see the nuts; can you? Nice 'n' dead down there...

You would have far better chances if you place the telescope itself on a motorised mount, whether tracking-only, or a go-to.

After the three screws shown above were sawn shorter, all three sets of hardware were installed... The extensions are now completed. Next, I will need to matte-blacken the hardware on the inside, along with other related areas.

To ensure that the bronze-veneered extensions do not pop off in future. these parts are for securing same to the optical-tube in the highly-unlikely yet not-impossible event that the epoxy fails... Note how one side of each of the nuts has been filed down, and so to clear the flange of the primary-cell.

The three, new mounting-screws for the primary-cell have been cut down, and to where they just barely "peek" out past their jack-nuts...

I was only wondering as to the nature of that Opticstar diagonal. I then found that it uses a mirror. You can use a star-prism instead with your 70mm f/13 refractor. I have the Celestron version of your telescope... I've used a Celestron star-prism with that one, and with my other refractors. A prism is more durable, and with less light-scattering when viewing brighter objects. This is the diagonal... https://www.365astronomy.com/Celestron-Diagonal-Star-1.25-in.html You have to be careful when selecting a prism-diagonal, as there are the Amici erect-image types, and the star types. That Celestron is a star type, and best for use at night, as is a star-mirror. In that the Opticstar contains a mirror, then I assume that it is a star-mirror, and will serve. The diagonal that came with your telescope is an Amici erect-image, and best for daytime/terrestrial use; birds in trees, ships at sea, that sort of thing. You can use it at night, but on the smaller, brighter objects you may see the "Amici line" of the prism, and as an illuminated streak across the objects...

Your 127mm Maksutov may function as a daytime/terrestrial spotter, for birds in trees, ships at sea, that sort of thing, and where you'd want the image to be upright and corrected for left and right. For that, you would need a 45° Amici erect-image diagonal; for examples... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/diagonals/skywatcher-45-erecting-prism.html https://www.365astronomy.com/Baader-Amici-Prism-45-degree-1.25-inch-with-24mm-free-aperture.html However, when the telescope is aimed at the sky, it doesn't matter if the image is upside-down or whatever, for which a star-diagonal will serve, unless you want the view to match what you see on a chart, map or app. In that event, you'd want a 90° Amici erect-image; for example... https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/antares-90-erecting-prism-125.html With any Amici erect-image diagonal, you will see the "Amici line" illuminated when viewing smaller, brighter objects...

I found my answer to a question now deleted.