badgerchap

Something which routinely frustrates me and which I am yet to solve satisfactorily is the cable routing required for hassle free imaging. I've lost count of the times I've been slewing and the power cable on my EQ6 has been snagged out, or my cables have been too short and resulted in power bricks dangling precariously. I'd be really grateful to see other people's approaches. As well as that there is something really satisfying about a well routed cable. The cabling work done at server farms gets me a bit weak at the knees . So I'd be really interested to see what people have come up with in terms of scope-related cabling!

Have any hardware drivers been updated recently? These can be a pig with astro gear.

l second this. If I'm honest the vast majority of the time I spend "doing astronomy" is actually tinkering time.

I too had a good night with those two. More detail than I've ever seen on Jupiter, I think, although admittedly I've not spent much time on him with a decent FL until recently. I noticed particular detail between the equatorial bands.

Yes, that's what I've read about. I've not noticed anything yet, but it's probably too early to tell. I'm primarily using it for visual use, so I'm not too concerned. I understand the newer versions are less prone to it.

I rather did, didn't I? Apparently the chap had 12 replies in half an hour! It did require a 2.5 hour drive in each direction, but it was well worth it.

Further testing and I'm getting closer to a favourite. The older scope is really quite nice. The convenient controls and comfortable viewing are absolutely swinging it. Even if I could swap the newer scope onto the old mount (I don't think I can) I wouldn't. The 90s OTA gives lovely views, and tonight has shown me more detail on Jupiter than I've ever seen before. Got to 203x which gave some wonderful moments. It feels like it deserves its place on that old mount. Well done 1990s Celestron!

An excellent point. My SCT may be small, old and battered, but it's not billions over budget and stuck in prelaunch! In those terms I'm winning already!

Today I added a second 8" Celestron SCT to my collection, from sometime in the 90s (thanks for the ID John). This joins my early-mid 2010s version. They're both the black tube, but the newer edition has Starbright XLT coatings as opposed to plain Starbright, and it is also Fastar compatible, although that shouldn't affect this comparison. Also irrelevant to the comparison but very relevant to me is the mounting. The newer scope is sitting on an EQ5 with a wooden tripod, making it rather low to the ground. By contrast the older scope sits in its original fork mount on a wedge atop what appears to be a homemade tripod - if it's not homemade, suffice it to say that modern manufacturing has made some serious improvements. This aside this old setup is higher, not requiring me to bend down, although the height is fixed so others might not be so fortunate. So how do the two scopes fare against each other? I am sharing eyepieces and the diagonal between the two scopes so that only the scope optics are compared. Initially I have setup very quickly and not allowed any cooldown time. Firstly to the Moon, which looked marvellous in both scopes. If I really had to be picky, there is a very slight improvement in the newer optics. There was a very, very slight yellowish cast to the older image, but it was almost imperceptible and could even have been my expectation causing an illusion. Next to Jupiter, which may even have been slightly nicer in the older scope. I was able to pick out both equatorial bands and the GRS in both scopes with the 40mm. Saturn also was brilliant at 40mm and 20mm too, with nothing to choose between the optics. The older scope may just be a little softer towards the edge of the field, but being standard, non-HD Celestron SCTs, neither are wonderful here, but for visual use I'm not really bothered. If optics were the only consideration and I was really forced to choose, the XLT version would win by the narrowest of margins, but of course it's not just about optics. The ease of use and comfort of the older mount, the lack of counterweights, the ***battery powered!!!!!*** tracking, the natural eyepiece height and the very convenient handle put the older scope ahead in my eyes. Now. Financially speaking I'm going to have to sell one of these (and some other gubbins) to get the frac I've been lusting over. But which one?! Better do some more observing after cooldown and maybe even a bit of imaging.

Fabulously quick work, thank you John! Also gives me a whopping extra 14.8mm FL than the newer version! Watch out JWST

I already have a modern-ish Celestron C8, but I got what I feel was a little bargain today. Feels kinda 80s or early 90s in terms of build, solidity etc. Optics look to be in great condition, with nothing but a speck of dust on the corrector plate and a clean primary. Coatings are Starbright, but not XLT (as my other C8 is) The mount seems to run under battery power, although how well I don't know until I get it under a clear sky. Came with a tripod and a wedge too. Missing a 12V power supply and doesn't have a hand controller. Can anyone clear up the age of this? Also if anyone knows what hand controller I need to find for this, that would be really useful. Thanks!

Time, practice and learning are more important than kit. Even naked eye astronomy can be massively rewarding if you can learn about what you're looking at. Don't be intimidated by the incredible shots you see on here and elsewhere - as impressive as they are, they're no substitute for losing yourself among the stars of an evening.

Afternoon all from a sweltering Gloucestershire! In an effort to escape this oppressive heat I've been considering ED80s. The SkyWatcher is an obvious candidate, although I hear the focuser is a weak point. As an alternative I'm considering two Altair Astro scopes, the Starwaves 80ED and 80ED-R. I can't afford the triplet, so a doublet will have to do. I can find several reviews of the 80ED, which is an F7 with I believe FPL-51 with an unknown mating element. Reports are good, but my aesthetic tendencies are dragging me towards the shiny red 'R' of the pricier version. This is also an F7 but with FPL-53 with I believe a lanthanum glass mate. However, I can only find one or two reviews, none of which really gets to the nitty-gritty, particularly being short of info regarding imaging. The price difference is a couple of hundred quid, so I was hoping someone could tell me if that couple of hundred is worth the investment, or if I'll just be forking out a few weeks' family food shopping for a shiny red letter on the dew shield. Any chance anyone can save me a few hundred pounds or, failing that, persuade me into the prettier scope? 80ED: https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/altair-ascent-80.html?gclid=Cj0KCQjwgo_5BRDuARIsADDEntShLuINmJMlmwfWcQNfgx7mFFYfKTu4FHzrwJghjOQzp7tKVD6qCDIaAqQlEALw_wcB 80ED-R: https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/altair-starwave-80ed.html?gclid=Cj0KCQjwgo_5BRDuARIsADDEntSRNg-2FEJor3CaGjFVDK1mw2tPANHAmWMjk2I2r2LyEb13Otdp1RwaAlV6EALw_wcB Thanks all.

Thanks! They say necessity is the mother of invention...

Only just spotted this. Thanks! That's a great improvement!! Considering you had only one frame to work with too! What did you do?