Greymouser

Or you could have just put it in the one post as an opening post?

Excellent, but could we have a link here too please?

Hard to argue with that sentiment! Welcome and enjoy the journey.

Could you put up a link for the pouch please? Also what dimensions is it? Ta.

Couldn't agree more, but with 14 million subscribers, he is earning good money being an idiot!

Whilst looking for a documentary: Natural World: Buddha Bees and the Giant Hornet Queen, I came across this on You Tube: I mean, interesting in a macabre way, but why? Oh yes, You Tube an 14 million subscribers...

I have only seen Hornets once, when on holiday in a cabin in Devon. There was a large wasps nest in the cabin roof space above the door, which was disconcerting, especially for my wife who is allergic to the sting. I told reception about the problem, expecting to be told we would have to move to another cabin, but was told we would have to wait a couple of days for them to get a pest man out, to get rid of the rather large nest. We should just leave them alone and get on with things. Fine then, though It would have been better just to move us out, rather than kill the whole nest... However, as we sat enjoying a glass of wine, we heard a loud; deep drone getting closer and closer and thought that is loud for a wasp. It was in fact the first of several Hornets which came in, entered the wasp's nest, after quickly killing off the wasps by the entrance, then proceeded to kill off every single wasp in the nest, then over what seemed like a short time, carted off all the larvae in the nest. They just ignored me, completely, even though I got very close to watch in fascination. They busily dismembered the ordinary wasps and carried some of the parts off too. The ordinary wasps did not stand a chance, even though they tried to sting the Hornets, they were just stung and dismembered in a short time. They flew of with their booty and we never saw more than three or four at a time, compared to hundreds of ordinary wasps. Thing is, there were House Martins thereabouts too, which we had seen picking off the odd wasp etc., but we saw the birds swoop in on the Hornets, only to veer off at the last moment, seemingly recognising how dangerous they were! It was also shocking just how far away we could see and hear the Hornets as they flew quite high, unlike ordinary wasps. We were told a few days later by a local bee keeper that Hornets can in fact be a disaster for bees, as they are also quite partial to munching through their nests too. He said though that some bees have worked out how to kill the Hornets, indirectly by smothering them with their bodies and making them over heat, as they exercise their wings. He also said that if you come across a Hornet nest, to not get close to it, because even though they are docile from a humans point of view normally, they can be extremely aggressive in defending their own nests, even to the point of leaving sentries around it, watching for intruders. Hornets are completely fascinating creatures, as are bees and even ordinary wasps. Ants are fascinating too, it's all the idea about the hive mind, as it where. I would love to keep bees myself...

Hello and welcome. One thing I would say is go for a alt az mount first, unless you have experience of an Eq mount, they can be daunting at first.

Hello from Cheshire and welcome to this very useful forum.

Hello and welcome to this great forum. Also you are one ahead of me, even though I have been stargazing years: I have not done any astro photography yet! 😀

Well, my C5 is a little bit better than a Mak127, so yes to me significant. I did question here, before deciding on the C5. My decision was also influenced by the fact that I already had the ST102, which has what is sometimes annoying CA: The C5 has no CA. I was told I would need a 100mm to equal the C5 in performance and to avoid CA to one degree or another, an APO, which was just not financially viable I am afraid. I supposed that the ST102 would give me a refractor fix, until I could afford better. ( If I ever can justify it that is. ) Until then The C5 will have to do, which is not in any way a hardship. My ST 102 is not as portable as my C5, though is still doable. Hopefully I will be able to afford a Tak one day, or find a decent Tellevue. There is something to ponder: Tak or Tellevue? Edit: You know, I have forgotten how to find out the true field of view! C5 at F 6.3, with a 26mm, 62 degree 1.25" eyepiece?

Thank you everyone for the useful posts. Now all I need to do is to decide which wide FOV refractor, I so much need and persuade the wife. Only to round the collection off, so too speak. Honest love this one will be the last one needed...

Hello and welcome to this great forum. I assume you are considering the 200p Dobsonian, only thing is I would suggest to not get an Equatorial mount, at first anyway with whatever scope you choose. A simple alt az is better and easier to get started on, in my opinion. John's advice is most excellent too, the local society will be a great help.

Hello and welcome to this useful forum. Perhaps you should say whereabouts you live, just in case there is someone else near you.

Not bad here too, but I am just too tired...

Actually, that reminds me of a fish mouth spreader I used to use, when fishing for Pike, back in the day, to stop the little devils biting me as I removed the hook. ( Very long time ago... ) I hope he has no Pike in there now, it would have to be tiny and very illegal...

Wow! Could you tell me the make and model of this little setup please, that sounds great? Also, I guess would it take the weight of a C5? If so I wonder just how light I can make my setup? @Mark at Beaufort I am unlikely to need to take a scope on a plane any time soon, so car or backpack are the only considerations, hence I had more choice I suppose. I did not even know that Orion made a filter, never mind a glass one. I was assuming the baader film was the best available, or better yet the wedge. I was toying with the idea of getting a wedge, but know so little about solar observing, except back in the day with my first little scope: a 50mm Greenkat and projection. I did also use the dreaded little eyepiece solar filter that came with it too. ( Yes I know, but I was only young, about 8, so there... ) I was surprised that some scopes still come supplied with this, why are they allowed to be sold? I got away with it as a kid, but they should probably be banned. I have so far kept my ST102, because of the thought of getting a wedge to use with it, at least until I can afford a better Refractor. How good would a wedge work with a ST102? @Captain Magenta I doubt I will be bumping into Stu anytime soon, ( probably a good thing since he is obviously a scope pusher! ) but it was always my intention to get a decent refractor, but as money is not as good as I would wish at the moment, I considered the C5 to be a cheaper option, especially when considering performance. I will get something like Takahashi FC 100 at some point, I have heard such good things about them, but they were just too expensive for now, 4 times + the price of a C5, never mind being quite bulky, so not sure about how mobile. Before I got my C9.25, I was considering the Skywatcher 150ED, but that is in now way a travel scope! Even less so than the C9.25. @iapa The collimation on my C5 seems to be spot on in fact, No fettling needed so far, but I am sure that could change. In fact it is very sharp, sharper than my C9.25, which means now I will have to check to see if that needs collimating, next time I get it out. I cannot compare the C5 to a Tak or similar, but certainly it is far better than my ST102, which has left me wondering if I should push that on.

That is something new to me, I was told elsewhere not to try using a SCT for solar observing. Everyday a school day I guess. @JamesF I did consider the 127 Mak, but it is a little heavier and takes even longer to cool. I will be driving mostly with it, or maybe backpack if I can get past a couple of problems, but certainly whilst driving, I like your idea of getting both and sneaking both into the car!

Smaller and lighter than a C5? My C5 weighs in at about 2.36 KG and is about 30 cm long, both without diagonal or eyepiece. Though I am aware that refractors are narrower. The Astrozap dewshield wraps around the OTA. which seems to take up little extra space, or weight. But OK, I get where you are coming from, but is your tiny refractor better than the extra aperture? I am not arguing, I am trying to understand. Also how much did your refractor cost, if you don't mind me asking? @Stu I guess I need to get a look through a decent refractor now, just to see how different the view is. I suspect it is mostly just preference, unless I want to spend a huge amount of money on a 4" apo, but perhaps I am just justifying my decision. As you say I do like it so, it is all good.

Hello and welcome back to the hobby. I am curious though, do you find that the C8 was superior to the Meade version? Or is there another reason why you miss it, whilst still owning a 8" SCT? Oris it just the mount?

I have not yet ventured into the " darkside " and use it for visual only. Until I win the lottery that is and can afford to do imaging properly! So many of the images here put me off joining such a steep; expensive and difficult learning curve. Not to mention my light polluted skies and lack of opportunity to travel at the moment to truly dark skies. On my C9.25 the view is improved with the reducer, over no reducer, which I found odd to be honest... ?

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reducersflatteners/celestron-f63-focal-reducer.html

Having been sorting out my perfect travel scope for some time, I looked at what other people decided to go with and nearly everyone, it seems, goes for a small refractor. Why? I have settled on a Celestron C5, ( even though I was considering a small refracotr too at first, ) which is light; very compact; seemingly robust and has a larger useful aperture than a small refractor. So why do most seem to go for the small refractor? I know it has a larger field of view than a SCT, but I can step the C5 down to F 6.3, which gives what is too me a decent field of view, so I am finding it hard to understand. I have been very impressed with the C5 so far and do not regret it's purchase at all. I am sure I will get a small refractor at some point, when I can afford it that is, because I will have to spend a lot more than I did on the C5, to get a similar, or better performance. So what am I missing? ? I will not even mention a Mak option here...

It is that sort of image vernmid, that makes me want to dip my toes in the imaging part of the hobby. My wallet keeps saying: NOOOOO!

No counterweights with either the Evolution mount, or AZGTI! I am not so sure of the combination of C9.25 and the Evolution mount, they are not a match imo, however the C5, even though the mount is overkill is slick on that mount. The weight is an issue, which is why I am now going to get the very versatile AZGTI, as soon as I can it weighs only 1.3KG, then a lightweight tripod and away I will go! I expect the whole setup to be less than 8 KG in weight including the odd eyepiece!