Clarkey

You do not say whether this is motorised or goto - if it is not, then that would be the first step. You can modify the EQ5 quite easily. In terms of scope, either a small newtonian or a small refractor - you can pick up both quite cheaply on Astro Buy and Sell or on the SGL pages. If you have a camera already (DSLR or mirrorless), you can use this. If not, you can pick them up fairly cheaply second hand. Whether you can do all of this for £450 is debatable - it depends on what you want to achieve. As @Ratlet says, you could use standard camera lenses. You can pick up older prime focus lenses very cheaply on Fleabay. I got a couple for about £20 each. If you go widefield you won't need to worry about guiding.

Yes, but I normally align in daylight. I have tried aligning at night but quite often I cannot even see any stars. I have a Galaxy A32 for work - I'm going to try that. Looking at all of the comments about the Starsense explorer app, it does seem hit and miss as to whether it actually works. I think Celestron are being a bit dishonest in their claims regarding compatibility. Yes, the software might work - but whether it can actually plate solve is another matter.

I have had occasional issues with the OIII filter and halos - but not like this. I had halos on every bright star which made it such a pain. I use the same filters with a multitude of other scopes without any serious issues. I doubt the issue was with the CC itself as it was a SW aplanatic which generally has a good write up. I actually bought it because the Baader MPCC did not give me good enough stars. By the way - that is a cracking looking scope you have 'made'. If I had the time, it would be something along those lines I would be looking at.

No - I found them tricky to find. I ended up getting the power cable with a female end and a usb c female to male adaptor. A lot of the cables are 'intelligent' and won't work.

I was not really suggesting it was down to the newtonian (other than the fast optics). The reflection was between the coma corrector and the filter as far as I could tell. It was just another reason why I gave up on the scope - ever mounting costs. I think a newtonian design that is intended for imaging is not a bad proposition - hence my comment about looking at the Sharpstar hyperbolics. I actually got some good images from it - and pretty quickly. However, I spent a lot of time in processing removing halos. Eventually, I just decided it was too much work and I would look at other options. If I had the OSC camera at the time it may have changed my mind, as the filter reflections would no longer be a problem.

I can't comment on the Quattro specifically, but I did get a 6" f4 TS Photon - mainly for the speed. However, by the time I had brought a new focuser and decent coma corrector it ended up costing me near to £1000. Also, I got horrendous reflections from the OIII and Ha filter and which were a nightmare to remove. See below for the worse version - this is Ha only. (I could have brought new filters but this would have added another £1000). I ended up selling the extra's and now have a redundant f4 scope. I guess the buy cheap, buy twice is correct in this case. For now, I have gone back to refractors and the RC8. I would like a RASA when funds permit (or possibly the F2.8 Sharpstar) - but that may be a while.

I assume this is the 3nm version - I am looking at these myself. What was the old filter?

My phone refuses to work at all with the Starsense app, despite being on the 'approved' list. Not sure if it focus or anything else. It has never plate solved, just keeps saying it is unable to locate it's position. Looking at the screen I cannot see any stars. Shame as it is the only reason I bought it. I certainly did not need an 80mm achro. Unfortunately, I modded the mount to work on a standard finder bracket so I can't even return it....

Is this not the same principle as night vision kit (and other similar sensors). Very high gain but very noisy. I remember covering this at college 30 years ago. Not sure how it would affect well depth and bit depth though.

@iwols C'mon - time to let on......

My earlier comment was assuming the scope was a 200P, not a PDS. If it is a PDS version, then working with the scope you have is obviously a sensible option. However, for the 1000mm FL you will really need to guide for longer exposures which will be an additional cost and complication. Starting with the smaller scope, although an additional cost, might save a lot of pain in the long run. Yes, AP is a rabbit hole......

As @Budgie1 says, you need and heq5 as a minimum with the 200mm reflector, but even that will be near its limit, especially if you start guiding. As a 200p owner I would recommend getting something smaller to start 'serious' imaging. The 200mm newt is a bit of a wind-sock and is not really designed for imaging.

I would agree with @RT65CB-SWL that the Baader zoom is very good and I would also recommend it. If you are on a tight budget, there is a Svbony version. Although not not as good as the Baader, it is much cheaper and still gives reasonable views. I'm not sure what mount you have, but you could consider a small widefield scope instead of eyepiece upgrades. The Mak is always going to have a fairly limited field of view so a small refractor or reflector could be an option. They can be picked up pretty cheaply second hand on SGL and Astro Buy and Sell. Most second hand kit is in excellent condition as Astronomers tend to look after their kit. Another option would be to see if there is a local astro club near you. Get a chance to look through a few scopes and talk to some like-minded folk.

Surely for a Tak, it's a hot water bottle and a blanky 🤣🤣

Looks very much like the amp glow on my 1600mm pro, but slightly more balanced. As said, if it calibrates out - don't worry about it🙂

I'm still running well after 50+ years. What does that say about my build quality🤣 Seriously though, it is great to hear about good quality kit lasting so well in a world where nothing is really built to last.

You could try a bespoke cover such as these: https://www.bagsandcoversdirect.co.uk/category/500/Garden-Chair-Covers I have no idea about them, but the prices seem reasonable and they can be made to measure.

Mmmmm. Clearly I am over doing it. I have a large cupboard and set of shelves for my 'bits and pieces'. The rest is in the observatory.

Any clues yet? Don't say Chroma, I'll have to sell body parts.

To be honest, because you have steel in the tube and an alloy of some sort for the mirror cell, trying to prevent galvanic corrosion completely is tricky. One or other will be affected. Chrome plated mild steel is probably as good as anything - which I believe is what SW normally use. SS is probably the worse choice. Not sure how strong they are, but you could try nylon.

I'm not allowed to forget about any scope I buy. SWMBO makes sure of that🤣

Agreed. Also, given the 1/3 of the average signal which suggests a much narrower band pass. @iwolsI wish you hadn't done this; I keep telling myself that the filters I have are fine and I do not need to buy new ones..... I can feel my wallet groaning already🤣

Interesting that it quotes 'suitable for APS-C' but also says a 21.7mm image circle. Slight contradiction in my book. But I agree that larger sensors will not be good. I actually considered one of these for imaging but was put off by the small imaging circle (to pair with an IMX571). I do have a 150mm TS Photon F4 which I pair up with a 1600MM pro. I would certainly advise against this scope as it needs too many modifications to be acceptable for imaging - not least a new focuser.

?? You've lost me already. Fish and fruit??

I would second a couple of the points above. I use a Powerline adaptor for my internet connection into the observatory - this is just for the remote desktop. It's still not too quick, but I collect the subs on the PC and transfer in the morning as suggested by @ONIKKINEN. I use a fanless mini PC which generate enough heat to keep dew off.