Clarkey

Try it. It will work, but the degree of distortion will depend on how large your camera sensor is. Whether it is acceptable is a personal thing, but you will get distortion on the outer stars. You may find you have to crop the image to compensate for the poor outer stars - which then defeats the point.... FLO do a well priced 1x flattener that I have used and works pretty well:

StellaMira 2" Field Flattener with T / M42 Adapter | First Light Optics

5 hours ago, StevieDvd said:

Celestron will replace/provide codes only on evidence of ownership of the scope

Interesting. I still own the scope (or at least my son does) but the module is now on my Dob. I do not remember seeing anything in the literature saying the two had to be kept together. If I was to ask for a new software code and showed them the scope and the dock, would they give me a new code? Similarly, if I was to break the dock, would I be able to get a new one? I'm sure there is some bit of contact law somewhere that says 'NO', but it would be interesting to try.....

I have seen this plenty of times - not only in telescopes but plenty of other places as a lot of mechanical engineers do not understand galvanic corrosion.

It is difficult to see in the picture, but are the machine screws definitely stainless or are they some sort of galvanised thread? There appears to be rust around the junction of one of the screws which made me wonder? Also, for a relatively dry environment, that appears to be a lot of corrosion for an alloy. I was wondering whether it was a zinc residue?

ENS optical have one for sale at the moment. It is a homemade one, but looking at the inch thick aluminium and massive bearings I don't think it would flex.

Homemade Super Strong Equatorial wedge for Meade LX200 8-14" (ensoptical.co.uk)

3 hours ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

you need a GoTo mount

Not sure this is really true. I cannot find much in the sky - but even I can find planets. (Typical Astrophotographer - if in doubt plate solve😂)

3 hours ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

Most serious planetary imagers use a SCT of 8" or larger, or a Newtonian of similar aperture

True, but as the OP says, 'starting off' the Starfield will do, even if it is not ideal. I would say the only things missing are the camera and the barlow. There are loads of planetary cameras to choose from and the 224mc is certainly good enough. However, as @Astr0Kaz suggests, there are uncooled options that can also get you started in DSO imaging if you ever wanted to go down that route. With this kit you will not get the sort of images the serious planetary imagers are getting - but it is a start.

Depending on how strong you are feeling and how much storage room you have, you could consider a larger 10" dobsonian. There are lots for sale second hand - and generally well looked after. Also, within your budget.

Maybe slightly better condition than the one I brought from Fleabay. However, it was only £90. Little bit of fettling and 9 year olds paint job and TA DA!

On 13/07/2023 at 06:07, Franklin2324 said:

I’m doing my best to learn about agronomy

Although very interesting, I'm not sure it will help with the telescope🤣

Good advice above so not much to add. A good starter scope for planets, moon and brighter DSO's.

I have used the 8 position ZWO filter wheel for a few years without any issues. No possibility of light leakage as it is all screw in fittings. The 2" is just a larger version so I assume the performance would be similar. There is always the possibility of getting a 'duff' one I guess, but I think it should be obvious within the 2 year warranty period.

I use some of the listings here:

Illustrated DSO Guide - Deep Sky Watch

Not a wall chart, but you can certainly create a tick list. I use it for imaging and observing.

I am obviously a cheapskate. Food bag and elastic band 😂

Welcome back to the forum!

Cumbria is probably like Shropshire in many ways, but the reason for dark skies is the permanent cloud cover😁

I think NINA just re-scales the graph to fit the exposure. If you look at the statistics it shows the max, min and mean as 16383 i.e. swamped. What is the problem with the standard NINA flats wizard?

11 minutes ago, Xxjrhxx said:

Is this the one what you are referring to? I’d need a tripod to go with it, otherwise I’d get trampled on by horses and cows, we get 42 degrees here in summer so outside is covered for shade unless I go out into the field - is a tripod possible or am I best to stick to the 6”

Yes - that is the scope I was referring to. If you need a tripod, then the Dobsonian is not really an option. You can get larger tripods for 8" newtonians - but it starts getting costly and the Starsense part becomes an add on or you need GOTO. A 6" SCT is still a good scope and you will be able to see plenty with it. My only concern is whether the mount will be stable enough with the long focal length. Manufacturers tend to use the lightest mounts possible which are not really up to the task. I have no specific experience of this scope so cannot really comment.

There is a review here that might be worth a look:

Celestron StarSense Explorer DX 6" SCT Review (telescopicwatch.uk)

It also suggests the Astro Fi SCT which is a similar price to the Starsense DX, but has a fully motorised mount. It does take a little more time to set up in the field but has the advantage of GOTO and tracking. Personally, if it was me, I would want the tracking mount. Once you get used to setting it up it only take a few minutes and probably only a bit longer than aligning your phone in the Starsense holder.

For planetary viewing aperture and focal length is what you want - so out of these I would go for the dx6. However, given these are manual Alt-Az mounts (without any form of tracking) at long FL you may struggle to keep the planets in view.

Personally, given your location, I would look at a Dobsonian. Not only are they good for planets, but due to extra light gathering capacity, in dark skies will show you a whole lot more. An 8" Starsense dobsonian is a similar cost to the 6" DX but more versatile.

On a separate note, I was in Australia a few years ago, in rural WA. They were the darkest clearest skies I have ever seen. If you live in rural (dark) Oz, consider yourself very lucky from an Astro point-of-view.

2 hours ago, Grierson said:

contrary to Clarkey I found an improvement in tracking

I should probably clarify that the tracking on both my mounts is pretty good. Both have been stripped down and have had new bearings and grease, and the HEQ5 is belt modified. I typically get guiding around 0.6  arc seconds which is adequate for all my scopes imaging at 1 - 1.5 arc seconds/pixel. Even at 1600mm FL I do not have a problem.

I have an HEQ5 and an AZ-EQ6. In terms of tracking accuracy there is very difference between the two (when within design limits). So other than weight, there is little benefit in terms of tracking.

1 hour ago, Mark2022 said:

I think I'll just purchase the SVBony 80ED version at £45.99

If you can get any FF for £46 just buy it. Bargain in astro terms.

As a general rule the specific flatteners should give slightly better result than the generic versions. However, I am using the generic Stellamira FF with my 115mm F7 scope and the results are absolutely fine (in my eyes). The SM flattener is £79 whereas the specific one is £130. In reality you won't really know until you try (I might be wrong on this - someone with a better idea of optics may say different). Personally, for a small ED doublet I would try a generic version if the cost difference is significant.

FWIW I am planning to move my 115mm Starwave triplet to my HEQ5 this coming season. I was using it on an AZ-EQ6 but I think it should be fine on the HEQ5 with a 60mm guidescope and camera / mini PC. I intend to use the larger mount for a larger scope (RC8 plus ST80 guidescope). My HEQ5 has been belt modded and also has new bearings / grease so better than stock. I expect it to be fine at this FL - but I have not tried it yet.

3 hours ago, mftoet said:

during an exceptionally long clear spell

I have had the exceptionally long clear spell. Unfortunately, too far north for anything resembling darkness☹️

Very nice capture and processing.👍

I don't have a GEM45, but it suggests in the blurb a limit of 20 Kg. For imaging you probably do not want to go more than 2/3 of this which puts it in the same range as an HEQ5. I think the 250 may be pushing it. Not just weight, but any breeze is likely to cause problems unless you are in a very sheltered spot. Which Quattro? I assume the 10", which although smaller than the 250PDS is still big. Have you considered an RC8?

FWIW I have the 115mm triplet with FPL-51 and use it for imaging. Personally, I have found the colour correction to be very good and I am glad I did not pay the extra 50% price hike for the FPL-53 version. This was taken with the scope. (There is a small bit of tilt giving the slight red / blue tinge to some of the stars). It is also a very good visual scope.

15 hours ago, vlaiv said:

I start of with 5-6 shots of it to get me in the mood

5 or 6 shots to start? That is a major night out for me. I'd probably be on the floor! (Yes, I know - lightweight). These days anything more than 3 beers is a major bender.......

Signed.

I would love some of the businesses to take heed of the light pollution issue. Penrith is actually quite good in terms of street lighting. Although it is LED, it is low intensity and all points downward. 90% of the light pollution is the industrial estates and the golf driving range who seem to think it is necessary to light up the entire sky to keep an eye on a few wagons.......

I think you would see quite a bit of difference with the filter. My guess is that there is some bloat which would be greatly reduced with a UV/IR cut filter. Well worth the £20 outlay for a basic 1.25".