Planetarian

Thanks for the info. It seems like the P1000 can't beat serious telescope setups, so still worth going with a proper rig instead of the camera.

Mainly the Moon. First I used the Super 10 that came with the telescope, then I tried my Ostara 10mm SWA 70 FMC which was a little better. Now that I'm thinking about it, it might be possible that the secondary mirror got steamed up somewhat from be breathing while observing. As the tube is extended, there's nothing between my mouth and the secondary mirror. I might try to add some kind of shield next time. I'm thinking to get a Bahtinov mask as well.

Yes, outside, cooled down. Without barlow. If I insert the two times barlow (metal, not too bad quality one) with the 10mm lens, I can still focus, maybe it's the contrast that gets less and the image seems less sharp to me. The sky was very light polluted as well. I'm gonna experiment more when it's fully clear outside.

The conditions were definitely not perfect, that must have been the issue then. Collimation was fine, optics quality is good too.

Just thinking how this setup would compare to normal astrophotography setups. Imagine a Nikon coolpix p1000 on an equatorial mount. Has anyone done that yet? As I saw in the YouTube videos about the camera, it has absolutely no chromatic aberration, so I assume it's got apochromatic lens. It's magnification is extremely good (125x with 16MP sensor). The aperture is quite small tho compared to many different refractors available. So what do you think about the idea: astrophotography with a Nikon?

Hi, I've got a Skywatcher Heritage 130p reflector, and if i insert anything less than 10mm eyepiece, the image won't get crisp. I guess it's normal, but as I'm very new to astronomy, I'd like to know what the sharpness depends on exactly. Is that the focal length (how fast the telescope is? ) or the size of the mirror and how much light it gathers? Or both affect it the same way? Are things the same with refractors in this regard? Thanks.

As there are almost 3000 satellites on orbit, I was wondering if they ever become an obstruction of our stargazing. I'm just a beginner and don't know much about it. Spacex has started the Starlink project which consists of thousands of satellites. Are those ever gonna be in the way when observing, or there's nothing to worry about? I know they won't be in focus but can decrease contrast i guess.

First Moon sighting with the Heritage 130p and a phone camera.

I'm at about 30 miles from the sea.

I'm just starting observing the night sky with a telescope so I'm just a beginner. I've seen images online of nebulas that look great and full of colour. I'm just wondering if we would actually see them colourful if we looked into our telescope, or people colour them in on purpose. If they do, then what's the point of doing so?

Thanks for the replies, I'm feeling more relaxed about the longevity of my telescope now.

Thanks, that's good news. I'm gonna make sure my mirror stays clean but one day if it will be necessary to give it a wash i guess I'm just gonna need washing up liquid, some sterile cotton balls and distilled water to rinse it.

Update 2: I've got my heritage 130p and I haven't regretted buying it. There's no double image, it's brighter then the other telescope and gives a great image. It was the first time i could see Jupiter's bands, but wasn't too visible, probably because the planet is too close to the horizon nowadays and can't get a great viewing condition.

I've got a SkyWatcher 130p, and just wondering if the primary mirror got any protection on top of the aluminium coating. As I know aluminium gets an oxide later on it's surface after a time. In case they coated it with an extra layer of some kind of protective material, then it will stay shiny for a long time. I hope this is the case.

Update: So I've done a little experiment (still without the laser collimator). I aligned the mirrors using a pinhole cap, and the situation is this: the image is not sharp, I mean everything has a shadow. For example a distant telephone wire looks double, or as it has a shadow very close to it. This happens with any eyepiece. When I cover half of the front opening with a piece of paper, the image becomes crisp and perfectly sharp even with the highest magnification that I can achieve (350x). Of course the image is dimmer due to the paper I covered half the aperture with. Then I removed the pap