Replacement scope advice

[huggiebear]

Hi all

I've had my Skywatcher 200p dob for over a year now and have been thinking of upgrading/replacing.

Initially i wanted to but he Skywatcher 200P on the EQ5 but the advice from here was to go for the dob so i did.

What i am is after is an all rounder scope that i could use planetary and deep space. I have managed to do some photography using a webcam and want to do a bit more.

So heres what i am thinking

The OTA 's i'm thinking of are

http://www.firstligh...00p-ds-ota.html

http://www.firstligh...-newtonian.html

But are these good for visual viewing as well?

Plan is to sit the OTA on a HEQ6 Pro

Also is there anything else you would recommend instead of this setup? Budget is about £1k give or take

[gkec]

Would it not be possible to get some rings and a dovetail bar and fit that to your existing OTA?

Or are you going to part exchange it or something?

[huggiebear]

I was planning on sticking it on ebay and getting myself a new setup.

[RikM]

The 200P-DS would be a good choice on the NEQ6. A bit more focal length and easier to collimate than the Quattro. For deep sky, the Quattro would probably sneak it, but for planets as well, the P-DS with a 2.5x Powermate would be my choice.

[LukeSkywatcher]

I was planning on sticking it on ebay and getting myself a new setup.

A 200mm scope after 1 year really does not need upgrading. Its a great aperture to have. The DOB mount is limiting, so i thing (as mentioned above) all you need to do is upgrade the mount to an EQ with tube rings and this wil allow you to do AP (which seems to be what you want to do).

I really cant say more then this because i simply dont know.

[huggiebear]

Paul one of the reasons for another OTA is currently i have to use a barlow to get focus. I was hoping to get a shorter tobe so i have the opention of a barlow.

I quite like i look of this setup but i don't know much about the mounts.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-200pds-heq5-pro.html

[LukeSkywatcher]

Paul one of the reasons for another OTA is currently i have to use a barlow to get focus. I was hoping to get a shorter tobe so i have the opention of a barlow.

I quite like i look of this setup but i don't know much about the mounts.

http://www.firstligh...s-heq5-pro.html

Surely no scope depends on having a barlow to obtain focus (as it is an optional extra). The purpose of a barlow is to magnify, not focus objects.

A Skywatcher 200p dob should focus without a barlow. If your scope is not in focus, i am thinking its a collimation issue.

[gkec]

Surely no scope depends on having a barlow to obtain focus. The purpose of a barlow is to magnify, not focus objects.

I'm having trouble with understanding the problem as well. I often need to extend the eyepiece, usually to get parfocal with the DSLR but I unscrew the lens on the Barlow and use it as an extender tube.

Or as you are apparently wanting a shorter tube is it that you need to remove the focusser to bolt the camera on?

It's your money obviously but it seems that you could spend more on the mount, or on other goodies, rather than buy a nearly identical OTA.

[RMcCallum]

I am going to recommend, due to the current weather saving up a bit more and splashing out on a radio telescope, that way you can use it every night, and stick two fingers up at the clouds whilst doing so!

[huggiebear]

I'm having trouble with understanding the problem as well. I often need to extend the eyepiece, usually to get parfocal with the DSLR but I unscrew the lens on the Barlow and use it as an extender tube.

Or as you are apparently wanting a shorter tube is it that you need to remove the focusser to bolt the camera on?

It's your money obviously but it seems that you could spend more on the mount, or on other goodies, rather than buy a nearly identical OTA.

What i find happens when i put a webcame on the OTA is i do not get focus. Seems others have also had this issue with the dob and the way to rectify this is to use a barlow.

[huggiebear]

I should point out that visually it is fine without barlow. Only with a webcam i need to barlow to obtain focus

[Naemeth]

I'm having trouble with understanding the problem as well. I often need to extend the eyepiece, usually to get parfocal with the DSLR but I unscrew the lens on the Barlow and use it as an extender tube.

Or as you are apparently wanting a shorter tube is it that you need to remove the focusser to bolt the camera on?

It's your money obviously but it seems that you could spend more on the mount, or on other goodies, rather than buy a nearly identical OTA.

Dobs often have this problem when it comes to webcam imaging, the solution is usually to move the primary mirror up the tube. A barlow brings the focus in, so compensates for lack of out-focus travel .

[RikM]

With the Skywatcher 1.25" adaptor you can unscrew it and reverse it and that gives you a bit more inward distance.

[huggiebear]

With the Skywatcher 1.25" adaptor you can unscrew it and reverse it and that gives you a bit more inward distance.

Tried that but not enough

[rowan46]

Paul one of the reasons for another OTA is currently i have to use a barlow to get focus. I was hoping to get a shorter tobe so i have the opention of a barlow.

I quite like i look of this setup but i don't know much about the mounts.

http://www.firstligh...s-heq5-pro.html

if you can afford that setup then get it the heq5 is considered the entry level mount for quality astrophotography

[huggiebear]

Thanks all. How heavy is a HEQ5? Sorry for all the questions but a grand is a lot of money so want to get it right.

Are there any other suggestions for a setup that will allow visual and some AP for arounf the same price?

[Astrosurf]

I can't give an actual weight for the HEQ5 but it's reasonably heavy. I'm not that strong but I can lift it as long as I don't have to walk very far! A few metres is fine. If you're strong you'll have no problem. It's a great mount and I've got some quite good shots with it and my 200P. You can autoguide with that mount as well.

[Patrice Lanteigne]

The focus issue is why I'd go for the imaging newtonian for astrophotography. The secondary is a bit larger than on visual scopes to accommodate bigger light cone caused by the decreased distance to the primary. These scopes have the focus point further out. Similar thing could be done with your existing scope by moving the primary up the tube a bit and increasing the size of the secondary if you feel you must.