Telescope Recommendations?

I agree with point 4).

I also have a Meade LX50 10". I've had it for about 6 years and used it about 10 times. It is just such a hassle to set it up.

The first thing you have to ask yourself is what are you going to want to look at. If you mainly want to look at planets, then get a refractor telescope. If you want to look at deep sky objects, then you want to go for a reflector. At this price, I would say any Cassegrain or Maksutov is going to be disappointing. All you're going to get is less than a three inch aperture.

If you plan to just look quickly at both planets and deep sky objects, you might want to look at Dobsonian scopes. The mounts are not very flexible (forget astrophotography), but you will get the biggest aperture bang for the buck. Dobsonians are strictly for looking and not photographing.

If you want to photograph, get a reflector with a good equatorial mount. Later, you can add a clock drive for long exposures, or a digital imager for fast, cool pictures.

Hi Rickmoore & AnonHero

I agree with many of Anonymous' comments (esp regarding local astro clubs, to which I add the local planetarium - they're often affiliated with local clubs, generally staffed by astronomy nuts, and often sponsor viewing evenings...some even have their own observatories), I respectfully disagree with what he says concerning telescopes.

- Dobsonian telescopes have altitude & azimuth mountings

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dobsonian

Although they seem simple at first glance, they can only approximately follow objects in the sky (i.e. as the earth turns continuously, objects in the field of view drift out of it and so therefore must be somehow compensated by movement of the telescope) and also make it more difficult to find 'deep-sky' objects (nebulae, galaxies, etc,
which are too dim to see with the naked eye). They're built that way because
it's cheap and simple, and usually, the mountings suffer as a result. (A telescope's mounting is almost as important as the optics, because if the mounting isn't robust enough, the tube shakes and judders and generally drives you nuts, esp. if looking at something dim or small, which is typicall what we do in astronomy).

- GOTO telescopes - great comment here (scroll down to GOTO Telescopes..)

http://www.jotabout.com/portuesi/astro/firstscope.html

Besides being incredibly interesting and multi-faceted - some would say addictive - astronomy can lead to all sorts of other areas of practical knowledge. One is (re)learning time and coordination concepts required to REALLY find objects in the sky, using their coordinates. It turns out these are the basis of navigation. In other words, once you understand how to find - and see - an object (say, M41 or M27), you can figure out where you are and what time/season it is at night. A GOTO telescope 'allows' you to bypass learning these concepts, while a Dobsonian makes it more difficult to use standard coordinates to find things and then to keep them in view (again, due to the earth's rotation).

You can surf the net and/or read books to figure this stuff out, but the best way is to learn it from someone standing next to you who really understands it. As Anon says, look for a good club or a planetarium. In general, inform youself, e.g. on the jotabout page plus a couple more that look interesting
http://findascope.com/
http://www.weatherman.com/BEGINNER.HTM
there are many more.....

$700 can indeed buy a very good telescope, but it will also buy a *very* good pair of binoculars, which many would say are just as powerful a tool for beginning astronomers (they're arguably better to learn about the relationships between objects in the sky, and with a good pair of 7x50s or 10x50s, you can see a LOT of deep-sky objects).

I wish you a lot of dark velvet nights!

RF_G

Thanks for the info guys. I feel I could get a great used telescope for what I'm wanting to spend. I'm not obsessed with getting a new one. I did find a local astronomy club to join. Again, thanks for some great info.

Rick

Great point on the planetarium!

You are right that GOTO scopes are arguably superior in many ways, but this is his first scope. I did not recommend a GOTO in this case for a number of reasons:

1. Finding a GOTO scope for under $700 is probably not realistic and anything you do find will probably not be very good. A bad scope will soon cause the observer to give up the hobby.

2. GOTO scopes really don't teach you the art of locating objects in the sky. You just push a button and wait. A non-computerized scope forces you to learn where objects are based on the proximity to other well-known objects. For example, locating M42 in Orion should be learned by sight and a manual scope or even a pair of binoculars will do just that. The first step in astronomy should be to learn the sky by proximity and angular distances (i.e., basic sky charts). Then you can learn about the astronomical coordinate system. All of this will be taught to you by a local club and a good book store or library.

3. If you are new to the hobby, attempting to jump right into astrophotography is really too much, too soon. Astrophotography is complex (let alone expensive) and it is good to learn basic skills first, then find someone that is already doing photography and build from there.

Setting up a GOTO scope (unless you mount it on a peer) is time consuming and there will be many times you want to simply grab a scope and go. There is always a place for a simple scope in your life and many people keep their first scope for just that reason as they advance into bigger and better gear.

Your point about binoculars is spot on! Everyone should get a pair and explore the sky with these. They are so portable that you can take them everywhere you go. There are differences between terrestrial and astro binoculars, so be sure to understand the differences before you buy. I would think that $100 (or less) is a good entry price for binoculars.

You can mount binoculars on a standard camera tripod and you will have a more powerful and optically better "telescope" than Galileo had!

$ 700 is not a bad budget. See for ORION telescopes. You should be getting upto 6" motorised (not GOTO) telescope in your budget.

I've been using a SkyView 6" Deluxe EQ with drives for many yrs bought it at Orion, did add on a few extra items which makes it even better to use and back then I spent about $1k.

$700 is a very ample budget for a first scope. DOBs are OK - if you know the night sky. Orion is a reliable vendor. Celestron likewise. Be careful with Meade. Look at Celestron's NexStar SLT series offers a 102 mm refractor or a 130 mm reflector. Both are GoTo and very portable. Avoid the SCT designs smaller than 5" diameter. Buy a good filter for viewing in light polluted sky and...,

Enjoy.

Bob

You have been given a mass of good info already, but my tip is to go for something cheap and secondhand, max $100 or less. Play with it, learn its faults and read the Astronomy magazines......join a club....

Do not buy anything from another Astronomy nut like myself as they only want to get rid of what they bought wrongly at a good price.....!!! As a beginner, what may look good will probably be a disaster!! So put as few $Bucks$ into it as possible!!!

Use it for about 6 months or more and then you will know exactly what you want and go and buy it with the rest of the $700 you still have left!!! New or secondhand.....

Make sure that whatever you buy is good, some reflectors are supplied new but unadjusted, some have been unadjusted by the owners......!! Adjustment is not difficult WITH THE RIGHT TOOLS AND KNOWLEDGE!! Some adjusters will have been broken or damaged and be useless on secondhand scopes......

Remember "Caveat emptor" (I think the spelling is good......!)

A cheap/secondhand Meade reflector with the Autostar controller is a good cheap start.......say with a 4.5" mirror or bigger......Good luck.

The Telescope Warehouse on eBay run by Bill Vorce has some nice 4.5 inch reflectors some with GoTo mounts up to $170. Good suggestion.

Bob G

Get the biggest reflector scope you can find and assorted eyepieces. Clelestron was a good brand when I wa selling them 20 yrs ago.

I disagree. I think others on this thread have a better idea. Get a four inch reflector or a three inch refractor, either with a good equitorial mount and a couple of eye piceses. Find out if you really like it. In the Nothern hemiphere, a lot of the best viewing is in really cold weather. Get a feel for the hobby without spending your whole $700.00. If you like it, great! You'll learn a lot and know what you're next scope/step will be. If you find that you don't particularly like it, you're not out a major chunk of change.

Remember that those really cool pictures you see in astronomy books were timelapse photos. Even with the biggest scopes, you don't see things like that in your eyepiece.

Good luck!!!

Vermin I agree as what you have written is basically the same as I wrote some days ago already Great minds think alike?

I do NOT agree with post #12 at all, that is not the way to start such a hobby!!!

I started in the same was as we both suggested and it was nice to find out exactly what my wishes were to be without a huge investment first. I did go onto buy a 4.5 inch Meade with Autostar that covers all my needs and wishes. The old 'scope I presented to someone in the family, who is still very happy with it!

All I have done since is upgrade to the bigger (wider) Oculars and bought a few really good ones....that does make quite a difference!!

I will rate your answer as good and on topic as well.....

Thanks!

I wish to suggest one step further (ew may think it as step backwards).

Instead of going for telescope, purchase good Binocular may be little bigger in diameter say 80 mm. .. 80 X 20 binocular along with sturdy mount for it.

This will have two advantages:

1. The view will be much great than any telescope. This is because of bigger field of view.

2. It will be much comfortable to see the sky by both eyes.

Using telescope is strenuous for eye, as you see through only one eye.

This will give you hang of the subject. Telescope with great magnifying power will be boring and much strenuous to new comer. You will understand sky much better and will be elligible for use of telescope.

Remember many of the comets are discovered through good binoculars.

I have to say I completely disagree with most of your comments made, Sorry!

You mentioned:-

Remember many of the comets are discovered through good binoculars.

I cannot believe that is a general rule, maybe it has happened once somewhere!! I have searched around but not found a single reference to anyone managing to do this, even on the web.... Perhaps you would be so kind as to provide such facts that would substantiate what you wrote here....thanks in advance for the infos.

I checked the Edgar Wilson Award page and this gives the definition of the Comet awards using simple equipment and a $5000 Binocular would be acceptable as such. The awards for several years never mention Binoculars though, one award was to someone using a 1.5 meter reflector, that I personally would think of as "professional" size, but they gave it a "simple equipment" status!!!

"Observations" of Comets using Binoculars is "a different Kettle of Fish" to "discovering" them as someone once put it and expensive Binoculars (up to $5000!!) are used by "Moneyed" people to do that.

But is that a lot more than the original Blogger wanted to spend..? If he is of course happy with the special offer on the web site and to lie on the ground as shown, then maybe its OK.....

I have used fairly powerful Binoculars quite a lot (and looked at the night sky with them), I find that they are OK for say looking at the moon on a clear night, so that you can see the craters better, but not really good, and then only with a firm mounting of some sort, otherwise you are "wobbling" about so much that it gets boring very quickly. The "better" the Binocular, the worse the wobbling becomes......children have a real problem with keeping them stable.....

For planetary or star observations, they are almost completely useless to my mind....only just better than nothing at all.....

A reasonable Telescope, with a controller to allow the scope to stay on target, is not that expensive today and therefore particularly suited for a beginner, or someone who wants to take photos, there is nothing better to my mind. Perhaps you have not had the pleasure of observing an interstellar or planetary object for many minutes without having to readjust the scope every few seconds.....

At some point in the hobby you really need to get used to using a single eye for observation (though a video camera attached to the scope does allow the picture to be displayed on a computer or TV screen, which is nice and not that expensive today, if using one eye is a serious problem, but it adds further to the costs of course).

I personally feel that the earlier you get used to this slight drawback the better to my mind, especially if you are serious in going further with the hobby of astronomy!

I hope that my Observations (pun intended) do not upset you in any way, but I do feel that accuracy is most important on CR4. I am sure that you would agree.....

No problem in agreeing to disagree.

1. It is not only accuracy in CR4, but in some subjects opinion also counts.

Now regarding binox:

In my opinion, in astronomy one should start with naked eye. Once conversant with the sky, go for binox. It gives good hang of the subject. You see the beauty of the sky, which rarely you can see through telescope because of narrow field.

In my first thread only I said that good mount is necessary. So your point of hand shaking is invalid.

Next step will be a telescope... next step may be bigger telescope... next step bigger telescope.

Regarding comet discoveries through Binocular, I am sorry I made my comment without ready list with me. I will send it in due course of time. But recent example Hyakutake was discovered through Binox ?? X 125 one

Many thanks for the reply.

The Binoculars you mentioned as discovering a Comet appear to be huge with a magnification of probably 30 or more (you did not mention exactly) and with a diameter of 125mm.....and therefore very, very expensive......and heavy!

Technically you are correct, but someone who gives out up to say up to $5,000 or more for Binoculars, is not the same person looking for a 'scope under $700!! they would be looking at much cheaper Binoculars and it was on those that I really based my answer on....

I found a good constructional article by a Dennis Simmons (Australia), well worth reading with clear pictures of what just such a Binocular (30x125) looks like, see:-

Dennis Simmons Constructional Article

That is similar in size and weight of those sizes of Binoculars that you mentioned found a Comet!!!!! It weighs over 16 Kg he says with a mounting, 11Kgs on its own!!! Thats over 24 Lbs for the Binoculars alone.....my scope weighs a lot less and is therefore far more portable (with Laptop and Scope Battery pack) than these Binoculars alone.....also my scope has a higher magnification!!! At least more than the ones Dennis was showing......

It like saying that a Sherman tank can be used to travel around town......! technically correct.....but.....

I wish you a great day and through you I have learned that the "Big Binoculars" that I have used in the past were really quite small!!!I am amazed.

In spite of discussions, arguments, I also got few new information. Thanks for it.

My basic point is

new comer is Astronomy should start with naked eye (at no cost other than some maps and books),

then with binocular and

then bigger and bigger telesopes.

On the other hand your scope with higher magnification can not show the sky beauty as any binocular shows.

Besides Astronomy as science, I always advocate enjoying the beauty of the sky.

Your

I have to agree, I get still a big kick on a dark clear night just looking at the stars with no aids.....I am not alone!!

Here's my 2¢ worth...

I think he should take "some" of that $700.00 and buy a decent telescope - reflector or refactor. One with a decent equatorial mount, and a couple of different eye pieces. If he is going to see whether he enjoys amateur astronomy, he needs to find out whether it interests him enough to go through all the hassle that goes along with setting up the scope and all that stuff, and if the images he sees in the lens excites him enough to continue further. Working with the telescope is an endeavor in itself, and this can be found out without spending his whole wad.

One of the major things one needs to discover about their desire for amateur astronomy (especially in the Northern Hemisphere) is are you willing to go out on clod, clear nights, and see sometimes dim views of things that look really cool in the astronomy magazines. I know many people that discovered that they'd rather be inside, where it's warm, and looking at pictures in astronomy magazines, rather than be out there pushing the limits of their equipment, knowledge, and pocket book to get a long exposure of a very faint object. Those that have really been bitten by the astronomy bug will learn soon that they have the spark to go further.

To draw an analogy from microscopy, it's as if you've been looking at a bunch of glamor shots taken by an electron microscope, just to be disappointed when looking through your 400 X optical microscope. If you got the bug, you'll still be delighted by what you see, however, if you don't have the bug, better off looking at the electron microscope glamor shots!

Having all of them I would compare telescopes to boats, fishing rods/reels and guns. No single one will do everything. This newbie must start somewhere and go on from there according to his or her wants and needs and ultimate budget. This novice will evolve or drop out. You can't have it all in one scope/boat/rod/gun.

Bob

Guys, I really appreciate the input (and bantering a little too!). I have joined a local astronomy club and subscribed to a magazine. Guess I need to get a book or two and start learning where to locate things in the sky. I'll probably hold off on buying a scope for a little while (till I build the stroker motor for my Roadrunner) and gain a little more knowledge. I have been to an observatory a couple of years ago as one of my physics teachers was an astronomy major. Lots of good info you've posted and a lot to digest but the old saying goes, good things take time. Thanks again for all the input.