Searching for a telescope, need advice

[RononDex]

Hello dear SGL community

This is my first post here so please go easy on me Also English is not my native language

So I have been working as a volunteer worker for the planetary society and helped out at one of the star parties in LA.

Now I want to buy a telescope for myself. My budget is around 1200-1500 swiss francs ( around 1200$ - 1500$, more or less) for the telescope alone and around 500-700 swiss francs for the tripod or whatever stand you can recommend me. So the total budget would be around 2000 swiss francs.

As I am new to the whole stargazers community I need some advice. I know most of the physics behind it (Physics student here) but I am unexperencied and don't want to waste money on bad quality.

After some initial researching I found this refractor telescope: http://www.skywatcherusa.com/sizzlingsummersavings/proed-120mm-doublet-apo-refractor.html#prettyPhoto

However someone gave me the advice to get a Newtonian telescope instead. He told me you could get a good 200mm newton telescope for that price.

I want to be able to do planetary observations (including our moon) inside our solar system, but at the same time I also want to be able to do deep space observation. Furthermore I would like to be able to mount a camera to do space fotography.

Do you have any advice?

[RononDex]

Damn, cant find the edit button in this forum...

For my total budget I could also go up to around 2500 swiss francs. That would be the upper limit.

Also I don't mind shipping it in from a foreign country (I live in Switzerland). However I prefer swiss shops for reasons like waranty, taxes, shiping costs, ...

[hjw]

Hi and welcome to SGL

It's quite a range of interests you are listing and I am afraid some of them collide. Planets are small and bright and require a longish focal length. Nebulas are big (some are way larger than the disc of the full moon) and faint. And then there is the majority of galaxies and planetary nebulae which are small and faint. All three categories would need their own telescope.

If you are interested in astrophotography (as in deep sky objects) the mount (tripod) your are choosing is very important. Capable mounts start with the Skywatcher HEQ5 or the Celestron AVX. A NEQ6 or even AZEQ6 would make the setup more future proof.

For DSOs the SW ED80 is popular and yes I am bias . There is a thread here about pictures taken with this scope

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/236987-what-can-the-skywatcher-evostar-ed80-do-for-me/

Mind you a 200mm f/5 reflector would make a nice scope too, but it will push the carrying capacity of the HEQ5 to its limits.

For planets you ideally want more focal length such as a Cassegrain. A webcam is sufficient to do imaging.

I am afraid that at the end the decision is yours.

Clear skies!

HJ

[valleyman]

Before spending huge amounts of money( you do have a healthy budget) I would suggest you spend small to begin with.

Until you decide what route you wish to go for, ie Visual or Astra will depend on how much money you will end up spending.

I have a neighbour who has just bought a huge telescope and a top rate Mount and has no idea how it works and nothing at all about the night sky so it sits in his lounge doing nothing.

So I would suggest a Dobsonian to start with. They hold their resale price.

It will show you the solar system plus deep space objects without to much trouble.

There is nothing automatic about so learning the night sky and star hopping is a must.

Also download "Stellerium" it is free and will show the night sky as it is at your location.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-200p-dobsonian.html  This is the most popular Dob going and is first choice for most starters.

Good luck with it all and enjoy clear skys

Pat

[RononDex]

Hi and welcome to SGL

It's quite a range of interests you are listing and I am afraid some of them collide. Planets are small and bright and require a longish focal length. Nebulas are big (some are way larger than the disc of the full moon) and faint. And then there is the majority of galaxies and planetary nebulae which are small and faint. All three categories would need their own telescope.

If you are interested in astrophotography (as in deep sky objects) the mount (tripod) your are choosing is very important. Capable mounts start with the Skywatcher HEQ5 or the Celestron AVX. A NEQ6 or even AZEQ6 would make the setup more future proof.

For DSOs the SW ED80 is popular and yes I am bias . There is a thread here about pictures taken with this scope

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/236987-what-can-the-skywatcher-evostar-ed80-do-for-me/

Mind you a 200mm f/5 reflector would make a nice scope too, but it will push the carrying capacity of the HEQ5 to its limits.

For planets you ideally want more focal length such as a Cassegrain. A webcam is sufficient to do imaging.

I am afraid that at the end the decision is yours.

Clear skies!

HJ

Thanks a lot After some time of doing research I think the Skywatcher I linked is a pretty good choice. The thread you linked uses the smaller 80mm version of this telescope. However the 80mm version has f/6 and the one I linked has f/7.5 but has a higher focal length of 900mm. As far as I understand a bigger f makes stuff darker? If so If I wanted to take pictures I would just have to use a longer shutter speed for the same image?

[RononDex]

Before spending huge amounts of money( you do have a healthy budget) I would suggest you spend small to begin with.

Until you decide what route you wish to go for, ie Visual or Astra will depend on how much money you will end up spending.

I have a neighbour who has just bought a huge telescope and a top rate Mount and has no idea how it works and nothing at all about the night sky so it sits in his lounge doing nothing.

So I would suggest a Dobsonian to start with. They hold their resale price.

It will show you the solar system plus deep space objects without to much trouble.

There is nothing automatic about so learning the night sky and star hopping is a must.

Also download "Stellerium" it is free and will show the night sky as it is at your location.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-200p-dobsonian.html  This is the most popular Dob going and is first choice for most starters.

Good luck with it all and enjoy clear skys

Pat

Thanks for voicing your concerns. However I want something bigger, something that I can have fun with for a long time.

At the star party I was working at I saw a lot of different telescopes and their abilities. I want to have something a little better then the telescope you can buy at walmart.

I understand your point but this is really a long term investement which I will be using in a lot of occasions.

[ronin]

Ignoring prices (they just complicate things) the problem is as mentioned each aspect has different requirements.

For Planets and solar system the refractor you mention would do a good job, a 120ED should get to magnifications of 150x-160x without problems and produce a good image.

DSO's are generally faint, so for them you need to collect as much light as you can and that means a newtonian reflector, one lump of glass, one surface only so less cost or bigger mirror.

Imaging really means a good solid mount and oddly and good small scope, a good imaging scope is something like the WO Star 71 (NOT the Zenithstar - they get mixed up)

To an extent the 120ED you have picked is likely to do all the things mentioned. Solar system will be goo - possible except Mars, which is always trouble. It will show a good range of DSO's. It depends on how many of the faint ones you want. If you got a good mount NEQ6 type then the 120ED will image also, perhaps with a bit more difficulty then say an 80mm apo, but you can.

In imaging Bigger is not necessarily Better. You have more weight to swing around and control, and the longer focal length means tracking errors are magnified a bit more. Hence the need for the more solid mounts. With a decent mount then if you got the 120ED you could "practise" at imaging then perhaps get a smaller sort of dedicated scope for imaging and have the mount for both aspects.

I think the 120ED will manage to cover "everything" but not exceed at one specific aspect.

You will not collect the light of a 12" newtonian, you will not get the magnifications of a 925 CPC, you will not get the images of a WO Star 71. However a WO Star 71 is NOT visual, the CPC has a narrow field of view, the 12" newtonian is big and again not really an imaging option.

The main concern I would have is the DSO aspect, clusters etc will be OK, but things like the North American and Pelican Nebula could be where things do not work out.

Are you buying in the US or Switzerland. Costs and available items vary.

Have you allocated money for eyepieces?

[happy-kat]

Hi

As the big heavy awkward mount is really for imaging I would put that to one side and for now to get going and always have a grab and go setup look at something like an Az4 steel legs for visual use with perhaps that ED you listed (check weight carrying range). You can get an imaging mount later, sometimes you just want a quick portable setup and they never become redundant unless you end up being only an imager.

Do you have a dark garden or lots of light pollution?

Will you want to travel to observe.

This is a nice read on the ED100

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/149053-ed100-v-tal100rs/?fromsearch=1

[Dave grim]

I have to agree with the above comment , I think you would be better off with a portable setup first of all then if you want upgrade at a later date I would go for a Skywatchers HEQ5 mount it is quite portable and can handle a reasonable load, as regards to a scope if want to image as well as visual I would think about a 200mm f6 reflecter I know Skywatcher do one , I don't of any astronomy shops in Switzerland , but FLO in the UK are good , www.firstlightoptics.co.uk

[Dave Lloyd]

Hi and welcome.

[valleyman]

I was not suggesting you buy something from WALMART.

[laudropb]

Hello and welcome to the SGL. As you can gather from the above comments there is no single scope or type of scope that will do everything well. You sound keen to get on with things, so you will have to take the plunge sooner rather than later. The best piece of advice if you are keen on astrophotography is to get the best mount that you can afford. The scope you eventually choose will let you get started and get you on the learning curve. The members here are not trying to be negative in their comments. They are speaking from experience. We have all bought gear that we later realised did not suit our expectations and we always try to get new stargazers to avoid this pitfall.

Best of luck and enjoy your new hobby.

[glowjet]

Hi Ronon and welcome to SGL. You will get a lot of very helpful advice from the forum members, as has been commented there is no one scope that can cover all eventualities. My advise is to keep reading and researching the many aspects, from using Refractors and Reflectors in conjunction with your anticipated imaging, for at least a little while longer. 

You have already chosen a very nice observational 5" scope in the APO120 Refractor, which will cover a lot of what you want to observe. Mounted on a suitable equatorial driven mount, can give good results with astrophotography. For your information there is a dedicated reducer/flattener available for this scope, to reduce the f7.5 down to f6.37.

Alternatively you can consider the many reflectors systems, large apertures and extra light gathering capabilities, giving advantages over refractors, especially where deep space is concerned and of course improved visual on Planets. But consider heavier scopes need appropriate heavy duty mounts to cope with the weight, if you are considering imaging, then there is the inevitable increase in outlay, except, of course, where you go for the basic Dobsonian.

I do not know the availability of second hand gear in Switzerland, with the various Astronomy retailers, but buying good s/h can save money in the long run, if you are not initially satisfied with the outcome, exchanging will not be the financial loss as in buying from new.

You may be blessed with decent skies in Switzerland, where you intend to observe or image from, but will have an effect on what you can actually see, very dark skies giving the best results.

Whatever you eventually finish up with, enjoy your Astronomy and the forum

[kalasinman]

There are limits. If you have a slight interest in imaging, the dobs are out and many suggest you spend on the order of 2x on the mount as the OTA. The complete kit for even a $500 6" Newtonian runs to $3000, ask me.

[Charic]

Hi there, welcome to SGL.........I wanted either  the TAL100 or the Skyliner 200P......from the information gleaned here and the web, I chose the Skyliner. I still have not looked through a TAL100 but have been advised that my 200P is much better for my purpose and needs. And yes, it is good.

I just want to observe  visually, so astrophotography is not an issue. A good solid Dobsonian mounted telescope is the way to go for me, sturdy, practical and oh so easy to use and set-up.  I would need a motorised  tracking system if I wanted to go into astrophotography, just to achieve the longer exposures! Any EQ system ( just for visual observations ) is a complete waste of time for in my opinion! Polar alignment,  the setting  and continual adjusting and possible rotations to the tube assembly, just to keep the focuser/eyepiece in a sensible position,  just does not suit my needs. However for proper photography, you will need some sort of tracking system, Polar aligned on a solid sturdy mount.

As you described in your original post, you want a telescope that is capable of all those things, but that might be difficult to achieve. Look in SGL signatures and see the various scopes in use. Some folk have more than one, like tools in a tool box, one tool, one task?

Enjoy your journey into this difficult and expensive hobby

[hjw]

Thanks a lot After some time of doing research I think the Skywatcher I linked is a pretty good choice. The thread you linked uses the smaller 80mm version of this telescope. However the 80mm version has f/6 and the one I linked has f/7.5 but has a higher focal length of 900mm. As far as I understand a bigger f makes stuff darker? If so If I wanted to take pictures I would just have to use a longer shutter speed for the same image?

The SW80ED has a focal length of 600mm and therefore it is f/7.5 as well. Exposure times would be the same but the field of view is different. In your scope objects are more magnified, which is good for smaller DSOs and better for the moon and planets but not so good for larger objects. The other consideration is (for imaging) that the longer the focal length the more precise the polar alignment hast to be in order to achieve the same exposure times.

Have a look at the before mentioned software Stellarium. It allows to enter data for a scope and a camera sensor and simulates the frame you can see. It will give you some appreciation on how big some objects out there are.

Good luck!

HJ

[kalasinman]

Hi there, welcome to SGL.........I wanted either  the TAL100 or the Skyliner 200P......from the information gleaned here and the web, I chose the Skyliner. I still have not looked through a TAL100 but have been advised that my 200P is much better for my purpose and needs. And yes, it is good.

I just want to observe  visually, so astrophotography is not an issue. A good solid Dobsonian mounted telescope is the way to go for me, sturdy, practical and oh so easy to use and set-up.  I would need a motorised  tracking system if I wanted to go into astrophotography, just to achieve the longer exposures! Any EQ system ( just for visual observations ) is a complete waste of time for in my opinion! Polar alignment,  the setting  and continual adjusting and possible rotations to the tube assembly, just to keep the focuser/eyepiece in a sensible position,  just does not suit my needs. However for proper photography, you will need some sort of tracking system, Polar aligned on a solid sturdy mount.

As you described in your original post, you want a telescope that is capable of all those things, but that might be difficult to achieve. Look in SGL signatures and see the various scopes in use. Some folk have more than one, like tools in a tool box, one tool, one task?

Enjoy your journey into this difficult and expensive hobby

I disagree. For observing polar alignment need be done only once, and if torn down  the foot positions marked for re-use. Easy. I have no idea what you refer to as far as "the setting, and continual adjusting and possible rotations of the tube assembly..." is something that is unfamiliar to me with my EQ mount and EPs. I do rotate the tube once when switching from imaging to observing. Other than that, set the EP on the side at a convenient orientation and get going. After a meridian flip, walk to the other side of the scope. Too easy. As far as time spent, I recon pushing a button and slewing right to any object in seconds and starting to observe is faster than star hopping.

...and what about tracking? With an EQ mount, the objects stays in view as long as you want it. No pushing around and re-centering. If more than one person wants a look, they just walk up and look. No problems with bumping and re-adjusting. How much time does that save?

[Charic]

kalasinman.......Its your right to agree or disagree........freedom of speech. As long as its helpful to the thread.

My experience  with a manual EQ system is obviously  different to yours, and something you have therefore not experienced yourself.  I didn't  have buttons to push! it was time consuming in use, and needed  constant hands-on adjustments  to  obtain and track new targets, and after tracking to the full extent, the slo-mo controls need centring to start the process over again, which is why I now prefer the Dobsonian for visual use.  With my Dob I can reposition to the next target far quicker than any EQ allows.

Can you find without a button?  Go manual?  disable the power and release the locks and  experience and see what I mean!

Remember every telescope is different, has to be, as they serve different purposes. Your EQ was different to mine.

[YKSE]

 Any EQ system ( just for visual observations ) is a complete waste of time for in my opinion! Polar alignment,  the setting  and continual adjusting and possible rotations to the tube assembly, just to keep the focuser/eyepiece in a sensible position,  just does not suit my needs. 

That's a very strong statement, I'd think there're quite some visual observers who use different EQ mounts, I started with 130p on EQ2, got over 50 Messiers in my backyards, before upgrading to C8 on EQ-3, with easy travel to to dark site, this combination has got me over 300 galaxies so far. There're much more successful visual observers, like this one with a 4.5" newt on EQ mount has got more than 600 galaxies.

I'm there're many choices here, anyone can pick whatever suits them, the key is going out observing when weather permits.

[ollypenrice]

The problem is that you want a setup that can do everything.

Deep sky visual observing needs aperture.

DSLR astrophotography needs a fast focal ratio.

Planetary imaging needs focal length.

On a budget the only instrument which can do all this is the good old basic Newtonian. A 6 inch or above has aperture. Most of them are about F5 so they have a fast focal ratio. With Powermates or Barlows they can have focal length because they have the aperture to support it. They have some disadvantages. They need collimating (but, hey, you're a physics student...) and they are bulky and catch the wind wich makes them like a solid mount. For DS imaging an 8 inch would be right on the limit with an HEQ5 but a 6 inch would be OK.

Newtonians on German Equatorials are a bit of a pest in that you sometimes need to rotate the tube for visual observing.

You can't have every convenience for every different astronomical activity in one scope and mount but if you want to do deep sky observing, deep sky imaging, planeatry imaging and planetary observing then the best compromise would be a 6 or 8 inch Newt. With a little effort it can do the lot.

Olly

[kalasinman]

kalasinman.......Its your right to agree or disagree........freedom of speech. As long as its helpful to the thread.

My experience  with a manual EQ system is obviously  different to yours, and something you have therefore not experienced yourself.  I didn't  have buttons to push! it was time consuming in use, and needed  constant hands-on adjustments  to  obtain and track new targets, and after tracking to the full extent, the slo-mo controls need centring to start the process over again, which is why I now prefer the Dobsonian for visual use.  With my Dob I can reposition to the next target far quicker than any EQ allows.

Can you find without a button?  Go manual?  disable the power and release the locks and  experience and see what I mean!

Remember every telescope is different, has to be, as they serve different purposes. Your EQ was different to mine.

Yes, but my statement was specific to my experience rather than a general condemnation of EQ mounts for observing.

Why should I go backwards to support a point I find unnecessarily broad? I'll stick with my buttons, thanks. Folks who have the inclination and free time to do it manually, I say go for it. I don't.

[LukeSkywatcher]

You can't have every convenience for every different astronomical activity in one scope and mount but if you want to do deep sky observing, deep sky imaging, planeatry imaging and planetary observing then the best compromise would be a 6 or 8 inch Newt. With a little effort it can do the lot.

And this is the reason why the 200mm Dob is the most popular choice. The 8SE can do the same pretty much but with a narrower field of view, which i have to say ive never noticed or am bothered by.

[Charic]

YKSE...............I did say there were many  types and my opinion was, just an opinion, as stated!........(Any EQ system ( just for visual observations ) is a complete waste of time for in my opinion!)[sic] and we all  have them, positives and negatives. Its what makes a forum interesting, allowing readers to better judge the merits of other users in order to make their own managed decision  of  their next intended purchase?

Next time I'll single out the specific EQ to avoid any issue?

[Charic]

Yes, but my statement was specific to my experience 

I fully agree with you kalasinman........and so was mine, and yes, looking back at my phrase......Any EQ System..... I can now see why you felt the need?

I cant withdraw that , as the edit time has passed, but next time I`ll be more explicit in naming the model or   type of equipment used?

We both now know the reasons why and should  move on / agree to disagree! 

But I have no argument.

[YKSE]

YKSE...............I did say there were many  types and my opinion was, just an opinion, as stated!........(Any EQ system ( just for visual observations ) is a complete waste of time for in my opinion!)[sic] and we all  have them, positives and negatives. Its what makes a forum interesting, allowing readers to better judge the merits of other users in order to make their own managed decision  of  their next intended purchase?

Next time I'll single out the specific EQ to avoid any issue?

Glad to know your opinion, I have just stated some facts

Sorry to OP for being off topic, I hope you take special notice of Olly's post about the difference between visual and astrophotography. Good luck with your choice.