Totally befuddled!

[Debyalden]

Hi all and thanks in advance for any time you give me! Christmas is coming and beloved is going to buy me a telescope, something I've always wanted. I have researched and researched. I've frequently found EXACTLY the right thing only then to either read bad reviews or to discover I'm going to be very disappointed in what I might see. i really thought I'd nailed it with the Skywatcher 130p but.......

Now, I will be using the scope in deepest rural France (where it will stay) with no light pollution and starts just shouting out at you. The milky way is pretty good to the naked eye too. My interest is planets. Just planets! In my make believe world I will look through a scope and see rings and colours and moons, they will be more than just tiny images and all nice and cleanly and I will be awed. My absolute top budget is £200. Oh dear you now all say! There do seem to be deals around (jessops looks competetive?). BUT so,eone just tell me what to buy please! Decision needs making quickly if I want Santa to deliver on Christmas day! Many thanks!

[laudropb]

Hi. First of all I would advise you not to buy from Jessops. It is much safer to buy from a astronomy retailer. You will get much better advise and after sales service. I would recommend a Dobsonian scope such as the Skywatchers 150p. Look at the sites sponsors FLO. You can click onto the site from the logo at the top of the page.

[RichM63]

Whereabouts in deepest rural France? From my dark location even a lowly ST80 can have light polluted folk weeping.

You will be awed no matter what, but a shift in a pre-make believe world is required.

Eg, Jupiter in a 200P with 6mm EP is only a small detailed planet although all the moons are visible as bright spots of white.

Any chance you can get to observe through telescopes before you buy, it will give you a live perspective on what you can expect?

And yes I agree, the stars and milky-way do shout, so do the owls, foxes, badgers, hedgehogs, and stags.

[Paul73]

Hi & Welcome

Firstly. With sky like that, you will not be fully satisfied with the wonderful planets. Galaxies, clusters & Nebula (never been sure about the plural) will be shouting to be explored. Wow per £££, this one is a great all rounder:

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-150p-dobsonian.html

I have a friend ŵho said "just show me the rings on Saturn and I will be happy." I did and he was. Then we went deep space.........

To be fair. Nothing really beats Saturn with steady sky.

Errrr. Except the Andomeda Galaxy, the Orion Nebula, the Great Herculese Cluster etc etc etc.....

Seriously though. Spend your budget on inches (aperture) and good optics rather than computer controled mounts (you can't look through the fancy mount).

Paul

[Debyalden]

Thanks I'm getting some great advice! My deepest bit of France iis in the Mayenne department which is around the same latitude as Paris, but no where near it obviously! I am hindered slightly by being in an effective narrow valley that I think may mean I leave my garden to set up on the top road. No risk to life from passing traffic as there is none. Hmm thought I would probably meed to reset my rose tinted expectations. Will look at those links at FLO thanks. I feel drawn to a tripod quite simply for the reason I've stated about moving to the top road and I don't want to heave the garden table with me - or do I completely misunderstand these ones that seem to sit on the table or floor. What would you do if you didn't have a flat surface I wonder? Am absolutely in agreement not to go for computer comtrolled stuff - I want something very simple to set up. more views most eagerly awaited

[MarsG76]

Also to add to the above, I'd recommend nothing less than a 200mm (8") telescope aperture as a minimum if you want some nice big views of the planets, coupled with a contrast booster and moon & skyglow filter and a HQ 7mm?5mm eyepiece. With this setup on the clearest nights you will be able to push your magnification to the 400X mark and have some stunning views of saturn, Jupiter, Mars, the Moon etc that will have a nice decent size in the eye piece.

[Debyalden]

Also to add to the above, I'd recommend nothing less than a 200mm (8") telescope aperture as a minimum if you want some nice big views of the planets, coupled with a contrast booster and moon & skyglow filter and a HQ 7mm?5mm eyepiece. With this setup on the clearest nights you will be able to push your magnification to the 400X mark and have some stunning views of saturn, Jupiter, Mars, the Moon etc that will have a nice decent size in the eye piece.

Ok so this went right over my ability to comprehend! But I like being told exactly what I might look to get as add ons. An 8" may not be right for me right now - wouldn't that be enormous and also out of budget?? HOWEVER, you got me thinking. So, as said, I'm leaning back toward the skywatcher explorer 130p, it's on a tripod and looks cute! (Cute is one of the selection criteria right?). That would also mean it is nicely under budget , so if I the booster, filters and an eyepiece would I then be getting closer to my unrealistic expectations? Or have I just become befuddled again? OR is there something around my budget that is nice, tripod based but would give a bigger image? (And equally cute?)

[cuivenion]

The 130p is a very capable little scope but the EQ2 mount and tripod are less so. The EQ2 is usable but tends to be a little wobbly. For ease of setup nothing is going to beat a dobsonian, you just take it outside, put it down, wait for it to cool down then start observing.

With both scopes you will have to learn about collimation, which can be frustrating at first. I've never used dobsonians myself as I like to dabble with imaging and video astronomy in addition to visual observing but the consensus seems to be that they are the most cost effective way to get a large scope. Don't be intimidated by the size, I have an 8 inch scope and find that easy enough to carry outside. Here's a rough guide to the size of dobsonians that I found online.

[Mr Spock]

That's a good visual - an 8" Dob, because of its focal length, isn't much bigger than the 6". The only difference is the tube diameter.

In dark skies, an 8" scope will open up a whole world of fuzzy objects, clusters etc. It will also give lots of detail on Jupiter, the moon and divisions in Saturn's rings. Us townies envy those dark skies!

If your other half can't stretch to the extra £75, consider putting the cash in yourself. Failing that the 6" is also a good scope and will give great views.

[rockystar]

something to be aware of when looking for a new scope is the focal ratio, it will say in the description something like f/5 or f/8 ( take the focal length, say 900mm, and divide it by the aperture, lets say 90mm and you get f/10). Now, an f/5 and lower is considered a "fast" scope. If you want to upgrade your eyepieces, or add new ones (which you probably will to give you higher magnification for your planetary viewing), you will need to get up into the premium (or near) range to get the most out of a fast scope. Slower scopes (f/7-f/8 and higher) are much more forgiving with lower priced eyepieces.

You may also want to consider a more traditional refractor: http://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/skywatcher-evostar-90-az3.html

it doesn't have the light gathering power of a dodsonian reflector, but it will give you some great planetary and luna views, it will be a good double star scope and will also alow you to see some of the brighter DSOs from your dark rural location. It is also on a tripod and will be pretty easy for you to move up the street (a 10" dobsonian won't be that easy).

Aperture is a great thing for seeing those dimmer objects, but I will quote an often said phrase: "the best scope is the one you use the most". Do check out the Reflectors though and do some more research. Some pluses of this scope is that it is well under budget some leaves money for any extras that you may want to invest in, and you shouldn't really need to worry about collimating it.

Don't limit yourself to planets though. They are great to look at, get more detail out of those things that you can see with the naked eye, but there are only 4 that are realistically in range of a smaller scope:

Mercury is very fast, doesn't hang around for very long and never gets very high in the sky.

Venus is fab in the morning at the moment, but you do need to get up early.

Mars isn't in a very favourable position at the moment so you won't get much detail out of it - I believe it will be 2016 before it comes into a good position.

Jupiter and Saturn are always fantastic, but it will be summer before we see Saturn again.

Uranus and Neptune are tricky to find, not very big and I don't know how much aperture you need to see this, however they are in quite a good position at the moment.

And don't forget, that as detailed as the moon is, there are going to be a couple of weeks each month when you won't be able to see it at a sensible time of the night.

I'm not going to definitively say, "get this scope", I'm just offering another option.

[MarsG76]

Ok so this went right over my ability to comprehend! But I like being told exactly what I might look to get as add ons. An 8" may not be right for me right now - wouldn't that be enormous and also out of budget?? HOWEVER, you got me thinking. So, as said, I'm leaning back toward the skywatcher explorer 130p, it's on a tripod and looks cute! (Cute is one of the selection criteria right?). That would also mean it is nicely under budget , so if I the booster, filters and an eyepiece would I then be getting closer to my unrealistic expectations? Or have I just become befuddled again? OR is there something around my budget that is nice, tripod based but would give a bigger image? (And equally cute?)

Ok, I've never heard or even considered the word "cute" with a telescope... Something tells me that you're not a fan of the dosonian style of mounting... Bang for buck a dobsonian is probably your best option, as in getting light gathering for lowest price inch:dollar ratio.

Out side of dobsonian choices you have newtonians on a al-az tripod, or on a equatorial mount also on a tripod.

I'm leaning toward 8" for diameter size since comparing 4" & 8" the 8" was noticibly better for astro viewing, and that's the size that I use, so I recommend that size. Logically a 130mm (6") would, or should not be much worse, but mathematically the 8" has almost... ALMOST double the light gathering power of a 6".

It's a little more expensive, but consider a 8".. Or 6" NexStar from Celestron, you'll have the power, a tripod and a electronic GOTO capability that will locate objects for you. Attached is a pic of a NexStar 8SE... 8" version.

Now thinking about cute... A 50mm refractor on a $8000 equatorial mount, now that's cute. :-D

[Paul73]

Not sure that I would fancy carrying a Dob up the hill.

My little Skywatcher ED 80 bolted to its tripod and slung over a shoulder is an easy walk. But not great for Planets or the OP's budget.

What do you guys think of an Evostar 90 on an AZ3?? F10???

Paul

[Paul73]

Looks like I need to type faster!

I've never looked through this scope but the review on the FL0 website is encouraging.

Paul

[rockystar]

Looks like I need to type faster!

I've never looked through this scope but the review on the FL0 website is encouraging.

Paul

Not that much quicker, it took me nearly an hour to write that post (interrupted by the school run)

I haven't looked through this scope myself, but have heard good things from others at one the Astro groups I attend, and I was looking at it as on intro scope / travel scope for the kids. I think it would be a great companion to my 8" reflector.

I was trying to find the sky at night review it references, but can't find it

[happy-kat]

You can't beat portability for getting to use something.

I keep an az3 with a star travel 80mm at my Mum's dark sky location. Quick to grab and take out side. What ever telescope you might have in 10 years a grab and go setup can always have a place.

[rockystar]

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/141556-skywatcher-evostar-90mm-refractor-review/

[ollypenrice]

I, too, live in rural France but well to your south.

In my view it's beyond reasonable doubt that the view through a 6 or 8 inch Dob will eat all comers for breakfast on a £200-ish budget. Are they difficult to move about? Not really. And set up? Well, you put them on the ground... One great way to do this is by using a hand truck (sack truck) or, in Franch, a diable. Yes, a  ! You could make or adapt a wooden box to get the scope to your comfortable height for sitting or standing. (Sitting is better). You could attach the Dob base to this with three screws and then roll the whole assembly out on the hand truck and set it down. I used this system with a much bigger and more complex telescope when I was in the UK. If you don't already own a Diable you will find a thousand other uses for it when you do and wonder how you managed without it. There are even stair climbing versions with three wheels on each side which effectively roll as one.

Wobbly tripods and mounts are horrible and ruin the view. And £200 is not a lot to spend on a tripod, let alone one with a mount and telescope thrown in.

It is an honorable and venerated tradition on SGL to try to tease up your budget by a small percentage (say to twice where it started  ) but if I wanted a scope for £200 there would be literally no possible alternative to a Dob.

The planets will be small but detailed - exactly as they are in a 0.8 metre professional scope. (We have one up the road.) The main difference on the planets is that the professional scope doesn't have to wait till it's dark. You get a great planetary view on a sunny afternoon. I don't think you'll be disappointed. The main thing for planets is to have good 'seeing' which means freedom from the mirage-like ripple effect. This is often associated with wind or spells after wind.

Olly

[BritAngler]

With a £200 budget, the SkyWatcher 150P Dobsonian looks the best bet, but if you can add the rest of the money, the 200P Dobsonian is even better.

[Debyalden]

So here's where I'm at right now:

That Nexstar Celestron IS cute. But also too pricey

there is nothing cute about any of the Skywatcher Dobs (look at me getting the lingo,).

A 6 or 8" I reckon is about as tall as me at my awesome 5'4".

I would need to have OH build a truck capable of transporting 2 French Sheep, to haul it up the track., a 'diable' no less! Do these scopes cope with being bumped around??

Collimation sounds similar to what I talked to my doctor about the other day amd scares me.

8 inches is so much better than 6 - OK I hear you.

I came to you for advice and you have given it. I have listened. so it looks like the Skywatcher 200p for me if I can find some pocket money to add to the budget. Does it come in pretty colours?

[Mr Spock]

It only comes in white but, as long as the inside stays black, you can paint the outside any colour you like

An nice shade of turquoise won't do much for the warranty though

[cuivenion]

If you don't want to be bothered with collimation, want it to be more portable and are mainly concerned with planetary/lunar views, what about a Skywatcher Skymax 90 on an Skywatcher AZ3 mount. It's only a little over budget. I've not used either personally but maksutovs like the Skymax 90 are supposed to excel on planets and they're light and compact. I'm not sure how good the mount is unfortunately, maybe some other members can shed some light on that.

[LukeSkywatcher]

You can't beat portability for getting to use something.

I keep an az3 with a star travel 80mm at my Mum's dark sky location. Quick to grab and take out side. What ever telescope you might have in 10 years a grab and go setup can always have a place.

I think i own 3 of the most portable scopes on the market: 70mm Travelscope,Heritage 130P and 8se. I also have a 90mm refrac on an EQ mount which to most people would be very portable but for me in a wheelchair it was a nightmare so i only used it a handful of times before i upgraded.

[triton1]

The 200p gets my recommendation as well and you could pick one up secondhand for exactly your budget.If you sell it you will probably get your money back if you keep it you could always mount it on an eq mount at a later date.

[rockystar]

So here's where I'm at right now:

That Nexstar Celestron IS cute. But also too pricey

there is nothing cute about any of the Skywatcher Dobs (look at me getting the lingo,).

A 6 or 8" I reckon is about as tall as me at my awesome 5'4".

I would need to have OH build a truck capable of transporting 2 French Sheep, to haul it up the track., a 'diable' no less! Do these scopes cope with being bumped around??

Collimation sounds similar to what I talked to my doctor about the other day amd scares me.

8 inches is so much better than 6 - OK I hear you.

I came to you for advice and you have given it. I have listened. so it looks like the Skywatcher 200p for me if I can find some pocket money to add to the budget. Does it come in pretty colours?

If you want cute, you need to start looking at eyepieces: http://www.firstlightoptics.com/baader-planetarium/baader-hyperion-68-degree-eyepiece.html

But that is a whole other ball game, get yourself the scope first and start using it. The 200p is a great scope and will keep you busy for a while.

[ollypenrice]

If you have, as I do, a small English income and a small French one as well, the temptation to buy in France and pay from UK Sterling funds is irresistible with the exchange rate as it is. It is so irresistible that I have, for some time, been unable to resist it. It feels like buying things with a 40% discount. In reality the 'discount' is far less than 40% and, though it is still a hefty discount, we do like to kid ourselves! For example, I bought a car here in France this year for £13,500 (cost to me) when the UK price for the same car was £16,000. Eventually the manufacturer's pricing stabilizes across the markets but there is a consdierable time lag before it does so. At the moment it can pay to fund purchases in the UK and make them in France.

As for 'cute' in the scope market, there's a lot of it about but don't fall for it. Astronomy is about looking through telescopes, not looking at them. If I sound like John Dobson in saying this then that's fine by me! (The great man might not be so wowed!)

Olly