Goto or not goto?

[popeye85]

As a beginner I'm Trying to decide wether or not to get a go to on my telescope-I have had recommendations for both sides of the argument-one saying no as it eliminates the fun and enjoyment of getting to know your way around the sky however others have said that it justmakes it easier for locating objects-I'm torn! Please help. .....

[Flyingfuzz]

I have just upgraded from a manual to a goto and can say I would not go back. You still have to know your way around the sky as the alignment requires you to know certain stars and where they are in the sky. Unless you plan to view over several hours you can pack a lot of objects in a short session so making the best out of evening viewing. I got the latest goto with freedom find that allows you to manually move the scope without loosing alignment.

As to the fun in finding objects, there is also a lot of frustration trying to find them as well, at least I now know what I am looking at!

[pipnina]

I think GOTO is nice since you can opt to find objects manually if you want but you can just have the scope move about and find the target for you if you might not have much time... But you'll pay a fair bit for it. I think the GOTO dobs usually increase in cost around 50% with GOTO

[Pig]

Both have advantages and disadvantages. I have had both and prefer the manual method mainly due to the simplicity of it.

GoTo has some great advantages especially when you are new to the hobby as it can reduce the frustrations of not having the time searching for targets, especially so with the limiting weather patterns the UK has and the limited time available.  

However, once you get to know your way around the sky the need reduces for GoTo, there is also a sense of personal satisfaction at being able to find targets.

Without a doubt GoTo does help you learn your way around the sky, so both methods have their merits and both are very enjoyable.

[John]

I think GOTO systems can create a lot of enjoyment. The only snag is if your budget is limited because most of it will go on the GOTO mount system leaving little for the scope that will ride on it. And it's the scope that provides the views of course.

[Charic]

GoTo, essential if your viewing with several observers, who may not be familiar with scope operations,  as the system will maintain track between each user, and necessary possibly for astrophotography.

Expensive when you consider the  basic scope equivalent without the  GoTo facility.

For the price of the GoTo, I would rather spend my money on a Nu-To with more aperture at half the price maybe (Nudge Too) Also, a GoTo requires a lot more setingt up, and set up correctly, or it won't work! 

I have, a basic scope, except for  the task of collimation, which will bother some folk, but once understood, its as simple as?

Nothing to worry about with my scope no  critical  setting up EVERY time?  Just place it outside, pop in a low powered EP and enjoy the view, with the  views getting better as the scope cools and the magnification goes up.

Oh! and of course! you need good weather conditions.

[Lorne]

Check out our group near to you, Central Scotland Observers Group..... google CSOG, we meet at a few sites in the Central belt (if it ever clears) if you get to one of our meets you will see both options in action, and get advice on the pros and cons of both..... although there are no cons!! they both have their advantages in my opinion.

[Gazabone]

You'll polarise opinion with that question! But it's a good one nevertheless. Personally I would regard a GoTo as a learning option; not so much for learning your way about the night sky, I think it helps build confidence to know what the fainter targets look like through a scope. Personally I find setting circles on a good EQ mount more accurate than GoTo but I'll never forget finding M97 (Owl Nebuka) for the first time; I used setting circles, looked through the EP and couldn't see anything remotely resembling what I expected so decided to start fishing around as I knew that I couldn't be far off. It was when I started moving the scope that noticed that the patch of gloom in the centre of the ep wasn't quite as gloomy as the surrounding gloom and that's because I was spot on the target. Either way I think it's helpful to have confidence with faint targets that your scope is pointing at it.

I really struggle with star hopping but I haven't put too much effort into trying to learn how to.

[Stub Mandrel]

Well I'm trying to make a GOTO system for my mount...

[Tinker1947]

If it's affordable go for it, you don't have to use the GoTo but if you don't have it you have no choice.

[Astro Imp]

I can only speak from personal experience.

When I started I was unwilling to commit a lot of money to a new hobby not being sure if I would stick with it. I bought myself a reasonable manual set up. I have found I spend nearly every clear night outside but have never become proficient at star hopping so my sessions usually start with ideas of what new objects I want to see and spend a disproportionate amount of time not finding them and then go back to the usual suspects. On the occasion of adding to my found objects I do feel that I have won a little battle. 

With the above in mind I am in the process of upgrading my set up and will be going for a GOTO 10" Dob. as I know it will get well used and feel I have sufficient experience to make the judgement call.

BTW I am interested in visual only not imaging.

[laudropb]

One worry I would have is the packing of a lot of objects into the one session. It depends whether you just want to see an object and tick them of on a list or actually look at the object and get some idea of its structure, extent etc. of course this is all down to personal choice and I am not knocking list compilers. Each to his own, but not my cup of tea.

[Moonshane]

For me the answer to this question rests not so much on goto or not goto but on more aperture or less aperture for an assumed budget. To a point, given a choice of a larger scope where I'd see things I had to find myself or a smaller scope where I can find things but not be able to see them as the aperture will not reveal them in my skies, I'd have bigger/manual every time. However, if money is no object then a large aperture goto scope would be a seriously good investment.

[pipnina]

One worry I would have is the packing of a lot of objects into the one session. It depends whether you just want to see an object and tick them of on a list or actually look at the object and get some idea of its structure, extent etc. of course this is all down to personal choice and I am not knocking list compilers. Each to his own, but not my cup of tea.

You can compile lists and spend time enjoying what you're looking at.

[Waldemar]

it all depends on  how you want to spend your (limited) time... getting frustrated because you cannot find what you want to see, or enjoying what you see and be sure of what it is you see...It eliminates nothing, it just brings more fun

With or without GoTo you will learn the night sky anyway. If you are interested in technique, GoTo offers nice possibilties to get into several disciplines and you can tweak your sytem almost endlessly on those cloudy evenings and nights:  another side of the hobby.

Think it over and take a dicission wisely, with an eye on your future goals. I am sure you will have fun either way!

[Yearofthegoat]

Being a newbie I've found GoTo to be great for learning. Before I started using it I would pick out something I wanted to see and would try to find it. The trouble is that when you're new to all this, your confidence in what you're looking at is low. So even though I would think I was pointing in the right direction, I wasn't sure. And if you don't know the constellations that well, it's even worse.

I'm lucky enough to have an HEQ5 Pro and I got to grips with polar alignment through the polar scope first before using GoTo.  After that I printed off diagrams of Ursa major, Ursa minor, Cassiopeia and the other one that looks like a tilted shed - hang on - Cepheus. That way I could do a 2-star or 3-star alignment on really obvious stars.

After that I could use GoTo to double-check other objects I thought I recognised like Vega, Arcturus, Deneb and also Jupiter, Saturn and of course the Moon (!). Now it sounds really stupid to say I needed GoTo to find Jupiter - I didn't really, but I did need it to be more sure of finding Jupiter. The GoTo keeps the frustration side of being a n00b to a minimum, which is great because if using the scope just p's you off, you won't want to use it.

On the money side, as Moonshane rightly says, the scope is the important bit, as is the mount/tripod. I blew my own budget in getting an HEQ5 Pro Synscan - to host a 150P-DS (6" aperture) which was a present from relatives. But it leaves me with an upgrade path and/or the option to do some imaging later on down the line. Put it this way, I'm glad I didn't go for a bigger scope on a lesser mount - the 6" scope gives me enough to view for now.

[happy-kat]

Add setting circles to a dob makes it a push to.

[Putaendo Patrick]

What type/size of telescope are you thinking of buying? How much money do you have available?

A good Go-To in action is a very powerIful tool indeed! It is also an expensive part of the set up, and this money could be spent on a better scope and mount. This seems especially true at the lower/cheaper end of the market.

In the mid price range, some telescopes come with manual mounts which can be upgraded to Go-To. Or buy a Go-To mount at a later date, keeping the original telescope.

I remember at school in the 1970s when pocket calculators began to become available at accessible prices, teachers were divided as to whether they helped or hindered children learn maths. I think the general consenus now would be that a calculator can help you to advance faster - and, for me the same applied to Go-To. If it makes going out and observing the sky more enjoyable for you then it can't be bad!

[goodricke1]

If you're in Edinburgh the weather is probably even worse than here in Ireland, so it has to be GoTo. It will allow you to maximise your observing time before the clouds roll in.

[happy-kat]

If you get a goto setup that has the higher weight carrying head then you can change the telescope later on, some mounts carry either 4 or 5 kilos.

[nucleardwarf]

Learning the night sky applies to all scope types. 

[Charic]

I've seen Dec / Ra circles fitted to a Dob , but not sure how it becomes a Push -To from a Nudge-To, by the addition of a few decals?

The Dobsonian system is by design, simple to use. Why not keep it that way?

You need to fully understand the co-ordinate system, and align the Dobsonian in order for the settings to work. Not something I need on my scope!

Unless Im missing something ( always open minded ) ?

[ronin]

Like many, even most, I have both. Will say I like goto.

I can let the scope do the travelling around bit, usually it manages to do it right.

Actually find the advantage is the time that is saved and then it tracks the object. If you are with others it is very nice that the objects remains in view (more or less) while you look and then others do.

Had a small scope goto tracking the Sun a few months ago it managed to keep it in the eyepiece for 2+ hours, week ago was using a small reflector on a manual mount, we had to jump in at every 3rd person to recentre the object. The 3rd person usually only saw half the moon. I suspect that this aspect is the most useful but not the bit that people talk/consider/argue over as much.

Before you consider just a tracking mount I do not consider it worth the difference as the motor cost adds up and then you do not save any time locating the object. You sort of get the cost and lose the time saving.

[Tinker1947]

I've seen Dec / Ra circles fitted to a Dob , but not sure how it becomes a Push -To from a Nudge-To, by the addition of a few decals?

The Dobsonian system is by design, simple to use. Why not keep it that way?

You need to fully understand the co-ordinate system, and align the Dobsonian in order for the settings to work. Not something I need on my scope!

Unless Im missing something ( always open minded ) ?

I would spend more time looking at the RA/DEC numbers, get halfway through the move and need to check them again, writing them on paper is another time waster as there on paper to start with and this then requires a light to see the numbers when standing by the Dob, a GoTo is a lot easier, learning the night sky with Stellarium and a list of Messiers, a Telrad and patience is the real way to go, just use the GoTo once you know where to look.....

[cotterless45]

I'd start with something that'll teach you the skies, like binoculars or a small 130 Dob. If you like paddling around in the shallows ,then go for a goto. Remember that most small systems the money had been spent on the GOTO and not the optics. I've seen so many newbies turn up with small GOTO mounts, but completely unable to identify stars or constellations. Even with a Satnav , for example, you need to know where you're heading to.

If you can manage it, a GOTO mount will allow you to add a refractor, Newtonian or a catiowhatsit scope.

It's been a reluctant choice for me, driven by so few clear nights for observing. I do still very much enjoy just a simple mount and scope to star hop around the skies,

Nick.