Alan64

About five years ago, I came this close...[ ]...to getting an Orion ST80, an 80mm f/5 achromat. But then, I ran across this... https://i.imgur.com/JDZsVqh.jpg It's at f/6 instead, and with the same 2" focusser that was found on the Stellarvue AT1010 "Nighthawk" during its production. I think the cemented-doublet of my own, and perhaps that of the Stellarvue, were made by GSO. The doublet exhibits a blemish however... I can see it jutting out all the way until I reach a perfect focus, in so far as it might, but it doesn't seem to affect the images. Synta, the manufacturer of the Orion ST80, and under other marques, started operations round the time you acquired your own, and all that that may entail. Still, it's at f/5 nonetheless. But the ST80 is by no means dead... https://www.meade.com/telescopes/infinity-80mm-altazimuth-refractor.html Quite frankly, I consider even my own to be little more than a "kaleidoscope", and a regression of the achromatic design.

Did you like the type of telescope that your neighbour had? A refractor or a Maksutov sounds like what you need. You may be wanting the largest aperture for the outlay of either of those two designs, I expect. Comets are found, and discovered for the first time, in the hunting for them, as they tend to be a bit on the dim side. You need a low-power, wider view for that. Hence, comets require a larger, shorter Newtonian, or a larger, shorter refractor, ideally; but most any shorter telescope among those two designs will do. I got this 5"/127mm Maksutov a year or two ago... https://explorescientificusa.com/collections/maksutov-cassegrain/products/fl-mc1271900tn But it wouldn't be so much for hunting comets. It's like a microscope, but for high-powered views of the night sky, and distant land-targets during the day. Maksutovs require acclimation, to the outdoor conditions, and before using them; 30 minutes to an hour. Some store them outdoors, protected of course, so as to be ready to go when they are. Sometimes, they might require collimation. It would also need a large finder-scope, to help the telescope see well, to find things, although the included red-dot finder will work at first. This would be a fun refractor, albeit at 80mm, but it would need eyepieces, a diagonal, maybe a finder, or a low-power eyepiece to enable the telescope to act as its own finder, and a mount to get it up off of the ground... https://www.astronomics.com/astro-tech-at80ed-3-1-f-7-ed-refractor-ota.html?___SID=U

I re-read your initial post; I understand now. Rather, that was my fault. Now we're getting somewhere... You have three designs of telescopes from which to choose: refractors, Newtonians(reflectors), and Cassegrains. I have at least one from each design... A refractor is the only design that uses a lens for the objective. All of the other designs use mirrors. Cassegrains are reflectors, too, and always have short tubes. Many prefer them for that characteristic. Cassegrains are for the medium-to-high powers, not for low-power, wide-field views of the night sky. They are an ideal for close-up views of the Moon, the planets, the stars, and quite a few deep-sky objects. Most deep-sky objects are small, and will fit within the lowest-power view of a Cassegrain. On the other hand, refractors and Newtonians can have long, medium or short tubes. Long and short refractors... Long and short Newtonians... The long ones are good for the medium and higher powers. The shorter ones are good for low-power and wider views of the sky. Each type has its advantages and disadvantages. Refractors normally do not require collimation, the alignment of the optical system. All others, reflectors, do require collimation, and to varying degrees. The goal in collimating a telescope is simply to produce and enjoy sharp, pleasing images, particularly at the higher powers. For the lack of a better analogy, the procedure is like the tuning of a guitar or other. Many years ago, I referred to a relation's reflector, one from his early youth, his first, as his "star-banjo". I might think that you are looking for a telescope that will show you everything, that does it all. From low-power, wide-field views of the Milky Way in summer; the galaxy in Andromeda, the Orion nebula, and the Pleiades in winter -- to narrow, high-power views of the Moon and planets, the stars and star-clusters. Indeed, to see with your own eyes the Trapezium within Orion, if not the Horsehead with a far, far larger telescope. Or, you simply want to see the smaller, dimmer objects in the sky, that seem hidden, yet more brightly and closer. The closest I have to an all-rounder, that at least attempts to do it all, is this 150mm f/5 Newtonian... Through that one, I've seen the lower-power wider views of the sky, of course. A telescope doesn't have to work hard to produce those. But I have also seen the festoons and whorls within the equatorial-bands of Jupiter, and through that very telescope. A telescope, and the eyepieces, etc, did have to work hard to produce that. That's why collimation is so very important, to learn and master; to enjoy the procedure even. Have you seen this one? It's not too difficult to collimate... http://site.astrofoto.com.pt/welcome/produto/dobson-gso-8-de-luxe/

If the 150€ must include books and accessories, the telescope choices will be limited. If not, then you might consider a kit among these... If a refractor, the longer ones exhibit minimal false-colour whilst observing brighter objects. They also have the smallest apertures among telescope designs... http://site.astrofoto.com.pt/welcome/produto/telescopio-meade-70-900-polaris-eq/ ...or... http://site.astrofoto.com.pt/welcome/produto/telescopio-skywatcher-70-700-az2/ FLO, the host this site, also carries that kit... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/sky-watcher-mercury-707-az-telescope.html With a Newtonian, you generally get a larger aperture for the same cost... http://site.astrofoto.com.pt/welcome/produto/telescopio-sw-dobson-100x400/ That one however is best for low-power observations, if that's your interest; similar to binoculars. For more versatility, and in observing most everything in the sky, at low and high powers... http://site.astrofoto.com.pt/welcome/produto/1556/ FLO carries both of those kits as well... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-heritage-100p-tabletop-dobsonian.html https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html FLO also carries this kit... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-heritage-114p-virtuoso.html If you want the ability to track your objects, the mount of this kit features slow-motion tracking controls... http://site.astrofoto.com.pt/welcome/produto/telescopio-reflector-skywatcher-114x900-eq2-2/ ...as does this one, but a refractor with a smaller aperture... http://site.astrofoto.com.pt/welcome/produto/telescopio-meade-70-900-polaris-eq/

Hi from Mississippi... The term "inexpensive" would seem to exclude the Cassegrains, save a 90mm Maksutov perhaps. That leaves refractors and Newtonians, the "ancient", tried and true designs. But a Newtonian is not suitable for daytime/terrestrial use; birds in trees, ships at sea, and drones, as the subjects would appear upside-down. That leaves refractors. This refractor, an 80mm f/8 achromat, is versatile for observing at low to high powers. For the higher powers, where the planets become interesting, a 2x or even a 3x barlow would be required... https://explorescientificusa.com/collections/firstlight/products/fl-ar80640tn The telescope comes with an erect-image diagonal suitable for daytime/terrestrial use. At night however, for the Moon, the planets and beyond, a star-diagonal is best; for example... https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/201981-REG/Celestron_94115_A_Star_Diagonal_1_25.html/?ap=y&ap=y&smp=y&smp=y&lsft=BI%3A514&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIvpPs4Lzx6wIVkYbACh0Okw-YEAQYASABEgJ5jPD_BwE If you choose a refractor with an even longer tube, it would excel at the medium-to-high powers, day or night; for example... https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1248235-REG/celestron_22402_inspire_80az_80mm_f_11_3.html A star-diagonal may be desired for that one as well. This is the Celestron C90 Maksutov... https://www.opticsplanet.com/celestron-90mm-maksutov-spotting-scope-package-52268-op-90mm-spotting-scope-with-trip.html There is a waiting-period associated with that one. A relation got one of those a couple of years ago, and from that very vendor as it came with a photo-tripod. They didn't get it for astronomy however, but for observing targets during the day, only. I used it at night a couple of times. The Moon looks great through it, and I assume the planets would as well. During the day, if the drones are a considerable distance away, then it just might be the one for you... A Maksutov is the closest a mirrored telescope may come to a long-focus refractor. Indeed, the Celestron C90 simulates an 80mm f/16 achromat, at best. Oh, and it, too, could use a star-diagonal, and for use at night.

I have a 127mm Maksutov, too. It's an Explore Scientific, identical to the Bresser(in cahoots Bresser and ES are), and both at f/15. When I got my definitive 4" refractor... ...at about the same time, and to ward off the fever, I got a custom 8" f/5 Newtonian, the OTA only... It was originally white, with black-plastic trims. The trims are present still, but painted/aluminum-taped. Believe it or not, I've yet to observe through it, being that it needs a mount, but once the fever hits, if and when it does, I'll need to get a Dobson base for it, of all wood/plywood most likely.

One sure-fire cure for aperture-fever is to cease production of all telescopes beside these two, and for about five years... You get your choice of a 50mm refractor, or a 76mm Newtonian, and both at f/12. Although, I do realise upon the expiration of said moratorium that it could backfire...

Very well, however, by no means shy away from the higher and highest powers of which the telescope is certainly capable. Fine refractors have been known to reach powers of up to 100x per inch, and at times beyond. But for the sake of argument, let's reduce that to 50x-per-inch, and to play it safe. 61mm = 2.4"; we'll go ahead and round that off to 2.5"... 2.5 x 50 = 125x But I think you might be able to reach 150x, if you're determined; possibly more. I doubt that you've even conducted a star-test with the telescope, and that is done at the higher and highest powers. A star-test will reveal the quality of the FPL-53 doublet, the objective, of your refractor... ...if you dare, if you're not afraid to find out. At 150x, the planets become interesting, and they're certainly bright enough so as not to appear that dim through a 61mm aperture; Saturn might be a bit dimmer, but not by much. Then, as I understand, Sirius, the Dog Star, may be viewed there. You can conduct the star-test with that star, or with any other bright star. I have what might be considered as a near-equivalent to your own telescope, in so far as a short focal-length and focal-ratio... It's a Newtonian, rather; a 100mm f/4, and with a focal-length of 400mm. Yours is a 61mm f/6 refractor, and with a focal-length of 360mm. It's the focal-lengths that are comparable among our own, and for purposes relating to magnifications with various eyepieces. I've been trying to max out the power of the 100mm, and with some success, but I'm not quite done testing it. At present, I'm eyeing a 4mm 58° planetary-eyepiece, but it's back-ordered until October. I will then combine that 4mm with a 3x-barlow for a simulated 1.3mm(400mm ÷ 1.3mm = 308x), and see what I might see. If too high, I can then barlow the 4mm with a 2x, and for a simulated 2mm(400mm ÷ 2mm = 200x). I'll be trying out both combinations of course. It's great fun. You might find it entertaining as well, if not thrilling.

But in my next breath, I'd prefer this, and a most useful ocular for a 130mm f/5 Newtonian... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/tele-vue-eyepieces/tele-vue-3-6mm-nagler-50-degree-zoom-eyepiece.html Yes, I would suggest that one.

Indeed, for example... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/tele-vue-eyepieces/tele-vue-ethos-100-110-degree-eyepieces.html

I have that one as well... ...albeit under a differing marque. My late father was able to see the galaxy in Andromeda, and through that very eyepiece. Needless to say, I treasure it. However, that was also through my 102mm f/8 refractor. In any event, the 32mm will provide your lowest power, for the hunt, and at 31x. It will help somewhat in augmenting the finder in same. I have this 12mm 60°... There, I have it barlowed, and for a simulated 4.3mm(174x), and through this 150mm f/5... But that 12mm of my own has only four lens-elements, as it's older, from the early 1990s, "old school". The modern 12mm 60° has five, and that should play well with your 200P-DS. Then, there are short focal-length eyepieces with barlowing lens-elements(4mm or so), and at varying price-points. A 150mm f/5 Newtonian is a bit picky about eyepieces in its own right, but a 200mm f/5 even more. When you go up in aperture, yet at the same focal-ratio, the pickier a Newtonian can be. I had a blast with that 150mm f/5 during the warmer months of 2015. I think you will, too.

That one would work quite well with the telescope in question, albeit after mortgaging something or other.

A 3mm to 4mm eyepiece would be for the higher powers, and for a shot at the planets; and the Moon, its craters and other features. A 6mm, and up to a 12mm perhaps, would be for the medium powers, for those not-too-close yet not-too-distant views, and relative to the telescope in question. From 16mm on up to 32mm, I'd have the option to use binoculars instead, but I wouldn't since I don't care for binoculars at night. Which eyepiece would you like per those categories? You may find a medium-power eyepiece most enjoyable, to be used most often, perhaps a 6mm(60x) or a 7mm(51x). For example, the 6.7mm from this listing... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/explore-scientific-eyepieces/explore-scientific-82-degree-series-eyepieces.html

I have a 200mm f/5 Newtonian myself, albeit unused. It was a special order from the manufacturer, as the only 200mm OTA offered off their shelf was at either f/4 or f/6, and I wanted neither. Keep in mind that your former 200mm "Dobsonian" was at f/6, and played well with your eyepieces. The 200mm f/5 parabola will be a bit pickier as to what is used with it. Hopefully it won't require more eyepieces. If you have Plossls you should be good to go. Do you have any wide-angle eyepieces?

This is the basic EQ-5... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-eq5-deluxe.html Automatic-tracking can be enabled at present with a single motor-drive kit, and for the RA-axis only... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-mount-accessories/single-axis-dc-motor-drive-for-eq5.html That, to get your feet wet. In future, you can consider the go-to upgrade... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-mount-accessories/synscan-pro-goto-version-3-upgrade-kit-for-eq5.html Do you earnestly desire to capture glory on "film"? Have a look at this thread, if you haven't already... It is still active, unto this day.

Another item you may find useful is a barlow; or a short focal-length eyepiece, a 4mm(90x) or 3mm(120x).

The term "astrophotography" conjures up visions of house-mortgages and such. If you have a DSLR-camera, and the desire to take long-term exposures of dim and dimmer objects, £300 is not going to go very far, I'm afraid. There is afocal-photography and EAA that may be done with any telescope. Most any entry-level equatorial mount can be motorised(RA-axis only) for automatic tracking, and that can help ensure success when taking instant and short-term exposures. With an alt-azimuth, instant exposures are to be expected, and of the brighter deep-sky objects; even the camera of a "smartphone" can be used. I used a 150mm f/5 on a manual alt-azimuth, and took this instant shot of a globular-cluster, M13, and the brightest globular in the sky... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-130p.html https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-mount-accessories/ra-single-speed-motor-drive-for-eq-2.html Best of luck to you.

I had been wanting a Maksutov for a few years before I got my own, about a year ago or so. It makes for a very good simulation of a 102mm f/19 or even a 115mm f/17 achromatic-refractor. At focal-ratios like that, a refractor doesn't need exotic glasses to reduce or even to eliminate false-colour. I had thought about a 150mm, but not for long. For one, they're a bit more expensive, but the real reason was due to the longer acclimation period required prior to observing.

For the time being, you can transform the EQ-2 into a rudimentary yet fully-working alt-azimuth. This is my Meade 114mm f/8, and the EQ2-class mount that came with it... You simply throw the RA-axis back until the butt of it rests upon the latitude-stop bolt, then clamp it to secure... The EQ-2 will go almost all the way back, but far enough to effect the transformation, and at 85°, with my own in any event... The counterweight must be used, still, and to balance that side of the mount opposite the telescope. You then unclamp both axes, and motion the telescope left to right, and up and down, just as a dedicated alt-azimuth. With the axes clamped, both slow-motion controls can be used as well; fully operational. If that helps, you can certainly continue to use it that way. If you want the ability to throw the RA-axis back all the way to 90°, if your own does not allow that as it comes, a notch will need to be made into the body as shown, carefully, and to accommodate the width of the stop-bolt... The notch must not be made too deeply, or it will go past 90°, to 91° or more.

That due to at least one of two things. One, the ground, figured and polished surfaces of a short focal-ratio, crown-and-flint doublet, the curvatures, are steeper(convex), deeper(concave), a bit more exotic if you will. That requires more attention, and labour, in getting it just right. It's the same with a 150mm f/4 parabola vs a 150mm f/8, among Newtonians. Then, imagine yourself at a shop at the end of a dark alleyway. You know absolutely nothing about telescopes, yet one is earnestly desired nonetheless. The sign above the shop is faded and soiled. You can barely make out the name: Soso Telescopes & Pet Shop. The door creaks as you enter, and a bell tinkles, alerting the proprietor... "Good Day. I'd like a telescope, please. Ooooh, that one's nice and long. How much?" "220." "Hmm, what's that short one over there, by the dead parrot?" "It's the same as the long one, but shorter." "I can fit that one in my car! How much?" "420."

The rings are holding a 90mm f/10 achromat within that image. In so far as the spacing between the rings, they must also accommodate a shorter, 80mm f/6 achromat to which the rings originally belong; two telescopes, one set of rings. Imagine my delight when I discovered that the one set of rings also fit the 90mm f/10. In so far as the bar's length, that's to balance the 80mm f/6 when using a 2" diagonal and a 2" ocular, to move it farther forward. In that I did not purchase a set of rings and a dovetail-bar for the 90mm f/10, I can assure you that I will not be purchasing an extra set of rings for a third, then to have a useless spare on hand. For one, I'm a visual observer only, albeit with the odd afocal-shot taken with a small point-and-shoot camera, but only to demonstrate what may be seen during a live view, through this eyepiece and that, and this telescope and that. Two rings per telescope, maximum, in my stable, or sometimes for two, if I can get away with it. I don't even have premium rings for my premium refractor... ...as they are not necessary. Those work, and serve, admirably. Then, what does all of this have to do with securing a telescope within its mount's saddle?

Yes, like this... Any that are within the bar must be counter-sunk.

I think you mean less false-colour, rather than coma, being that the "Startravel" is a short-achromat, a refractor. Gracious, at f/5 I think it is, with lots of "rainbows". As you may know by now, the instrument is for the dimmer deep-sky delights, and so as not to rile it up. For something a bit more down to Earth in outlay, for the brighter and brightest objects, like the Moon, the planets and super-stars... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-ar-102l-1000-refractor-ota.html ...or... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-ar-127l-1200-refractor-ota.html Although, both will exhibit some false-colour, the 127mm in particular, but not nearly as much as the one you have at present. Another choice, and perhaps the best of all, would be a 127mm Maksutov... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-127-ota.html ...or... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-mc-127-1900-maksutov-cassegrain-ota.html (I have this one, and under the Explore Scientific marque) A 127mm Maksutov is the "sweet spot" among the varying apertures of the design; an effective aperture, and reduced time in waiting for the telescope to adjust to the outdoor conditions prior to observing. If you choose a Maksutov, you will want to get a dew-shield for it straight away; for example... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dew-prevention/astrozap-flexible-dew-shield.html You don't want the meniscus(the front "lens") to dew up on humid nights. It will also help to keep bugs, dirt and pollen at bay.

Not surprising, as Takahashi's in-house operations are more along the lines of a mechanical nature, with their regular offerings at least; the tubes, the focussers, the mounts and tripods perhaps in addition. The fluorite-doublet of my own was produced by Canon-Optron.

Incidentally, Takahashi is offering an achromat, albeit an 80mm f/10, for the first time in decades... https://www.highpointscientific.com/takahashi-starbase-80-beginners-refractor-telescope-stk0800 ...and perhaps guaranteed to knock your socks off, achromatically.