Zermelo

Hello and welcome. Even without the links to the actual scopes, there are some general observations: - almost all serious astrophotographers use an equatorial mount, because it can track objects using smooth rotation around a single axis - even then, to get really good results on fainter objects, you need a more expensive EQ mount that has finer tolerances and can manage a greater total weight - nevertheless, few things are actually "impossible", and this group on this forum are a case in point - astro imaging is a big learning curve (and not cheap) - if you are just setting out, think carefully whether you want to go straight into it

Ah, here you go: https://www.365astronomy.com/Replacement-Reticle-for-Telrad-Finder.html

If you mean this, then yes, they are available separately, though I haven't found a UK supplier.

Some amazing photos. Almost like the good old days:

Welcome, which scope do you have? Light pollution won't help, but this book has some good advice on technique and suggestions for suitable targets from urban locations.

The 2012 transit of Venus, because I won't see another. From my location there was a short window between sunrise and end of transit. The night before, I set up a small refractor and projection arrangement in an upstairs room, pointed at the eastern horizon. Next morning we got up at dawn and found the horizon covered in cloud, but the sun escaped just in time for us to see the disc before it was over. The thing that surprised me was the size of Venus - I had been expecting to see something smaller.

A Cheshire is an aid to collimating a telescope, like this one for example. There are alternatives, like caps (cheaper) and lasers (usually more expensive)

I didn't get the clouds down here, but seeing was poor (turbulent upper atmosphere, I think). I made out some darker areas, just about.

In the spring, from northern latitudes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messier_marathon

Has anyone done the Messier Marathon and seen all the planets, in the same session? There must be some sort of award for that.

I have an F/5 reflector and three of the BST Starguiders, and they perform very well for the money. Many people on here have recommended them. Your other option is to consider a zoom eyepiece. They will obviously span a range of focal lengths and can be very useful, for example when identifying and splitting double stars. Because of the compromises involved in design they won't be quite as sharp as a fixed-focus eyepiece, and the apparent field of view will generally be narrower. But you can get very decent ones like this for not much more than a single BST. If you did want to consider a barlow (they can be useful to fill in "gaps" in the range, with an existing EP), you again have a whole range of quality and cost to choose from. You can pay well into three figures, but it probably makes sense to align the quality and spend to match the eyepieces. To complement the BSTs (or that zoom), these two barlows have been recommended previously (I have the first on order): https://www.firstlightoptics.com/barlow-eyepieces/baader-classic-q-225x-barlow.html https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/revelation-astro-25x-barlow-lens-125.html

Welcome, I doubt that you will be disappointed if you buy Turn Left at Orion. It is ideal for beginners, and concentrates on the easier-to-find objects. The other relevant feature for your query is that it describes how to find the targets using multiple diagrams for each - e.g. the view through a (regular) finder, and through a refractor diagonal. One of the challenges in finding targets is that different instruments will reverse the actual view - left/right, or up/down. So the view you get may be different from the chart you're using. If you found Neptune with binos you may already be comfortable with this, but some people prefer to have the views matching, which can be achieved by reflecting a paper chart in a small mirror, or by flipping the view in some charting apps, or using a "correct image" finder (which matches a regular starchart view). The book also has an accompanying website that has some useful supporting information. This resource is also a good guide to finding objects.

Ah, sounds like a plan. Some other threads that have discussed portable options: https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/364691-grab-and-go/?tab=comments#comment-3971809 https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/357741-grab-n-go-systems/?tab=comments#comment-3896908 https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/328904-dinky-travel-scopes-grab-n-go-options/?tab=comments#comment-3582425 https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/318921-newbie-looking-for-grab-and-go/?tab=comments#comment-3487912

Isn't that just a very fast newt with an excessively cautious dew shield?

Hello and welcome (and your English is better than some of the natives!). You seem to have a number of different (and sometimes opposing) factors driving your decision (and that's quite common). In terms of what you want to do and see, you mention "budget astrophotography". Yes, you can make a start with a standard DSLR and tripod, but that will limit your targets very much. You would need to progress to a decent mount if you want to target fainter deep sky objects. You mention wanting to stay away from equatorial mounts, and that the advice for beginners is often "get the biggest dobsonian you can". Well, equatorial mounts can be heavy to transport, and are a bit more complex for beginners to learn than the alternatives - so for both those reasons, that is a fit for your circumstances. However, dobsonians are really better suited to visual rather than photographic astronomy, so you really need to think about what you want to be doing, starting out. You are right that a large dob can be difficult to transport, but an equivalent scope on a decent equatorial mount would be worse. If you go for a 130mm or 150mm dob as suggested above then it can be reasonably portable, as they are often designed to be broken down and re-assembled. The alt-az option you have considered is often recommended for beginners, as the mount is simpler, reasonably compact, and can support a decent refractor or catadioptric device that will show you quite a lot. Again, though, alt-az will severely limit your photographic abilities. It is possible to achieve results with care and shorter exposures (there are some good examples in this forum) but you are really fighting against the technology rather than working with it. In terms of your targets, you mention solar system first and DSO afterwards. Again, there are balances and compromises to be made here. You correctly point out that a longer focal length (which you often get with a catadioptric scope, but you might also with a refractor) will tend to narrow the field of view available with a given eyepiece, and so will make it hard to view the whole of some deep sky objects. A fast (F/5) reflector will work better in this case. On the other hand, if you are interested in solar system objects then you will want to increase the magnification as much as the conditions allow, and a longer focal length scope helps here. You can perhaps see why many people eventually end up with several telescopes! There is often no single answer that will suit all the requirements. But you need to start somewhere, and to narrow down your choice, perhaps you can decide which of your wants and constraints are the most important and most urgent. I'm only a few months ahead of you, and I also came into it wanting to do visual and photography, of solar system and DSOs (oh, and possibly spectrography) but I decided to concentrate on visual to start, and decided that a faster newtonian gave me the best mix of targets for now - but I do have a back garden. The main thing is to go with something that you will use as much as you can, and will let you see enough to keep you interested, and then you will have a lot more to base your next choice on. Happy shopping!

I was surprised how white it looked when I observed it a few weeks ago (my first time through a "proper" telescope, 6" newt with a low-dispersion EP, no filter).

I assume you're talking about the line titled "7Timer Seeing"? I couldn't find anything on the CO site that explained it either, or the other 7Timer forecast lines. However, you can compare the CO data with its source on the 7timer website. The format is different there, but when I matched the two websites for my own observing location, it seemed that the general rule for all the lines on the CO site is "the darker the blue colour, the better". For the seeing forecast, that would mean the lower numbers are better.

... which I would also put into the "anti-social" category (from an environmental perpective at least). I think the other factor might be an increasing trend towards individualism over the years. For example, when I was a boy, there was an unwritten rule that you didn't light up a bonfire before dusk, because of other people trying to enjoy their gardens, dry washing etc. These days it's pretty commonplace to see bonfires and barbecues lit up at all hours. Consumer security lighting didn't really exist back in the day, but if it had then I think people then would have given consideration to the effect on other people before installing or using it.

... and seem to last forever! We also have neighbours that found it necessary to dress their garden with solar LEDs, and they keep going for hours after dusk. The battery must have more amp-hours than I'm using to power my scope!

OK. Well you've obviously found the welcome forum, there are some stickies there, and I expect you've found other forums by activity area. The "Activity" drop-down gives you access to several useful views and filters, such as threads that you have started and those that you have posted in. You can choose to follow individual posts and members, which will appear in standard views ("my activity streams"). You can even convert your own searches into bespoke "custom streams" that will appear in the same menu. If you prefer push notification to passive checking, you can even turn these into RSS feeds, and include them in an external news reader. If you're interested in buying second hand gear, you might want to keep a close eye on the For Sale/Swap section - there are sometimes good bargains, but they go very quickly.

Hi, welcome. Is that "figure out how this website works" or "figure out how astronomy works"? Do you have any specific areas of interest? Do you already have equipment?

Welcome. Looks like you should get some viewing in the coming week.

You will get less - if you have a fixed budget then opting for Goto will leave you less for the scope (OTA) and accessories. If you were viewing from a dark site then you would probably receive advice to get the biggest dobsonian you could afford. But there's no advantage in having a bigger bucket if you're going to struggle to find anything in the first place. That's the trade-off you need to decide, and for a beginner I think it's important to be seeing stuff early on. And I'd support Cosmic Geoff's mention of the RACI finder. I linked to a "straight through" model, but the RACI has the double advantage of (a) showing the sky as it appears in most sky charts (the other models are reversed L-R, up-down, or both!), and (b) saving you from contorting your neck into difficult positions. I'm waiting on a RACI myself (currently out of stock, like many items at the moment). Unfortunately, they are also more expensive than straight-through types.

There are folk who manage surprisingly well from city centres. In many cases the problem isn't so much seeing your target but finding it in the first place. In polluted skies you are going to struggle with star hopping because you will have fewer reference stars to guide you. Compounding this, a beginner scope will likely come armed only with a basic "red dot" finder or perhaps a 6x30. Substituting a larger finder will help with the hopping, but the extra weight may either throw the scope off balance or exceed the overall mount limit (especially if you start to upgrade eyepieces). A Telrad finder is very useful, but again it's heavy. You might consider a computerised "goto" mount, which will help with locating targets, but be aware that they are (a) significantly more expensive and (b) don't do all the work for you - you will likely still need to do some manual finding. That sounds a bit gloomy, but as I say plenty of people do manage well in cities. Another point is to pick your targets sensibly. Don't expect to see M33 from a balcony window (and now I know that someone is going to reply that they did just that). There are resources aimed specifically at the urban astronomer, like this book and this observing programme . Good luck.

This is a recent thread asking about a first scope for a 14-year-old, some of the responses may also be of interest to you.