Orange Smartie

Likewise, no issues with dew for me except on the finder. I got round that by making a tube out of some stiff paper I found lying around. I just slide it on when I take the scope out and remove it at the end of the evening.

You'll also need something to collimate (align) the optics, as you'll probably find things will move about a bit. There are various ways do this, from laser collimators to a simple collimation cap. I have a cap (came with my little telescope) and a cheapo cheshire collimator from eBay (cost about £10). The latter seems to work ok in my hands. And before you actually do any collimating, checkout the interweb for guides on how to do this.

How about an observing chair? If if your budget doesn't run to that, something to stand the telescope on. I use a water butt (barrel) stand. Unless you're Danny DeVito, in which case, a stepladder!

If you don't already have it and you're starting out, a copy of Turn Left at Orion is worth buying.

Just note that I'm listing what I can SEE, but the detail will be nothing like the photos you see from Hubble etc. For me, the challenge is to find the object and to tease out some hint of what is going on - but often finding and seeing the object is all I can do*. Regarding eyepieces, the 10mm supplied is not great, so 8mm BST is a useful starter. I don't use a Barlow, but I have 5, 8, 12, 25mm. Most of my observing is with the 8mm or 25mm. Others with more experience may well recommend a different arrangement. *at least for galaxies, which mainly appear as fuzzy smears.

Hmm good question. I will check out my entries on here..... In no particular order: Split Rigel from Rigel B, Orion nebula, double cluster in Pegasus, Cor Caroli (double star), Leo trio of galaxies, M13 cluster, M94, M63, Andromeda galaxy, loads of other double/multiple stars, M53, M81/82, Saturn, Mars, Jupiter, Moon, Polaris (double star), NGC 4638, M59, M58, M89, M60 in Virgo, ring nebula, owl cluster, Caroline's rose cluster, M1 etc etc. That's a small selection... Galaxies (for example the Leo triplet) are easily visible if it's dark enough, although you'll see them as faint smudges and not much more. I've seen the whirlpool galaxy in my 150p and there isn't much detail to it, but with dark adaptation and a dark night in a dark site, you see more. On a night when there's any moon or light pollution all but the brightest ones are hard to spot. If you're solely interested in planets, being in a dark place won't really matter so much but there is a lot more to see than just planets. Edited to answer the second part of your question.... probably I have seen things in the 10" that I haven't seen in the 6" but maybe because I haven't tried. As I hinted, I'm probably not working at the absolute limit of what can be seen with either scope, it's more a case that you get to see a little better detail with the bigger scope and so much depends on seeing conditions and light pollution. You'll find plenty to look at (buy a copy of Turn Left at Orion) with either scope.

I have a 10" Dob (my second scope), which I bought after having a Heritage 150p for a while. The 10" is superior in a number of ways, but the 150p is still a very fine instrument, which I do still use and which has shown me many great things under appropriate conditions. It's not really an all-or-nothing thing - good seeing conditions and dark skies will improve the view for both scopes and whilst you get better resolution and light-gathering with the bigger instrument, if you're not going to use it, it's obviously not going to work for you. If you can try both in similar conditions (is there a club or owner nearby you can contact to compare?) that might be worth doing. If you can't, and you can't transport the 8", I'd say go for the Heritage.

Nice one! As @cajen2 says above, might be worth getting yourself a better eyepiece or two. If you're new to the hobby, I'd strongly recommend a copy of Turn Left at Orion, which will help you learn the night sky, plus give you some nice targets to look for/at. It looks from your picture that you've also got a collimating cap there (the thingy in the plastic bag). It's probably got a shiny underside. If so, that's to help you collimate (align) the optics, which you'll need to do occasionally.

I've hardly spent anything! Just checked and my dob was ordered in Feb 2021, and since then I've only got a Rigel and OIII filter to go with that, plus a couple of bits amounting to 25 quid or less that I've just ordered. I think I'm due a Takahashi or something....what do you think?

I was looking at this last night from a dark site in a 10" dob - it's visible, but it doesn't exactly leap out at you! Thanks for sharing 🙂

Updated to say that I did go with the Geoptik bag and got to use it in anger for the first time last night. I agree with the posters who said that I probably didn't need to use a bag, however it does help to keep the very loose cap in place and it makes it easier for me to move the telescope around. Plus of course it's protected in transit. The bag is a nice snug fit. Not cheap, but I'm pleased with it. Edited to say that it fits in with the alt bearings in place; obviously I have to take the Rigel and RACI off, but otherwise it's a straightforward fit.

Please forgive the lousy photos; this is just to illustrate the difference in area covered by the two atlases. Cambridge Star Atlas on the left, Hercules easily fits on a single page. Interstellarium Deep Sky Atlas on the right shows that 4 pages plus a bit are needed to cover Hercules.

Hi, Lots of suggestions will come I'm sure, but here's my 2p worth: 1. Newtonian view is rotated 180 degrees. So yes, you can rotate your atlas. I like to try to work it out "as is" but I'm funny that way! 2. The Interstellarium Deep Sky Atlas is a great atlas, but it's very big. I have the Desk version, and I don't like the idea of it getting wet, so I always either do a free-hand sketch of anything I wish to look at, or normally, just photocopy the relevant page. Bear in mind that the field of view in each double page is relatively small, so it's useful to have a primary atlas to get your bearings, and only use the Interstellarium where the object you are looking for is not obvious. I use the Cambridge star atlas for this, because the area of the sky that I can see throughout the year is covered by a mere 13 or 14 pages. Both are ring bound. 3. Dunno. Agree that red light can be tricky with some charts. 4. Useful idea for starhopping - essentially you can follow patterns of stars within your field of view. I don't use a computer-based atlas programme, but I'd be very surprised if something like Cartes du Ciel doesn't allow you to simulate field of view. I've got a Right Angled Correct Image (RACI) finder on my larger newt, coupled with a Rigel (red dot - actually a ring - type finder) and when I use my smaller scope that has only red dot, I find it difficult to orientate myself. If you can put a conventional finder on your telescope (or at least a RACI, which is much easier to use and which shows you the "real" orientation as the name suggests) you might find that helps a lot. Pete

I have a Black Diamond Cosmo 250 that has a dimmable red LED. It remembers what setting it was previously on when you switch on, but you do need to be a little careful that you don't accidentally switch to eye-ball melting mode with a clumsy button press. I like the fact that it doubles as a general-use headlamp as well as for a red lamp for astronomy. The dimmest red setting is pretty dim IMO.

Which is why you need an 8" dob. Very little set up time. Runs off and hides....

I agree. It would be nice to have an article aimed at those starting out with a consensus view on what makes a good starter set up given ambition, budget, local light pollution conditions etc.

What would be really nice to see is a real world test - what you can actually buy for 200 or 300 quid in dob, mak, refractor. Bring along a bunch of newbies and see what's popular.

This is an interesting topic. I have 2 dobs, but wouldn't recommend the larger one to a newcomer - it is simply too large and heavy. I would recommend the smaller tabletop one, and have, because it's light, relatively cheap, compact, easy to set up and gives good views. Does that make me part of a "dob mob" (a slightly pejorative term, I would say)? Probably! However, that doesn't make my personal experience invalid. I haven't ever had the chance to look through a refractor or mak - I would love to, if and when the chance comes along. I don't think I would regret the choices I've already made though. I'd be very interested to see a thread based around the lines of "I bought a ...... and wish I hadn't because...." as I feel negative reviews are far more revealing than positive ones.

I said I wouldn't make any suggestions, but now I am.......... This is what I got about 2 years ago: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/sky-watcher-heritage-150p-flextube-dobsonian-telescope.html It's inside your budget. What is it? A reflector telescope on a "Dobsonian" mount. This is a simple alt-azimuth mount that essentially you have to point at the object you want to look at and, um, look at it. 150mm or 6" will give you LOTS to look at, especially if your site is reasonably dark. It will give you a wide field of view, being a "fast" telescope, so you can use it for viewing the moon, planets, double stars, open clusters....basically everything. It won't give you super-high magnification for a given eyepiece, but actually and perhaps counterintuitively, that isn't really a bad thing. I've seen loads with mine and I still use it occasionally (as I did last week), when I can't be bothered to lug my 10" dobsonian outside. Pros: Quite a lot of light-gathering capacity for your money. Light and easy to handle. Cons: It's a table-top telescope, so you'll need to place it on a table/upturned bucket or box etc. My son made me a small 3-legged table that does the job for me. It's an open design and so if you stick your sticky hand in it, it will get dirty....so don't! You have to collimate it (align the mirrors) from time to time. Please note that this is a relatively straightforward process and shouldn't put you off. Alternatives to this might be a wide-field refrector, which I'm not really qualified to comment on, but they have a strong following. Couple of other things to say - basic eyepieces are not great on the above scope, but you could buy the BST starguiders, as I did, for about £50 a pop. The supplied 25mm lens is less bad than the 10mm, so if I could buy one, I'd buy a BST 8mm to use instead of the 10mm. Finally, I mentioned "Turn Left at Orion". This is an absolutely brilliant book and will give you an idea of what you can see and what it will look like (not like Hubble or James Webb images, unfortunately) throughout the year. Again, highly recommended. Anyway, good luck in your search! Pete

It was a 114mm Konus reflector on a whopping great German equatorial mount. The collimation was way out when I got it, and it was hard to adjust properly. There were none of the advantages of the Dobsonian (cheap for the size of aperture, simplicity) and the equatorial mount was unnecessary and annoying for straight visual use. Plus, being so heavy, I hardly ever got it to a dark site from suburban Leeds, where I lived. The 6" dobsonian got more use in the first couple of months than the Konus did in its entire life. Also, and not the Konus's fault, I didn't know what I was doing. I re-started my astronomy journey with a copy of Turn Left at Orion and that has made a massive difference to the whole experience.

Welcome to the forum; you'll get lots of friendly and helpful advice here. I'm not going to chip in with what I think you should buy, but I would give one piece of advice - buy from a proper astronomy shop (or buy something that you COULD buy from a proper astronomy shop, if buying second hand). There's a lot of stuff out there advertised on the interweb that is rubbish. Asking on here whether X, Y or Z is worth owning will also get a fast and probably helpful response. My first telescope was poorly made and on a very heavy mount and I hardly used it. If I'd been willing to listen to advice I could have avoided that purchase and bought something more suitable for my needs. Pete

My first session in ages, and I took out my Heritage 150p because I wasn't anticipating being out for long. We'd had some friends over for a barbecue and I wasn't expecting them to be interested, but as it happened, they wanted to see whatever I could show them. We looked at the moon briefly, then as the sky darkened, some doubles (polaris, Almach, the double double), the owl cluster, M13, Andromeda galaxy and the ring nebula. The adults left and my son turned up with his mates and then THEY wanted to see it all. Highlight of the evening was when one lad asked if we could see any planets. I told him no, because they're all a bit low, but 5 minutes later, Saturn popped up over some trees. The reaction to seeing that was priceless.

Ha! To me, it is a lovely thing.

Welcome from another Oxfordshire person.

Thanks Mike and Cajen, I'm going to go with a Geoptik one from Rother Valley...they think it will fit (will probably need to remove the alt bearings). I'll report back when it comes. For the record, FLO got back to me quickly and said they didn't think their bag would fit. The Orion bag obviously would, if it fits Mike's telescope, but I can't find a supplier in the UK. Pete