Starter telescope for a 10 year old

[Yimini]

A work colleague has asked me to recommend a reasonable starter telescope for her 10 year old girl who, after a couple of terms at school moon watching, is keen to take the next step in astronomy. Her budget is about £100. Obviously she needs to avoid the 'toy' telescopes, and as I have never looked at scopes in this price range, I was wondering if anyone here has any suggestions?

Thanks

[squashnut72]

I would go with a Skywatcher Heritage Dob as they are simple to set up, easy to use and have proper optics.

The 76mm version is about £50 from FLO whilst the 130mm version is a bit over the £100 at about £135

Cheers

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/page/1/

[lucjam]

I'm no expert but would think a small refractor is best for a 10 year old, no maintenance grab and go. Then onwards and upwards.

[Yimini]

I'm no expert but would think a small refractor is best for a 10 year old, no maintenance grab and go. Then onwards and upwards.

That's what I was thinking. I imagined something like this

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/startravel/skywatcher-mercury-705.html

or

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/startravel/skywatcher-startravel-80-eq1.html

????

[JamesF]

I'd recommend against the EQ1, whatever scope you get. It's about the most pointless thing ever for telescope use.

Given that there's £10 difference between the ST80 and Heritage 130P, I'm really not sure I could justify saving the £10. I started out with an ST80 and it's about as bullet-proof as you could get, but the 130P will show so much more. It will need to be used from a table-top outdoors, but it will still probably be much steadier than the EQ1.

The 76mm Heritage is an option if you want to spend less, but I think she'd just grow out of it more quickly.

I'd have thought that a ten year-old should be able to cope with collimating a newt with a little adult help, so I'm not convinced that's a good argument for avoiding them.

James

[todd8137]

Hi there a brought my daughter a 90mm refractor on a cheap goto mount ,of e bay for around 140 quid it was a brill cope she loves it well I sy did she's 13 now so she seems to be less happy about standing out side in the cold ,she still comes out when. I put mine out I still use hers for a quick look some times

Cheers pat

[JamesM]

Hi given your choice of refractors, I would be tempted to go for the Mercury 705. Yes it has 10mm smaller aperture but, it has a longer focal length 500mm making it a 'slower' scope at F 7.14 and therefore less demanding on the eyepieces (StarTravel 80 is 400mm @ F5). The Mercury is also on an altazimuth mount which for youngsters is more intuitive to use and comes with a prism diagonal, that will present a 'correct' view of the sky that will appear the same as a star map. In addition it also comes with a red dot finder which again is more intuitive than a straight through optical finder that will show an inverted back to front image. Lastly it is marginally cheaper. Yes the smaller aperture will mean less light gathering potential but at this size, it won't make a huge amount of difference. Hope that helps.

Clear skies

James

[Stargazer_00]

I'd actually recommend a pair of binoculars on a mount. you realy would get alot more out of it imo. Plus it can be used for terrestial use (bird watching) as well.

Just food for thought I guess

[JamesF]

I'd actually recommend a pair of binoculars on a mount. you realy would get alot more out of it imo. Plus it can be used for terrestial use (bird watching) as well.

Just food for thought I guess

I'd not thought of that. I think it's possible to find some with reasonable aperture that's a pretty good idea.

James

[Stargazer_00]

8x40 apherics off FLO for 69 quid. http://www.firstlightoptics.com/porroprism/opticron-aspheric-wa-zwcf-ga-8x40.html You could use these too, lovely wide angle.

Or some 10x50s, the usual astro bin. I got a pair off amazon (the celestron up close 10x50) for something ridiculous like 20 quid. Would need a bracket ofc and a cheapo tripod off ebay or amazon.

bear in mind shes very young so will have a huge exit pupil.

[JamesF]

And FLO might even have some suitable ones still available on clearance.

James

[jimmyjamjoejoe]

I'd go for a small refractor. The heritage dobs are somewhat short focal length, and the supplied eyepieces offer very little magnification. For a beginner, and a young beginner at that, i'd imagine the main targets to be lunar and planetary, especially at this time of year where the "most popular" DSOs aren't around (Orion/andromeda) and the planetary views through a 76 dob might be a little small and disappointing.

Add to that the fact that a frac is maintenance free and much more grab and go.

[Ad Astra]

I've always favored a dob for a beginner of any age. I've taught introductory astronomy for over 25 years and started thousands of youngsters off right.

A dob of 130-150mm aperture is perfect for many reasons.

1. Sets up in a minute - one piece, no alighment, no fuss.

2. Rugged - I have dobs that have been in service in the classroom with teens for 13 years which still work perfectly. It doesn't get more rugged than that.

3. Learn the sky - a dob is easy to point and shoot, you get to learn the constellations and how the sky rotates overhead from East to West.

4. Most flexibility and best views for the money. Unlike a cheap refractor, a reflector suffers from almost no chromatic error (colour flare) or spherical aberation - the views are very pristine.

Hope that is helpful,

Dan

[LukeSkywatcher]

I agree with other who suggest the SkyWatcher Heritage 130P. It on budget and is a great scope to be honest.

[Stargazer_00]

dont they need collimation though? that scares some adults into not buying a newtonian..

[LukeSkywatcher]

dont they need collimation though? that scares some adults into not buying a newtonian..

The Heritage is only 5" aperture. They mostly arrive perfectly collimated and really dont need to be collimated that often unless you are dragging it in and out and across fields and it is getting knocked about etc. I've had mine for 3 yrs and have only collimated it once (when it arrived because i wanted to get used to collimation..........it didnt need it).

Its a simple process and should not put people off buying a Newt.

[JamesF]

Quite. Adults are scared of lots of things they shouldn't be. It's amazing what a child can achieve if they don't know it's not possible.

James

[JimFR]

I think there is no consensus other than this: it really comes down to build quality, and personal choice for type !

However, a decent lightweight pair of bins, a planisphere, and a decent book (probably one of Patrick Moore's ) is a good starter.

[LukeSkywatcher]

Kids brains are like sponges. They absorb info better then adults. Once a 10 yr old reads about collimation once, i'm sure they can do it perfectly on their first attempt. Adults can too but we are more afraid of somehow "breaking the scope". You cant break a scope simply by messing with the alignment of the mirrors. Anything you do can be reversed.

The reason i say a Dob is better for a child is because to use it, it is simply a case of "pan and tilt" unlike an EQ mount which can be tricky to use.

Bins are also a great isea. 10x50 is about the minimum i'd suggest for astronomy and they do not need a tripod to be mounted on. They are a great,cheap,fun,easy way to start out in astronomy. A step up from that would be the Celestron SkyMaster 15x70 bins. I think FLO sell them for about £50 (dont quote me on that though).

[JamesF]

Don't think FLO have the 15x70s available at the moment, but they do have some 50mm bins at half price (about £65?) in their clearance thread assuming there are any left.

James

[x6gas]

The Celestron 70mm Travel Scope is surprisingly good optically (unless I just got really lucky with mine) though the tripod that it comes with is utterly, utterly useless. Nonetheless, I paid a very small amount of money for mine (less than £25? I really can't remember...) so even with a decent camera tripod it's way less than £100.

I bought it to use as a guidescope but like I say was pleasantly surprised. Not that it gets used now...

[x6gas]

I bought it to use as a guidescope but like I say was pleasantly surprised. Not that it gets used now...

In fact it doesn't even make it on my sig! Makes me realize that I probably ought to sell some scopes. Have 6, use 2...

[LukeSkywatcher]

The Celestron 70mm Travel Scope is surprisingly good optically (unless I just got really lucky with mine) though the tripod that it comes with is utterly, utterly useless. Nonetheless, I paid a very small amount of money for mine (less than £25? I really can't remember...) so even with a decent camera tripod it's way less than £100.

I bought it to use as a guidescope but like I say was pleasantly surprised. Not that it gets used now...

Good scope.........useless mount. I use mine on the Horizon 8115 tripod. But for use while overseas (on travels) and at low magnification the tripod is fine for the Moon and star fields.

Very good quality built scope........................the tripod really lets it down.

[sgazer]

I'd actually recommend a pair of binoculars on a mount. you realy would get alot more out of it imo. Plus it can be used for terrestial use (bird watching) as well.

Just food for thought I guess

Great idea, I'd also recommend binos, they are excellent for working out the sky, star patterns and you don't need a mount. 10x60 for 112 quid http://www.firstlightoptics.com/helios/helios-quantum-4-binoculars.html

[Yimini]

Thanks everyone, you've given us plenty to think about there.