First Telescope

[joeWyncoll]

Looking for a first telescope-after being told that a full on 6"+ equatorial would be too big for the house and for me to carry by my parents, I have decided that a refractor would be suitable. I have looked at the Meade StarNavigator 102mm refractor with a Go-To system; what will I be seeing with a telescope of this aperture? I am interested in Planetary/Lunar viewing.

Many Thanks,

[Qualia]

They'll be those far more knowledgeable than myself to help on this one, but for now, until you get to a significant size on a refractor (6"+) or reflector (10"+) the actual weight isn't going to be that bad. For example, I have what is considered a 'tank built' refractor and it weighs only about 4kg.

The length of the Meade you mention is about 800mm in length. Give or take, your average 6" reflector is going to be more or less the same in length, and no doubt the same in weight, although just like a refractor they can get longer and heavier. So, just looking at the 'size of the thing', unless you go for some kind of Mak set up (smaller in length), or decide on getting a bigger refractor (4"+) or reflector (6"+), you're talking about a more or less similar length and weight of the OTA.

The mountings generally come in three standard forms, and I agree, from what I've seen the EQs do take up a larger 'foot print' and do weigh a lot (especially once you start including the counter weights needed to balance the OTA). My own comes in around 25kgs, or so. I imagine the Azimuths take up a similar 'foot print', they're on a tripod, afterall, but I also imagine they'll be a tad lighter, nay, I imagine them being about half the weigh of the EQs. If you're looking for a a smaller 'foot print' than either of these two, then I guess the dob mounts win hands down and I also imagine them to be considerably lighter and up to an 8", easier to lug about a house.

So, my advice is to re-think the advice you have been given. The refractor - although it looks okay - may not be your best bet at the moment. For example, unless you're really digging for a refractor (which I completely understand), you may wish you had bought that extra 2" aperture and got something like:

http://www.astroshop.eu/skywatcher-dobson-telescope-n-150-1200-skyliner-classic-dob/p,15559

http://www.astroshop.eu/skywatcher-telescope-n-150-750-explorer-bd-neq-3/p,15330

Hope this has helped a little

[joeWyncoll]

The Telescope I have my eye on is around 2 stone. The Telescope will have to be carried up stairs also.

[jonathan]

You can always break down a full set up into it's constituent pieces - OTA (the telescope), mount, counterweights if it's an EQ, and tripod. Sometimes this is the only way to transport them because they are so big / heavy. I would only attempt to move a small telescope fully set up on it's mount and tripod together through a house, something like an 80mm refractor on EQ1, after that it gets a bit tricky and you definitely don't want to risk bumping your telescope on walls or dropping it down the stairs etc.

I think if you can get hold of a CG-4 mount you could comfortably store that as the tipod legs can be brought together easily for a really small footprint (only for storage though) with the mount still attached, and it is light enough to carry assembled (minus the OTA). Then you could add a reflector (such as the Skywatcher 150P) or refractor - 80mm, 100mm - or maybe even a small Mak / SCT - 4" should be fine (not sure on 6").

Also remember that you will have eyepieces and diagonals etc, these are best kept in a foam-lined flight case like those that Maplins frequently have on special offer. Some OTAs come with a pre-fitted flight case too for storage, typically this is only refractors or small Maks; the more you can store in flight cases the better as it means they won't be getting knocked about or gathering dust when not in use. Obviously you cannot store a reflector in a flight case as they are usually too large. You should treat any telescope and it's accessories as you would a delicate scientific instrument, that's what it is essentially.

[kenmyers]

you can get a 6" Skywatcher Heritage collectors edition for less than £150. It is a flex tube dobsonian that folds away very small and is very lightweight.

Not on an eq mount but you can get one later on.

[StarryBob]

you can get a 6" Skywatcher Heritage collectors edition for less than £150. It is a flex tube dobsonian that folds away very small and is very lightweight.

Not on an eq mount but you can get one later on.

They are about £135 but are 5" not 6.

[Pappy Nick]

I was going to suggest the Heritage 130p as well. I bought one of these earlier on in the year, and I don't think they can be beaten for the combination of affordability, portability and storability (you could also add flexibility too )

[Naemeth]

+1 for the Heritage.

It's extremely portable and easy to use, can be very compact (although my FlexTube is permanently raised due to my Light Shroud, which I don't feel like taking on and off). It's also very light (only about 7kg), which makes carrying it very easy. Very good value for the money and gives some great views .

P.S. They are great on a chair, with you sitting next to it on a chair, eyepiece is at the perfect height, otherwise it would go on a table top.

[kenmyers]

They are about £135 but are 5" not 6.

Oops sorry. I have had a long weekend, brain hasn't powered up correctly yet. (and I own one too! lol)

[umadog]

If you need something portable then don't buy an equatorially mounted scope. Those things need counterweights and bulk in order to provide a stable view. A Dobsonian is much more suitable if you need portability.

[JamesM]

I agree with umadog above that a dobsonian is the way to go. You say your are interested in mainly planetary and lunar. If so, then you won't have much need for 'goto' in your £300 budget as these objects are very easy to find. For your budget you could afford Britain's best selling scope the 200P here. As this scope has an 8" aperture, it will show you more details and more magnification on the planets than the refractor. In addition, the refractor will show false colour (colour fringing) on these bright objects which can make focusing on fine detail problematic. Perhaps you are attracted by the inclusion of goto where is a great tool, however just because the mount can take the scope to a particular object, doesn't mean that you will be able to resolve that object in your eyepiece. The 200P will out perform the refractor, will have a smaller footprint when stored and can be broken down into two parts (base & scope) for easy transportation. Yes you will gave to find the objects by yourself but you will be doing so in the knowledge that when you find the object, the effort will be worth it. If you download Stellarium here which is a great piece of free planetarium software, along with getting hold of a copy of "Turn Left At Orion" here, there won't be much that you can't find. Hope that helps.

James

[barbusg60]

As some of the guys above I would reccomend a Heritage.

i am very please with mine so far.

Cheers,

Rob.

[Enrico]

Another plus one from me for the heritage. I've had one for 18 months now and although (due to young family) have not used it as much as I ought to have, it has been fun teaching my son about the universe. I also bought a goto-Celestron-refractor last Xmas from Costco, and found that the heritage mounted well on the goto-tripod and you can get quicker gratification and tracking, which is a huge bonus.

The only downside to the heritage is the focusser in my opinion. Not the best in the world, and doesn't look like it can be upgraded.

[todd8137]

get some big binoculars and a tripod

[CFC]

James M is right, if your primary interest is moon and planets then even if you live in the city, you don't need GOTO and are better spending your money on the optics. The dobs look massive but because they store upright they take much less space than a tripod that is left up - and putting them away and getting them out can be a bit of a nuisance, depending where you have stored the box...the mount box is very large IMO for my 4SE.

[ikorodu]

I have just bought the 200p skywatcher dob. It's massive and not what could be considered portable in my book. The 130 flex tube dob was another that I considered. It's got to be the way to go for you. It's small and can be stored in its box, it's easy to carry and holds it's value so that if you really get into it you could eBay it and get the 200p without loosing a lot of money.

The only issue may be collimation. I found the process very awkward and frustrating, but you may be better than me at it, which I don't think would be difficult!

ikorodu

[Clouder]

I don't find the dob too big to move about - yes you have to carry it in a few lumps, but it's not 'heavy' as such. A great scope, will be selling mine soon though as it just doesn't get used

[lucjam]

It may be worth looking at a 127 MAK with GOTO (either Celestron or Skywatcher are well thought of), at around £380 it is within your budget and ticks all of your boxes. It is very good on lunar and planetary viewing as well as showing some brighter DSO's. It is also reasonably portable especially when split.

[umadog]

I have just bought the 200p skywatcher dob. It's massive and not what could be considered portable in my book.

Like you say, it all depends on how you define portable. It won't fit in a backpack but you can take it most places. Yes, it's somewhat bulky but it's not heavy and it breaks down into just two items that you need to carry. I've taken my 100% plywood (so bulkier than your scope) 9" f/6 on a plane, so I'd consider scopes of this size as "air plane portable." Aperture is what provides the views so if you want better views you have accept bulk to some degree.

As regards collimation. It can be confusing at first, but it doesn't have to be. There are plenty of good resources (http://www.physiol.ox.ac.uk/~raac/collimationLinks.shtml) and if those don't work for you then head to your local club and have someone show you. With someone to guide you, you should have the process under your belt in no more than half an hour or so.

[joeWyncoll]

I opted for the Meade StarNavigator 102mm in the end. The go-to feature of the telescope was an added bonus-now for the question of what sort of things I can see!

[knobby]

I opted for the Meade StarNavigator 102mm in the end. The go-to feature of the telescope was an added bonus-now for the question of what sort of things I can see!

Good to see a young man with his own mind !

hope it works out for you ... Let us know how you get on

[jonathan]

I opted for the Meade StarNavigator 102mm in the end. The go-to feature of the telescope was an added bonus-now for the question of what sort of things I can see!

I had a look at a review of this telescope on youtube, it looks like a very nice introductory telescope that you should get some good views through. The alignment process looks easier than the Celestron SE goto, maybe I just never really got to grips with it though!

At this time of year with the lighter nights you'll probably be best sticking to the brighter objects, so that's planets, the moon, and the brighter star clusters and stars. I'm sure the goto will have a 'Tonight's Highlights' option so that would be a good place to start. With any Goto telescope it should also be possible to slew manually, so don't be afraid to do this if you just want to pan around the night sky to see what you can find. A star chart (or maybe even something in the Goto if it can track what you are pointing at) should help you to identify what it is you are observing. It should be darkest around 12am - 1am so if you can be out around 11pm until 1am that will probably give you your best views until the darker nights return around September time.