Goto or not goto for a newbie

[kevrees]

Hi,

I been reading through the forums about different scopes and what-not, and the wealth of knowledge on here is unbelievable so thank you to all the more knowledgeable members with the advice and answers to different questions that have already been asked on here by other members

Anyway, im sorry if its been asked a million times before i have tried searching and not getting anywhere so just thought i would ask one last question before getting back to reading up some more.

Im asking this as a complete novice and speaking hypothetically here so as not to go down the 'spend the extra cash and get a bigger scope' route. You have found a scope that will suit your needs in terms of size and portability etc. and you have the option of either getting it on an eq mount or spending some extra and getting the same scope on a goto mount. Will a goto mount make life easier and the learning curve less steep or would you be better off persevering and trying to locate the different objects yourself?

Thanks to anyone who takes the time to answer

[Tinker1947]

I don't use the Goto option on my mount, but what i do is set it up so its polar aligned and solar tracking, so when i find a DSO to view it tracks the DSO and should i go make a cuppa, the DSO is still in the FOV when i return and remains in the FOV untill i alter it....so thats a option you may want to think about, there's nothing like finding DSO's of your own back,,

[Black Knight]

Some people enjoy the challenge of manually star-hopping their way around the sky, and wouldn't have it any other way. Other people find the convenience of GOTO a boon in itself since it eliminates the frustration of not being able to locate objects. The problem is, GOTO mounts always require a degree of setting up themselves each time before they can be used, and this can be a real source of frustration for some newcomers. Added to that, a GOTO mount and electronics can add a significant premium to the price as well.

The question of learning the night sky is a moot one, in my opinion. There is no doubt that a manual system will encourage you to learn the sky, and probably pretty quickly! . But there is no reason a GOTO system couldn't do the same, although perhaps not to the same depth, and perhaps at a more leisurely pace.

In the end I think it pretty much depends on you, and what you want from astronomy.

[nmoushon]

Goto will make it easier to find smaller/dimmer objects. Especially if you live in a light polluted area. I have goto for this reason as star hopping is very difficult if you have heavy LP. I live about 25 miles due West of downtown Chicago so LP is very bad. Damn suburbs. Anyways....but at the same time I like to star hop sometimes when I get to go to a dark site for a weekend. I like the challenge. But when I'm setting up for imaging work then I use goto to save time. It really depends on what you think you would like best. If you get goto you dont have to use it. You can manually move your mount.

[sologuitarist61]

You have hit the nail on the head kevrees. To GoTo or not to GoTo is a question that gets asked in many different forms on here and there is no definite answer.

You could get a scope with no GoTo, get your self a star atlas and find all the objects you want quite easily ..... or can you? In theory it is easy, but in practice finding a specific star, let's say, is remarkably difficult. For a start there are a lot more 'bright' stars when you look through a scope then there are with the naked eye. That is obvious, but what is not so clear is just what star are you looking at? I have to say that I never did quite get my head around it. I knew where the object was because I knew which constellation it was in, so you have some idea of the general direction, but then you come up against a number of points. One the sheer number of stars that you can see through a scope, the fact that the slightest move of the scope will result in what appears to the a big movement through the eyepiece and you will find that it is very easy to get lost and frustrated.

It is clear from this that I favour getting GoTo every time. Is is really important that you know how to find a faint object - not really. What is important is to not get frustrated at the scope. We have so few clear nights that you don't want to waste scope time searching and searching. Is it important to know where everything is to be a good astronomer? No, not really. I don't know every word in the English Lanuguage, and my grasp of grammer isn't that good, but that doesn't stop be reading and enjoying a good book, and in the same way I don't know where every star or NGC object is in the sky either but I still enjoy my astronomy. Get yourself a GoTo right from the beginning even if it is with a humble scope, it will make life so much easier and give you so much more enjoyment than doing it the hard way.

Now prepare yourself for people telling you that I am wrong :grin:

[umadog]

The GoTo thing is very personal. Some people swear by it and others aren't interested in it. It's not a question of right and wrong, it's just down to individual circumstances. It's true that if you live somewhere very light polluted then you don't have any naked eye stars to star hop from so GoTo is advantageous. Then again, DSOs don't look very good (if they're even visible) from heavily light polluted sites. If it's an option for you (and it isn't for everyone), you're much better off simply going somewhere darker. So if you can travel, the light "pollution GoTo" advantage may be irrelevant for you.

How hard is it to find DSOs? It's not terribly hard and the joy that people seem to get from tracking something down is great (judging from comments on these fora). It's not a question of how many objects you see per night, but the significance of those objects to you. If you can find three DSOs in one night yourself and know what they are and that you got there, this is a big deal. If you see 10 things that the computer found, it somewhat dilutes the experience. If you do opt for no GoTo then remember that you can always go to a local astro club and someone will show you the ropes quite happily.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

When I got my scope, I wanted good tracking, so I can focus on observing, not nudging the scope the whole time. This meant an EQ mount with RA drive motor, GoTo was too expensive in those days. I had to do without and star-hopping became second nature. Instead of GoTo I got myself a big finder scope a few years back (a home brew 16x70mm), and that has made life a whole lot easier (bagged hundreds of fuzzies with it).

Thus, I like to star-hop, others don't. Imagers always want GoTo to find very faint objects, because time spent star-hopping means photons lost. At the same time if observing is your thing, setting up an EQ mount just for tracking is dead simple and requires less time that setting up a GoTo system. I can bag new objects whilst others are still aligning their mount.

As others have said, it is a personal matter. Maybe it is best to visit an astronomy club, and try your hand at star-hopping vs. using a GoTo scope. Alternatively, get an EQ mounted scope that can be upgraded later at reasonable cost.

[Monty]

Could always buy a Goto that you can add a wedge to later for polar alignment. My CPC800 is great for a quick Goto in cloudy weather and for long night obs just add the wedge.

[Donkeiller]

I live in central Cambridge and would be stuffed without goto.

Personally I would not be without it.

If you have regular access to reasonably dark skies there is an argument for manual finding.

Depends whether you want to "find your own", or have them found for you.

[BargeGazer]

I have just been through the same question when I got my first system. I went the GOTO route and am very glad I did.

It doesn't stop you having to learn your way around but it makes it easier. And, most importantly, you will get success in seeing those dim objects on your first viewing session. Let's face it, what you want when starting out is to get to see things not to have to hunt around while learning telescope basics and end up getting frustrated.

A good GOTO on an EQ can always be used in non-goto mode when you feel like learning your own way round the sky.

David

Skywatcher 127Mak GOTO EQ3

[astrofox]

My first scope was a goto and I was glad it was. Light polution severely limits my view of all but the brightest stars.

[Tyr]

Something I've not seen mentioned above (apologies if I've missed it) is that any form of GOTO or even tracking mount is going to require power, which usually means a power tank (car battery jump starter, leisure battery, astro branded power tank). With a purely manual setup you wouldn't need this. You mention portability in your original post so it may be a consideration.

Tyr

[Tyr]

ps

I started out with a goto alt az mount and later decided to replace it with a manual alt az one, for speed and simplicity of setup I'm very pleased I did. Take it outside plonk (gently) it down and point it at the sky and start observing, no aligning and I can move around the sky as quickly or slowly as I please and no noise!

It wouldn't be suitable for imaging but it suits the kind of visual observing I'm doing at the moment and I like trying to find stuff on my own.

Tyr

[Saleratus]

I love tracking so that I can really concentrate on viewing objects, but I feel I would be missing half the fun if I had goto. Every time you find an object for yourself, you get to know the sky a little better.

[mart rich]

For me, I chose GOTO, on the basis of being able to find things easily and maximise effective observing time right from the off.

It was a decision between ease of setup (GOTO takes longer) or ease of finding things (a likely source of frustration for a newbie like me)

I decided that I wanted to be able to spend time looking at things rather than finding them. For me, with limited time to observe, juggling 3 young kids and occasional sleep as well, that balance seemed about right.

Learning to polar align and then run the star alignment took a couple of sessions but that was far quicker than learning the sky (which I obviously have not yet done becasue I have a computer that does it for me). Mind you I have a copy of Turn Left at Orion which I use as a guide for observing which I find very good indeed.

The motors also make it a bit easier to get started with planetary AP as you don't have to worry about tracking, it just happens.

As has been said, this is personal, so good luck with your decision

Martin

[paul schofield]

As others say, I think its a personal choice really. My personal opinion is that Goto would take away the feeling of satisfaction when you find something under your own steam. I did toy with the idea of Goto before buying my 2nd scope. I was told by a friend that cheaper Goto scopes can be more trouble than they are worth, once they start going wrong. I have never experienced this as I have never used a Goto scope. I would rather search the skies than push a few buttons. I think Goto has good and bad points, but my choice would always be a manual telescope.

[alexog]

When I was choosing my first "proper" scope it came to: ETX125 (goto) with field tripod vs. OMC140 with EQ5 (no drives). At the time they were roughly the same price. In the end i went for the OMC. My thinking being a bit more aperture and optical quality (?...) would be an advantage over the convenience of goto. For me personally I think I made the right choice as I'd been star hopping with small refractors on alt az mounts for a while.

When the weather is bad I spend time with planetarium software planning the next session, selecting objects I can realistically expect to see with my aperture/sky conditions and stars to hop from. As faint objects are best observed near the zenith I don't need to memorize the whole sky, just the area/constellations for the next couple of months (12 months later they're in the same place).

Using a red dot and finderscope helps (note to self: I need a RA 50mm finder more than a new eyepiece). On my mount one full turn of the fine controls is 2 degrees so a quarter of a turn equals the width of the moon... With an EQ mount you can use the setting circles and dial in the RA and Dec and be reasonably close.

Goto is a great tool and if I saw an EQ5 goto upgrade going for a song I'd jump on it but after all the effort of finding the bit of sky I'm after, I think I spend a bit more time studying it for that elusive fuzzy. The temptation for me with goto would be if I didn't see the object straight away I'd be pressing "next" on the controller far to quickly (assuming it's actually in the FOV as I've just kicked the tripod and didn't notice).

I'm not for or against goto. I just like the idea of a red torch and a star atlas. Good luck with your quest, choosing your first set up is very difficult.

Alex

[brantuk]

A few criteria to consider. If you're on a tight budget it may be better to spend the cash on aperture rather than electronics. Goto does make you lazy (well it does me any way lol). But then - if you are intending to do imaging a goto is pretty essential for accurate tracking and saving time cos you don't thave to find stuff before imaging it.

I feel you learn more about the sky without goto - but there's no doubt a goto scope can aid learning for a diligent skywatcher. There are many experienced amateur astronomers who can find objects quicker than a goto system. You still need to at least know what you want to look at before you key it into a handset.

But in the end it's all down to your own personal aspirations and budget. What would you get if you'd won the lottery big time? I'd get a massive goto astrograph and 20"+ manual dob so I could benefit from both

[Richardisgreat]

Like you i was a total newbie when i first got my scope, in the end i managed to get a skywatcher 200p goto on a dobsonian mount. The money i saved going for a dob enabled me to afford the goto. Goto is good if your a newbie and just want to find things easily and to avoid frustration, but like Paul said in the above post, if you really want to find things on you own you will probably gain a greater feeling of satisfaction finding it on your own, or you might be left feeling "what was that i just found". I have read plenty of posts on this forum of people who cant find the objects they are looking for and waste a whole night and only get to view the planets ( stunning as they are) and come away feeling "did i see m81 or didnt i see it i cant be sure it was so faint" etc etc. In my opinion if you are a total newbie then i would go for the goto. I would only go for a eq5 or similar tripod type mounts if you plan on doing astrophotoraphy in the future but then the cost goes up rapidly. At the end of the day you can turn the goto off, and push it around if you like, at least you have the choice to use it if your not having much luck.

Just my opinion

Richard

[Mark at Beaufort]

I bought my first scope in 1965 which was a 60mm frac on an alt/az mount. I found a few Messier objects but it was not that great. In the late 1990s I purchased a 5" Nexstar goto SCT and on the first night I found so many DSOs. The goto allowed me to study the night sky and in the end I could find individual DSOs without reference to the computer system. I now have several scopes the largest being a 10" Dob and all my observing in undertaken by star hopping - much more satisfying.

I don't regret buying the goto scope although its now been sold. Certainly if you have LP I think a goto system is a good investment.

Mark

[DrRobin]

Hi,

You have already decided to go for an equatorial mount, I assume it is a motor drive? If it is then once it is pointed in the right direction it should track pretty well. Is GOTO option also on EQ mount or is it an ALT AZ?

The decision is not easy, it depends on what you want to do with your scope. I started 19 months ago (probably less than some on here) and just went for an ALT AZ GOTO. Once aligned it whizzed round to nearly the right place and then a small adjustment on the controls had it pointing reasonably well. I have owned two ALT AZ GOTO mounts, one EQ GOTO mount and recently one EQ with motor drive. No doubt about it GOTO makes life easier, but if it is fairly bright objects you want to look at (E.g. Planets, the brighter stars and DSOs) then you don't really need GOTO, a decent star atlas or program on your PC, Phone or tablet computer will soon have you in the right place.

If you are considering a ALT AZ GOTO then they are not as good as an EQ mount for Astrophotography, so if you are heading this way I would opt for the EQ mount without GOTO. Depending on which mount you are looking at you might be able to get a GOTO as an ad on at a later date if you find you need it.

GOTO really works well when you are looking for feint objects, especially for astrophotography. Set up the mount, polar align, calibrate and then just tap in the object. Some of the objects I have gone after, I find hard to see with the eye, but run a 60 second exposure with a camera and there they are. Without GOTO they would be a lot harder to find and I just like to get on with observing or imaging.

Perhaps if you post which mounts you are looking at we might be able to give a little more advice.

[glowjet]

So there you have it, to GOTO or not to GOTO? that is the question and a choice which only you can make, I originally chose a GOTO, not because of the attraction of the auto system mount, but the financial deal which included the scope I wanted at the time. I now have my ultimate set-up, what I call my shove to, and no it is not a Dob but a Losmandy GEM, a beautiful piece of American engineering, once set up, which takes little time, you shove to whatever part of the sky you want, tracking is continuous and is not affected by any alteration of the scopes position, but it comes at a price. It is a pleasure to use and worth every penny. Just my two pennyworth, enjoy your Astronomy

John.

[nytecam]

I went goto ~18yrs ago with my current scope and haven't looked back in LP suburbia. It wasn't always so - all my earlier scopes were homebuilt including my aperture fever and final 17.5" Newt with purchased optics. However with a drive in just one axes [RA] finding fainter stuff was frustrating and unproductive. Ok - I now have a dome but am up and running in 5min and no set-up - paradise ;-)

[sologuitarist61]

I bought my first scope in 1965 which was a 60mm frac on an alt/az mount. I found a few Messier objects but it was not that great. In the late 1990s I purchased a 5" Nexstar goto SCT and on the first night I found so many DSOs. The goto allowed me to study the night sky and in the end I could find individual DSOs without reference to the computer system. I now have several scopes the largest being a 10" Dob and all my observing in undertaken by star hopping - much more satisfying.

I don't regret buying the goto scope although its now been sold. Certainly if you have LP I think a goto system is a good investment.

Mark

I think this is one of the problems with GoTo in that there is so much to see and they are easy to find, you tend to hop from one to the next, to the next. It has taken imaging to make me stop on one subject and to really look at it (I have two scopes piggy backed so image with the other). Would still go for GoTo over aperture if I was a newbie, you only get aperture fever when you have been doing it for a while, and with GoTo you are ore ikely to stay the course than if you have to labouriously hop from star to star to star to find your subject, but that is my personal opinion and I offer it for what it is worth

[x6gas]

+1 for GoTo but this is very definitely personal preference territory... it really depends on what you want to get out of the hobby.

Star hopping is a real skill and one that I have not acquired, but I honestly think that it's a fallacy to say that you don't learn the sky if you have GoTo...