Which telescope do I choose!!

[io1]

Hello everyone, over the last couple of years I have become increasingly interested in astronomy. Last christmas, my dad bought me a skywatcher 130. I was impressed by the views of saturn and jupiter and the moon and so on, but my dad wasn't bowled over. A good few years ago, my dad bought a tasco (I think thats the correct name) telescope that was reasonably cheap at around £70. He tells me that looking at saturn through that was much better than through the skywatcher. As a result, we've decided to upgrade and get a more serious piece of kit.

We would like a scope that is perfectly capable of producing detailed views of planets, but also capable of viewing some deep sky objects. The andromeda galaxy and orion nebula for example aren't particularly impressive though the skywatcher. We have been looking at the celestron nexstar range. What are peoples thoughts about the 4se, 5se and the 6se. Also, we were looking at the nexstar 127slt. I would also like to take a few pictures as well, I have a panasonic lumix gf3 which I have the adaptors for. Any advice would be greatly appreciated!!!

[Marki]

Well, it depends on the budget, but a lot of people here will recommend going for a 150mm or 200mm + newtonian maybe on a dobsonian mount. Aperture really does make a difference for visual (as opposed to imaging), especially for deepsky objects. The nexstar series are really nice optically, with a useful goto capability (I have an 8SE), portable (well, in bits) and easy to set up. I've always found the alignment a bit of a pain, but that probaly just reflects on me. Great when it works though. The down side is that you spend a fair bit of the total on the goto/electronics mount, which others would recommend you can spend on pure optics in a dobsonian. Personally, I prefer refractors now, but I concede you can buy a let more aperture for your money with a dob style telescope. Maybe an idea of budget would help us give a better idea how to advise you? As for photography, I;m sure others will be along to offer better advice than me, but an alt az mountlike the nexstar is not suitable for any kind of long exposure work. WIll be fine for quick single shots of the moon though.

Oh, and welcome to SGL by the way !

[rory]

130mm of apperture should show nice views of the planet saturn and jupiter, could it be that collimation needs attention ?

[io1]

Thanks for the extremely quick replies! The views of saturn and jupiter aren't bad in my books (I don't really have anything to compare them to), but after a lot of time spent this year out in the garden coupled with the fact that viewing anything other than planets just shows a blob, not even that sometimes, has made us decide to upgrade to something more serious. Perhaps I was a bit harsh in my phrasing when talking about the skywatcher! A quick question about collimation, is it bang on from the factory or are tweaks needed? The views are the same now as they were the first time we looked though it. As far as budget goes, I think the price of the 6se would be an absolute maximum, but £500-£600 is much more realistic. I know this question is probably very hard to answer, but if you had this kind of money to spend on a telescope suiting the things mentioned above, what would you buy? If the nexstar series would be something you'd recommend, is it worth a bit of saving to go for the 6se over the 5se and 4se? Thanks

[rory]

i personally cant give any answers regarding choice,due to my lack of knowledge in astrophotography . but alot of dso will appear as faint fuzzy blobs,in particular galaxies.

as for collimation ,theres no guarantee that it will be spot on from the box,so id check that out first.i dont know the focal ratio of the scope you have but i believe (might be wrong) that faster scopes need better more accurate collimation. also take into account the amount of light pollution you have around you,it effects views massivly.

remember when looking at/for dso's like galaxies and nebula you want to get dark adapted too,where as not so much a problem with the bright planets.

if youve had your scope for a year, i could well be telling you nothing you dont already know,sorry if thats the case.

[Matt Scunthorpe]

I had to redo my secondary mirror when i first got mine. Also as your moving it around, putting it in storage, into car etc, the collimation will slowly move out. You should be getting decent views through a 130 though.

[Ags]

Just be careful: the 130p will give a far better view of M31 than the 6SE would - the aperrture is almost the same, but the 130p shows a field of view over twice as wide. This is essential for viewing a large object like M31 or M33 or the the pleiades. The poor view of M31 may be because your expectations are too high, or you have too much light pollution, which kills views of galaxies in particular.

I would discount the SE scopes as they will not give much of an improvement over a properly collimated 130p. A 200mm dob would be a worthwhile step up in optical power.

[JamesM]

For the amount of budget you have I would go for this 10" dob as it's a great deal of aperture without being too cumbersome. Its design would allow you to transport the scope easily to a dark site if needed which in itself can make a difference to the view you can see. Your budget is a decent amount to spend though including the price of Goto in as well will absorb a lot of money. Goto is great at pointing to up to 15,000 objects but if having it means there is less to spend on the actual scope, then you are not going to be able to see an awful lot that the Goto will be able to find for you. This scope will most definitely keep you busy of deep sky objects as well as perform very well on planets. It will mean of course finding the objects yourself and you will need nudge it along to track the object, especially at higher magnifications. If you want some tracking capability then this scope might be an alternative for you to think about. The EQ5 mount on which this 8" scope sits on is just about able to carry this scope and for an extra £75 you can fit a RA drive on it that will help you track the objects you have found and will facilitate others having a look too.

Now if you look at the bottom of the page here as advertised by First Light Optics, you will see exactly how much the EQ5 Goto version is (£515) and the smaller EQ3 Goto (£390) is too though the capacity of this last mount has only enough load capacity for a smaller scope (e.g Skywatcher 150P). The extra for the Goto is in my view a lot of money and for what its worth (...others may disagree ) I believe that observing starts to become that bit more interesting when using a scope 8" and above. In my opinion it is as this size that detail and structure starts to avail itself and becomes something that helps maintain observational interest in the longer term. Both the suggested scopes (10" dob or 8" with tracking EQ mount) are newtonian type scopes and by definition will need to collimated (optically tuned) to get the best out of them. The easiest device to use is a Cheshire eyepiece like this one at around £26.

Regarding the possibility of imaging from the scope, it is possible to capture a picture but without very precise tracking you will be confined to taking images of only solar system objects like the moon and planets. To be honest a better device would be to use a webcam because it is lighter and has the ability to capture a lot of 'frames' very quickly and from which you choose the best to help construct a composite image that hopefully will contain some good detail. Trying to take a good single exposure whilst looking though a fast moving dusty atmosphere is extremely difficult hence the use of video which can grab a lot of exposures in a very short period of time. Imaging as an interest puts a lot of technical demands on optical equipment to such an extent, that kit for imaging tends to be slightly different to the requirements for observing. To understand a little more about these differences, I would strongly recommend you get yourself a copy of Steve Richards' book, "Making Every Photon Count"(FLO £19.95) which is a very comprehensive guide on what kit you need to take good consistent images that will best meet your expectations. It's well written but also easy to understand and will lay out the technical considerations so that you can decide how far you want to go. Hope that helps

Clear skies

James

[BinocularSky]

... skywatcher 130. I was impressed by the views of saturn and jupiter and the moon and so on, but my dad wasn't bowled over. A good few years ago, my dad bought a tasco (I think thats the correct name) telescope that was reasonably cheap at around £70. He tells me that looking at saturn through that was much better than through the skywatcher. As a result, we've decided to upgrade and get a more serious piece of kit.

Whilst Tasco, with some justification, gets some harsh words nowadays, in the 1970s it sold some reasonably good kit. It would not surprise me to learn that a 70s Tasco refractor gave views of bright solar system objects that rivalled or exceeded those from a SW 130, especially if the latter was out of collimation (see later).

What are peoples thoughts about the 4se, 5se and the 6se.

Unlikely to show you significantly more than a collimated SW130. Note also that the 6SE would need a wedge if you wanted to do astrophotography.

I would also like to take a few pictures as well, I have a panasonic lumix gf3

Tricky, with anything in your budget. To use the camera through the scope, you're going to need a far better mount than your budget allows. I would suggest that you either follow JamesM's advice re webcam, or use a mount that you can afford to piggyback the camera (see later).

anything other than planets just shows a blob, not even that sometimes,

This strongly suggests that there is something wrong with the telescope; if your description is accurate, then it sounds like it is severely out of collimation.

A quick question about collimation, is it bang on from the factory ...?

Only if you are very, very lucky. With a Newtonian reflector or an SCT, collimation is a techique that you have to learn, and the Newt will need it frequently (but it becomes second nature).

If you have never collimated it, it will need it. I strongly suggest that you get in touch with your nearest astronomical society (http://fedastro.org.uk/fas/members/) and ask if there is anyone who can show you how to collimate it. Once that is done, then re-assess what you have. Also, the AS will probably hold observing evenings in which you can try out different bits of kit -- use one of those to help you assess any kit that you are tempted to buy. Also, we've got Stargazing Live coming up -- lots of observing events all round the UK, which gives you the opportunity to see what does what.

but £500-£600 is much more realistic. I know this question is probably very hard to answer, but if you had this kind of money to spend on a telescope suiting the things mentioned above, what would you buy?

I would be very surprised if anything in your budget that is also photography-capable could show you more than the SW130. My advice would be to get the 130 collimated and, assuming it is then satisfactory, spend your money on a decent-ish mount. The EQ2 that the 130 comes on is barely adequate. Get an EQ5 (the Pro Synscan is within your budget), and you will have a mount that is certainly capable of piggyback photography (using the main scope as a guide scope) and, with care, of photography through the scope. Alternatively, if you want to "future-proof" your mount for a bigger scope later, get the HEQ5 (you can add Synscan later as well). Either of those mounts will make the 130 much more of a pleasure to use.

Alternatively, if photography is not a priority and you really want a step-up for visual observation, get an 8" (200mm) or 10" (250mm) Dobsonian. (But look at one in the flesh first, especially if you are considering the 10" -- it may be bigger than you think!).

[Capricorn]

Reading what you say I get the idea taht seeing things is not a great problem but the quality of the image that is seen.

M31, Andromeda, I will say forget. You can see it but usually as an indistinct narrow oval blob of no real structure. Owing to the size then I find a dark site and a pair of binoculars are better. When you look at M31 I would say all you are looking at is the brighter central core.

M42 and M45 you again need a wide view, especially M45 as otherwise all you get are a few close stars, not the cluster complete.

The 130 will need maintaining, collimating being the obvious - collimation requirted for any newtonian reflector. You also don't say the 130 model, I think they do a P and a spherical, Going for a bigger reflector is one option and several have suggested it. How about the other option of a 4-5 inch refractor? My best view of Saturn was through a TAL refractor, same for Jupiter just a diferent refractor. Simply the images seen were sharper and more distinct and to me this seems to be the problem you are describing. Not that they are not seen but are poor when seen.

If the idea of a refractor was taken up then you are looking at an Evostar 120 on an EQ3. Being achro and f/8 (I think) there will be an amount of CA. But a 120 refractor will pick out planets and quite a few DSO's without problem.

[ollypenrice]

Well, I feel that if the 130 isn't giving as good or better views that a small Tasco refractor then it needs collimating.

Astrophotography is not remotely like daytime photography. Firtlsy it comes in two flavours, deep sky with long exposures and planetary with fast frame webcam-like cameras. The former is all about the mount and this will eat your budget in seconds. To find out more try Steve Richards' book Making Every Photon Count.

I would advise leaving out the photography and buying a larger Dobsonian, a 10 inch if you can run to it and manage it. (I recommended the Skywatcher in my own contribution to Astronomy Now's Christmas article on Beginner Scopes.) Do buy a cheshire collimator though, to get the best of of any Newtonian.

I love astrophotography and devote much of my life to it but cheap it ain't and simple it ain't!!! http://ollypenrice.smugmug.com/Other/Best-of-Les-Granges/22435624_WLMPTM#!i=2277139556&k=FGgG233

Olly

[BinocularSky]

If the idea of a refractor was taken up then you are looking at an Evostar 120 on an EQ3.

Or the Evostar 102. It has consistently sharper optics than the 120 and is better suited to the EQ3-2 mount.

[io1]

Thanks everyone for the great advice. I think, like suggested, that my best plan is to get the 130 properly collimated and then decide what to do from there. I agree totally with the point made about the mount. The mount at present seems very crude to me, but does the job. Upgrading the mount maybe an idea, and then later on, upgrade the actual optics. However, upgrading completely seems like a good idea to me. I think I will forget about the se series because of the fact that most of the money is being spent on the electronic mount, as already mentioned. It seems like a much better use of money to upgrade the optical quality as much as possible - plus finding objects is half the fun! The skywatcher explorer 200p looks promising, the sky at night gave it a great review. I've heard about the fact that observing gets fun with an 8" upwards scope a couple of times and I think if possible this is the way to go. I think I've been put off skywatcher slightly, but it seems that they are very good scopes - lots of people seem to have then and the sky at night have given lots of their scopes excellent reviews. I will get back to everyone when the 130 is properly collimated for some more advice!! Thanks again, Sam.

[rory]

good luck , and clear skies sam.

[LukeSkywatcher]

Well, I feel that if the 130 isn't giving as good or better views that a small Tasco refractor then it needs collimating.

I have to agree, but there are other factors involved such as "seeing" etc, but in general if everything is correct (weather and collimation) then the 130mm scope really should be giving pretty good views of planets and the likes.

If you want to do imaging, then i would avoid the Nexstar 4se,5se,6se or 8se.............simply because they are mounted on an Alt-Az mount which really is not ideal for imaging.

I think its a good idea to get the SW up and running optically (collimation) and see how you go. Its already on an EQ mount?...............thats good enough to start doing some basic imaging.