Advice on a telescope

[daaveyboy]

Hi all

Advice please

I have been looking for a telescope for a while now and have narrowed it down a bit to the following 2

A Meade 10” lx 200 plus wedge (top end of my budget)

And the Celestron 11” on a DX cgem mount (New "All-Star" Polar alignment sounds good)

I want to observe the planets in good detail and also do deep space as well as astrophotography so tracking will be a factor.

The Meade has 147,541 objects while the Celestron has only 40,000 objects, HOW relevant is the extra 107,000 objects?

Meade has Advanced Coma-Free and Celestron has StarBright / XLT coating what is the difference and will I notice it?

What are the pro’s and con’s of each scope, and which is best for photography?

I would also need a few good eye pieces to get started, what should I be looking for?

It will need to be movable to dark skies in my car.

Any help would be much appreciated.

[NGC 1502]

Hi there. I'm sure others will come in to answer your questions, but if I may, a couple of points.

Both those scopes are popular. But are you ok with the size & weight. Many folk are ok, but I think it would be good to visit a dealer or astro club to check.

I wouldn't be the slightest bit bothered as to the extra objects in the database. I'd make your choice on other factors.

Hope you come to a decision as to what's the best for you.

Regards, Ed.

[rowan46]

If you definitely want to do photography get this book first before you drop a load of money on it. catadioptric scopes are not optimal for photography unless you are fairly profficient and have a pretty serious wad of cash. This book will give good advice on the sort of equipment to buy and more importantly why it's the best for a beginner.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/books/making-every-photon-count-steve-richards.html

both those scopes will work well for visual astronomy and will be great for planetary imaging but wedge mounted scopes do not make for very successful portable systems. They can be made to work reasonably well in a permanent setup.

[ronin]

The Meade has 147,541 objects while the Celestron has only 40,000 objects, HOW relevant is the extra 107,000 objects?

Probably not greatly relevant, the extra ones will be small and dim, so even if you can point at them you may not see anything, but nice to have them I suppose.

Meade has Advanced Coma-Free and Celestron has StarBright / XLT coating what is the difference and will I notice it?

Suspect no significant difference.

What are the pro’s and con’s of each scope, and which is best for photography?

Both are SCT's so each has a long focal length. which tends to make neither that good for astrophotography.

You really want a short focal length, fast scope on an equitorial mount.

Both the ones are good visual scopes, that doesn't mean a good AP scope.

I would also need a few good eye pieces to get started, what should I be looking for?

How many and what budget?

I would suggest taking £300 and buying the set of BST Skyguiders, the 5mm will not be much use however - too short for the scopes mentioned.

It will need to be movable to dark skies in my car.

That depends on your size, fitness and car.

Ignore the claims such as "New "All-Star" Polar alignment" they are not going to say it is a pain in the rear afterall. Will say that with better software and GPS etc the systems are a hell of a lot better.

[AlexB67]

Hi Daveboy, assuming you are new to the hobby, many will argue that trying to take on all that you mention, imaging, observing all at once may be a bit much, and that you will be better getting started with some visual observing first, getting familiar with the sky, use the types of mounting system that are required for imaging, instead of getting lost with bags of equipment loike cameras, adapters, ending up frustrated with how to do things. It is worth having a thinking about.

I just started with visual only, but for me the choice was easy, for some reason, imaging just did not ring the doorbell with me as something I'd want to do anyway

I would say personally, each to their own in the end of the day. I suppose if you are tenacious, willing to learn and got the budget, listen to advice that you will find here from plenty knowledgeable members what to buy etc. ... why not.

The only time you are really doing it wrong is when you are not enjoying it, ending up frustrated and so on, or that you find out you ended up spending loads, having equipment that is not right for you.

Number one priority: It is all about having fun and enjoyment

[swag72]

You mention AP and DSO's and also planetary stuff in the same sentence. These things are really not compatible with one telescope. For DSO AP (I don't do planetary so will leave that to someone else) you need a GEM mount and a good solid one at that as you are ultimately looking at taking long exposures. With Planetary work as I understand it, you can do it perfectly without a GEM mount as the exposures are so much shorter you don't need to account for rotation.

DSO's are better generally with a small fast scope. The 80ED refractors have got a good following on here with DSO imagers and for good reason. They have a short focal length, which places minimum strain on the mount. They are about as plug and play as you can get, which is always a bonus! Also, many DSO's are rather on the large size.

If you are interested in DSO AP, can I recommend you buy the book 'Making Every Photon Count' from the FLO site in the book section (only the 2nd recommendation I've made of this book today!) - It will save you a lot of money in mistakes and also help you understand fully about what you need and why.

What camera are you planning on using?

[brantuk]

For a portable imaging rig the CGEM is going to be much easier to manage. Using a wedge is fine but better in a garden obsy cos you don't have to keep taking it down and reassembling it, and saves packing in the car when you move around. I wouldn't worry about the number of objects in the database - I doubt you'll get through more than a thousand of them in your first year, and that's optimistic in our climate. You should find the tracking on both scopes to be roughly equivalent and the difference in aperture won't be so big as to be significant.

The Meade might just pip the Celestron optics - it's an ongoing debate - but won't be that big to cause concern unless you're a perfectionist - you can't go wrong with either scope but I'd advise to join an astro soc or go to a star party and get a look through both to decide your personal preference. You'll want a reducer for imaging and a second scope/camera for guiding long exposures whichever scope you go for. For eyepieces - again it's a personal thing - you need to use a few to see what you're comfy with. Take your time info gathering and deciding though - it's a big investment. Hth

[umadog]

Heed well the advice above. Don't expect to buy a single scope that will do it all. Don't try to begin AP with a medium to large SCT. Make sure you understand the reasons behind those two pieces of advice before making any firm choices.

[damnut]

Hi There,

Having owned a 10" lx 200 I can vouch for their quality. It is a beast to hulk around though!. I very often only used it in alt az and push to as with a widefield 30mm you don't always need goto as it swings around easily on the forks. My Lx used to belong to Pete Shah, so check out the images possible with this sort of scope.

There are good deals to be had if you go for a used scope. Both the Celestron and Meade are awesome 'scopes and you would not be disappointed with either!.. But your wallet raid will not end there!, and good advice above

[daaveyboy]

Many thanks everybody

Its giving me a lot to think about.

I was under the impression that size was the main thing to go for,but not so for photography.I will have a look around for a refractor scope around the 3.5" - 4" Dia with a short focal length possibly around the 5 mark,will this be OK for taking photos?

swag72 asked me about what camera I will be using,at the moment I was looking at getting a Canon EOS 60Da it has a swivel screen and built in filters but it is a lot more than the 60D model,are the filters important could I still get decent photos without them?

Please keep all the advice coming.

Cheers

Dave

[rowan46]

first get the book. and it will suggest something like this

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-heq5-pro-synscan.html

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/pro-series/skywatcher-evostar-80ed-ds-pro-outfit.html

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/reducersflatteners/skywatcher-focal-reducers.html

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

http://www.modernastronomy.com/camerasGuider.html

your dslr

laptop

bits to knit it all together

still interested get the book and study it first It could save you a fortune you nearly blew 3 grand on the wrong equipment

[daaveyboy]

Many thanks for that rowan46

[rowan46]

sorry that came out sounding a bit harsh I do apologise I could and should have been a bit more diplomatic. it sounds like you have a fair budget to blow go and get yourself a reasonably cheap dob or decent pair of binoculars so that you can get under the stars

http://www.firstligh...-dobsonian.html

http://www.firstligh...-binocular.html

read the book when you understand what you are getting into you will be able to ask more precise questions that will elicit more precise answers. In short you want a scope that will do everything and the answer in short is that there aint no such animal.

If you buy either the scope or the bins it will not be wasted money as there will be times when you want to just look at the sky and not have to disassmble your imaging rig many imagers also have a visual rig as well as their imaging kit

[swag72]

swag72 asked me about what camera I will be using,at the moment I was looking at getting a Canon EOS 60Da it has a swivel screen and built in filters but it is a lot more than the 60D model,are the filters important could I still get decent photos without them?

If you are looking at getting the 60Da, this is quite expensive and so I assume that you are interested in 1) Getting the best kit that you can and 2) Using the camera only for astro use.

If these two assumptions are true then I'd consider the following. Get a dedicated CCD camera instead of a DSLR. If you get an 80ED for example, then you can couple this with an Atik 314L+ CCD camera. Second hand you can pick one of these up for about £725. You would also need a filter wheel (manual one will do which you can get for about £50) and also a set of LRGB filters (Maybe £150 if you wait for a second hand set to come up) - You will then have an absolutely great AP setup regarding scope and camera that you will grow into and never really grow out of. This combo is excellent and serves you well.

Some believe that the DSLR is a good place to cut your teeth and that moving directly to a CCD is difficult. I disagree, having started with a DSLR and then moved to a 314L+, I wish I'd skipped the DSLR part. CCD imaging is not difficult, in fact I find it easier than a DSLR. The data is easier to process and this is a big bonus in my book. You will need a computer though to run it, whereas a DSLR can get away without one. But once you start wanting to guide, you'll be wanting a laptop anyway.

My 2p worth, based on my experience thus far. Certainly have a look at the various CCD threads there are and give it some thought. I think it will save you money and time and effort in the long run. That's my AP experience - Sorry if it's a little one sided but I've hardly actually looked through a scope!!

[Richie092]

All good advice above.

I was in your position a little while ago and was going to blow my budget on just a big scope and mount then hang my DSLR off the back. Thanks to the people on this forum I spent a lot less on the telescope (80ED as suggested above) a little more on the mount (HEQ5 Pro) and had money left to buy the other things you "need" like EP's, focus mask, cables, connectors, adaptors, books, filters, more books, software, guide camera, cases to store it in safely and finally dumped the DSLR that I already owned and went more or less straight to the ATIK 314L+ CCD with filter wheel and filters.

I also use the ED80 for visual and although new and easily pleased I am really excited by what I can see through it.

BUT... for me personally I have found the ease of set up with the smaller, lighter easier to use kit means that I do use it. It's light, beginner friendly and all packs away into a few boxes easily.

To finish this long and winded post I will also say that along with this forum, Steve Richards "making every photon count" book saved me a lot of money, frustration and time - something we in the UK don't get a lot of under the stars.

The End.

[daaveyboy]

I have just ordered Making Every Photon Count by Steve Richards.hopefully it will guide me in the right direction.

Many thanks for the recommendation.

Davey