Pocket Sky Atlas vs Cambridge Star Atlas

[David55]

Hi,

A simple question, I hope; which star guide is the best out of the 'Pocket Sky Atlas' or 'Cambridge Star Atlas'? Do they both list all of the Messier objects- my main targets? Are they easy to read outside under red torchlight? Do they name all of the main stars and show doubles etc? Do they both have spiral binders to make them easy to lay flat. And finally, which one do you prefer?

Your help appreciated.

David

[Moonshane]

hi David, I have the pocket atlas and the Cambridge double star atlas which is very similar to the one mentioned. I actually use the pocket atlas more. it is much smaller (about half the size) but still has all the Messiers, many NGCs and a number of other objects including double stars etc. there's more than enough to keep you going.

both are good under red (I actually now use green) light and both have spiral bindings. if you had to get just one, then I'd say the pocket atlas.

[damnut]

Hi David,

I use the pocket star atlas and a well used copy of Nortons. The pocket atlas is great at the scope as it is sort of dew proof and a convenient size.

Both the cambridge and the pocket have lists that will exceed your viewing capacity. Most folk have a couple of these sort of atlas's and a couple of planerium progs on their computers. If you have not downloaded one try stellarium, its great and free, to be found here :-- http://www.stellarium.org/

Moonshane & I crossed in the ether!

[glowjet]

The Pocket Sky Atlas is most useful outside. For reference work I use a copy of Uranometria, therefore unable to comment on the Cambridge map, which I understand is also very good

[rwilkey]

I agree, the Pocket Star Atlas is the most useful outside, but I also have the Cambridge Double Star Atlas, most useful! One odd thing, in some cases the Pocket Star Atlas sometimes has more detail than the Cambridge, for example, the Pocket Star Atlas has the nebula around the star Sadr in the centre of Cygnus, whereas the Cambridge does not. There may be other omissions, but I find both atlases incredibly useful. Both atlases are spiral bound and very useful in the field. I usually use low white light to read them!

[avtaram]

At the telescope I use "sky & telescope's pocket star atlas".

For planning my night's observing I also use the cambridge star atlas, the cambridge double star atlas and atlas of the night

sky by storm dunlop.

Avtar

[NGC 1502]

Hi David, I don't think that either atlas would be a mistake, but for use outside at night I prefer the Pocket Sky Atlas. Nice and compact, shows almost everything useful unless you are under an excellent sky with a large telescope. The Cambridge star atlas is nice indoors for planning observing sessions, each page shows a larger area of sky than the pocket atlas.

I see you are in Essex, you would be most welcome at http://www.cpac.org.uk/ we are on our summer break at the mo, but are back on 4th Sept for a social and a chat.

There are other clubs in Essex, but ours is the best . You don't have to be a expert, otherwise none of us would turn up...........

Regards, Ed.

[MarkMayf]

Do either of these books have black on white charts? I seem to get on with those better.

[Moonshane]

if you mean white pages with black stars then yes, both do.

[MarkMayf]

Ah great, thank you.

[David55]

Hi Ed,

Many thanks for the invitation to your club. It looks very interesting. Unfortunately I'm in West Essex, so quite a distance, but I'll keep your kind offer in mind in case I'm in the area.

Regards,

David

[David55]

Thanks everyone for your help. The Pocket Sky Atlas seems to get everyone's vote, so I'll be ordering it shortly . But, like most things, it's probably not so much either one or the other, but which to get first....

Regards,

David

[Geordie mc]

I only have the Cambridge and norton books. Both good but the former is spiral bound whereas norton is not. Both great books and well worth having.

[bendiddley]

thumbs up on the pocket sky atlas, i have it and get on really well with it.

[cotterless45]

Pocket Sky Atlas, spent ages "laminating " it with self adhesive clear vinyl floor covering from £ shop. Dew's a great killer of paper works,

Nick.

[Stargazer_00]

I've actually found using a 7" tablet alongside my pocket sky atlas helps alot. Maybe a larger page atlas would provide the same benefit the tablet is serving but it allows me to see a bit more context around the constellations and then drill in with the pocket sky atlas. The atlas alone can keep the blinkers on a bit. For instance you may be staring at a page not knowing that just above where your scope is positioned is a wealth of other DSOs but they are 10 pages further along.

If you are familiar with the sky then this isn't so much of an issue but if you aren't so familiar or were but have forgotten a little over the warm summer months (ahem) then a couple of options are always nice.

[TwoPi]

Good point, I have sometimes found that too - the star atlases are great but inevitably have to focus on a limited area of the sky to show the detail that they do. Having an overview (be it a planisphere, a book with an overview of the night sky for that time of year or a tablet) can be a great idea. That said, I must admit I always steer clear of tablets / phones during observing in case I accidentally blind myself by pressing the wrong button!