Beginner stuck for choice of scope

[FairDoos]

Hey everyone!

I've been wanting to get into Astronomy for some time now and I'm especially interested in the Moon and other close planets such as Mars.

I've been looking at a few scopes and wanted to get a second opinion from the professional community on my choices enabling me to round them up to purchase one before Christmas.

My price range is £300 at most I don't really want to go over £250.

These are my 2 choices so far;

http://www.telescopehouse.com/acatalog/Skywatcher_Explorer_130M_130mm_f_900_Motorised_Newtonian-1.html

http://www.telescopeplanet.co.uk/celestron-astromaster-130eq#_specs&diff[1101]=1,0

I'd also like this to be somewhat portable, I have a car but I'll be going into the countryside with this so I'd have to carry it.

Thanks in advance for your advice!

[Ganymede12]

From what I hear, Sky-Watcher Explorers are good telescopes, as are Celestrons. I personally couldn't say which of those two is better but it's hard to go wrong with a Sky-Watcher. If your fine with the collimating and you've decided on a reflector instead of a refractor then either could be good option. What I can say however is that I own two different Sky-Watchers and both have served me well.

[Lowjiber]

Since you've decided on a reflector (vice refractor) for your first scope, I'll caution you that reflectors need to be collimated.  That's not a difficult task, but does have a learning curve.  Here's the "bible" of collimation: http://www.astro-baby.com/collimation/astro%20babys%20collimation%20guide.htm

Given that, there is a snag concerning the Celestron 130mm.  It's what we call a Bird-Jones design.  Bird-Jones designs are more difficult to collimate because they have an additional lens inside the focuser.  That lens needs to be removed to properly collimate the scope.  For that reason alone, I suggest staying away from the Celestron model you're considering.

Another consideration, regardless of the scope chosen, is the Equitorial Mount (EQ).  EQ mounts can be a bit daunting for someone new to the hobby, in that the learning curve is a bit steep, and is often dis-heartening to the new astronomer.  All that motorized stuff is useless unless you can properly perform a polar alignment of the mount.

Of the two you've mentioned above, I would definitely get the SkyWatcher.

If I were to recommend a beginning scope in the price range your budget allows, it would be a decent-sized refractor on an Az/Alt mount.  No collimation needed and no learning curve associated with a more complicated EQ mount.  Here's one:

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/skywatcher-evostar-90-az3.html

Clear Skies

[Jim Steele]

Have you considered a dobsonian mounted newtonian? You can get a lot more apature for your money and the starter EQ mounts sometimes have very questionable quality.

I'd recommend a 150P or 200p as a first scope. This gives you plenty of aperture to keep a solid intrest in the hobby and is really easy to use and quick to setup. Important aspects in Britain where the weather is rather changeable..

Best of luck with your choice

[NGC 1502]

Hi and welcome to SGL.

I too would prefer the Skywatcher over the Celestron in your post, but would prefer the one in the link in post  #3 - if you want a no-hassle scope to get going with astronomy, a 90mm refractor on a simple alt-az mount is great.

Regards, Ed.

[C7tsj]

Have you considered a dobsonian mounted newtonian? You can get a lot more apature for your money and the starter EQ mounts sometimes have very questionable quality.

I'd recommend a 150P or 200p as a first scope. This gives you plenty of aperture to keep a solid intrest in the hobby and is really easy to use and quick to setup. Important aspects in Britain where the weather is rather changeable..

Best of luck with your choice

Suppose it all depends how far he needs to carry it? An 8 inch scope on a dob base ain't light!

Mark

[Jim Steele]

Suppose it all depends how far he needs to carry it? An 8 inch scope on a dob base ain't light!

Mark

True, not too bad if it's just out the boot to your observing spot. Another piece of good advice is to check them out at a local shop or even better look through one at a local astronomy club.

[Sirius Starwatcher]

You may wish to buy some additional eye pieces to get maximum value from your scope so I reccommend you factor this in to your budget. Best wished and welcome to the longe

[Daniel-K]

Suppose it all depends how far he needs to carry it? An 8 inch scope on a dob base ain't light!

Mark

  ..it is compared to a 16!!! my old 8" i could move very easily.

1. how much are you willing to spend?
2. are you going to travel?
3. what are you going to observe?

these are fundamental questions you need to ask yourself. answering these will help you choose your first telescope.

1. BUDGET- stick to it. it can be very easy to over spend in this hobby especially when you have no idea on what to buy. asking lots of question will help you gain important information on choosing a scope thats right for you.
2. if you plan to travel to dark sky locations away from light pollution to get the best from you equipment then you need to consider the size of your car vs your equipment. observing from home then size isnt really a factor.
3. are you going to look at DSO ( deep space objects or planets or both?) choosing a all rounder scope is ideal for a first scope,something that will perform well on planets and DSO'S  like the skywatcher 200p.

have a look aroud the forum and dont rush into anything and ask lots of questions.

Dan 

[faulksy]

  ..it is compared to a 16!!! my old 8" i could move very easily.

1. how much are you willing to spend?
2. are you going to travel?
3. what are you going to observe?

these are fundamental questions you need to ask yourself. answering these will help you choose your first telescope.

1. BUDGET- stick to it. it can be very easy to over spend in this hobby especially when you have no idea on what to buy. asking lots of question will help you gain important information on choosing a scope thats right for you.
2. if you plan to travel to dark sky locations away from light pollution to get the best from you equipment then you need to consider the size of your car vs your equipment. observing from home then size isnt really a factor.
3. are you going to look at DSO ( deep space objects or planets or both?) choosing a all rounder scope is ideal for a first scope,something that will perform well on planets and DSO'S  like the skywatcher 200p.

have a look aroud the forum and dont rush into anything and ask lots of questions.

Dan 

all these have been stated in his first question

[Daniel-K]

all these have been stated in his first question

get ya own mates dumbass

[happy-kat]

I'd also like this to be somewhat portable, I have a car but I'll be going into the countryside with this so I'd have to carry it.

How much walking distance/terrain fromn the car do you imagine having to carry what telescope and tripod you buy?

[Digger1895]

Since you've decided on a reflector (vice refractor) for your first scope, I'll caution you that reflectors need to be collimated.  That's not a difficult task, but does have a learning curve.  Here's the "bible" of collimation: http://www.astro-baby.com/collimation/astro%20babys%20collimation%20guide.htm

Given that, there is a snag concerning the Celestron 130mm.  It's what we call a Bird-Jones design.  Bird-Jones designs are more difficult to collimate because they have an additional lens inside the focuser.  That lens needs to be removed to properly collimate the scope.  For that reason alone, I suggest staying away from the Celestron model you're considering

Clear Skies

LoJibed, the Celestron is not a bird-jones type reflector. It has a smaller focal length, 650mm, compared to the Skywatcher at 900mm.

But this does add to the choice between the two.

The longer focal length/focal ratio of the SW will allow more magnification and will be easier on eyepieces. The shorter Celestron will be after but will give a wider, richer field.

[Digger1895]

*faster, not after.

[FairDoos]

Thanks for all the great replys everyone!
 

From what I hear, Sky-Watcher Explorers are good telescopes, as are Celestrons. I personally couldn't say which of those two is better but it's hard to go wrong with a Sky-Watcher. If your fine with the collimating and you've decided on a reflector instead of a refractor then either could be good option. What I can say however is that I own two different Sky-Watchers and both have served me well.

Thanks for the advice, I'll have a deeper look into Sky-Watcher scopes.

Since you've decided on a reflector (vice refractor) for your first scope, I'll caution you that reflectors need to be collimated.  That's not a difficult task, but does have a learning curve.  Here's the "bible" of collimation: http://www.astro-baby.com/collimation/astro%20babys%20collimation%20guide.htm

Given that, there is a snag concerning the Celestron 130mm.  It's what we call a Bird-Jones design.  Bird-Jones designs are more difficult to collimate because they have an additional lens inside the focuser.  That lens needs to be removed to properly collimate the scope.  For that reason alone, I suggest staying away from the Celestron model you're considering.

Another consideration, regardless of the scope chosen, is the Equitorial Mount (EQ).  EQ mounts can be a bit daunting for someone new to the hobby, in that the learning curve is a bit steep, and is often dis-heartening to the new astronomer.  All that motorized stuff is useless unless you can properly perform a polar alignment of the mount.

Of the two you've mentioned above, I would definitely get the SkyWatcher.

If I were to recommend a beginning scope in the price range your budget allows, it would be a decent-sized refractor on an Az/Alt mount.  No collimation needed and no learning curve associated with a more complicated EQ mount.  Here's one:

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/skywatcher-evostar-90-az3.html

Clear Skies

Thanks for the bible! I'll definitely have a read of this, I'm trying to soak up as much knowledge as I can at the moment. Thanks for the suggestion too!
 

Have you considered a dobsonian mounted newtonian? You can get a lot more apature for your money and the starter EQ mounts sometimes have very questionable quality.

I'd recommend a 150P or 200p as a first scope. This gives you plenty of aperture to keep a solid intrest in the hobby and is really easy to use and quick to setup. Important aspects in Britain where the weather is rather changeable..

Best of luck with your choice

I have, but like the person who replied to you first, it seems a bit large for me to carry about, but I was tempted to go with the Dobsonian 200p and it is still playing on my mind. I can plenty of room in my car for it, but could I hack carrying it for half a mile to a mile?

Hi and welcome to SGL.

I too would prefer the Skywatcher over the Celestron in your post, but would prefer the one in the link in post  #3 - if you want a no-hassle scope to get going with astronomy, a 90mm refractor on a simple alt-az mount is great.

Regards, Ed.

Hello! Thank you. I'll definitely take this scope into consideration.

True, not too bad if it's just out the boot to your observing spot. Another piece of good advice is to check them out at a local shop or even better look through one at a local astronomy club.

I definitely will! I know of a local telescope shop thinking about it now, I hope it's still there, if not I'm sure I'll find one in my town centre.
 

You may wish to buy some additional eye pieces to get maximum value from your scope so I reccommend you factor this in to your budget. Best wished and welcome to the longe

I'll definitely take that on-board, thank you!
 

How much walking distance/terrain fromn the car do you imagine having to carry what telescope and tripod you buy?

2 Miles at the most really, most of it's hilly.


Thank you again for ally our posts, I'm now scrapping the first two choice's I posted thanks to the advice from the comment's, so here is my new list;

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/skywatcher-evostar-90-az3.html (I wanted to look more towards reflector scopes rather than refracters but if anyone can match the 2 reflector scopes with a refracter 'I'm game'.)

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-200p-ota.html (Anyone recommend a stable tripod for a scope of this size?)

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-200p-dobsonian.html (Not my ideal choice but then again I can always make my mates lug the stand whilst I carry the scope.)


 

[Ganymede12]

I can vouch for the Sky-Watcher Skyliner 200P Dobsonian. It is a superb scope which will give incredible views. My prifile pic was taken through my 200P for example.

[happy-kat]

Is it realistic to carry a 200p with a suitable tripod over a 2 mile varied hilly terrain with the other observing items. 10 or so kilo just for the tube. Plus the size of the tube and tripod needed.

200p dob mounted totals 27kilos.

[Charic]

FairDoos.....Hi there...........Your budget will get you the wonderful Skywatcher Skyliner 200P Dobsonian. As  portable as an EQ system, but less storage space required.   I have an EQ system mount for a celestron 127EQ Powerseeker and just can't be bothered with it after my initial use, just for visual  astronomy,  too much in the detail to correctly set it up EVERYTIME and its just not right for someone that just wants a simple mechanism for easy setup and easy viewing. The Skyliner blows my Celestron away, totaly, period.

You may want to upgrade  your accessories, this comes later. But the 200P will be better than the two in your original post?

Also why park so far from your viewing point. If you have no choice, find another viewing point! Just hiding in the garden shadows is sufficient for me, as long as the eyes can't see the direct light from street light pollution. But a darker site gives me the impression that I am using another telescope altogether, the difference is so apparent. If I needed to travel any distance from the car, I could use my Carp fishing barrow, but I  always try to be near the car.

[happy-kat]

Could you carry yours over a 2 mile varied and hilly terrain Steve with help?

Perhaps there is enough budget to have the 200p and a smaller grab an go for the remote observing location.

[swamp thing]

Given that, there is a snag concerning the Celestron 130mm.  It's what we call a Bird-Jones design.  Bird-Jones designs are more difficult to collimate because they have an additional lens inside the focuser.  That lens needs to be removed to properly collimate the scope. 

Clear Skies

The celestron astromaster 130 that the OP linked to is not a bird jones design. you  are thinking of the power seeker 127.

That said I would not recommend either of the scopes linked to in the OP. These tiny EQ mounts are a gimmick and wobble like jellies at the best of time. my advice would be to save a little bit more money and get one of these

[Charic]

The celestron astromaster 130 that the OP linked to is not a bird jones design. you  are thinking of the power seeker 127.

That said I would not recommend either of the scopes linked to in the OP. These tiny EQ mounts are a gimmick and wobble like jellies at the best of time. my advice would be to save a little bit more money and get one of these

I concur 

[FairDoos]

The celestron astromaster 130 that the OP linked to is not a bird jones design. you  are thinking of the power seeker 127.

That said I would not recommend either of the scopes linked to in the OP. These tiny EQ mounts are a gimmick and wobble like jellies at the best of time. my advice would be to save a little bit more money and get one of these

I'm considering the Dobsonian 200p.

Could you carry yours over a 2 mile varied and hilly terrain Steve with help?

Perhaps there is enough budget to have the 200p and a smaller grab an go for the remote observing location.

Most of the locations I wish to go to aren't that far away from the car, 5 mile was just my maximum range I have plenty of spots that can be anywhere from 10 Meters to 5 Miles away from my car.

FairDoos.....Hi there...........Your budget will get you the wonderful Skywatcher Skyliner 200P Dobsonian. As  portable as an EQ system, but less storage space required.   I have an EQ system mount for a celestron 127EQ Powerseeker and just can't be bothered with it after my initial use, just for visual  astronomy,  too much in the detail to correctly set it up EVERYTIME and its just not right for someone that just wants a simple mechanism for easy setup and easy viewing. The Skyliner blows my Celestron away, totaly, period.

You may want to upgrade  your accessories, this comes later. But the 200P will be better than the two in your original post?

Also why park so far from your viewing point. If you have no choice, find another viewing point! Just hiding in the garden shadows is sufficient for me, as long as the eyes can't see the direct light from street light pollution. But a darker site gives me the impression that I am using another telescope altogether, the difference is so apparent. If I needed to travel any distance from the car, I could use my Carp fishing barrow, but I  always try to be near the car.

Thanks for the reply! I'm considering the Dobsonian 200p (See my second post) I will take the EQ into consideration as someone has already mentioned that it's a steep learning curve for a beginner.

Is it realistic to carry a 200p with a suitable tripod over a 2 mile varied hilly terrain with the other observing items. 10 or so kilo just for the tube. Plus the size of the tube and tripod needed.

200p dob mounted totals 27kilos.

Most of the locations I wish to go to aren't that far away from the car, 5 mile was just my maximum range I have plenty of spots that can be anywhere from 10 Meters to 5 Miles away from my car.

I can vouch for the Sky-Watcher Skyliner 200P Dobsonian. It is a superb scope which will give incredible views. My prifile pic was taken through my 200P for example.

Wonderful! Those are the type of views I want to expect!

What does everyone think of the Skywatcher Explorer 200p? I imagine this would be the same as the Dobsonian but I would need to purchase a Tripod, a lot easier for me to transport around though? 

Thanks for all the help!

[Charic]

The EQ is easy to get to grips with (was for me) I just don't see the need for the effort required in setting up the telescope, then having to continually lock, adjust, rotate and everything else associated with an EQ mount. I just wanted to put the telescope into position and use it straight away (bar any cooling times ). Therefore the Dobsonian suits me fine. If you want to venture into astrophotography, then a tracking EQ mount is a must. But the mount itself may cost a darn sight more than the telescope?

[FairDoos]

The EQ is easy to get to grips with (was for me) I just don't see the need for the effort required in setting up the telescope, then having to continually lock, adjust, rotate and everything else associated with an EQ mount. I just wanted to put the telescope into position and use it straight away (bar any cooling times ). Therefore the Dobsonian suits me fine. If you want to venture into astrophotography, then a tracking EQ mount is a must. But the mount itself may cost a darn sight more than the telescope?

Dont get me wrong, I was planning on taking a couple of photos now and then, will this still be possible without the EQ? 

The more I think about it the more I want the Dobsonian 200p.

[Avocette]

You might think of buying second-hand, and this package looks like incredible value! http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php?view=89924