(Yet another) request for advice purchasing a telescope

[samdag]

Dear All,

My 28 year old younger brother recently went back to school specifically to study physics, and as is typical for him he has become completely engrossed in the subject matter.  A fairly natural off-shoot of his study has been a burgeoning interest in the universe and astronomy.  He has already made numerous visits and spent countless hours at one of the better observatories here in the U.S., but has not yet made the plunge to purchase his own scope.  I'd like to do that for him.  I've done some initial research and read a number of the threads already up on this site, including the 'How to start right in astronomy' article which definitely resonated (yet I'm still selfish enough to start a new thread for my own purposes.)  My brother is patient, inquisitive, and a self-learner and thus I have no doubt that he will approach astronomy with the same measure of purpose and dedication that he does with all of his interests.  He is the type of person who would become an avid reader/contributor to a forum such as this one.  All this is to say that while I want to get him a scope that is reasonable for a still-learning amateur, he is the type of person who will quickly outgrow any scope solely meant for beginners.    Does anyone have any advice?  I suppose I'm ok to pay upwards of 900 USD for something like this: http://www.telescopes.com/telescopes/reflecting-telescopes/celestronadvancedvx6inchnewtoniantelescope.cfm  but I also certainly don't want to throw away money on unnecessary features and would hope that there might be something appropriate for my brother at a lower price-point.  Basically, while he will no doubt take the time to learn how to best take advantage of whatever scope I get him, this will still be his first real scope and a learning curve will be in play.  Any advice would be very much appreciated.  Thanks a ton.

[knobby]

Hi, you'll need a bit of groundwork ... do you think he'd prefer a manual scope where you push it about by hand or a computerised type that finds and follows objects after a set up procedure ... Also , would he be into imaging or purely visual. Lastly , how much space and ease of access from house to backyard ...

Good luck

[RichM63]

What a kind brother you are.

Does this have to be a suprise gift, mainly because there are 2 fairly distinct fields. Visual observing, and Astro Photography, although results can be had in both fields with the same kit. Generally speaking, one would use kit designed for a particular field.

Could it be that the 'suprise' aspect is that you take him into an astonomy store and tell him that he now has $1000 in the pot to spend on just what he wants. He may also have a few $ of his own to add in.

I have a very similar SkyWatcher badged version of this telescope and love it.

Also in the USA, look up Zhumell Z..... telescopes

[knobby]

The scope you linked to is a decent scope by the way, and wouldn't be a waste if you did choose it , the mount is a very good one which would take an improved scope later if the upgrade bug bites

Also have a look here for clubs in the new York area , maybe pop along and see some different types of scope in the flesh

http://www.go-astronomy.com/astro-clubs-state.php?State=NY

[Sirius Starwatcher]

Hello Samdag As you can see from the first few posts, a couple of questions posed to help you decide, because like most things one scope may not cover all disciplines in astronomy. There will be plenty of advice from experienced members to help you choose. Best wishes with your choice.

[samdag]

Thanks to all of you for the thoughtful advice, it is really appreciated.  

Knobby, I will check out the astronomy club here in the city - thanks for the link and the suggestion.

I'll try to answer your questions as best as possible:

A) I'd say that if I had to pick one I would go with a scope for visual observing.  That said, if there is a model that would at least allow for some form of astral photography in addition to solid visual observation I could see my brother enjoying that as well.  

Not sure about a manual scope or computerized model - would you have any suggestions or personal preferences?

C) Space is not really an issue (within reason), however if there is a model that at least is able to be broken down and transported with only moderate effort that would be preferable.

Not sure if any of these 'requests' are realistic, or at least realistic within my budget, so certainly feel free to tell me i need to firmly narrow down my criteria.

Thanks very much.

[bomberbaz]

I will come in here and make a suggestion http://www.telescopes.com/telescopes/catadioptric-telescopes/celestronnexstar8se.cfm  The setup is reasonably lightweight and would fit in your budget (just). It finds and tracks objects for you and is able to do basic, short exposure photogrphy. 

It has a larger aperture than the one you posted a link to and is also more forgiving on eyepieces which would be the next big money drain if you brother gets into this in a big way. What tis means in real terms is he wont have to pay mega bucks to get decent views when adding 2 or maybe 3 extra eyepieces to the one supplied which would be fine to start with.

It doesn't take up huge amounts of space either and as mentioned isnt too heavy to lug around. There are a few other bits that would be needed for this such as a power pack (liesure battery will do this easily), dew shield which can be made yourself for a few $ from a camping sleeping mat but to get him started all he would actually need is 8 AA baterries, clear dark skies and away you go.

I am sure other members will suggest other options but this is mine based upon what you have said thus far. If you find the computerised version isnt required, then you are moving into a whole new territory but I will leave it there so as not to overload you with options.

steve

[happy-kat]

How far is storage location to observing spot?

Something that is big and heavy and up stairs could likely gather dust.

[samdag]

Is it realistic to look for a scope of this caliber that is able to be broken down, transported, and set back up again somewhat easily?   I'm asking because the viewing spot at my brother's house is mediocre at best  (he lives in a somewhat populated area.)  However, he is about a 10 minute drive from some fantastic, secluded, open sky area's that I could see him taking advantage of if the scope itself is able to be transported.  

I understand that it's all about tradeoffs, but all things being equal a lighter, more easily moveable scope would definitely be best if it's possible to find one that does not completely sacrifice overall performance.  

[bomberbaz]

Is it realistic to look for a scope of this caliber that is able to be broken down, transported, and set back up again somewhat easily?   I'm asking because the viewing spot at my brother's house is mediocre at best  (he lives in a somewhat populated area.)  However, he is about a 10 minute drive from some fantastic, secluded, open sky area's that I could see him taking advantage of if the scope itself is able to be transported.  

I understand that it's all about tradeoffs, but all things being equal a lighter, more easily moveable scope would definitely be best if it's possible to find one that does not completely sacrifice overall performance.  

The one I mentioned I used to break it down, put it back in the boxes it came in and into the car in less than 10 minutes. Setup time similar also.

To be honest it would help people advise you better if we knew more about what you were after. For example does he want the computer driven model as per the SE8, or would he be happy learning the night sky and using a simple dobsonian scope to push to the target and find manually.

Just to throw something else at this, there is something of a hybrid called a "push to" scope. Where you simply tell the scope what you are looking for and it shows you where to go but you push the scope manually. I actually like the idea of these although I haven't got or even used one but it means less money spent on electronics and more can be spent on the optical side of things and could still be used for brief exposure photography.

This one here for example http://www.telescope.com/Telescopes/Dobsonian-Telescopes/IntelliScope-Dobsonians/Orion-SkyQuest-XT8i-IntelliScope-Dobsonian-Telescope/pc/1/c/12/sc/27/p/102012.uts?refineByCategoryId=27 Lovely looking scope that at F6 focal ratio will be reasonably forgiving on eyepiece. Disassembles in a few seconds with part weighing 21lb and 20lb and if you have great dark skies as you mention, he will have no end of fun with this and should keep him busy for a couple of years at least. Oh and the cost is only $650   (maybe money left over for a couple of eyepieces or other accessories)

As i say, ther is a scope for everyone but finding the right one when you are not sure of the preferences is always going to be very difficult. 

[samdag]

Thanks everybody.

SubDwarf - stupid question here, but looks like the Orion scope you recommended is designed to rest on a table/flat surface as opposed to being mounted on a tripod.  Is this a problem if I anticipate him viewing in places where flat surfaces are hard to come by (like the middle of a large clearing in an otherwise wooded area?)

Also, would you mind giving a layman like myself a quick breakdown of how the scope you suggested matches up against the Celstron Advanced VX6 (I certainly like the smaller price tag of the Orion model...)

thanks, 

Sam

[bomberbaz]

Hi Sam. First its Steve or Bomberbaz, (SubDwarf is my forum tag that denoted how many posts I have made and how long a forum member, yours is Vacuum. hehe    )

The Orion scope has a tube measuring 44.5 inchs and with the base should take it to around 55 ish tall. So yes, it would be a little easier using it if you either elevate it to eye level or get a small seat to use whilst at the eyepiece, its idown to preferences realy but nothing to worry over.

All scopes should be as level as possible, it is just far easier with a tripod set up as this is simple to adjust. I have the flat base scope just like the Orion and I usually use whatever is handy for doing that or use a screwdriver to dig a level into the ground if it is soft enough. Its no biggie.

The Celestron other that being mounted on a tripod has a system that once aligned to the night sky, takes you to the object chosen from tjhe scopes mount database, puts the obect desired in the eyepiece and keeps it there by auto tracking. (assuming you align it correcly) This is an equatorial type mount which takes a little more aligning but once done a few times, shouldnt be overly taxing.

The Orion also requires aligning although the procedure is somewhat easier than the Celestron model as no polar alignment is needed. You then tell the scope where you want to go and this then shows you where it is in the sky and you manually "push" the scope to this point and the required object is in the eyepiece. It does require constant pushing to keep the object there though but this should be easy once you have it in the eyepiece.

I would just add, the above is not as difficult as the overview may sound.

Hope this help

Steve

[bingevader]

I've only once put my 8" dob on a table to look over the hedge, I'm not sure I'd advise it!

Sam, it's big!

Take a look further down the page in the link to see a size comparison.

It has its own mount and doesn't need a tripod.

The surface only needs to be flat enough for it to be stable.

Maybe if you could get a long to a store (must be one in New York) you'd a have a better idea of what's available.

The main differences between the Orion and the Celestron are the size of the primary (big) mirror and the mount.

They are both Newtonian reflectors and so gather the light from the night sky in the same way by bouncing it off a big mirror, up to a smaller (secondary) mirror and then into the eyepiece.

This distance (big mirror to eyepiece) gives the focal length of the telescope.

The Orion has an 8" mirror as opposed to the 6" mirror in the Celestron, so the light gathering power of the Orion will be better.

The Orion is on a simple Dobsonian mount, but this one is "intelligent", so that once you've located an object the 'scope will keep tracking it and keep it in the field of view of the eye piece.

The Celestron is on a computerised equatorial mount, so that once it is aligned correctly, it will find and track any object that is in the computer's database.

Hope that helps.

Lol, too slow, by seconds!

What he said.

Oops, sorry, double edit!
Which VX6 are you looking at?

I was looking at the newt, there's a schmidt-cassegrain too!

Whoops, not getting any better!
I mentioned the focal length but forgot to say the difference.

The VX6 (newt) has a 650mm focal length, the Orion, 1200mm, so for a given eyepiece, images will appear bigger in the Orion.

[bomberbaz]

Hiya Ben, your bang on with that and I forgot about the extra aperture size. An 8" scope gathers roughly 50% more light than a 6" one, makes the objects you look at seem brighter and more defined.

Although the Orion does track, its not done automatically, this is done by hand. Just clarifying that point 

Steve

[ollypenrice]

The 8 inch motorized Celestron suggested by Bomberbaz has a lot going for it in many ways. It could be used with a webcam derived camera (cheap) for excellent planetary imaging. It will not take him into the photography of the deep sky so it is not likely to be a very long term keeper, though you say this doesn't matter.

On the other hand the advantage wiith a moderate sized Dob is that he might keep it forever and buy himself a separate rig for imaging one day. Often people on here ask for suggestions on a do-it-all visual and photographic scope and the frequent advice is, 'Forget it, just buy a cheap Dob for visual and a dedicated imaging rig.' It's actually easier and cheaper and more convenient to do this. Many of us have a Dob as well as our imaging rigs because they give a nice relaxed evening's observing and are the antidote to infernal imaging rigs needing constant attention!

Maybe I'm used to having a lot of big telescopes around me (I run an astro holiday place) but I don't think of an 8 inch Dob as big.  When placed upright in a corner it is incredibly discrete, has a small footprint and all but disappears. This would come in well under budget so you might think of adding a moderate quality pair of 8x42 (or similar) binoculars since these are something else that most of us have to hand. They are brilliant for beginners learning the sky, very relaxed and enjoyable to use and give a wide field which puts telescopic views into perspective. When I'm catering for visual beginners I use just the binoculars and a Dobsonian (though a very big one.) This is what I find works best.

Olly

[Dave In Vermont]

Merry Christmas - a bit early. Here's a free e-book you may find quite helpful in getting a working understanding of what's available out there by way of telescopes:

http://www.astroshop.eu/advice/telescope/telescope-knowledge/ebook-download/c,9154

It's well-written, with technical-jargon sprinkled sparingly to make it educational with causing your brain to have a meltdown.....

Enjoy,

Dave

[samdag]

Guess I showed my ignorance big-time with that question (as well as referring to Steve/Bomberbaz by his forum tag which I can't even blame on lack of astronomy knowledge.)

Thanks to all of you for your patience and for the detailed responses.    Starting to get a clearer picture of the different strengths/weaknesses each model brings to the table.

To summarize, am I correct to say that the Orion with the 8" dob will offer a much better overall viewing experience as far as range/clarity/etc, whereas the celestron would allow for decent but not fantastic imaging as well as solid viewing?

As far as 'ease of use / setup' seems like both are more or less the same?

Bingevadar, this was the celestron scope I was referencing: http://www.telescopes.com/telescopes/reflecting-telescopes/celestronadvancedvx6inchnewtoniantelescope.cfm

[bingevader]

Woohoo, the Newtonian!

Then, yes, the 8" dob will give bigger brighter images with same eyepiece, but you'll have to find them yourself.

[Dave In Vermont]

I will play with you again here!

I have three - 3 - words for which way I'd go if I was in the market for a first 'real' telescope: Aperture! Aperture! Aperture!

While the 6-inch F/5 looks like a well presented introduction to astronomy & telescopes - with the added draw of computerized convenience - a 200mm (8-inch) scope is generally considered to be of sufficient aperture to keep one busy looking at new & fascinating stellar objects for a lifetime. That added two-inches over the 6-inch Celestron truly opens the gateway to finding & observing DSO's (Deep-Sky Objects) in earnest.

Aside from the aperture issue, the 200mm (er - 203mm) Dobsonian from Orion has a F/5.9 optical-train, whereas the Celestron 6-inch is a faster optical-train of F/5. What this boils-down to is the F/5.9 Orion is more 'forgiving' regarding the need for keeping the collimation checked & tweaked prior to usage if you so much as looked at the scope sideways. My F/4 200mm Newtonian is like that - fortunately I am a devout "techie." I LOVE rolling-up my sleeves and aligning optical-pathways. Among other things.....

So I think I've made clear which way I'd go. As well as the reasons why.

Clear Skies & Learning-Curves,

Dave

[bomberbaz]

I think Dave above makes the point I was trying to get across perfectly, however he is just a little more direct about it than I was, he he :-D

[samdag]

Thanks guys, looks like I'm going with the Orion.   All of your help provided patiently to a neophyte such as myself was really appreciated.

Clear skies and Happy Holidays.

[bomberbaz]

Thanks guys, looks like I'm going with the Orion.   All of your help provided patiently to a neophyte such as myself was really appreciated.

Clear skies and Happy Holidays.

you are welcome now that I have googled neophyte and know what it means 

[carl20171]

For me aperture and motorized go to are important. I found when I was just starting out it was nice to be able to tell the scope to point at an object and then I could get an idea of what was in the sky without much initial learning curve, Then when I realized in deep sky what I was going to see was a tiny smudge like a cotton ball I decided to get a bigger aperture scope and I then could see a larger cotton ball smudge. So then came astrophotography. Then I went full circle and used binoculars and a wide view scope to just relax and enjoy the view. The moral for me is often we put all the effort in getting the perfect scope in a hobby that is ever evolving with our interest. I think put together all the great advice from my fellow stargazers and get what you can afford. The main thing is to get a scope and get out and use it. (:

[Piero]

I think a Newton 150mm F5 is a good choice for a beginner (and not). Regarding the mount, it is tricky to suggest.. 

The mount you listed would be perfect if the sky he will observe from is light polluted or if he intend to do imaging. 

Otherwise, I think an Alt/Azimuth would be better TBH. 

On the Alt/Az front, one option could be a Skywatcher 150P F5 mounted on a Skywatcher AZ4. This is a nice combo, very easy to move and to use. 

Plus, you would save some money which could be spent on a couple of eyepieces. The finder 6x30 generally included with a syntia newton 150 is

not the best, but you can replace it with a telrad. 

With a relatively cheap explore scientific 24mm 82 degrees, you should get more than 2 degrees of field of view. This, combined with a Telrad would make star hopping

and low power observation quite easy!   

For high power you could get a 7mm 82degrees (e.g. Skywatcher nirvana 7mm). Again relatively not expensive but good one. 

The cost of all of this should be similar to the cost of your solution. 

Then, he can add a barlow lens 2x and get magnifications of: 31x, 62x, 107x, 214x (and exit pupils of 4.8mm, 2.4mm, 1.4mm, 0.7mm which are quite nice.. ).

Good luck with your choice, 

Piero