Are table tops suitable first telescopes for kids?

[Jamus]

First telescope

Hi everyone.

I have been looking into options for a first telescope that would be suitable for my daughter who will shortly be seven.

The Moon has long fascinated her and more recently we identified Venus which seems to be almost too perfectly positioned from her window.

As sensible as binoculars might be for the first step to get a better look at things they just won't hit the mark in a seven year old eyes. They also might be hold in position for a time(?)

Two of the telescopes I have read about are table top mounted. What are people's views on these? She is lucky enough to have a small bay window which is currently home to a little table so this seems ideal to me. How easy are these types to operate and find things?

Celestron Firstscope

Skywatcher Hertitage 76 Mini Dobsonian

Both seem very cheap and would enable me to get a good book for my budget too!

Would I need anything more? A moon filter?

Just to throw a spanner in the works. I have also been looking at this which is perhaps what I think looks like it most fits with what kids think a telescope is.

Celestron 21007 Powerseeker 40AZ Tabletop Refractor Telescope

And this one looks like any incredible deal cost wise but maybe not be the best choice (keep for myself?!?)

Celestron Travel Scope 70 Telescope

Help! Any advice welcome.

Sorry about the lack of links. I will try and add them in later!

Thanks.

[happy-kat]

Hi

You don't mention a budget.

The heritage 100p is table top as well and just that but more aperture to get a bit more from the view.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes/skywatcher-heritage-100p-tabletop-dobsonian.html

I would not personally do the celstron 21007 too small.

Though spot on saying a refractor looks like what children expect if they draw one. I have never used the 70mm my own small one is 80mm. There are members who have the 70mm so perhaps they will comment on what you might see.

Moon filter I never use mine. If it is that bright I put m sun glasses on but NEVER look at the sun you need specialised equipment for that.

[ronin]

Before I reply I will say I am not a fan of these small ones, they have too many restrictions and constraints.

They are small and portable and need a table to use them so you have a scope to transport and a table, is transporting two items better or worse.

The Skywatcher Hertitage 76 Mini Dobsonian, is 300mm focal length that makes it f/3.9, that means that maintaining collimation is important and that getting eyepieces to operate well in one is (or can be) a bit of a problem. You could end up getting a £50 scope then getting a £50 eyepiece for it.

The Celestron 21007 Powerseeker 40AZ Tabletop Refractor Telescope is easier to use, it is a refractor and so collimation is not a factor and at f/10 easier for eyepieces. Problem is the diameter, it is small and could be too small for anything useful. There are 70mm ones and they are a better option. They will get used more and see more.

The Celestron Travel Scope 70 Telescope is at least 70mm, so bigger, again a refractor so less maintenence, at f/5.7 I think it is a bit short, would have preferred something around f/8 or f/10.

The 2 refractors look like they can be put on a standard camera tripod, which I think is where they will get used most, at least then you are not hauling a scope, table top tripod and table round.

For around the £70 mark there is the Skywatcher Mercury 707 telescope, I would suggest that as you will at least see more. A 10mm plossl on it will show Jupiter well (when it reappears) and at 100x (7mm plossl) it should just show Saturns rings.

Never used a filter yet for the moon, so do not bother.

Do not get a scope that supplies an upright image for terrestrial viewing - the extra glass makes things worse.

[nicoscy]

Both refractors mentioned suffer from horrible mount / tripod combos which effectively may frustrate a young aspiring amateur astronomer.

The reflectors are a good choice if there is a decent table / desk to put them on to ensure that they are stable.

I actually had the Celestron 70mm travelscope but mounted on a different mount and I keep a Skywatcher 76mm on my desk at work for quick cheap thrills.

Since the 70mm WILL need a better mount to make it perform as it should - which adds to the cost - I would go for either of the 76mm reflectors and a nice book.

Be warned though, it means you will have to invest time to explain and show things. My 10 year old got into the hobby at the same age. Now that it is getting warmer and schools are closed, we will be heading out again!

[nicoscy]

The 70mm Mercury 707 telescope proposed by Ronin is actually a decent choice, with a tripod / mount that is "not as horrible" as the other two refractor choices.

It will be stable enough if the bolts are greased a bit and the screws tightened a bit to do some decent viewing...

[ghostdance]

I like the 'tabletops' ( well, the two I've used and own, both Orion) and would not rule them out as a valid choice.

Orion Starblast 4.5" reflector + upturned builders bucket = perfect for smaller people imho. Why? Simplicity itself, ease of use, minimum cool down, good widefield views, nice low height, nice low cost, a proper scope not a department store toy, great introduction to learning the sky. And the bucket on a good surface gives very good stability. Pop a Rigel or a RACI finder on and your out and observing in seconds ( a red dot finder comes with the scope, so can certainly be used from the off - but a Rigel/RACI combo is hard to beat.)

Sure you can get better as your interest develops (oh that so-beloved upgradeitis!) but what's not to like?

[happy-kat]

What does though the starblast give above the heritage 100p for £80 more money?

It does have 14mm bigger aperture.

Both are table top, they are both f4 and parabolic.

Do we know if the primary mirror cell can be collimated separatly on the starblast?

[ghostdance]

I can't compare the two, having never used the 100p. I assume from what I've read it's a great little scope...wasn't recommending the Starblast *over* alternatives, just think tabletops are pretty neat - but I can only talk about what I've used.

The Starblast primary is as fully collimateable as any, afaik? Not sure I fully understand yr question on that , kat?

[happy-kat]

The 100p you colimate only the secondary. There are no colimation screws on the primary I don't think having previously read posts on that telescope.

I was considering the prices of the telescopes in the OP first post.

I like table top (upturned bucket) as well.

[ghostdance]

Ah...thanks - I didn't know that about the 100p. Non-collimateable primary, seems a bit strange if so? But then I am a higgsnoramus in terms of the technical stuff

[happy-kat]

Reading posts people manage to ensure all is OK using the secondary. If it keeps the price so low then that's cool.

[LukeSkywatcher]

No mention of this scope yet?. 

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html

[Jamus]

Wow. Thank you.

I can't believe how much helpful advice there is. The bus is not the place to digest all this info!

[jimbo747]

The travelscope 70mm is £39 at Curry's/PC world

http://www.currys.co.uk/gbuk/cameras/accessories/binoculars/celestron-travel-scope-70-refractor-telescope-03506588-pdt.html#srcid=11026

About as good as it gets for under £50 and you won't have to mess about collimating it. I've seen SLT and virtuoso mounts go for £60 if you do ever decide to upgrade the mount to one that tracks or can be controlled from your PC or phone.

The 130 heritage is pretty cool, but is £90 more, probably a lot less 2nd hand.

[Jamus]

Firstly - Thank you all for your advice!

The moon filter is struck off the list.

happy-kat

Budget wise I guess I was aiming for sub £100. The heritage 100p looks great.

[Also do I recognise you from the Puma forum?]

ronin

I've googled collimation and it is not supposed to be a big issue on these smaller version but thanks for the warning.

I personally like the look of the Skywatcher Mercury 707 telescope too but I think it may be too much for my daughter at the moment.

nicoscy

Good call on the mounts. That seems to be echoed elsewhere.

ghostdance

Thanks for the Orion shout. They weren't even on my radar. Will be looking into better/advanced finders but that is "later" item.

Interestingly the Celestron Firstscope doesn't come with a finder scope.

Tempted as I am by the Travelscope 70mm + decent mount or Mercury 707 I think I am swaying towards the table top mounted telescopes. After watching some videos the size of them, the wide field of view and easy of positioning looks key for me. Hopefully the collimation wont be a big deal. We won't be travelling away from the house with it for a while at least. 

Although not so powerful apparently the 76 mm Dobsoniain's (in the right condtions) should be able to see the Moon in detail and some of the brighter planet objects. Which as a first telescope will be ideal for her/us.

After looking into Orion I discovered the Funscope and I think it is the one to go for. Just pipping the Firstscope & Sky-Watcher Heritage. It seems to have (slightly) better eye pieces and can also be mounted on a tripod (be it a heavy duty one) at a later date. Plus it looks a little more child friendly than the graphics of the Heritage & Firstscope.

http://www.telescope.com/FunScope-76mm-Tabletop-Reflector-Telescope/p/102015.uts

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkgR_307OEo

Thank you all for you help and knowledge.

[Jamus]

I hope to let you know how we get on!

[nicoscy]

With kids it's always the fun factor so after any kid is done with the ohhhs and ahhhs, it is the parents' job to keep them engaged. Good luck!

[happy-kat]

The focuser taking 1.25 eye pieces is great means if the interest is there you could later on buy one better quality eye piece to improve the view.

[Jamus]

Oh. I just read a review on Amazon that has me doubting my choice

I not sure what spherical rather than parabolic means!

Image clarity lacking, perhaps due to spherical rather than parabolic mirror

By Amazon Customer on 15 Sept. 2014

This is great from the point of view of specs on paper : a red dot finder, quality eyepieces, good written instructions.

However I returned mine as it misses where it counts : the image quality is lacking and I believe it is due to its spherical rather than parabolic. I had to tweak the focus to be sure if I was seeing a binary star or an optical abberation. I don't understand why manufacturers cut such an important corner.

In the end I purchased a Skywatcher Infinity 76, that does have a parabolic mirror, and the images are pin sharp, though lacking the finder and eyepieces.

If Orion were to make this with a parabolic mirror, I would jump at it.

This review seemed quite positive.

http://eyesonthesky.com/Blog/tabid/80/EntryId/9/Orion-Funscope-76-review-Part-1.aspx

Help!

[brantuk]

Quite straightforward really - parabolic mirrors focus better at the edges than spherical mirrors do. Stars can look a bit "splurged out" towards the edge of a spherical one - not as sharp and focused as the central part of the mirror. This doesn't happen with parabolic mirrors where the image is more even across the whole view and all the stars stay in shape.

[happy-kat]

The problem with the infinity is it does not take a standard eye piece size last time I looked.

Parabolic mirrors are more expensive.

If you really want parabolic then the heritage 100p has one.

There is a thread on here explaining the differences in terms of views. Edit: someone else replied.

[cutepetgroomer]

I have a "tabletop" scope. I was able to get another tripod for it that provides more height so I can use either tripod for it. Mine is 70 mm, I have seen the moon, Saturn, Jupiter, Mars, Neptune and Uranus. I have also seen some various star clusters and possibly Orion nebula (I'm not good at identifying nebulas ). The moon and the star clusters will be easier to view than the other items , mainly due to how small the other planets will look. I'm saving up for slightly bigger. I'm not going much bigger as I need a scope I can store out of toddler reach easily. However a 70mm is an overall great size to start with. That is coming from someone who started with a 50 mm scope .

[Jamus]

Thanks  brantuk, but this would only effect the edge of the view then yes? Or should I try and avoid spherical mirrors on a beginner scope?

[Helen]

Maybe read this too http://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes.html

One thing no-one has mentioned is that it is not a good idea to observe through a window - the image will most likely not be good.  So work on something that can be operated outside.  

The small dobsonian mounts that you are considering are stable and easy to use and I'd say less faff than a tripod.  I've got a heritage 130 which I bought specifically to lend out to friends/family's kids if they expressed an interest in my telescopes.  Its on its second foster home (with a 7 year-old) at the moment and all the family are having fun with it.  

The other recommendation is to buy from an established astro dealer (like First Light Optics) rather than amazon or a camera shop/dept store..

This little book might be fun (again from experience with a 7-year-old - it has lots of stickers!!)  http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/184810152X/ref=sr_1_1_twi_1_spi_olp?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1435080967&sr=1-1&keywords=space+detective+handbook

Whatever you get though, I'm sure you'll have fun together.

Helen

[Jamus]

Thanks you Helen. The window point is a very good one!

The book looks great too.

Maybe read this too http://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes.html

One thing no-one has mentioned is that it is not a good idea to observe through a window - the image will most likely not be good.  So work on something that can be operated outside.  

This little book might be fun (again from experience with a 7-year-old - it has lots of stickers!!)  http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/184810152X/ref=sr_1_1_twi_1_spi_olp?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1435080967&sr=1-1&keywords=space+detective+handbook