I'm confused :(

[BrettL]

My partner and I did some star gazing on holiday earlier in the year and loved it so I wanted to get him a telescope for Xmas as a surprise, nothing expensive up to about £100 but something to get him started.

I have no idea at all what to look for, what the jargon means etc so I am really at a loss. I thought about getting a second hand one first of all to make sure that this is something he will use (as he goes through many fads) and I have found a Celestron Powerseeker Newtonian Reflector 675 Telescope second hand for a reasonable price. I have also seen on Groupn a Zennox Reflector Telescope (76x700mm) on offer for £55.

Are any of these any good or from your experience is there one you would recommend?

Any help or guidnace would be greatly appreciated

Thank you xxx

[Ouroboros]

You might not like my reply but personally I would almost never buy something specialist like this as a surprise gift. Better to find out if he/she really wants a telescope. Binoculars might be a better first option. Or something else altogether. If they do want a telescope then suggest you visit a good store together, or get them to research on the internet what they might like. Say you want to put £100 or whatever towards it, and if they want to spend a bit more they can. Sorry if that doesn't sound very ... err ... Christmas surprisey!

[BrettL]

No thats great thank you and makes sense. I really appreciate youve taken the time to answer x

[Stu]

If you do want to get a starter scope, then the Heritage range from Skywatcher are popular. Perhaps the 100p? It is a table top scope but has good specs for the price.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/heritage.html

[wuthton]

If you do want to get a starter scope, then the Heritage range from Skywatcher are popular. Perhaps the 100p? It is a table top scope but has good specs for the price.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/heritage.html

This would be my choice too.

[dweller25]

This would be my choice too.

Yes, I will third that.

Don't take it straight out of the (warm) house to use it - let it cool down for 30 minutes or more in an unheated  shed or garage - you will get much better views.

[Davey-T]

And a fourth, if you buy something half reasonable like this if he doesn't like it it will be easy to resell.

Dave

[Dave Lloyd]

Leave the Zennox, it's a toy really.

[Charic]

Take a look at the Binocular Sky website. http://www.binocularsky.com/

Just about everyone who owns a telescope will purchase binoculars too.

For the money you envisage, a decent pair of binoculars for widefield observations would probably out perform the scopes your suggesting. Some of the cheaper scopes are about as usefull as a chocolate fire guard?

Binoculars are more grab & go and their more portable too, not only for night time, but daylight terrestrial use, such as birding, aircraft, shipping, sports.

If and when the enthusiasm grows, and more detail is required for Planetary observations, then get a better scope, after some more study time and evaluation.

Enjoy your search, and welcome to the SGL.

[Matt Scunthorpe]

First off, Weclome to SGL.

I think a good pair of binoculars would be good - plus you might already own some - there are also plenty of guides to finding things (comets, nebulas etc) with binoculars so that he has something to start with. If he loves it still, then you can look at a scope together (you might enjoy it too!), but if he gets bored fairly quick then you have saved your money.

Matt.

[Matt Scunthorpe]

Then again, I also understand that when your heart is set on a present, such as a scope, being told to get binos can be a bit of a let down and wouldn't make that much of an exciting Christmas morning!

If your mind is set on a scope of some kind, I would keep it simple, cheap and easy to use.

I would also suggest the heritage which is linked below, I don't know what kind of budget you have set yourself (as you mentioned the scope for £55) but it wouldn't break the bank if it wasn't used all that much, and it can be used as a stepping stone to something bigger if he decides he would like to get into properly.

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/heritage.html

Matt.

[D4N]

I would certainly go for the heritage 100P with a sub £100 budget.

/Dan

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[brantuk]

+1 for the Heritage 100P. Great for dabbling ones toes in a hobby where a good eyepiece can cost from £100 upwards.

It's a sound little scope with two eye pieces and great views - and if he decides not to take up astronomy it won't have cost an arm and a leg. If he likes it though, start saving - his next birthday and Christmas pressies are gonna cost thousands lol

Welcome to SGL

[Knighty2112]

Why not try to go to a shop that specialises in astronomy? There are a few around the West Midlands area so if it is fesable then pop in to see some beginner scopes and get any further advice there if you can.

[Scott]

Yep, the heritage. I bought one when I was in oz for a few mths. works pretty much straight out of the box and suited me perfectly for chucking (gently) on the back seat of the car when travelling about. 

While I conceed binoculars have their place in astronomy, given the choice, I'll take a scope everytime. just get it and think of the browny points you'll score with your partner

[BritAngler]

With all due respect to the posters who suggested buying binoculars instead, they are not readily seen as astronomical tools whereas a telescope is (don't get your knickers in a twist, I go stargazing with bins too ). Looking at the 'scopes in the FLO link, if you can push to it go for the 130p Flextube as it will give you more light-gathering power than the others.

[Megaman250]

I would say to get http://www.firstlightoptics.com/celestron-astromaster-series/celestron-cosmos-lt-60az.html and This is a link to the FLO (First Light Optics) thread 

Have fun and try not to get to confused with all the scopes keep it simple

[glynnlondon]

Agree with the advice on the 100p an excellent scope for the money and will show the cloud belts on jupiter and the rings of saturn.

Binoculars handy as they are just wont show these details.

[beamer3.6m]

Go with the celestial 60 as linked to above.

Main reason is that it looks like a telescope should this should never be underestimated when a beginner starts as they like to feel like they have good kit (which it is).

It's also £59 so a real bargain.

A newt looks like a tube with a mirror (well... It is). I have 3 newts and like them but they do not look like a scope to masses.

Christmas is about excitement. As a true beginner I would want something which looks like a scope.

[Ricochet]

I would think that the Cosmos 60 is really too small. Even though twice the price and over the stated budget a 90mm Celestron Astromaster/Skywatcher Evostar would be a much better beginner scope if getting something that "looks like a telescope" is a major consideration. Otherwise, a dobsonian like the Heritage 100p is a better choice in my mind as it is better to have something that behaves like a telescope when you look through the eyepiece than to have something that looks like a telescope when it is sat in the box.

[BritAngler]

We're talking about an adult here, not a pre-teen   It's not so much about what the 'scope looks like as how it performs, and whilst a refractor may look like a telescope, it does not have the pulling power of a Newtonian (unless you spend £thousands). A decent sized Newt on a Dobsonian mount will have the power to show the banding on Jupiter as well as the Great Red Splat, or the ice caps on Mars, the rings of Saturn and a whole host of DSO's that would simply not be visible in a small refractor or a pair of binoculars.

No reason why you shouldn't buy both however. A pair of bins doesn't have to cost the earth, you can pick up a good pair of 10x50's for less than £30....

[Stub Mandrel]

My wife got mine a £70 Bresser scope from Lidl (at my suggestion).

She was upset that a few months later I went and got a Skywatcher 150PL. I explained that I would never have gone for the bigger scope if the smaller one hadn't got my enthusiasm up.

I reckon you can't go wrong with the 100P

[LukeSkywatcher]

If you were going to go for the Heritage 100P, i think you would be better off adding 30 quid more and going for the 130P:

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

[Charic]

I liked aeajr's reply, and I have a few notes to point out from my own experience.

aeajr mentions the typical rule of thumb for maximum magnification?

Theory is one thing, usually only attainable under absolute perfect conditions, therefore, I suggest folk should be guided by the telescopes aperture alone, as their guide to what is achievable, and by  using an eyepiece that closely matches the focal ratio of that telescope.

The information is there, why not use it?

In my case, looking at  the Skyliner, I can see from the label that the aperture is 200mm and has an f/6 focal ratio. By using a 6mm eyepiece, It does what it says on the label, provides 200x magnification/power, and what's more, achievable under (clear)  UK skies?

How much more magnification  is now down to personal choice, now limited by theory and weather conditions. 

I'll  also pick up on specific magnifications for observation of certain targets?  Its often quoted that a certain target looks good at ?x power  or you require at least this amount of  power?  This concerns me a little, as I've no doubt that someone using a 16" at say 170x may see more detail in their image than I would see from my 8" scope at 170x, so magnification alone is not as  important as the combination of magnification and a decent aperture, under the right conditions, so I don't go on the fact that I need any particular magnification, to achieve a certain result,  I just believe that framing my image for the best visual, Is all I can achieve under the present condition.

Another thing that concerns me sometimes is the awkwardness when advising some folk about the telescope or binocular of choice that their interested in,  or in some cases, already purchased, and then they ask, is this any good?

Having  little or no experience with the scope in question,  should we shut up, or just  try to offer our best advice/solution? 

I still have ( I think!) a celestron 127EQ (I've had a massive shed clearance! ) Thats a 5" scope, and many people use less aperture, and are totally happy with their results? but for me that particular scope is just total pants in comparison to what I use now, and will not advise anyone to purchase one, yet if you have never looked through a telescope at the Moon, that scope may be  suitable, but that's where it ends.  

aeajr quotes.........  "You come to us for help and get back many opinions that seem to conflict.......Lots of technical detail and lots of opinions.  It can be very confusing "

This will always be the case, when it comes to opinions on any forum. Take them or leave them, they are just that,  opinions, although most are  based on actual  positive/negative experiences.  

The hard part is down to the end user, and quite often, only after a purchase, and/or by further comparison, can  the end user  ascertain whether  that they had made the right choice.

I'm  fortunate? the first telescope that became available to me was the Celestron 127EQ. It taught me about Polar alignment, and that EQ is unnecessary (VERY UNNECESSARY ) for my interest, that is,  visual observation only.

Everything  I have purchased,  to be honest, has been based on the recommendations of the good users here at SGL. I have not regretted any purchase so far in my signature, and as the late Freddy would have said....." I thank you all! for the advice.

Unfortunately though  for me, my 2105 season  has been of constant bad weather for this part of Scotland, I've  not been out for ages,  and  Its blowing a gale outside right now, with hail, with snow expected later on the lower ground levels?

So not only is the subject of astronomy rather 'confusing' for some folk, its also 'frustrating' when you cant get involved.

Dark nights to all.

[John]

Let me note that several people have pointed out to me that they have been able to see Saturn's rings, to their satisfaction, at much less than 70X.   I stand by my recommendations in terms of setting a minimum standard for what I would want the scope to do but that is just my opinion.

Just to clarify, what I was saying in the other thread (or was it this one ?) was that you could see that Saturn has rings at lower magnifications. Many of us will want to see more than that and to make out details such as the Cassini Division, the brightness difference between the A and B rings, to pick out the C or Crepe ring and to see those ellusive Saturnian planetary markings. For that additional detail more aperture is needed to support more magnification and to deliver higher resolution.

Having a scope that is capable of the above is part of the story. Gaining experience with it so that the observer can pick out these finer details is another and having the seeing conditions to enable the scope and observer to perform really well is yet another

I don't know if the original poster is still following this thread (they have not been on the forum for 3 days) but buried within these posts are some sound recommendations although you will also have gathered that it is also quite difficult to find a telescope that will provide lasting enjoyment for under £100.

Maybe the original suggestion of a decent pair of binoculars is the right approach, especially if there are some doubts over the depth of the recipients interest in the hobby ?