Scope advice needed

[Fey]

Hi All,

I need some good impartial advice.  I've been interested in stargazing and astronomy as long as I can remember.  I have been using a pair of Celestron 10x50 binoculars for about 8 months now and would now like to start getting a feel for telescopes.

I don't want to spend a fortune on an all singing, all dancing scope just yet, looking to spend no ore than £100 to begin.

II have been looking at the Celestron 76mm Firstscope on Amazon , does anyone have any experience with this scope.  All of the reviews seem good and the specs seem reasonable.

I am not expecting to see too much at this stage, just better moon images and closer views of some planets an nebulae.

I dell I want to get more into astrophotography, but need to start small.

[happy-kat]

Hi Fey

This is within budget under £100 and is the same style but bigger aperature at 100mm. A grab and go telescope can always be used.

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

[Floater]

Hi, Fey.

Have a look at FLO's site - click the banner at the top of this page - and look at the section about beginner scopes. It's informative and you'll have a choice of possibilities.

[Ricochet]

I

Hi Fey
This is within budget under £100 and is the same style but bigger aperature at 100mm. A grab and go telescope can always be used.
http://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes/skywatcher-heritage-100p-tabletop-dobsonian.html

I agree with this. If it's within your budget it's always going to be worth spending more on aperture at the outset until you get to the point where weight/portability becomes an issue.

[ronin]

As Floater says try the FLO site.

They put together a 60mm Celestron at around £60 in possible response to the TV advert with a scope, they also have a 70mm scope of much the same criteria just a bit bigger at £75 - to me that is the better option.

At some time consider 2 (at least) better eyepieces in the way of a plossl or two, do not go for some insane magnification. With the 70mm you should look at a max of 100x, but you will get better results with 70-80x.

There is an astro group that meet at Regents Pk, Baker Street Irregular Astronomers, check their website for when they meet as they tend to move the night (Wednesday) dependant on weather.

Meant to say should be good for Open and Globular clusters, M42 (Orion Neb), the Moon, Jupiter and splitting a good number of double stars (Mizar, Albireo, Almaak etc). Saturn may need magnification up at around 120x for viewing the rings. Stick to the 10x50's for M31 Andromeda. :grin:

[Dave Lloyd]

You can get so much good stuff in this price range these days. Just avoid the " department store" stuff. Astro suppliers don't stock these and are also far more knowledgeable about their products.

[laudropb]

The heritage is a very nice beginners scope.

[Owmuchonomy]

Im not sure if you wouldn't be better advised in sticking with the Binos and saving up a bit more for something more at the 200mm Dob level.  You may be underwhelmed otherwise.  Just my opinion.

[Putaendo Patrick]

Celestron and Skywatcher are both brands of the Synta empire, and often have very similar specifications for similar models. This said, for me Skywatcher have the edge in cheaper telescopes. Skywatcher, for example, make a 76mm dobsonian too. But their version has better eyepieces and a finder. Celestron want you to buy these as an extra upgrade package!

http://www.firstlightoptics.com/heritage/skywatcher-heritage-76-mini-dobsonian.html

But, as has been said, larger aperture is a great advantage. More light gathering means better and clearer resolution which in turn allows for greater magnification. The Skywatcher Heritage 100 is a great improvement, and comes in a good package with Barlow.

Although over your budget, if you could find 129 pounds, the Skywatcher Heritage 130 would be even better. With 130mm of aperture its beginning to be quite a serious telescope, and one which you would probably keep as a quick "grab-and-go" even when you eventually get something larger!

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

Unfortunately savings in the short term can result in disappointment in the long term. Having used binoculars for eight months, you have demonstrated your continuing interest in astronomy - so try to buy the very best you can afford in your next step up the ladder!

[ronin]

Fey, go look at somewhere like the Baker Street Astro group.

See what they have and ask why, then decide what it is that you like, immaterial of what just about everyone else suggests.

Hopefully something there will hit you as looking just about right for what you want to do.

If you cannot make the Baker St group then try for another club. Better still try for 2 or 3 clubs.

I found at an event that what people use can be somewhat different to what is suggested that you purchase.

If a first scope I still suggest something small and easy and inexpensive hence the 70mm refractor.

Mainly get something that you will use, and use often.

If the initial thought is "Oh heck I need to drag that damn scope out", then you are not going to do much in the astronomy and observing line.

Nothing will show you the Martians stripping a rover for the parts to sell on the used Mars-Rover market , we have all tried for the Clangers and the Soup Dragon . So far a total failure by everyone . Nothing in a scope looks like Hubble images.

[Fey]

Thanks for all of the good advice from everyone.  At the moment it seems a toss up between the Heritage 100p and the Celestron I was originally looking at.  I understand what is being said about aperture being key, so in that respect the Heritage wins.

I am not expecting Hubble-like views from a small back-garden site with an entry level scope I'll just keep visiting the NASA website for the high quality images.  I need to find some local astronomy clubs in East London closer to where I live and try out some different scopes.

Thanks again for the advice.

[Highburymark]

I notice you're in London - I've got a couple of decent Plossl eyepieces (Meade and Celestron - 6.4mm, 9mm and 13mm) that I don't use - would be happy to let you have them if you can pick them up from Highbury.

[faulksy]

just get a dob

[brantuk]

Check out this link - they might be closer to you Fey

http://stargazerslounge.com/forum/157-essex-cloud-dodgers/

[jetstream]

The 150P SW dob is an excellent scope as is the 200P dob. These scopes will put up some lunar images that will rival very good refractors. Same goes for the planets.  The nebulae will take some dark skies to bring them alive.

Yes, as you can see I belong to the dob mob

[Pig]

Fey there are some bargains to be had for scopes that are second hand. Have a browse through the lists in the the link below and if you see something of interest you can look on the internet to get a better description and find some reviews....its worth a try

http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/propview.php

[Fey]

Hi everyone.  Thanks for the helpful replies.  My main problem is that I now hve more question than answers, so here goes:

Is a dob better than a more 'traditional' telescope, i.e one on a tripod (I know that dob refers to the mount).

I am better off looking at something like the Celestron Astromaster 70 AZ or 70 EQ, which will give easier portability.

For a beginner, is a telescope on an EQ mount too complex, should I look to get an AZ mount?

The problem is that the more I look at these forums and the advice that is being given, the more I realise that I want to get a telescope without rushing in and getting the wrong one and being put off by poor equipment.

Ass I have stated before, most of my initial viewing will be of the moon and planets (really would like to see Jupiter).

Hopefully someone can help.

[Ricochet]

Hi everyone.  Thanks for the helpful replies.  My main problem is that I now hve more question than answers, so here goes:

A dob is not "better" than a tripod, the advantage of a dob is that it is cheaper. For a few tens of pounds you get something that is very easy to set up and use and that is very stable and damps down vibrations very quickly. In fact with my 8" dob I don't remember ever having any sort of vibrational issue, ever. If I wanted to get the same stability and vibration damping from a tripod then I would need spend hundreds of pounds more.

I am better off looking at something like the Celestron Astromaster 70 AZ or 70 EQ, which will give easier portability.

More portable than what? The mini dobs you were looking at before are a lot more portable, even though they have a bigger aperture. The Astromaster would be more portable than a full size dob, but at a huge loss of aperture. The bigger the aperture, the more light gathering capacity which allows you to see fainter objects, or see more detail in the brighter objects. For reasons stated below I would discount the 70mm Astromaster but the 90mm might suffice.

For a beginner, is a telescope on an EQ mount too complex, should I look to get an AZ mount?

An eq mount is not really too complex, especially if you're only using it visually and polar alignment doesn't have to be spot on. As long as it is roughly in the right area you can track an object across the sky using the RA slow motion control with only a small tweak on the dec control every now and then. The disadvantage an eq mount has is when you try to use a Newtonian on it and the eyepiece and finder rotate around the tube as it slews from one point to the other. In my experience a Newt is much better suited to a dob base than an eq one for visual work (photography needs an eq mount though).

Ass I have stated before, most of my initial viewing will be of the moon and planets (really would like to see Jupiter).

For viewing the planets what you are after is high magnification, something in the region of 150-200X (200 being a limit imposed by the UK atmosphere). Magnification is calculated by telescope focal length / eyepiece focal length so a telescope with a reasonable focal length is preferential here to get those high magnifications. In addition the limiting magnification of a telescope is roughly 2X the aperture in mm. For this reason I would suggest an absolute minimum of 90mm aperture (max mag of 180X), but more if possible. Also, something with a larger aperture will give better views of deep sky objects in the future. Based on that I would suggest one of:

Celestron Astromaster/Skywatcher Evostar 90mm +

Skywatcher Heritage mini Dob, but will need barlow lens for decent magnification

A 6/8/10" dob as an all round scope.

[Ricochet]

Oops, deleted the wrong line from the first quote. Can a mod fix that?

[glynnlondon]

Wouldn't bother with an eq mount a simple az will be much easier to use and more stable than a cheap eq.

Eq mounts really only come into their own for Astro photography ,an AZ will be more suitable for small scope visial.

[Fey]

Once again, thanks for the replies.  I had 75% made up my mind on the scope I was going to go for, and Aeajr last post made up the final 25% .

Everyone seems to agree that aperture is king, so with that in mind I will go with the Heritage 100p, as this seems to give what I need and also an easy to use piece of equipment.

Many thanks to everyone who offered their advice.

[happy-kat]

There are member reviews of the scope on here if you wanted further reading.

I would be tempted to either make or get a colimation cap.

There is also a good read here.

http://stargazerslounge.com/topic/196278-what-can-i-expect-to-see

[Highburymark]

Once again, thanks for the replies.  I had 75% made up my mind on the scope I was going to go for, and Aeajr last post made up the final 25% .

Everyone seems to agree that aperture is king, so with that in mind I will go with the Heritage 100p, as this seems to give what I need and also an easy to use piece of equipment.

Many thanks to everyone who offered their advice.

Sounds like a good choice. Don't feel you have to get lots of accessories at the start. We all grow into our telescopes, and it takes time to learn what they can do, and what we want to use them for. And acquiring accessories along the way is part of that process. I think we all made purchases early on that subsequently we didn't need, or we realised a very much better option was available. That learning process is a big part of the joy of astronomy. Good luck with your scope.

[happy-kat]

The 100p can only be adjusted by tweaking the secondary mirror and is designed to hopefully arrive not needing any tweaking so the need to adjust is very low hence the suggestion you can also make your own cap, you use an old film canister for that.

^ agree with the post above, it is also fun expanding and learning along the way what you might look at getting/or reading about further along in your hobby.

[ollypenrice]

A dob is not "better" than a tripod, the advantage of a dob is that it is cheaper. For a few tens of pounds you get something that is very easy to set up and use and that is very stable and damps down vibrations very quickly. In fact with my 8" dob I don't remember ever having any sort of vibrational issue, ever. If I wanted to get the same stability and vibration damping from a tripod then I would need spend hundreds of pounds more.

More portable than what? The mini dobs you were looking at before are a lot more portable, even though they have a bigger aperture. The Astromaster would be more portable than a full size dob, but at a huge loss of aperture. The bigger the aperture, the more light gathering capacity which allows you to see fainter objects, or see more detail in the brighter objects. For reasons stated below I would discount the 70mm Astromaster but the 90mm might suffice.

An eq mount is not really too complex, especially if you're only using it visually and polar alignment doesn't have to be spot on. As long as it is roughly in the right area you can track an object across the sky using the RA slow motion control with only a small tweak on the dec control every now and then. The disadvantage an eq mount has is when you try to use a Newtonian on it and the eyepiece and finder rotate around the tube as it slews from one point to the other. In my experience a Newt is much better suited to a dob base than an eq one for visual work (photography needs an eq mount though).

For viewing the planets what you are after is high magnification, something in the region of 150-200X (200 being a limit imposed by the UK atmosphere). Magnification is calculated by telescope focal length / eyepiece focal length so a telescope with a reasonable focal length is preferential here to get those high magnifications. In addition the limiting magnification of a telescope is roughly 2X the aperture in mm. For this reason I would suggest an absolute minimum of 90mm aperture (max mag of 180X), but more if possible. Also, something with a larger aperture will give better views of deep sky objects in the future. Based on that I would suggest one of:

Celestron Astromaster/Skywatcher Evostar 90mm +

Skywatcher Heritage mini Dob, but will need barlow lens for decent magnification

A 6/8/10" dob as an all round scope.

To be honest I think you're down-playing the EQ disadvantages, though you cover them. I don't think that the Dob advantage is just price - though the price is certainly a bonus. To re-iterate, Newtonian optics can be a bit of a pain on German Equatorials. As the scope slews around the sky the eyepiece orientation changes and you have to rotate the tube in the tube rings. This is a royal pest. You also have to contend with the meridian flip. (As you pass from E to W you have, sooner or later, to swap counterweight side for scope side and rotate in Dec through 180 degrees. This cannot be a 'positive!'

In visual use I think the Dob is indeed a cheaper mount but I also think it is a better mount. I have both, for what it's worth.

Olly