The Beginner's Kit

[Mafisen]

Hello everyone.

I just registered here today and have spent some time browsing the forum, picking up a lot of good advice. I wrote a long post an hour ago, but when I hit submit, the page failed to load, so here I go again. I live in a small village of about 6000 in the middle of Sweden, about 300 km almost straight west from Stockholm. I will do most my stargazing from my backyard, at least in the winter time (I've been out in -25 degrees Celsius so it's good to have warmth nearby then). In the summer I'll be out in the wilderness in our caravan with very little, if any, light pollution. There are some streetlights around our house, but I can find dark spots for myself, but there is bound to be a little bit of glow from the village and streetlights. There'll be some observing over a house too.

I'm new at this. My fiancee bought me a Skywatcher Mercury 705 for Christmas. This included a 10mm EP that I've come to learn isn't very good, and a 25mm which is ok. I spoke to an expert at the retailer's, a guy named Robert Dalby, who's involved with Astro Engineering, if anyone knows him/them. Very kind and helpful man, who, after I sent them an email, phoned me up and talked to me about getting started in stargazing for about 30 minutes. On his suggestion, I bought a 7.5mm Plössl EP and an Antares dual Barlow lens. It's given me a pretty good range of magnification to start out my "career". He suggested I'd get an EP of either 12.5mm or 17mm too, but I could not afford it at the time. I'm leaning towards the 12.5mm. However, to achieve this good range of magnification, I need to use the Barlow a lot and I'm thinking I should get some EP's to not have to do that all the time. I'm going to stick with Plössls though as the kind I've bought are affordable to me (about £25-30).

Now, there are as many filters, be they colour, polarising, light pollution etc etc, and EP's as there are stars in the multiverse and I'm a bit lost as to what I should have starting out.

My aim in the beginning is to keep it simple, ie observing the moon, planets (first and foremost Jupiter and Saturn), some easy to find star clusters and nebulae, like the Orion and perhaps a galaxy or two if possible.

So then, what do you recommend I should have in terms of eyepieces, filters etc? Sorry for a long post, I thought maybe some background info would help you help me.

edit: I now realise that I might've put this in the wrong forum. If possible, maybe a mod/admin can move it to the Beginner's area?

 

Thanks in advance,

 

Mattias

[Linda]

Hei Mattias.

Greeting from Norway and welcome to the forum.

I started out last October. An experienced person told me I didn't need filter. Filters take away light. They may give a nice effect on certain objects, but you don't need a hem as a beginner.

You typically want some eyepieces that give you a wide view and low magnification, something giving you your max or close to it. And something in between.

You can calculate magnification by dividing the focus length by the lengt of the eyepiece.

With your eyepieces you have:

500/25 = 20x which is widefield.

500/7,5 = 67x

I would advice you to buy a shorter eyepiece, a 5mm which gives you 100x magnification. Or the 3,5 that is your maximum.

Maybe more experienced have better advice.

[YKSE]

Hej Mattias,

I'd like to think that you're not in any hurry to any new kit. Your present eyepieces and barlow should give you some reasonably good range to work with, try to use them as much as you can to train your eye first, and find out your own preferences on the way (missing focal length?, viewing comfort? etc).

Color filters or Moon filter (polarizing or not) wouldn't be necessary in your 70mm for planetary and moon observing, IMHO, since I don't use these filter with 200mm C8.

[Mafisen]

Thank you both.

If I get the 12.5mm Plössl, I will have magnifications of 20x, 30x, 40x, 60x, 67x, 80x, 100x, 133x, provided I use the dual Barlow. 140x is max what my telescope can do and produce good images. Can you go over that and by ho much if so? Maybe I'm focusing too much on magnification, it has to be said. 

[John]

140x assumes absolute perfection in optics and viewing conditions which we just don't get of course. The range of magnifications that you list (20x - 133x) will be quite enough.

Often newcomers to the hobby do obsess about high magnifications but much observing is actually done at low to medium magnifications.

 

[Mafisen]

Thank you John, I had a feeling I was a bit Mad For Magnification.  

[Mak the Night]

You should easily be able to see the rings of Saturn and Jupiter's cloud bands at around 100x-130x. The Moon will look good at that magnification as well. You probably won't even need half of that to see the nebula in Orion (M42).

It's unlikely that you will see any colours but this is approximately what M42 looks like at 32.5x.

And at 130x:

So for non-planetary subjects magnification doesn't have to be large. 

[John]

The scale of the above images is accurate but local light pollution levels will dictate how extensive the nebulosity is through the eyepiece. I rarely see as much detail in M42 as the above images show with my 300mm dobsonian, from home, for example.

 

[Mak the Night]

Apart from there being no discernible colour for me, they aren't too far off what I can see with a 102mm Mak. The south and west are good directions for me to view though. 

This mimics the UHC-S filter and what I could see fairly well, although the stars are essentially proportionally too large:

The brightness and contrast aren't quite the same as what I could see with the Delos at 130x, and the stars are out of proportion, but it is an approximation to what I could actually see. The detail in the clouds was quite amazing. 

 

[Mafisen]

Thanks guys, that's very encouraging. Can't wait to have a look.

[John]

9 minutes ago, Mak the Night said:

Apart from there being no discernible colour for me, they aren't too far off what I can see with a 102mm Mak. The south and west are good directions for me to view though. 

This mimics the UHC-S filter and what I could see fairly well, although the stars are essentially proportionally too large:

The brightness and contrast aren't quite the same as what I could see with the Delos at 130x, and the stars are out of proportion, but it is an approximation to what I could actually see. The detail in the clouds was quite amazing. 

 

If you can see the "hook" of nebulosity with a star at the end of it, opposite HIP 26314 with a 102mm scope then you are doing very well

[Mak the Night]

5 minutes ago, John said:

If you can see the "hook" of nebulosity with a star at the end of it, opposite HIP 26314 with a 102mm scope then you are doing very well

It was 'first light' with the Delos and the detail stunned me. I remember thinking it had been worth buying an eyepiece that was worth more than the telescope after all lol.

[Mak the Night]

13 minutes ago, Mafisen said:

Thanks guys, that's very encouraging. Can't wait to have a look.

I don't have a great deal of light pollution, especially to the south and the west. I was also using some expensive eyepieces, and it can make a difference even on a small scope. I used an ultra high contrast filter with this 40mm Plossl as I can only get a low enough magnification to get a 3mm exit pupil with it to enable me to use a filter.

It's really the lowest magnification I can get on a 4" Maksutov. High magnifications are easier. The 10mm Delos (below) cost as much, more or less, as the telescope itself. You don't have to spend a lot of money on an eyepiece, but I was quite surprised at how good M42 looked with the Delos.

Having said that, two of the best views I ever had of Jupiter was with this inexpensive 15mm Celestron Kellner and 20mm erecting eyepiece (below). 

[Mafisen]

I have so, so much to learn. For every piece of information I learn, 3 more questions arise. 

 

[Mak the Night]

9 minutes ago, Mafisen said:

I have so, so much to learn. For every piece of information I learn, 3 more questions arise. 

 

That never gets any better lol! 

[LukeSkywatcher]

"I'm new at this. scope included a 10mm EP that I've come to learn isn't very good, and a 25mm which is ok".

I am by no means singling out the OP here. Time and time again i have read this very same comment from people who have just taken ownership of their first ever telescope. TBH, this comment puzzles me because if people are only using their new scope with these Ep's and have not tried other EP's yet..........how can they possibly know/judge/compare the quality of the EP's they are using.

I personally think its a case that when they are researching which scope to buy and reading the forums here on SGL or elsewhere that it is a well documented fact the stock EP's that come with most scopes are 10mm and say 20-25mm. The 10mm EP is usually pretty naff, while the 20-25mm is OK (thats my experience also).

The thing is that this comment about the quality of the stock EP's comes from seasoned observers (like myself) who have had the experience of using other EP's and are in a position to make the comment. 

My 1st scope back in 2007 came with a 10mm and a 20mm Kellner EP and i thought they were the business. I'd nothing to compare them against and the views were AMAZING. It was about 6 months after that i decided to "upgrade" to a Celestron Eye opener kit (not that i knew any different). The quality of the EP's and the views were leaps and bounds better. I had to find that out myself.

My point is.............use what you have before rushing into buying new EP's. 

If and when you decide to upgrade, be realistic about it. Is an EP that costs 5 times as much as your scope going to be worth it?. Dont be tempted by the lovely green and black coloured Tele Vue's.............unless they really suit your scope and budget. You may well be able to afford them, but will they work with your scope?...........i doubt if either of us know the answer to that (you being new to astronomy and me being not very tecnically minded).

A very good/excellent range of EP's that dont cost too much and work well on any scope (they work well on all of the scopes i own), are the Vixen NPL. They cost about £30 each. They have a lot of fans.

I'm leaning towards the 12.5mm. However, to achieve this good range of magnification, I need to use the Barlow a lot and I'm thinking I should get some EP's to not have to do that all the time. I'm going to stick with Plössls though as the kind I've bought are affordable to me (about £25-30).

I like your thinking. Plossl's are good and they are not expensive. You have a 10mm and a 25mm. I think you should buy a 15mm. That way you will have a low,medium and high magnification EP. This means that you really wont need to use a Barlow. Some people love them, others dont. I have enough EP's to use that i dont find the need to use a Barlow. Do check out the Vixen NPL EP's as they really are top quality and in your price range.

[Mak the Night]

Speaking of 12.5mm eyepieces, the Celestron Omni series has a 12mm which according to the Celestron homepage is actually 12.5mm. That, the 15mm Plossl and the Omni 2x Barlow were well used by me for quite a while. Unfortunately, due to the fact that the diagonal I use for mono viewing has a compression ring, and my Barlows are the same, the EP's don't get as much use as they once did. Plus, I did upgrade a lot of my Plossls.

I'd recommend the Omni Plossls though. http://www.firstlightoptics.com/celestron-eyepieces/celestron-omni-plossl-eyepiece.html

The 25mm and 10mm Sky-Watcher Modified Achromat giveaways are perfectly usable eyepieces, but you can give a small scope a much larger range, if you eventually acquire better quality eyepieces.

In my opinion, the eyepiece is half the scope. I don't regret buying any of the eyepieces I have. Well, maybe the 9mm William Optics Swan's lol.

[Bostonteax]

15 hours ago, Mafisen said:

I have so, so much to learn. For every piece of information I learn, 3 more questions arise. 

 

I know how you feel, I'm very new too, but I've found folk here to be extremely helpful. I got my first view of Jupiter and the four moons last night. Now to figure how to see the bands with my 4" refractor lol

[RT65CB-SWL]

Hi Mattias and welcome to SGL.

The Baader Neodymium is a pretty good all use filter. It is the 'Swiss Army knife' of filters IMHO. 

[Mak the Night]

2 hours ago, Bostonteax said:

I know how you feel, I'm very new too, but I've found folk here to be extremely helpful. I got my first view of Jupiter and the four moons last night. Now to figure how to see the bands with my 4" refractor lol

I was bino observing Jupiter last night  with a 4" Mak between around 02:38 GMT (Transit, 42° elevation, Leo) and 03:15 GMT. The transparency/seeing wasn't good though and although I could see the cloud banding the GRS (visible from around 01:50 to 05:30) wasn't easy to discern even with a neodymium filter. I varied the magnification a few times between around 83x to 166x and a fair few inbetween to try for more clarity. Callisto, Ganymede and Europa were visible but Io was occulted until about 03:30 although clouds stopped me seeing it emerge on Jupiter's west and inclement weather essentially ended the session. I thought it would be a better session as I could see Beta Virginis close to Jupiter with the naked eye quite clearly. 

Jupiter at Transit (CDC):

[Mafisen]

LukeSkywatcher: 

I should have made clear that I was told by someone who's an expert that the 10mm is not very good. Not from my own experience.

 

Mak:

Those two in the last pic you posted are the ones that was included with my telescope.

[John]

22 minutes ago, Mafisen said:

LukeSkywatcher: 

I should have made clear that I was told by someone who's an expert that the 10mm is not very good. Not from my own experience.

 

Mak:

Those two in the last pic you posted are the ones that was included with my telescope.

I'd agree that the stock 10mm 3-element eyepieces are not very good. I've tried a few examples which came with scopes I've owned and they didn't seem to do the scopes any favours. The 25mm "stockies" seem better but then optical aberrations don't seem as apparent at lower magnifications.

However, they are enough to get the new scope owner up and running without immediately needing to shell out another chunk of cash so they are worth having.

The biggest eyepiece performance "jump" you will get is the move from the stock eyepieces to something decent in the £30-£50 apiece price range. After that, the performance gains get smaller and smaller and smaller .....

 

 

[Mak the Night]

24 minutes ago, Mafisen said:

Mak:

Those two in the last pic you posted are the ones that was included with my telescope.

Yes, I have some. I planned on using the 25mm for a possible bino pair at one time. They are very light, probably because they are plastic barrelled. They aren't too bad in the bino but do seem to give some chromatic aberration. I still use one occasionally as a finder eyepiece. I think once you get below a 12 or 13mm focal length with small 1.25" eyepieces they become less easy to use as they aren't often very comfortable in use compared to larger EP's. I haven't really used the 10mm SW MA much but it didn't seem that bad, either ergonomically or in actual use. IIRC the field of view was manageable and the field stop wasn't a bad size, although I don't know the exact measurements. They're definitely usable.