Help to choose a teleskop

[Janus]

Hello

I am brand new to astronomy, and I'm looking for a good beginner telescope.
I am looking for an all-round telescope for around £ 500 
I've looked at Celestron NexStar 4SE and Celestron NexStar 127 SLT but I'm not so into the range of telescopes,
so I hope you can provide some advice  - I am very interested in Maksutov-Cassegrain Telescope because they are compact.
Hope you have some good advice : D 

(sorry for my english)

[Earl]

the 127 by sky watcher is a better deal and essentially the same telescope, the goto handsets on celestrons do have a slight edge but not much.

 

[ronin]

Just to throw a further option in have a look at the Bresser scopes, they do a number of Maks at 90, 100, 127 and 152mm diameter. Select bot Maksutov and Maksutov-Cassigrain from their selection list.

From what I can see the 100's are 879 Euro on a goto equitorial, more then you give as a budget. However the mount is the EXOS-2 goto and they do an EXOS-1 which is a smaller mount, The catch is they have the 100 Mak on the EXOS 2  goto but I see no mention of an EXOS 1 goto just EXOS 1. Sure they do an EXOS-1 goto.

Equally the EXOS -2 is a solid mount and will take care of a small upgrade in a year or two as being unnecessary.

Bresser

Searched and i looks like the EXOS-1 is either just manual or disappearing from sale. Apologies.

[ronin]

Just a question: How compact does the scope have to be?

Generally all scopes have advantges and disadvantages, the problem of this is we talk usually only of the advantages and conveniently ignore the disadvantages.

One option that may be worth considering is the Bresser 102/600 achro on a goto mount. Longer and a bit less compact and there will be chromatic aberratioon on bright objects. But it will have a wide field and built solid. I bought one about 4 months back.

I have a Mak (Meade 105) which I rarely use owing to the narrow field of view that results from the focal length.

The refractor should deliver 130x to 150x and that will do Saturn and Jupiter, you need a fair bit more for Mars anyway. For a first option I tend to suggest a more general scope that does most things well but nothing sort of excessively.

[Janus]

I do not know quite how compact I want it, but it is mainly for that it is easier to transpotere so I get to use it more.

I must say that Bresser 102/600 looks quite good, but does not look as "start-friendly" as the others - and i think (rely have no idear) the more compact scops like 127 by sky watcher are a more suited size for me. (I'm a complete noobi)

around £ 600 is ok - 

i am looking at the 127 by sky watcher - the NexStar 4SE - and the NexStar 127 SLT - but can't decide, it could also maybe be the Bresser 102/600     
but suggestions for other scopes are ofc welcome, there are so many scopes its very hard to decide 
 

[Putaendo Patrick]

To a large extent, two factors determine how a telescope will perform and for what type of objects it will be most suitable. These are aperture (the diameter of the lens or mirror) and focal length (the "length" of the tube).

Telescopes gather light, so the wider the aperture the better they will be to pick out fainter objects and obtain more detail with higher magnifications.

Focal length determines the magnification with a given eyepiece, but also determines the field of view. Matsukov and Matsukov-Cassegrain designs have a relatively long focal length which makes it easier to obtain higher magnifications but provide a narrower field of view. On the other hand short focal length refractors provide a much wider view but are less suited to higher magnifications. Both are excellent telescopes but have different strengths - Maks are very useful for lunar and planetary observation, while refractors such as that suggested by Ronin will be better for larger Deep Space Objects including clusters, nebulae etc.

Another important consideration is whether you need go-to. This is essentially a computerised system which can be programmed to find targets and follow them as they "move" across the sky. Although this is a very nice facility, it is also an expensive part of the package. The alternative is a much cheaper manual mount which frees money to buy a better telescope. Personally I enjoy hunting for objects and a manual mount is part of that process, other people prioritise the destination more than the journey and prefer go-to.

Size and mobility are likewise significant. A telescope that's just too big or heavy to set up easily, won't get used often and that defeats the point of having it.

In terms of value for money, the best telescopes are reflectors mounted on a Dobsonian base. For example: https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-200p-dobsonian.html There are smaller and larger versions of this design, but the much larger aperture (200mm) will significantly outperform all the telescopes you are considering. And while it is a big telescope, it is not especially heavy and although not compact, can be stored quite easily. It is not go-to, but is very simple to use: basically you just plonk it on the ground (carefully) and point it at the sky. For under 300 pounds, you get a quality telescope and quite a bit of cash left over which could go towards eyepieces etc. I would suggest it is probably the best all round option to start out in astronomy, and if further down the line you want a more specialised telescope for a specific niche, these are easy to sell on.

 

 

[Janus]

Thanks for the advice. I haven't decided yet, but it helped cutting the number down