Celestron NexStar 4SE

[mdgriffiths]

Hi

I'm thinking on getting one of these as my first scope.

I've around £300-400 to play with.

What do the members think?

Mark

[starf]

your choice should make a nice portable option for visual on planets and lunar as a start but you will probably outgrow it. its only drawback would be the 1.25" focuser - if you want a less portable option with 2" focuser the http://www.telescope-service.com/GSO/dobsonians/GSO-Dobsonians.html#250cc come within budget but are less portable.

if your going to go into long exposure astroimaging in the future, pehaps consider a refractor that once you grow tired of visually you can use as a guidescope, eg one of the 70mm - 80mm bresser apochromatic refractors.

saying that though the 4SE will always be a nice portable visual setup albeit you won't be able to use your nagler's and powermates wit it.

mike.

[Whippy]

the 4SE will always be a nice portable visual setup albeit you won't be able to use your nagler's and powermates wit it.

Why not?

[starf]

if your going to spend out for televue's and naglers' i would expect your going to get the 2" versions. i only have a 2x powermate and nagler 17mm but a 1.25" inch eyepiece just doesnt compare to 2". maybe just a personnal taste.

[Azelfafage]

The wisdom for absolute beginners from many experienced amateurs, is not to have a "Goto" 1st time out unless they're already conversant with what's up there.

I swotted up first & then plumped for a Nexstar 6 over a 4" refractor or 6-8" dobsonian, and haven't regretted it. It's a bit of a paradox IMHO that Goto's are pushed as suitable for people wihout previous knowledge, yet the knowledge is needed to get the mosr effective use out of them.

Good luck with whatever you decide anyway.

A

[Whippy]

if your going to spend out for televue's and naglers' i would expect your going to get the 2" versions. i only have a 2x powermate and nagler 17mm but a 1.25" inch eyepiece just doesnt compare to 2". maybe just a personnal taste.

It's your own taste but AFAIK, the only time a 2" eyepiece is preferable to a 1.25" is when you need the extra width to accomodate wide fields of view at long focal lengths (I believe the widest a 1.25" eyepiece can be before you need the 2" is 24mm at a 68 degree field of view). It doesn't make a scrap of difference otherwise.

Mark, I think the question you have to ask yourself is do you want to spend some time learning the sky and finding things manually or do you just want to get out there to see things?

Have you got a set of binoculars? If not, then I think your best bet is to get a pair, a good book and take it from there to start with. You may find that standing around for hours searching for dim and distant objects isn't for you, in which case you haven't lost too much money.

If you enjoy it, then try and get down to your local astro society on an observing evening and try and have go on a couple of different models there. We can give you all the advice in the world here but you could spend your budget on something and be disappointed because it's not what you expected from the picture on the website.

HTH

Tony..

[starf]

dont forget that if you go the imaging route a 1.25" powermate is going to cause vignetting on aps-c sized sensors and above. the 2" focuser will give you the flexibility you may need (though i would'nt recommend trying to image with a 4SE)

[mdgriffiths]

Thanks to the members that have given me advice!

It would seem that everybody has their own favorites when talking about scopes.

I have also looked at the Skywatcher EXPLORER-130PM Motorised Telescope what do memebers think of this one?

It's a lot cheaper than the Nexstar.

Mark

[Whippy]

Thing is Mark, there is no one 'perfect' scope that does everything the best. They all have their pros and cons. That's why a lot of people have more than one scope in their collection!

Reflectors are relatively cheap to make (in relation to other scope designs) and hence you can buy a big scope on a modest budget. Nothing wrong with the 130PM explorer, a lot of people have bought one as their first scope and thoroughly enjoyed it although my own personal preference would be a 6" (150mm) reflector as that will show you loads more.

Tony..

[Brinders]

Go to agree with Whippy. I have a TAL 150P Newtonian reflector that enabled me to learn the night sky and gives superb results optically (I still have it and won't part with it ever).

[Periscope]

Personally, if you say you have £300 to £400 to play with and you want a scope that will give you good results, then go for a Skywatcher Relector. They are not as portable as a Nexstar but you will get more value for money.

Here is a nice 6" Newtonian for just over £200 including post & packing

http://www.telescopeplanet.co.uk/ViewProdDetails.asp?name=Skywatcher%20EXPLORER-150P%20(EQ3-2)%20Telescope&prod_code=PON07B000060

and if you want to go to 8" it will add another £100 to your budget.

I have the Skywatcher 200P GoTo Snc and it is a brilliant scope, it costs more because of the GoTo but is the same scope as the manual version.

Have a good browse on the net for the best prices, but Telescope Planet is one of the cheapest for Skywatcher Scopes.

Geoff