Jump to content

Banner.jpg.b89429c566825f6ab32bcafbada449c9.jpg

Which telescope to buy


Recommended Posts

I'm looking to buy my first telescope, and I'm trying to decide which one is the right for me.

I looked at the Celestron 4SE but I have read that it is complicated to align with the two-start, specially if there are trees around and it needs collimation. But I'm getting a good deal one one ($375 with an extra 9mm lens) 

Should I get a Celestron Astromaster 130 or powerseeker 127 instead? Are these easier to use since you have to find the objects manually and have bigger aperture.

I have a Sony alpha 3000 that I would like to attach to the telescope to take some pictures.

I will appreciate any advice on this 3 telescopes or any other that I can get instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

David,

If you want maximum bang for buck then look no further than the 8" skywatcher dobsonian (yes 8"), it will show you miles more that any of those you have listed with its 8" of aperture.

http://agenaastro.com/sky-watcher-8-traditional-dobsonian-telescope-s11610.html

If you want goto then a good starter scope would be

http://agenaastro.com/celestron-nexstar-130slt-computerized-telescope-31145.html

Don't worry about 2 star alignment - its easy after a couple of goes at it!

When I was a beginner then it was the goto that made all the difference and got me hooked as with it I was able to find stuff and spend time viewing. After 2 months, I outgrew the scope and wanted to see things "larger" in the eyepiece. This you can only do if you go for 8" or more aperture.

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In terms of quality the 4SE is considerably above the Astromaster and the Powerseeker. If you are interested in basic astrophotography, you need a computerised or at very least a motorised mount - so a plus again for the 4SE. I think the Powerseeker is (or was) a Jones-Bird design. In simple terms, this has an internal magnifier which is often best avoided. Of the three, the 4SE will have the least problems with collimation. You may want to buy an external rechargeable power supply for the 4SE - goto mounts can go through a lot of batteries and these need to be quite fresh for the system to work. Trees aren't ideal, but shouldn't be too much of a problem when setting up the alignment -but quite a wide view of the sky is useful.

However, it might also be worth pausing and considering what your objectives are. The 4SE will allow you some limited options for photography, but it's not the prefect telescope if you want to take this aspect further. It is what is normally considered a slow telescope with a focal ratio of f13 - this can have advantages for visual as it will be less demanding on eyepieces, but for imaging a faster scope is usually preferred, under f6. The simple up-down, left-right goto mount is also not the best choice for photography - a good Equatorial mount will provide much smoother, more efficient tracking.

One downside of the SE4 for visual observing is limited aperture - 102mm. In general, larger aperture will allow you to see more detail and fainter objects. The 200mm/8" Dobsonian reflector recommended above by Alan will be a dramatic improvement - but this type of mount really doesn't permit much in the way of photography.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for the suggestions. It seems that bigger aperture is key but my budget is $400 max. I just want to use it mainly  to see the moon, Saturn rings, etc and take some pictures. How about 6'' instead of the 4SE?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, David86 said:

Thank you for the suggestions. It seems that bigger aperture is key but my budget is $400 max. I just want to use it mainly  to see the moon, Saturn rings, etc and take some pictures. How about 6'' instead of the 4SE?

 

 

You're going to love this hobby. Putaendo is much more knowledgeable than I am, and I agree with his points. You'll want the most aperture for your buck. Choosing quality eyepieces can help you out with lower aperture, but out of the box aperture is pretty important, in my opinion.

I had the same ambitions as you did starting. I wanted to do basic astrophotography, but wanted a cheaper telescope at the same time. With the 4SE you'll have no problems getting photos of the moon. This can be achieved very simply with a camera phone even. However, if you want quality images of planetary bodies, motorized units are almost a must, unless you're a gifted photo editor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you want to mainly view the moon, saturn etc, which sounds like you are in the city, look at the Celestron 127 SLT. The 130SLT that was mentioned is a more "all-around" scope, but the 127 SLT is better at moon/planets, a bit better fit for the SLT mount, and does not need collimation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, David86 said:

Thank you for the suggestions. It seems that bigger aperture is key but my budget is $400 max. I just want to use it mainly  to see the moon, Saturn rings, etc and take some pictures. How about 6'' instead of the 4SE?

 

Solar system objects are bright enough that you can take non-tracked photos of them through the eyepiece of a Dobsonian.  I've taken decent photos of the moon, the sun (with a solar filter), Saturn, and Mars with just a point and shoot camera attached to an eyepiece via an adapter tube and rings.  Today's high resolution smartphone cameras can produce pretty good results as well just by being held up to the eyepiece.  I generally choose a 65 to 70 degree eyepiece with long eye relief and put the object at edge of the frame and take photos of it as it drifts across the field.  You do have to adjust your exposure to compensate for the black background which will fool the camera into overexposing the subject.  The bigger the aperture, the higher the magnification before the object fuzzes out or becomes too dim to photograph.  If you were interested in photographing nebulae and clusters, the Dob would be nearly useless unless it had some sort of tracking.  Even then, exposures are limited in length unless you add a camera derotator.  Regardless, modern digital photo stacking techniques have opened up all sorts of astrophotography options that didn't exist 20 years ago.

Starting out with a $400 budget in the US, I'd recommend the Zhumell Z8 Deluxe Dobsonian Reflector Telescope.  It is a lot of bang for the buck.  If you stick with observing, figure on spending a few hundred bucks a year on accessories like eyepieces, books, aiming devices, etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's good you told us the amount of $$$ you can toss at this. This is a key factor. Another thing we need is: What sort of things are you thinking to use a telescope for. Such as Stars, Double-Stars, Nebulae, Galaxies? So forth. OR the ever-popular 'Everything!' :p

The more we know, the better we can sift & help you pick out something that will please you the most. This will help you, so you will be better helping another person - when you begin answering this sort of question. Which will be happening sooner than you think! :thumbsup:

Enjoy!

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dave In Vermont said:

It's good you told us the amount of $$$ you can toss at this. This is a key factor. Another thing we need is: What sort of things are you thinking to use a telescope for. Such as Stars, Double-Stars, Nebulae, Galaxies? So forth. OR the ever-popular 'Everything!' :p

The more we know, the better we can sift & help you pick out something that will please you the most. This will help you, so you will be better helping another person - when you begin answering this sort of question. Which will be happening sooner than you think! :thumbsup:

Enjoy!

Dave

To be fair he has told us "the moon, Saturn, some pictures" and still the dobsonian comes up in recommendations ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ecuador said:

To be fair he has told us "the moon, Saturn, some pictures" and still the dobsonian comes up in recommendations ;) 

True - and he's also told us $400 is the current 'ceiling' on this project. As I'm sure you're aware - in the world of Astro-Photography (AP) - $400 might buy a lens-cap for a camera. :p

Actually I'm multi-tasking several things into my writings so as to help hone-down what sort of gear would suit him best to a fine-edge, while also teaching readers the methodology to this madness we call astronomy! :D

Or a few aspects thereof...

Dave

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is the word "photography", will ask that you efine "photography".

The 4SE will allow planetary imaging - you put a webcam in the focuser where the eyepiece goes, then get a video of the planet and stack and process, planets are fairly easy. What the 4SE will not do in realistic terms is DSO imaging where the exposures are long duration, the mount is simply the wrong type. In most terms you are therefore limited to planets and there are 3 of them.

Hanging a DSLR off the rear of a 4SE is not really a good idea, the 4SE came out 15-20 years ago and putting a camera on the rear was not designed into them.

A dobsonian is not the ideal mount for any imaging, people do get results but it is not the normal approach. The purpose behind a dobsonian was to supply a large aperture on an inexpensive manual mount. Which is what they do admirably but they have limitations.

Any clubs around you ? It is always a good idea to go see the equipment and see what it is that people actually use.

Setup of a 4SE is not complicated but do not get the idea that they do it for you, they do not. If you get the data wrong or incomplete then they use whatever is there, even if wrong. They are, or were, called goto's and that is what they do. They goto the next object. They do not align themselves nor do they set themselves up, you do all of that. On a Celestron and Skywatcher they also presume that you know a fair selection of stars = if the scope says center Castor can you ? How about center Algebia ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with Ronin from the Astrophotogrpahy point of view.  An Alt/az set up or Dobsonian is not suitable for long exposure imaging which is what is needed for DS objects.

However if you are going to be happy with doing Moon and planets one of the scopes suggested would be fine for that but probably you'd be better off using an astro webcam than a DSLR.  With your budget you won't be able to afford to do long exposure imaging in any case.

Whatever you do enjoy it and if you get the bug you can get into DS Astrophotography at a later date.

Carole 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Dave In Vermont said:

True - and he's also told us $400 is the current 'ceiling' on this project. As I'm sure you're aware - in the world of Astro-Photography (AP) - $400 might buy a lens-cap for a camera. :p

Don't be ridiculous. I'm sure $400 will buy you both the lens-cap and a nice strap for your camera ;)

On a more serious note, I took "some photography" to mean the possibility down the road, which only the dobsonian precludes. A 127SLT can do great on planets with just a webcam (yeah, yeah, if you are very patient you can do something with a dob in that front) and some people even do DSO with their DSLRs on it, by stacking ~20-30 sec exposures - not the easiest, but I have seen some amazing results. I press on the 127SLT, because the difference with the 4SE is noticeable when it comes to observing and especially photographing planets (and you don't have the budget for a larger SE).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are mis-informed about the 4se needing collimation - this model, unlike the larger scopes in the SE range, is a Maksutov and is unlikely to need collimation. For the record, I have collimated an 8se and it was not particularly difficult. The only adjustable item was the secondary mirror.

2-star alignment is not difficult or time-consuming either, once you have learnt how to do it right.

Seems that you need  to think what exactly you want to do as regards observing.  The 4se would be a fine starter scope and would become a travel scope or second scope regardless of what you buy later. You need to decide if you prefer the simple un-powered approach with a manual or Dobsonian mount, or if you want the GoTo which is a little more work to set up, but will save you time and frustration every time you look for a fresh object. 

GoTo is less essential for looking at the brighter planets BUT despite your expressed interest, when you start observing, you may discover that planets do not occupy much of your time - the planets in the evening sky ATM are featureless.

Aperture is less of a priority for looking at the planets - it's a complex subject, but the scopes favoured by planetary experts are often quite small.

You can get a very cheap Dobsonian mounted reflector in the 8" size. If you want a biggish scope for looking at galaxies etc at low powers form a dark sky site, without the bother of electrics, this will tick the boxes, but IMHO this is not a general purpose scope. The fact that many people prefer far more expensive scopes and mounts for the 8" size ought to ring some alarm bells.

As for astrophotography, this requires different mounts and scopes to the degree that some call it a separate hobby. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

Aperture is less of a priority for looking at the planets - it's a complex subject, but the scopes favoured by planetary experts are often quite small.

Although the best view of Jupiter I ever had was through a 12.5" Mag-1 PortaBall with a Zambuto primary on a Osypowski equatorial platform.  I could clearly make out barges, festoons, ovals, color, etc. while it hung in the center of the view thanks to the tracking platform.  Sometimes aperture rules on planets when the seeing is superb.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As an inexperienced stargazer, I think the most important thing is ease of getting it outside and in use. My nephew bought a heavy newtonian on an eq mount and never really saw much more than the moon. At least at the beginning it takes a bit of effort to decide to set it all up and a lot of my early observations were only for about half an hour so and having a quick set up allowed me to do this. Joining this forum was a huge leap in my progress, but being bothered was the most important thing.

Other people have much more knowledge than me about which scope to get, but I would recommend something that you don't mind setting up just for a half-hour look at least at first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, domstar said:

As an inexperienced stargazer, I think the most important thing is ease of getting it outside and in use. My nephew bought a heavy newtonian on an eq mount and never really saw much more than the moon. At least at the beginning it takes a bit of effort to decide to set it all up and a lot of my early observations were only for about half an hour so and having a quick set up allowed me to do this. Joining this forum was a huge leap in my progress, but being bothered was the most important thing.

Other people have much more knowledge than me about which scope to get, but I would recommend something that you don't mind setting up just for a half-hour look at least at first.

I couldn't agree more.  That's why I stick to alt-az mounts.  I carry my dob out in one shot.  Being slightly non-level doesn't bother it much.  My alt-az refractor setup takes a little longer because I have to extend the tripod legs, level them, attach the OTA to the mount, and finally insert the diagonal.  Probably 2 minutes vs 5 minutes setup time.  I haven't used my big dob in years because of my bad back.  It's heaviest indivisible component is 65 pounds which is just a bit too much for me to lift while leaning over it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, David86 said:

powerseeker 127

SERIOUSLY..................DON'T GO THERE! ( Just my opinion, having owned one! )

I know nothing of the Astromaster, but don't waste your money on the Celestron 127EQ Powerseeker, if this is one of the chosen few!

My 127EQ was ok looking at the Moon for the first time, but  required constant  major adjustments, I  just wanted to look at stuff, not mess about having to re-align to every target,  which was a waste of time, just took to long, but is achievable, and with patience is do-able, just not necessary

Deep joy and  a massive difference in the performance between the 127EQ and my 8" Skyliner. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, alanjgreen said:

I outgrew the scope and wanted to see things "larger" in the eyepiece. This you can only do if you go for 8" or more aperture.

As Alan suggests here, going larger with a greater aperture is an option ( something I have considered myself) but have not outgrown my need just yet, so for now, it  seems I`'m keeping hold of the 8" for longer, much longer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi David,

the key question seems  to be -how important is Astro photography to you? Are you wanting a quick picture here and there or a more serious effort?

we know your budget is 400$

now, we need to know your intent?

example. 90% visual and 10% photo or some other ratio? Please let us know...

 

all other answers, what mount and what scope etc fall out based on your answer...

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, David86 said:

Is the Meade 114eq-astr a good biginer's telescope?

You might want to check if this is the Jones-Bird design. This telescope has an aperture of 114mm, and a focal ratio of 8.8 - thus the focal length should be 1032mm. To me, in photos, the telescope looks quite a bit shorter. If so, this is achieved by putting a Barlow type optical device inside the tube to extend the apparent focal length and thus effectively magnify the power.

This extra obstruction in the optical path can make collimation very difficult indeed. Similarly as the quality of the internal Barlow is unknown, you may find it degrades your observing.

Jones-Bird designs are not necessarily a complete disaster - but most more experienced amateur tend to avoid them for a reason!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you su much for the replies.

Just a picture here and there. Like 80% viewing and 20% pictures.

I'm really trying to avoid a telescope that you have to setup for 30 minutes every time you want to see something. That is my biggest concern. I have a lot of trees around also, which is not favorable for alignment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks David.

it is my opinion that for 80% visual and a need for quick setup, you would be best getting a reflector scope on an alt az mount.

for taking photos you really need a mount with motors that is able to track an object and keep it centred. Use a webcam style eyepiece to capture the image, forget attaching a camera as it's much more complicated!

http://agenaastro.com/celestron-neximage-solar-system-imager-93709.html

i would be looking at a celestron 127 mak or a 130 nexstar if I were you...

http://agenaastro.com/celestron-nexstar-130slt-computerized-telescope-31145.html

http://agenaastro.com/celestron-nexstar-127slt-computerized-telescope-22097.html

two star align should be fine as you choose the two bright stars that you can see from your location.

if the setup is really a bother to you, then I also stick by my recommendation for a 8" dobsonian. But this would make photos a challenge. You can get dobs with motors but then you are back to alignment as with the celestrons above.

if you want photos then alignment will need to be achieved.

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.