I want a visual reflector

[TareqPhoto]

I don't know how to explain it, so simple i want a reflector for visual of planets, and to be more specific i only care about 2 planets, you all know those planets.

I want it cheap, and lightweight if possible because my mount is rated for 55lb, but sure i have to go half of that maybe for visual scope?

Recommendations?

Yesterday i tested a reflector, that changed my mind about what i was looking for but it almost narrowed down the choices anyway, no need for details maybe.

[Charic]

You could look at/try the small skywatcher Heritage 130 which is a table top Dobsonian, or try something larger like a floor mounted Skywatcher Dobsonian  Skyliner in 6", 8"(my chosen telescope) or bigger still 10". I recommend Dobsonian mount for stability, and especially ease of use.

[Peter Drew]

A 6" F8 or 8" F6 Newtonian should cover your requirements. 

[MarsG76]

I recommend nothing smaller than a 8" DOB.

[Erla]

Why newt? Wouldn't mak or sct be better on planets? 

If newtonian (they are well priced for capabilities), then something from SW 150PL (f8) upwards.

[Moonshane]

what mount do you have? I presume the planets you means are Jupiter and Saturn but why? what about Mars? Larger newts can detect the moons of the ice planets too.

if you have a mount that can handle a 10" Newtonian and pretty stable skies then I'd suggest this or an 8"

Orion Optics UK OTAs are the lighter of the options but they don't match your criterion of cheap. with one of those you might be able to use a 12" f4.

bear in mind with equatorial mounts the eyepiece position can get awkward at times although if observing just two objects in roughly the same area of sky, this can be overcome.

[TareqPhoto]

WOW, thank you very much for all answers, so then now time for more details so it will make you giving another answers maybe.

Yesterday i went to an astronomy group in my country, and at the end of the session they did setup a scope for visual or observing as you call it, and they did it on Jupiter, Saturn and quick one on the moon.

The scope is Celestron 9.25" XLT not sure which one, it is that beige[white] scope, not the black one.

The view was crystal clear regardless it was haze and humid weather and the moon was glowing, but the scope was able to give that amazing view, and honest speaking, Saturn was the only amazing view, wasn't much impressed of Jupiter or the moon, Jupiter bands are seen but wasn't very clear and wasn't that color at all as i expected, so that i liked the Saturn view much more.

The problem with me was, I WANTED BIGGER VIEW OF THOSE PLANETS, regardless it was clear or high clarity, i wanted to get them much closer, i really don't know which EP did they use, and i think no barlow, but is there something more magnification or longer that i can use than this one and giving me bigger size view? and i said cheaper, this 9.25" is expensive.

I do like to including Mars too, very strange in another site they also mentioned Mars, why not Venus too? So i will add Mars and Venus as long Saturn and Jupiter are done great large view for me, any recommendations?

So it is like 9.25" or larger, i know 8" can do, but i am afraid that it may not satisfy me much if 9.25" itself didn't.

[Astro Imp]

When viewing planets size isn't everything, a smaller clear view is much better than a larger mushy view.

[John]

What you saw was as much a product of the seeing conditions as it was the scope. When the seeing conditions are good, even 4" scopes can show breathtaking views of Saturn and Jupiter. When the seeing is less good, even very large, expensive and high quality scopes are humbled.

 

[TareqPhoto]

1 hour ago, Astro Imp said:

When viewing planets size isn't everything, a smaller clear view is much better than a larger mushy view.

No not with me, i will prefer that mushy blurred big big view than a small razor sharp view.

[TareqPhoto]

14 minutes ago, John said:

What you saw was as much a product of the seeing conditions as it was the scope. When the seeing conditions are good, even 4" scopes can show breathtaking views of Saturn and Jupiter. When the seeing is less good, even very large, expensive and high quality scopes are humbled.

 

I know about that, the weather is something isn't in our hand, so i will view in a clear weather or sky, and we have that most of the time either in summer or winter, so no worry there.

[Stu]

25 minutes ago, TareqPhoto said:

No not with me, i will prefer that mushy blurred big big view than a small razor sharp view.

You may think that initially, but once your observing progresses you will want to see the finer detail and will understand that too much magnification for the conditions will not give you that.

Plenty of factors come into play when wanting the best planetary views. Collimation, cooling, seeing conditions, scope aperture, observer eyesight, skill and patience to name a few.

[TareqPhoto]

3 minutes ago, Stu said:

You may think that initially, but once your observing progresses you will want to see the finer detail and will understand that too much magnification for the conditions will not give you that.

Plenty of factors come into play when wanting the best planetary views. Collimation, cooling, seeing conditions, scope aperture, observer eyesight, skill and patience to name a few.

We will do all that for sure, but didn't i say that yesterday i saw a crystal clear view of planet and yet still i want for bigger, not higher quality, because i know if i want bigger size with higher quality then i will pay so so much money i think, but for now that 9.25" gave me an idea of what i can see and still i want closer or bigger, telling me going to smaller won't solve the problem, i will keep seeing crystal clear details or view but i will always want more and bigger, as i said i look for the size matter, and many say "Quality not quantity", but in my case i will scream "quantity not quality.

Another idea, i buy something now then another one later, but this definitely putting me in too much spending even in the long run, there is one scope in my mind, it has a focal length of 2700mm, that is slightly more than this 9.25", but it is a cheaper option, so i am not sure how good is the quality after all, but as i said i don't want the quality that much then i may go for it, but still not sure if the magnification is all the same on different scope even with different FL or maybe to say if that FL is really different on different scopes or it is not?

I mean, if i have a scope lower quality that has FL=2500mm and another scope higher quality with FL=2000mm, is that 2500mm type scope giving better view than of 2000mm one? or do you say that with 2500mm the highest magnification can be used is 300x while with 2000mm it can go up to 450x so it is better?

 

[Stu]

21 minutes ago, TareqPhoto said:

I mean, if i have a scope lower quality that has FL=2500mm and another scope higher quality with FL=2000mm, is that 2500mm type scope giving better view than of 2000mm one? or do you say that with 2500mm the highest magnification can be used is 300x while with 2000mm it can

It depends on your definition of better. For you, with the same eyepiece the 2500mm focal length one will give 'better' images because they will be bigger. For me, I could not say without understanding more.

To illustrate the extremes of this, many 60mm toy telescopes claim high magnifications of say x675. These will give a larger image than an 8" at x200 but it will be a dim and fuzzy image. Which do you think would be better?

[niallk]

1 hour ago, TareqPhoto said:

I know about that, the weather is something isn't in our hand, so i will view in a clear weather or sky, and we have that most of the time either in summer or winter, so no worry there.

In addition to clear weather, note the position of the jetstream too - it can have significant impact on views - perhaps Google the term 'astronomical seeing'. The link below gives a good forecast for the position of the jetstream:

http://www.netweather.tv/index.cgi?action=jetstream;sess=

In good conditions, I'd typically use 250x on planets (in very good conditions perhaps 1.5x or 2x this at most).  One can use Stellarium to get an idea of how 'big' a target will look for a given telescope and eyepiece combination.  Size isn't everything they say, and that holds true for observing planets Steady sharp contrasty views are everything!  Some nights you get poor views, many nights enjoyable views, exceptional nights you get magazine photo like views (in terms of details discernable).  Patience and persistence is key.  As time goes on, what initially looks small in the eyepiece starts to seem bigger in your brain as you learn to see detail.  Strange notion, but true!

Note also that Jupiter and especially Saturn are going to be pretty low altitude from UK & Ireland for the next few years (depends on your latitude) - so you are looking through more atmosphere and picking up greater optical distortion effects.

PS a 10" f4.7 dob will give great planetary views (I've a Skywatcher 250px manual solid tube), and also be great on DSOs. If strictly looking for planets, perhaps a high f-number 8" would be also good.

[TareqPhoto]

Well, i already gave that Celestron 9.25" as an example or say as a reference or standard, so how do you compare all of your recommendations to this scope? less? higher?

[Charic]

Perhaps you should buy the 9.25 if that satisfied your need, after all, its what got you to this point in time.
It's often recommended that folk should visit a club to see whats available and maybe buy the same or work from there, maybe buy even better if funds allow.
 
With my 8" Skyliner, the Planets are  small, the Moon is stunning all due to the physical capability of my scope, and of course the seeing conditions, these have a more overriding effect on what I can/cannot see.
For me a larger scope would help  fix the scale of the image. 

[jetstream]

"Seeing" is everything IMHO. Last night under light high cloud Jupiter was sharp @ 457x with a 4mm UO ortho and the 15" dob.

There are many factors at play and not just the sky- thermal equilibrium and collimation play a huge role as well.

[TareqPhoto]

5 minutes ago, Charic said:

Perhaps you should buy the 9.25 if it satisfies your need, after all, its what got you to this point in time. Sometimes, infect often its recommended that folk

To be honest, wish if they had many different EPs sizes and barlow to test then i can judge, for now the view was really nice but not satisfying me with the size, i am sure if you view yesterday you may get blown away of the view, but i didn't, unless if i tested the maximum of what it can go to then i can say that is more than enough or still not so much.

Did anyway tested that C9.25" at maximum magnification and then decided for something else better? but i think i wanted better size as many will say better view quality instead.

[Erla]

Try this link (you can the tool under resources here in sgl) http://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/ 

You can try different scope and eyepiece combinations to give you a better idea. 

But as so many guys above said - it's only on rare occasions that you'll be able to use mag above x250 (even 250 requires good seeing conditions). Above that you'll often see boiling mush. For that kind of view you can simple go out of focus - it will be bigger

[rockystar]

take a low quality photo with a small sharp image of Saturn, then zoom in until it is the size you desire - does this view still please and give you what you require? If so, then go for it.

[Charic]

54 minutes ago, TareqPhoto said:

many will say better view quality instead.

....that's all dependent on the seeing conditions up through the atmosphere.

Every scope has it limitation, but as long as the scope is correctly setup and the conditions allow, you will only see whats within the capability of the scope in use, and to get more often requires a bigger aperture. 

I use more than 250x regularly on the Moon, more often than not I work around 100x on Jupiter, but no matter which scope your using at say  your suggested limit of 250x, Its my opinion that the one with the bigger aperture will show a better, brighter and more detailed image (given that all other conditions are acceptable )

I don't see many folk with scopes larger than mine complaining! although in all honesty, if they could handle them, they could/still want something even bigger still, until the next limit is reached.

With more aperture, you could see fainter objects,  the bigger the aperture, specifically for visual observation,  the more photons the scope  will gather, in return, more detail in the image at a larger scale than the previous scope in what ever brand you choose.

Lastly, my scope works better away from home, away from any street light/man-made lighting,  and from such a dark site, the difference is stunning, to think I'm still using the same scope? it truly is worth the effort, but the  image of Jupiter will still be small, but I can see Moon shadow transits across the face of Jupiter ( clear and sharp - like a pencil dot! ) and the GOS? .............Yes! its orange to me.

[TareqPhoto]

36 minutes ago, Erla said:

Try this link (you can the tool under resources here in sgl) http://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/ 

You can try different scope and eyepiece combinations to give you a better idea. 

But as so many guys above said - it's only on rare occasions that you'll be able to use mag above x250 (even 250 requires good seeing conditions). Above that you'll often see boiling mush. For that kind of view you can simple go out of focus - it will be bigger

Thank for that link!

I will keep that in mind.

[TareqPhoto]

10 minutes ago, rockystar said:

take a low quality photo with a small sharp image of Saturn, then zoom in until it is the size you desire - does this view still please and give you what you require? If so, then go for it.

Then no need for another scope, i will just use my ST80 and barlow and ASI120MC camera which has tiny sensor and enlarge it, but i was talking about visual not imaging.

[TareqPhoto]

I saw one scope that is 10", F10, is this a better choice over C9.25" for example?