Recently Browsing 0 members
No registered users viewing this page.
By Arshad Wali Muhammad
Hi. I want to buy Celestron Evolution 9.25 with startsense. I have heard star sense isn’t avbl in 9.25 but 8.0. Is it true ? Is starsense very useful ? What’s actually is starsense is ? Because I’m not interested in 8 inch. Secondly is it better then 11 inch CGX EQUATORIAL 1100 SCHMIDT-CASSEGRAIN TELESCOPE? If not what’s the difference in terms of object clearity ? Secondly is Celestron motorized ? I mean to say the object moves very fast, so can it track the object live ? Please advise.
Hello all, my name is Paige. I am a college student and new to the stargazing community. I know all about the constellations and astronomy, but i’ve never bought anything to see the stars up close. I’ve read through the forum and come to the conclusions I want to start with some well built binoculars and eventually get into telescopes. The 7 x 50 seem to be the common starting point but I would love to get something with a bit more clarity, and preferably still handheld. I’ve also read up on some binoculars already and the big brands that jump out are Celestron and Orion, so I would love some opinions on those because they don’t seem to be reliable in the long run. I only have one shot on a good pair and I dont plan on buying any other equipment until i’ve mastered the binoculars! Price range up to around $300 so any tips would be amazing!
Thank you, happy sky watching 🌌
To celebrate the 25th anniversary of Sir Patrick's DSO catalogue, I've added the available Caldwells to my basic Marathon search sequence.
Those interested may be pleasantly surprised by how many of the additional treasures are only a short hop from a given (or en route to the next) Messier.
The sequence for 40°N can be found at the SEDS Messier Marathon homepage or at my blog.
By LR Watanabe
For Deep-Sky AP of mostly galaxies (and nebulae), what'll give me the best results– a medium-weight 130 P-DS or a very lightweight wide-field WO Z61? I know the "best" telescope is one that doesn't just collect dust all day long, but I just can't figure it out. Supporting said telescope will be the SW HEQ5 PRO Synscan (with the Rowan Astronomy belt attached), which will be supported further by a autoguiding system, possibly a very lightweight CF 32mm refractor with a ZWO ASI 120mm Mini (Can't find the -S model in Japan). On the telescope'll be the Canon EOS 600D, quite a heavy beast IMO.
Instead of leaving it here, I'll say (just blurt out) everything I know about these seemingly-equal telescopes.
The 130 P-DS, clocking in at F/5, will produce fantastic photos of Nebulae and Galaxies alike, although its aperture will slightly limit the galaxies it'll see. It seems this telescope does particularly well when it comes to imaging M81 or M51, and Nebulae like the Rosette. Its price-performance ratio is basically unbeatable, as it's only 250$ over here in Japan and it cranks out fantastic images. The only addition I'll need will be a F/5 SW-issued Coma Corrector; however, I don't need to worry as I'll be getting one from me mum in a few week's time.
The William Optics Z61, which has a slightly higher F number of 5.9. It sports 2 lenses with FPL-53 elements in them, allowing for extremely high contrast images of nebulae like the Rosette, Orion, all that lot. I've previously asked a similar question, and I've been convinced by the answer that "I won't really be able to take images of galaxies other than M31, Andromeda, and M33, Triangulum. So why do I even have this as an option when I could just go with the cheaper 130 P-DS? Well because it's a wide field APO. Everything it supports, whether it be the design to the focuser, is just amazing, so much so I can't emphasise the emotion enough.
On Astrobin, I've checked out what kind of images these telescopes produce, and I encountered a problem– pretty much everyone was using everything but the 600D. They all used the fancy Mono-cooled CCDs like the ZWO ASI 1600MM Pro.