Jump to content

Stargazers Lounge Uses Cookies

Like most websites, SGL uses cookies in order to deliver a secure, personalised service, to provide social media functions and to analyse our traffic. Continued use of SGL indicates your acceptance of our cookie policy.

Recommended Posts

I’m a beginner, I started of with a 70mm focal length telescope with a 4mm lense. With this I am able to see the moon in fine detail however all other planets appear very small. Mars for example, I can see with me eyes and when I look through the telescope it is barely magnified. My question is; What telescope could I buy at a £300-400 budget to see all the planets in the solar system and perhaps even nebula from Andromeda.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For planets and the moon a little maksutov is awesome, newly discovered myself. got a little 90mm mak from skywatcher. £150ish.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, although would you say that you are able to see planets like Saturn and Jupiter?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Eytan said:

Thanks, although would you say that you are able to see planets like Saturn and Jupiter?

Visually i can clearly see the banding on jupiter with mine. if i got myself a barlow lens it would be even better. i got mine for planetary photography. This is a pic i took

Jup_8-7-18.jpg.019c69ae66a18a5ea114a87abfd1e5c6.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue with observing Planets is that they will look about the size of a pea at arms length with most modest scopes, the images you might see are taken with additional barlow lenses and small chip sized planetary cameras. 

Alan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Anthonyexmouth said:

Visually i can clearly see the banding on jupiter with mine. if i got myself a barlow lens it would be even better. i got mine for planetary photography. This is a pic i took

Jup_8-7-18.jpg.019c69ae66a18a5ea114a87abfd1e5c6.jpg

Nice image, the little Maks are quite a surprise aren`t they.

Alan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Alien 13 said:

The issue with observing Planets is that they will look about the size of a pea at arms length with most modest scopes, the images you might see are taken with additional barlow lenses and small chip sized planetary cameras. 

Alan

This is very true. Planets such as Saturn and Jupiter start to look good in a scope of 90mm, but are pea size.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Alien 13 said:

Nice image, the little Maks are quite a surprise aren`t they.

Alan

yeah , for something that practically fits in my hand it blew me away what i could do with it. that was my second night trying webcam imaging so im sure i can do better in the future when i learn how to use firecapture and registax

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Anthonyexmouth said:

Visually i can clearly see the banding on jupiter with mine. if i got myself a barlow lens it would be even better. i got mine for planetary photography. This is a pic i took

Jup_8-7-18.jpg.019c69ae66a18a5ea114a87abfd1e5c6.jpg

Thats actually not a bad image. Ive never seen the GRS looking so red, and i do believe you caught a transit of one of the Jovian moons also.

MAK 127 is a popular choice of scope and a big step up from 70mm. 

Harrison scopes (UK) sell the Bresser 102:

https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/bresser-messier-ar-102s-600-hex-focus-optical-tube-assembly-4802600.html#SID=1683

 

Edited by LukeSkywatcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Eytan said:

I’m a beginner, I started of with a 70mm focal length telescope with a 4mm lense. With this I am able to see the moon in fine detail however all other planets appear very small. Mars for example, I can see with me eyes and when I look through the telescope it is barely magnified. My question is; What telescope could I buy at a £300-400 budget to see all the planets in the solar system and perhaps even nebula from Andromeda.

Hi.

You probably mean a 70mm diameter telescope, and if your only eyepiece is a 4mm you have the highest power but not all the lower ones. You need a choice between four or five magnifications to exploit a telescope.

Planets look small in all instruments, even at elevated magnifications, but viewing experience makes up for that. Just chose some little but detailed and contrasty object to view with your naked eye. Look for all its features with deep attention, and you'll notice a lot more than with casual viewing. Even the blurring effect of turbulence can be partially processed out by the experienced viewer, but no miracles, of course.

A good scope for your 300 to 400 pounds is an 8-inch dob. It's a kind of standard, does everything, does it pretty well, doesn't cost much, doesn't weigh much.

Remember only five planets (and the Moon) show some detail in an amateur telescope, but many hundreds of star clusters, nebulas, galaxies and double stars are within reach. Be sure to ponder that, and if planets are really your passion with the deep sky only a secondary interest, maybe a large apo refractor is your thing, but they cost a lot more than your 400.

Finally, the Andromeda galaxy can be plainly seen with the naked eye in a good sky, or remain barely seen with large binoculars in a heavily light polluted sky. Yes, blackness of the sky makes that much difference.

How dark is your sky?

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Ben the Ignorant said:

Hi.

You probably mean a 70mm diameter telescope, and if your only eyepiece is a 4mm you have the highest power but not all the lower ones. You need a choice between four or five magnifications to exploit a telescope.

Planets look small in all instruments, even at elevated magnifications, but viewing experience makes up for that. Just chose some little but detailed and contrasty object to view with your naked eye. Look for all its features with deep attention, and you'll notice a lot more than with casual viewing. Even the blurring effect of turbulence can be partially processed out by the experienced viewer, but no miracles, of course.

A good scope for your 300 to 400 pounds is an 8-inch dob. It's a kind of standard, does everything, does it pretty well, doesn't cost much, doesn't weigh much.

Remember only five planets (and the Moon) show some detail in an amateur telescope, but many hundreds of star clusters, nebulas, galaxies and double stars are within reach. Be sure to ponder that, and if planets are really your passion with the deep sky only a secondary interest, maybe a large apo refractor is your thing, but they cost a lot more than your 400.

Finally, the Andromeda galaxy can be plainly seen with the naked eye in a good sky, or remain barely seen with large binoculars in a heavily light polluted sky. Yes, blackness of the sky makes that much difference.

How dark is your sky?

Yeah, obviously 70mm diam. A 4mm EP would be pretty useless. 

What scope do you have?.

A 6-8" Dob............is the ideal solution. Good all rounders, but not good for imaging.

 

Edited by LukeSkywatcher

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For observing the planets and other brighter objects of the night with a refractor, that will require a longer achromat...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/evostar/skywatcher-evostar-102-eq3-2.html

However, for the galaxy in Andromeda, to see a fair-sized chunk of it, that may require another telescope entirely...

https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/skywatcher-explorer-130pds-optical-tube-assembly.html

That's a Newtonian, however, and would require collimation on occasion.  It can also be used for planetary observations with the aid of 2x and 3x barlows, or with planetary oculars of short to very-short focal-lengths which contain built-in barlowing elements.  Mounts for the telescope...

https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/skywatcher-eq3-2-deluxe-equatorial-mount-tripod.html

...or... https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/skywatcher-eq5-deluxe-mount-tripod.html

If you'd rather a simpler alt-azimuth... https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/explore-scientific-twilight-i.html#SID=568

...or... https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p1753_TS-Optics-Altazimuth-Mount-GSAZ-with-fine-adjustment-and-tripod.html

A 127mm Maksutov... https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/skywatcher-skymax-127t-optical-tube-assembly.html

...is a specialty telescope, with a very long focal-length, and ideal for observing the planets, and the smaller DSOs, up close.  Wide- and wider-field views are not possible, and for observing the galaxy in Andromeda.  You would see only quite small sections of it.  It could, or could not be, just the thing for your purposes.  A computerised, go-to mount is generally preferred for a Maksutov.

For observing the gamut, everything, at low power and high power, both, a 130mm f/5 or 150mm f/5 Newtonian is ideal.  But, the design does require routine maintenance, and unlike a refractor.  A Maksutov can require maintenance, although infrequently if at all, for it contains two mirrors like a Newtonian, but the design is "tighter" in its construction.

Then, there's a 200mm f/6 Newtonian on a Dobson alt-azimuth to consider... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-8-dobsonian-telescope.html

...and for that delightful "Earl of Rosse" experience.  It would be capable of mostly medium-to-high powers.  It is possible, however, to realise a low-power, the lowest and widest practical, of 32x with that one, and with a 2" 70° 38mm ocular...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ovl-eyepieces/panaview-2-eyepieces.html

...and for a pot-shot at the galaxy in Andromeda.

For the planets, it can realise up to 400x, under ideal atmospheric conditions.  On average nights, 250x or so at least should be routine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Anthonyexmouth said:

Visually i can clearly see the banding on jupiter with mine. if i got myself a barlow lens it would be even better. i got mine for planetary photography. This is a pic i took

Jup_8-7-18.jpg.019c69ae66a18a5ea114a87abfd1e5c6.jpg

I've never used a Mak telescope, and visually, thats a pretty good image, but if that was the visual image from my scope, any further magnification with a Barlow would destroy the image. Are you sure the image would be 'even better' on the Mak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Ben the Ignorant said:

Hi.

You probably mean a 70mm diameter telescope, and if your only eyepiece is a 4mm you have the highest power but not all the lower ones. You need a choice between four or five magnifications to exploit a telescope.

Planets look small in all instruments, even at elevated magnifications, but viewing experience makes up for that. Just chose some little but detailed and contrasty object to view with your naked eye. Look for all its features with deep attention, and you'll notice a lot more than with casual viewing. Even the blurring effect of turbulence can be partially processed out by the experienced viewer, but no miracles, of course.

A good scope for your 300 to 400 pounds is an 8-inch dob. It's a kind of standard, does everything, does it pretty well, doesn't cost much, doesn't weigh much.

Remember only five planets (and the Moon) show some detail in an amateur telescope, but many hundreds of star clusters, nebulas, galaxies and double stars are within reach. Be sure to ponder that, and if planets are really your passion with the deep sky only a secondary interest, maybe a large apo refractor is your thing, but they cost a lot more than your 400.

Finally, the Andromeda galaxy can be plainly seen with the naked eye in a good sky, or remain barely seen with large binoculars in a heavily light polluted sky. Yes, blackness of the sky makes that much difference.

How dark is your sky?

The sky is very dark with no light pollution whatsoever, it is on the very west side of Turkey by the Agean sea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Anthonyexmouth said:

Visually i can clearly see the banding on jupiter with mine. if i got myself a barlow lens it would be even better. i got mine for planetary photography. This is a pic i took

Jup_8-7-18.jpg.019c69ae66a18a5ea114a87abfd1e5c6.jpg

Great picture, with the moon as well. I’ll look into the telescope you recommended, Thank you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Eytan said:

Great picture, with the moon as well. I’ll look into the telescope you recommended, Thank you.

just remember thats a picture , dont expect to see it that big visually. it'll be recognisable as a planet but not huge in the eyepiece. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 27/07/2018 at 10:04, Anthonyexmouth said:

just remember thats a picture , dont expect to see it that big visually. it'll be recognisable as a planet but not huge in the eyepiece. 

Yes I understand thank you, could I ask what camera and lense you were using when you took it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎27‎/‎07‎/‎2018 at 08:36, Eytan said:

The sky is very dark with no light pollution whatsoever, it is on the very west side of Turkey by the Agean sea.

Excellent, you are free to use any instrument to the max of its possibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look at the pictures in the first page of this thread:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By StarFiveSky
      Hi, I recently looked into telescope's & dso's again due to an interesting sight in the night sky 😉. 
      I wanted to get into telescope's etc... but my budget and other things got in the way. 
      This time there's no budget limit (that doesn't mean I'm bill Gates though).
      My main concern is size since I will carry the telescope with my bare hands (bag).
      I don't have a local astronomy club or telescope shop around so I don't know if an 8" Newtonian is too bulky/big. 
      Can someone post comparison pictures, if you have an 8" telescope (preferably newtonian, width and length)?
      Secondly I want to see dso's in the future (firstly beginner objects etc...) so the 8" is more adequate than the 6", but if an 8" is too big then I am okay with a 6" as long as it's much more portable. 
    • 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. 


    • By Lewtron_Stellae
      Hi All, 
      I wonder if someone can please help, I'm fairly new to astrophotography and confused about aperture. Basically I'm looking at a Canon EF-S 55-250mm lens. It has the specs
      f4-f5.6 does this mean that the lowest point of aperture possible is F5.6 or will it go lower. What I find confusing is that I have a lens that's the EF-S 18-55mm lens which has the specs of f/3.5/5.6 however My camera does allow me to set the aperture at f/8 The reason I ask cause it is advised to use a low aperture of f/8 to capture images of the moon.
      Any help and guidance would be greatly appreciated!
    • By lyfestyle
      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 🌌
    • By onefistinthestars
      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.
      Peace, Stephen
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.