Telescope recommendations

[Eytan 0]

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.

[Anthonyexmouth 401]

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

[Eytan 0]

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

[Anthonyexmouth 401]

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

[Alien 13 5,792]

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

[Alien 13 5,792]

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

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

Alan

[LukeSkywatcher 13,322]

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.

 

[Anthonyexmouth 401]

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

[LukeSkywatcher 13,322]

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

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 July 26, 2018 by LukeSkywatcher

[Ben the Ignorant 965]

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?

[LukeSkywatcher 13,322]

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 July 26, 2018 by LukeSkywatcher

[Alan64 837]

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.

[Tubby Bear 365]

I'd look for a second hand dobsonian.

Some thing like an Orion Optics 8" or 10"

Look on :

http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/index.php    or on here !

Plenty of used bargain to be had out there...

[Charic 2,726]

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

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.

[Eytan 0]

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.

[Eytan 0]

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

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

[Anthonyexmouth 401]

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. 

[Eytan 0]

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

[Ben the Ignorant 965]

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.

[JOC 5,056]

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