Should I get a go-to mount or not for a beginner?

[AlanP_]

Hi all,

I am looking at prices of mounts and telescopes for future reference when I plan to upgrade. I am thinking of either the HEQ5 or EQ6 as my first mount, which will give me some room to work with. I want to learn the night sky, and I am thinking if I use a go-to mount, I may never learn it. I am quite the beginner and I am only starting off with some milkyway exposures. Would it be a good idea to buy the mount without GOTO and try learn the sky myself and upgrading then in the future, or would I be better off starting with GOTO? Thanks.

[Ags]

What kind of astronomy do you want to do? Visual or imaging? The mounts you mention are quite hefty! They are a great basis for certain kinds of imaging but wouldn't be everyone's first choice for visual. You can after all learn your way about the sky with nothing more than your eyes, or binoculars or a small telescope.

Just a word of caution: bigger does not always equate to more enjoyment!

[michael8554]

A Marmite situation I'm afraid.

As Agnes says, if you really want to learn the night sky, then eyeballs, binoculars, and a star chart are a good start.

And if you are hooked on non-GoTo, a Dobsonian mounted scope gives you a bigger scope for your money.

If you intend to image then you will need tracking motors on both axis, which often involves buying a GoTo scope anyway.

A GoTo scope often requires you to identify suitable stars for the Alignment process, so some knowledge of the night sky is required.

A GoTo upgrade for a scope can work out more expensive than buying the GoTo version in the first place, or so I believe?

Michael

[F15Rules]

With great respect, you don't mention what scope you have or wish to buy to start with, and I think you need to determine that before choosing a mount?.

The scope you start with will determine the mounts you can choose from. 

A good choice of first scopes is a 100mm (4") refractor, a 127mm (5") Maksutov or 130-150mm (5-6") reflector, all of which will show you a lot of interesting objects (although the Maksutov does have a rather narrow field of view (shows less sky).

If you can tell us what size and type and budget you are thinking of,, you will get some good advice on this forum.

In my opinion there is no substitute though for getting a good basic knowledge of the night sky with a pair of 10x50 binoculars and a sky map/atlas.

With winter not far off you are starting at arguably the best time of year, with Orion and other very interesting, bright constellations coming into view...you are in for some real treats!

Good luck

Dave

[pete_l]

7 hours ago, AlanP_ said:

 I want to learn the night sky, and I am thinking if I use a go-to mount, I may never learn it.

There are some people who say this, but my personal experience (I started with a GOTO mount) doesn't support that. Just at the most basic level, you learn the constellations because you see where the telescope is pointed! And from that you get to "join the dots" (or stars) and see which ones are near to others, what the patterns actually look like and how far away the major objects are.
Since I was living in a light polluted location at the time, this was invaluable as I couldn't visually see many of the stars that are used as starting points for star-hopping.

So you will find that with GOTO you will quickly learn the major constellations: Leo, Orion, Cassiopeia etc. You will also discover that many do not look like they appear in star charts - especially when your sky brightness makes a portion of the stars in a constellation invisible.

And if you want to do things the hard way you can always turn GOTO off! Though then you should choose a mount that can be slewed manually. If I hadn't got a GOTO to start with, I would have quickly given up due to the sheer frustration of light pollution and spending too much time on rare, clear, nights trying to get my bearings.

[Demonperformer]

Goto means you don't have to learn the night sky. 

Even if you have a goto mount, a pair of bins should be in every astronomer's armoury (IMO) and if/when you go out with them you will find yourself learning the night sky by default.

[cloudsweeper]

I agree with @pete_l.  You get familiar with the sky with simple aids like the Philip's Planisphere, and their very helpful Month By Month Guide (published annually).  And there is the excellent Stellarium to download.  So starting out with GoTo would not be a hindrance - just the opposite!

Doug.

[PaulM]

Im quite enjoying the challenge of finding objects with my new 8" dobsonian via star hopping and a good star atlas to find the more elusive fainter objects.

Its surprising how quickly I've learn the sky and can now pretty much point the scope at previously observed objects and have them in view.

As said also download stellarioum on your pc/laptop/phone 

[Trikeflyer]

49 minutes ago, pete_l said:

There are some people who say this, but my personal experience (I started with a GOTO mount) doesn't support that. Just at the most basic level, you learn the constellations because you see where the telescope is pointed! And from that you get to "join the dots" (or stars) and see which ones are near to others, what the patterns actually look like and how far away the major objects are.
Since I was living in a light polluted location at the time, this was invaluable as I couldn't visually see many of the stars that are used as starting points for star-hopping.

So you will find that with GOTO you will quickly learn the major constellations: Leo, Orion, Cassiopeia etc. You will also discover that many do not look like they appear in star charts - especially when your sky brightness makes a portion of the stars in a constellation invisible.

And if you want to do things the hard way you can always turn GOTO off! Though then you should choose a mount that can be slewed manually. If I hadn't got a GOTO to start with, I would have quickly given up due to the sheer frustration of light pollution and spending too much time on rare, clear, nights trying to get my bearings.

+1 for this. I had goto to start with and if used as an aid it can enhance your learning of the night sky.  If used in conjunction with either software such as sky safari it stellarium, you can use it to define the objects you want to 'goto'.  That way, you learn the sky from the software or planishere and use the goto as a support. I had been without goto for a while and now I have it again, it makes the hobby from light polluted skies much easier and if the alignment is right, you can be certain to be looking at the object you think you should be looking at.  Now I use manual dobs and goto smaller scopes. I would probably recommend alt az goto to make life a bit easier at the start. 

[domstar]

I think it also depends on which telescope you want to get. If your telescope has a short focal length, you can have lower power views and therefore see a lot of sky. In that case (I have 900mm focal length) star-hopping is part of the fun and an essential part of the star-gazing hobby for me. If I had a longer focal length, for example a Mak, star-hopping is much more difficult. When I try to star-hop at higher mags because I'm too lazy to put my 2 inch eyepiece in, I soon get fed up.

[Cosmic Geoff]

Wanting to learn the sky is admirable, but there is no reason why you can't learn the sky AND have the convenience of GoTo.

With GoTo you can get a lot more done, and find a greater variety of objects. Especially if your skies are light polluted. One example: try finding Mercury in daylight without a GoTo scope. 

Another example: I wanted to see the comet "21P" currently in our skies. I got out the grab'n go 102mm f5 and the AZ-4, swept about the relevant patch of Auriga, couldn't see it.  Gave up and put the 102mm on the SLT GoTo mount. Stared at a patch of sky for a while till I made out a just-visible smudge.  Next night, found it more quickly with the narrow field 8" Goto SCT.

In short, it's just my personal view, but I have found that NOT having GoTo is just an exercise in frustration and waste of time.

Mounts: have you checked the weight of an EQ-6?  You want to haul that out every clear night?

 

[Alfian]

I am very much a map and compass person  and yet I have , to my own astonishment, succumbed to a sat nav mainly for all the extra info it provides. Similarly I have for some years now took pleasure, and occasional frustration, in finding my way around the sky and yet I now have a Goto. One of the big advantages I've found is that when observing time is short, the ability to find an object quickly is useful. More time observing rather than finding. This probably doesn't help too much in terms of which scope, either/or but as has been said with some set ups you can have both manual and goto.

 

[RolandKol]

I will not agree, with those who say, you will not learn the sky with a GOTO mount. 
I started with mine almost 2 years ago and I am sure, I have learned a lot.

I was not able to findAndromeda from my light polluted back garden, I manually targeted that area and simply saw nothing... Used charts... Youtube vids and etc.

NOTHING!

but GOTO + SmartPhone next to the eyepiece solved the problem, - now I understand, my sky was/is simply too bright.

And that little blurry picture of Andromeda hooked me up completely... My wallet and missus suffered a lot after

Learning way has changed a lot during the last 20 years, - and if computers would be useless in this area, we would not have them on every corner.

Technology is not always BAD thing to start with, the main thing - it must be Interesting!

What ether way you choose, make a choice based on your inner demon named curiosity, - you will be happy only by feeding him!

I guess you will also start imaging as you already experiment with the MilkyWay,  so If your wallet allows and if you have back garden to leave toys in it, - go for NEQ6.. If you will need to carry your toys a lot, - avoid it... as it is very heavy...

[mikeDnight]

9 hours ago, AlanP_ said:

Hi all,

I am looking at prices of mounts and telescopes for future reference when I plan to upgrade. I am thinking of either the HEQ5 or EQ6 as my first mount, which will give me some room to work with. I want to learn the night sky, and I am thinking if I use a go-to mount, I may never learn it. I am quite the beginner and I am only starting off with some milkyway exposures. Would it be a good idea to buy the mount without GOTO and try learn the sky myself and upgrading then in the future, or would I be better off starting with GOTO? Thanks.

GOTO mounts are very popular but are not at all necessary. You mentioned that you "want to learn the night sky," so I would suggest you forego the GOTO and get out under the stars, familiarizing yourself with the constellations. Very quickly you will be star hopping around, finding targets for yourself with nothing more than a star atlas and a pair of binoculars, or small telescope. It's easy, thoroughly enjoyable, and with a little practice every bit as fast as any GOTO. Soon you will become expert at finding your way around without having to rely on a temperamental computer to do the work for you. You might not think it now but the brain you have is far superior! Another advantage that doing it for yourself has, is that you will see breathtaking sights as you sweep the night sky in search of your target, that you would otherwise miss. The simpler you keep your set-up the more you'll use it, and the more you'll enjoy it.

[Geoff Barnes]

I've been giving this subject a bit of thought for the last few hours and I've come to the conclusion, that (for me) it boils down to one overriding consideration, and that is - Why do I have a telescope? Why indeed! The answer is very simple, I want to be amazed at seeing all the magnificent sights that are up there in the heavens. I want to immerse myself in their beauty and majesty, to see unimaginable, otherworldly things that transport me to another place and time. (Hope that doesn't sound too pompous!).

Whether "Object X" is 2 degrees west of "Object "Y", or "Object "A" happens to be 5 degrees north of "Object B" is of absolutely no interest to me, my GO-TO scope knows exactly where they are and takes me there in seconds, and once there the tracking function keeps them in the centre of the EP (okay with a tiny bit of adjustment to begin with sometimes), and I can relax without any nudging required and concentrate on them dead centre in view for as long as I like, just enjoying taking it all in while the scope does all the work.

Lazy? Maybe, but in time I will naturally learn to read the sky this way anyway without really trying. As I said before, I want to spend my time enjoying the sights as much as possible for as long as possible and my GO-TO allows me to do that so well, and I can always turn it off and use it manually too if I like.

(Did that make sense?). ?

[happy-kat]

I'm very pleased with my mount with freedom find as it gives me the option to use the mount totally manual (no power) or with goto.

[Alfian]

24 minutes ago, Geoff Barnes said:

I've been giving this subject a bit of thought for the last few hours and I've come to the conclusion, that (for me) it boils down to one overriding consideration, and that is - Why do I have a telescope? Why indeed! The answer is very simple, I want to be amazed at seeing all the magnificent sights that are up there in the heavens. I want to immerse myself in their beauty and majesty, to see unimaginable, otherworldly things that transport me to another place and time. (Hope that doesn't sound too pompous!).

Whether "Object X" is 2 degrees west of "Object "Y", or "Object "A" happens to be 5 degrees north of "Object B" is of absolutely no interest to me, my GO-TO scope knows exactly where they are and takes me there in seconds, and once there the tracking function keeps them in the centre of the EP (okay with a tiny bit of adjustment to begin with sometimes), and I can relax without any nudging required and concentrate on them dead centre in view for as long as I like, just enjoying taking it all in while the scope does all the work.

Lazy? Maybe, but in time I will naturally learn to read the sky this way anyway without really trying. As I said before, I want to spend my time enjoying the sights as much as possible for as long as possible and my GO-TO allows me to do that so well.

(Did that make sense?). ?

 I have a Nexstar goto and like it, (at least for now!) and other manual mounts which I also enjoy using and this reminds me of a conversation with my son, who has every gadget you can think of and is every inch a sat nav man. He had  "navigated" his way to Filey and having exhausted it's pleasures phoned me to ask  where else he could go to. He knew where he was but that was it. For me the sense of where I am geographically is important and I think the same is true, in a slightly different way with astronomy. Everyone will have their own take on that and the "balance" will different depending on what people want or expect. 

[Cosmic Geoff]

3 hours ago, mikeDnight said:

It's easy, thoroughly enjoyable, and with a little practice every bit as fast as any GOTO.

Sorry but this is simply not true. In a race to find an easy object like Mars, Alibero, the Orion nebula  or M57, the experienced star-hopper will win over the GoTo, but if the target is a 10th magnitude galaxy, a 9th magnitude asteroid, or any random dim object picked out of a long list of such objects, or Mercury in daylight, then it's likely to be a very different story. 

 

[mikeDnight]

All that's needed are coordinates and an objects position can be found in seconds irrespective of what type of object it is. With mercury in daylight is easy - all thats needed are its directional position at any given time and its height above the horizon, and there it is in a reasonably wide field eyepiece. 

[AlanP_]

Woah. I just got back from work and I did not expect to get this many replies. Thanks, everyone who shared their opinion. Having read everyone's comments, I have come to the conclusion that a GOTO mount is probably the best solution for me. The more I think about it, the easier it seems to me to learn the night sky using the mount. Especially for deep sky stuff. 

I forgot to mention it in my original post, I want my mount and scope to be used for imaging. I love the thoughts of sitting out the back garden with my scope a cuppa, and stargazing. As for what scope I want, I am really not sure. When looking at the scopes, it is quite overwhelming because there are so many different categories and I don't know what each one does. Same goes for mounts, I am not sure which one would suit me best. Ideally, I want to image deep sky objects such as galaxies, nebulas and all the rest. One thing I would really like to image is the pillars of creation. I find it absolutely fascinating and I would be over the moon if I could do that. Is there somewhere I can go that will teach me what scope will suit me best? I am not sure what focal length etc. I should be looking for.

So, @Ags, @michael8554, @F15Rules, @pete_l, @Demonperformer, @cloudsweeper, @PaulM, @Trikeflyer, @domstar, @Cosmic Geoff, @Alfian, @mikeDnight, I really, really appreciate all of your responses and opinions, so thank you for that.  

[Trikeflyer]

45 minutes ago, AlanP_ said:

Woah. I just got back from work and I did not expect to get this many replies. Thanks, everyone who shared their opinion. Having read everyone's comments, I have come to the conclusion that a GOTO mount is probably the best solution for me. The more I think about it, the easier it seems to me to learn the night sky using the mount. Especially for deep sky stuff. 

I forgot to mention it in my original post, I want my mount and scope to be used for imaging. I love the thoughts of sitting out the back garden with my scope a cuppa, and stargazing. As for what scope I want, I am really not sure. When looking at the scopes, it is quite overwhelming because there are so many different categories and I don't know what each one does. Same goes for mounts, I am not sure which one would suit me best. Ideally, I want to image deep sky objects such as galaxies, nebulas and all the rest. One thing I would really like to image is the pillars of creation. I find it absolutely fascinating and I would be over the moon if I could do that. Is there somewhere I can go that will teach me what scope will suit me best? I am not sure what focal length etc. I should be looking for.

So, @Ags, @michael8554, @F15Rules, @pete_l, @Demonperformer, @cloudsweeper, @PaulM, @Trikeflyer, @domstar, @Cosmic Geoff, @Alfian, @mikeDnight, I really, really appreciate all of your responses and opinions, so thank you for that.  

Ok, that adds a new spin.  I don't image so please take this as a basic intro from what I know... the mount is the kingpin for imaging.  You need an EQ mount and goto is a must for imaging these types of deep space faint objects.  Depending on the scope you choose, the mount you should look at are the EQ5 or HEQ5 or similar types of equatorial mounts.  Scopes don't need to be large for imaging. I am sure everyone who images will be much better to give detail than I can but I think it comes down to small - 72 to 100mm APO refractor like the skywatcher esprit or Williams optics gt range. You may be able to use an ED scope like skywatcher 80mm ED pro and other Astro imagers will tell you more about the ins and outs of ED vs APO optics and the effect on imaging.  The alternative scope is probably the Newtonian type of reflector like the skywatcher 130 pds which will be much cheaper than the refractor but requires a bit more in the way of accurate collimation to get good images.

Like I say I am Noe expert and the kit is only half the story when it comes to imaging.  Hope that at least gives you a bit to research before jumping in.  Of course others may provide equally valid opinions about the best way to get going.

Good luck

 

Steve 

[Demonperformer]

Would agree that EQ mount is an "essential" for AP  (it is possible without, but it makes life MUCH easier). However goto is not essential for it. Much AP software includes the facility to platesolve and automatically reposition accordingly. 

That said, I do not think you will regret your decision.

[reezeh]

I'm not going to bore you and everyone else here retreading what's been said about the pros and cons of GoTo ... but if you are willing to lug a heavy mount around then I'd say you can never have a mount too big for a telescope, just too small.

Just bear in mind that a "hernia special" might put you off using it once the novelty goes.

[DaveS]

At the risk of boring everyone, if you haven't already bought this

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/books/making-every-photon-count-steve-richards.html

Buy it NOW, and read it at least twice. AP is so different to visual as to be counter intuative. Steve is a mod on here, steppanwolf.

But in the meantime an ED 'frac on an HEQ5 is a pretty good start, oh and a pair of bins for a bit of eyeball astronomy while the subs are coming in.

[adyj1]

It sounds like you have the budget to buy some serious kit. As a beginner, this can actually work against you - in my very humblest of opinions... 

There is so much that can be learned from starting small and growing big later, when your budget allows; goto wasn't an option when I started, and I got a small cheap second-hand  refractor on an EQ2. I could find targets by star-hopping and using a planetarium app on my phone. After a few months of learning the sky I managed to pick up an AZ-Goto on the cheap. This got me into basic imaging with my dslr, and helped me actually learn more about the sky as I had to learn the best alignment stars offered to me by the goto software. Also it never seemed to take me exactly to my target and I always had to refer back to the app and manually find my target*.

Over time, I progressed to a cheap 1145p newtonian, an EQ5 motorised but non-goto mount, a 150PDS Newt, DIY-belt-modded the EQ5, and I am currently converting a non-goto EQ6 to a belt-modded EQDIR goto. 

I can't imagine how I would have leaned what I have by getting the ideal kit from the start, and if I had one criticism of the perfect imaging rig (goto and platesolving) is that you *don't* need to know anything about finding DSOs in the sky - after uncovering the scope and focussing the camera on a clear night, I can now actually let the software do everything else and control it from indoors - it's almost like a video game! 

So, my advice would be to build up to your ideal setup. If you are lucky enough to not have to start at the bottom of the ladder, then get decent kit at the start, but get something that you can run non-automated - I am grateful I had to learn star-hopping skills before advancing to the fully-automated stuff. 

Hope this helps, thought I'd give a different perspective. 

Ady

 

 

* as for the inaccurate goto - confession time; I wasn't setting up the software correctly and it wasn't adding an hour for summertime! It was always pointing to where the star would be in an hour... A real howler of a beginner's mistake, because I inadvertently ran it like that for months, but I hide my embarrassment with the fact that I learnt more by doing the last bit by hand!