another 'newb' needing advice....:)

[Alan64]

The higher and highest of magnifications do require a mount with a basic motor-drive at least, or a computerised and motorised go-to; if more than one person is attending the show.  Among the varying apertures of Maksutov-Cassegrains, the 127mm hits the "sweet spot"; not too small, nor too large, just right.  Naturally, a Maksutov fitted on to a go-to mount is going to be more expensive.  In observing solo, a Maksutov on a manual mount would serve, and in roughing it.  A Maksutov simulates a long-focus refractor, like this one...

Now you can see why the Maksutov is so popular, as its tube is shorter, more compact.  The focal-length of a 127mm f/12 Maksutov is 1500mm, and the same as that refractor above.  What is done in the case of the Maksutov is that the long focal-length is folded, twice, and in three segments...

With both telescopes, that refractor and the Maksutov, low-power wide-field views are not possible.  A 32mm eyepiece generally provides the lowest power with a Maksutov...

1500mm ÷ 32mm = 47x

Let's see what the Moon looks like at that lowest power...

https://goo.gl/5LBHwR

By comparison, a 130mm f/5 Newtonian(with a 650mm focal-length) and that same 32mm eyepiece...

650mm ÷ 32mm = 20x, and almost binocular-like in power...

https://goo.gl/giHzzv

Quite a difference, eh?  With refractors and Newtonians, what you see is what you get: if the tube is short, a short focal-length; if the tube is long, a long focal-length.  Not so with the Schmidt- and Maksutov-Cassgrains.  Those short tubes are misleading.  Telescopes with long focal-lengths are not suited for seeing a large expanse of the sky at low powers.  Rather, they are for the medium, higher, and highest powers, and for observing objects up close, like the Moon, the planets, double-stars, and the smaller of deep-sky objects(which happens to be the vast majority of same). 

With a short focal-length, like that of a 130mm f/5 Newtonian, you can see a much larger portion of the sky, and if mounted on a manual mount it makes it all that much easier to find things in the sky; for hunting them down.  Once you spot an object of interest, you then ramp up the power to see it larger, more closely, and with the aid of 2x and 3x barlows...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-130p.html

The mount of that one can be motorised, no go-to however.  If you are to observe under heavily light-polluted skies, then go-to is generally recommended...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-130p-synscan-az-goto.html

...however, with that go-to kit, the telescope itself takes a "back seat" to the mount, in the telescope's construction.  The telescope within the first listing is better equipped.  In addition, with most any entry-level go-to mount, the telescope cannot be moved manually.  You have to rely on the motors and the computer to move and point it for you; sounds luxurious, no?  But if there's a battery, motor or computer problem, the telescope will be "dead in the water".  This go-to mount, however, can be operated manually in the event of electrical and electronic failures...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/sky-watcher-star-discovery-wifi-az-goto-mount-tripod.html

But that's just the mount; no telescope included.  Although with that go-to mount, you can attach most any shorter telescope of your choosing...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/maksutov/skywatcher-skymax-127-ota.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-130p-ds-ota.html

Many go with a Maksutov due to the need for regular collimation(optical alignment) of a Newtonian; although a Maksutov can also require collimation, being that it's reflector too, but the need runs from nil to infrequent.  Of all the reflectors, a Schmidt-Cassrgrain is the easiest to collimate, followed by a Maksutov-Cassegrain, and with a Newtonian requiring the most attention to that aspect.  Refractors, on the other hand, require collimating the least, if ever; for example...

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

If you feel drawn towards a 130mm f/5 Newtonian, you might wish to consider a 150mm f/5 instead, and for that extra inch of aperture, especially if observing under light-polluted skies...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/omni-xlt-series/celestron-omni-xlt-150.html

...or... https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-150p-ds-eq3-2-eq3-pro-goto.html

The Celestron has the better mount, with its tubular-steel legs specifically; the Sky-Watcher with the better Newtonian, and its two-speed focusser specifically.

When a Newtonian is mounted on to an equatorial, as shown within that listing, the tube, and the focusser, must be rotated every now and again for a more comfortable observing position, and during the equatorial's revolutions.  Such a kit is for observing a single object for a greater amount of time.  If you'd prefer to flit from one object to another in a span of a few minutes then an alt-azimuth is preferred...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-150p-az4-mount.html

...but motorised/computerised tracking is not possible with that kit.  With the 150mm f/5 Newtonian, low-power wide-field views are also possible. 

With the 102mm f/10 achromat(refractor) on its equatorial, the tube would not need to be rotated, therefore flitting about the sky is a good bit easier.  

There are also short achromats...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/startravel/skywatcher-startravel-102t-ota.html

However, being short, and being an achromat, it would be suitable only for observing the dimmer objects of the sky.  If you point a short achromat at the brighter, bright and brightest objects, you will see colourful "rainbows" round and about them; false-colour, which blurs and smears the images.  The longer the achromat, the less false-colour seen when viewing brighter objects; but then you have that longer tube.  It's a choice between comfy and cozy ergonomics with the short achromat, or optical performance with the longer.

Inch per inch, or centimeter per centimeter of aperture, a refractor offers the sharpest and most contrasty images, and over all other designs.

And then, we haven't really begun to discuss eyepieces.  Eyepieces are fully one half of the experience.

Edited December 22, 2018 by Alan64

[Astro Imp]

^^^^^
Great post Alan, concise, comprehensive and informative. Should be read by anyone thinking of buying a first scope.
Mods. Worthy of a sticky?

[thekwango]

@Alan64

thank you’ve very much for the post, seems to be a whole load of excellent information. That’s my reading for tonight sorted ?

[Geoff Lister]

18 hours ago, thekwango said:

I’ve a D3100 kicking about somewhere and I’d read the Nikon D3xxx range aren’t supported by most Astro imaging software. Do you use a particular sw solution to control the camera via the laptop or do you manually take your shots?

This is what I use.

I use an infra-red mini zapper to take a series of stills. This avoids the mount vibration that would occur if you pressed the normal shutter release button. I then transfer the stills to my PC and use the "Registax" stacking software to generate a final image.

Geoff

[Seanelly]

I use a cheap ($30) battery operated digital timer that plugs into the camera. You can program length, delay between, and number of exposures.

https://www.amazon.com/Shutter-Release-Control-Digital-Cameras/dp/B011BK84BE

This is an example, and  I wouldn't recommend this particular one for your Nikon, as I bought a similar one for my Canon and it wouldn't work in cold (<0) weather, so I upgraded, but you get the idea.

Edited December 23, 2018 by Seanelly
syntax

[thekwango]

On ‎23‎/‎12‎/‎2018 at 06:35, Geoff Lister said:

This is what I use.

I use an infra-red mini zapper to take a series of stills. This avoids the mount vibration that would occur if you pressed the normal shutter release button. I then transfer the stills to my PC and use the "Registax" stacking software to generate a final image.

Geoff

ah Coolio - the D3100 doesn't support infra-red for some reason but I have a remote cable kicking about somewhere

23 hours ago, Seanelly said:

I use a cheap ($30) battery operated digital timer that plugs into the camera. You can program length, delay between, and number of exposures.

https://www.amazon.com/Shutter-Release-Control-Digital-Cameras/dp/B011BK84BE

This is an example, and  I wouldn't recommend this particular one for your Nikon, as I bought a similar one for my Canon and it wouldn't work in cold (<0) weather, so I upgraded, but you get the idea.

cheers - as above I have a remote cable kicking about somewhere though I can't remember if I ever figured out how to set length/delay and number of exposures...….must get onto google!

 

as a side note, how does one go about editing existing posts?

[Seanelly]

1 hour ago, thekwango said:

ah Coolio - the D3100 doesn't support infra-red for some reason but I have a remote cable kicking about somewhere

cheers - as above I have a remote cable kicking about somewhere though I can't remember if I ever figured out how to set length/delay and number of exposures...….must get onto google!

 

as a side note, how does one go about editing existing posts?

Believe me, once you see the user's layout of these digital releases you'll be surprised how easily and quickly they can be programmed.

If you'll check the bottom of the post you should see a + box, a quote box, and an edit box.

[Mognet]

The D3100 can be used with a cheap (£25ish) intervalometer, as can the D3200 and D3300 I believe. The D3400 can't though, and can only be remotely triggered via IR. They can also be driven by qDSLRDashboard and digicamControl using a mini or micro USB cable (D3100 has an older style mini USB socket) if you want to use a laptop based setup

[thekwango]

3 hours ago, Seanelly said:

Believe me, once you see the user's layout of these digital releases you'll be surprised how easily and quickly they can be programmed.

If you'll check the bottom of the post you should see a + box, a quote box, and an edit box.

I swear I must be going senile or gremlins are at work, that edit button was definitely not there when I posted!! ninja mods maybe ?

[thekwango]

1 hour ago, Mognet said:

The D3100 can be used with a cheap (£25ish) intervalometer, as can the D3200 and D3300 I believe. The D3400 can't though, and can only be remotely triggered via IR. They can also be driven by qDSLRDashboard and digicamControl using a mini or micro USB cable (D3100 has an older style mini USB socket) if you want to use a laptop based setup

oh cheers for the software links. google was failing me bad trying to find some that would work with my old camera. 

[thekwango]

On 22/12/2018 at 13:08, Alan64 said:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/sky-watcher-star-discovery-wifi-az-goto-mount-tripod.html

 

On 22/12/2018 at 13:08, Alan64 said:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-130p-ds-ota.html

i'm now toying with just going new........trying to search the second hand market when you don't really know what to avoid is a bit of a minefield and following a bit of a search of other threads on here i'm now leaning towards this combo. i had initally almost set my heart on the SW 127 Mak and goto but i've read the 130pds might be just slightly a better all rounder?

[Alan64]

20 minutes ago, thekwango said:

 

i'm now toying with just going new........trying to search the second hand market when you don't really know what to avoid is a bit of a minefield and following a bit of a search of other threads on here i'm now leaning towards this combo. i had initally almost set my heart on the SW 127 Mak and goto but i've read the 130pds might be just slightly a better all rounder?

For visual, the 130P-DS can handle low power(20x), and up to 200x and beyond with the aid of 2x and 3x barlows; for observing the gamut, most everything in the sky.  For the higher powers, however, the collimation must be as near perfect as possible.  

Then there's its penchant for imaging...

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/210593-imaging-with-the-130pds/

...although not quite to the level of an apochromat, in both image-quality and ease-of-use; but a formidable contender nonetheless.

For imaging, the 130P-DS should have at least this level of mounting...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-eq5-pro-synscan-goto.html

Imaging would be possible to an extent with an EQ3-class mount, with basic tracking; no go-to.  But I'm of the mindset that if one is going to lug an EQ-3 round, they might as well an EQ-5 instead; for visual or imaging, or both.

[thekwango]

1 hour ago, Alan64 said:

For visual, the 130P-DS can handle low power(20x), and up to 200x and beyond with the aid of 2x and 3x barlows; for observing the gamut, most everything in the sky.  For the higher powers, however, the collimation must be as near perfect as possible.  

Then there's its penchant for imaging...

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/210593-imaging-with-the-130pds/

...although not quite to the level of an apochromat, in both image-quality and ease-of-use; but a formidable contender nonetheless.

For imaging, the 130P-DS should have at least this level of mounting...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-eq5-pro-synscan-goto.html

Imaging would be possible to an extent with an EQ3-class mount, with basic tracking; no go-to.  But I'm of the mindset that if one is going to lug an EQ-3 round, they might as well an EQ-5 instead; for visual or imaging, or both.

thanks for another very informative reply. 

i think i'd best revert back to my original thoughts and look at the 127 Mak. i'm already more than doubling my original budget ( from £200 second hand to 450ish new) that mount alone is in excess of the revised budget! ? 

[Alan64]

2 hours ago, thekwango said:

thanks for another very informative reply. 

i think i'd best revert back to my original thoughts and look at the 127 Mak. i'm already more than doubling my original budget ( from £200 second hand to 450ish new) that mount alone is in excess of the revised budget! ? 

That EQ-5 with go-to would be for imaging, with a DSLR camera.  If for visual only, with eyepieces, you would need only a mount to get the telescope off the ground.

Let's approach the matter from a different perspective.  Let's concentrate on the mount, first.  You need only one mount, for visual, and for the taking of pictures eventually, whether with a DSLR or a webcam-type camera.  Within your first post, you were almost there by listing the 150mm f/5 Newtonian with an EQ-3 mount.  I feel that you were on the right track.  Consider...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-eq5-deluxe.html

You can't beat that price for what it is, and for what it promises.  The mount is ideal, in its initial simplicity and wonderful versatility.  It's the next size up from an EQ-3.  It is also the "sweet spot" among all equatorial mounts.  It's not too small, nor too large; just right.  An EQ-5 will support telescopes from a wee 50mm f/12 achromat, to a 200mm f/10 Schmidt-Cassegrain, or a 200mm f/5 Newtonian even.  You did say "450ish new"...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-200p-eq5.html

...but I'm not suggesting that combination.  An EQ-5 does support that telescope, but for visual use primarily.

An EQ-5 would also support practically everything in between; one mount, and for a myriad of telescopes, for future-proofing.  In future, a go-to system is available as an add-on.  The tripod sports stainless-steel tubular legs, and superior to those of aluminum(like those of an EQ-3), for rigidity and stability.  With a lesser mount, as the magnification goes up, the shaking and wiggling of an image is magnified as well.  That won't do for taking pictures, not at all.  The human eye will tolerate such, if it must, but not a camera of any sort.  You'd never need another mount, really.  The next size up is an EQ-6, and it's an absolute beast to haul round.

A plasticky go-to mount, like the "AZ GOTO", is for the here and now, fleeting, expendable, like a day at the county fair, and very limited as to the telescopes it can support.  The same goes for the "Star Discovery".  On the other hand, an all-metal equatorial mount is for the decades ahead, and like one holiday dinner after another.

You could mount a 127mm Maksutov now, and a 130mm or 150mm Newtonian in future; all together, albeit one at a time.

The EQ-5 is like a canvas.  How would you "paint" it?

[Geoff Lister]

1 hour ago, Alan64 said:

You could mount a 127mm Maksutov now, and a 130mm or 150mm Newtonian in future; all together, albeit one at a time

This is my selection of interchangeable OTAs and mounts. Some have limitations near the zenith.

Geoff

[Mognet]

9 hours ago, thekwango said:

i think i'd best revert back to my original thoughts and look at the 127 Mak. i'm already more than doubling my original budget ( from £200 second hand to 450ish new) that mount alone is in excess of the revised budget! ? 

If you are not in a rush, then keep an eye on the second hand market, both on here and Astro Buy Sell. I bought my 127 mak with a SynScan alt-az mount for £250 that way

[thekwango]

8 hours ago, Alan64 said:

That EQ-5 with go-to would be for imaging, with a DSLR camera.  If for visual only, with eyepieces, you would need only a mount to get the telescope off the ground.

Let's approach the matter from a different perspective.  Let's concentrate on the mount, first.  You need only one mount, for visual, and for the taking of pictures eventually, whether with a DSLR or a webcam-type camera.  Within your first post, you were almost there by listing the 150mm f/5 Newtonian with an EQ-3 mount.  I feel that you were on the right track.  Consider...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-eq5-deluxe.html

You can't beat that price for what it is, and for what it promises.  The mount is ideal, in its initial simplicity and wonderful versatility.  It's the next size up from an EQ-3.  It is also the "sweet spot" among all equatorial mounts.  It's not too small, nor too large; just right.  An EQ-5 will support telescopes from a wee 50mm f/12 achromat, to a 200mm f/10 Schmidt-Cassegrain, or a 200mm f/5 Newtonian even.  You did say "450ish new"...

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-200p-eq5.html

...but I'm not suggesting that combination.  An EQ-5 does support that telescope, but for visual use primarily.

An EQ-5 would also support practically everything in between; one mount, and for a myriad of telescopes, for future-proofing.  In future, a go-to system is available as an add-on.  The tripod sports stainless-steel tubular legs, and superior to those of aluminum(like those of an EQ-3), for rigidity and stability.  With a lesser mount, as the magnification goes up, the shaking and wiggling of an image is magnified as well.  That won't do for taking pictures, not at all.  The human eye will tolerate such, if it must, but not a camera of any sort.  You'd never need another mount, really.  The next size up is an EQ-6, and it's an absolute beast to haul round.

A plasticky go-to mount, like the "AZ GOTO", is for the here and now, fleeting, expendable, like a day at the county fair, and very limited as to the telescopes it can support.  The same goes for the "Star Discovery".  On the other hand, an all-metal equatorial mount is for the decades ahead, and like one holiday dinner after another.

You could mount a 127mm Maksutov now, and a 130mm or 150mm Newtonian in future; all together, albeit one at a time.

The EQ-5 is like a canvas.  How would you "paint" it?

again, very informative and helpful so many thanks - however, i think the need to rotate the scope about (if i understand what has been said previously about EQ's) when moving/viewing different objects coupled with the fact i want to try and introduce my eldest girl might make the EQ's more 'awkward' (not the right word but i'm sure you know what i mean) 

if it was just going to be me wanting to look then i would jump all over the above but trying to keep a young 'un interested might just push the boundaries of her focus a tad?

6 hours ago, Geoff Lister said:

This is my selection of interchangeable OTAs and mounts. Some have limitations near the zenith.

Geoff

nothing more to say other than.....good god!!! how do you find the time to use them all?! ?

1 hour ago, Mognet said:

If you are not in a rush, then keep an eye on the second hand market, both on here and Astro Buy Sell. I bought my 127 mak with a SynScan alt-az mount for £250 that way

no massive hurry and i actually started off nosing round the 2nd hand market but then realised how little i know - i have no idea what to watch out for (red flags so to speak) with 2nd hand scopes, i'd have no idea if someone was to sell me a 3 legged donkey!! so that's what kind of prompted me to start looking at new. 

Edited December 25, 2018 by thekwango

[Alan64]

2 hours ago, thekwango said:

again, very informative and helpful so many thanks - however, i think the need to rotate the scope about (if i understand what has been said previously about EQ's) when moving/viewing different objects coupled with the fact i want to try and introduce my eldest girl might make the EQ's more 'awkward' (not the right word but i'm sure you know what i mean) 

if it was just going to be me wanting to look then i would jump all over the above but trying to keep a young 'un interested might just push the boundaries of her focus a tad?

In any event, I do hope you'll favour us with a first-light report upon receipt of the kit of your choosing in future.  Best of luck in your pursuit. 

 

[thekwango]

2 hours ago, Alan64 said:

In any event, I do hope you'll favour us with a first-light report upon receipt of the kit of your choosing in future.  Best of luck in your pursuit. 

 

oh without a doubt. i'm not a post and run merchant. i just need to sit back and have a think which route to take, scope wise. the selfish me says to get the EQ5 the best scope the remaining budget allows but then the 'dad' side reminds me i have a massively inqusitive daughter who has been fascinated with my cheap bresser since she could talk but has never been able to see anything through it.

this started off as what i thought would be a simply straight forward plan....oh how wrong was I ?

[Geoff Lister]

8 hours ago, thekwango said:

how do you find the time to use them all?! ?

Each setup has slightly different visual characteristics, and requirements for alignment and power; but for at least 75% of my sessions, I use the 127mm Mak on the Skymax mount with Synscan GoTo.

[thekwango]

2 hours ago, Geoff Lister said:

Each setup has slightly different visual characteristics, and requirements for alignment and power; but for at least 75% of my sessions, I use the 127mm Mak on the Skymax mount with Synscan GoTo.

yea i keep drifting back towards this scope. new is just under budget...second hand is well under. head, gut and heart are all starting to lean heavily toward that option.....seems if i decide to 'stick' at it and want to upgrade or even decide it's not for me it's pretty easy to move it on if i have to...oh the joys of indecision.?

Edited December 26, 2018 by thekwango

[dweller25]

@thekwango

Hello and welcome to SGL and the  complex choice of selecting which scope is best for you.

Perhaps a visit to your local astro club may help ?

As a good value/performing telescope this is well worth considering....

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html

It will allow you to “test the water” at a reasonable price.

Hope that helps

 

[thekwango]

6 hours ago, dweller25 said:

@thekwango

Hello and welcome to SGL and the  complex choice of selecting which scope is best for you.

Perhaps a visit to your local astro club may help ?

As a good value/performing telescope this is well worth considering....

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html

It will allow you to “test the water” at a reasonable price.

Hope that helps

 

hi and thanks for the welcome and reply. sadly astro clubs in Northern Ireland seem to be very limited (can only find 1 and it convenes miles away)

re testing the water, i do have a cheap bresser and always intended to upgrade - still look through it from time to time but the moon is about all it's capable of....now the oldest kiddy is just about old enough i thought now was as good a time as any to take the plunge and make the step up to something more substantial. 

[jetstream]

6 hours ago, dweller25 said:

As a good value/performing telescope this is well worth considering....

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-heritage-130p-flextube.html

Great recommendation and I also vote for it.

[tonyowens_uk]

As you are based in Norn Iron, provided you are not too far from Armagh you could check in with events at the Planetarium there. http://www.armaghplanet.com/blog/category/about-us/armagh-planetarium

I was a little older back in the 70's when my own parents brought me there.  There were people (Pat Corvan and several others) there who cared what impression it made on the mind of a 9 year old and removed the intimidation factor. I visited on and off on observing nights to use the 16" scope there for viewing planets, courtesy of my own and other understanding parents who drove me and a friend there and back the 17 miles from my home in the then-impoverished South of Ireland.

Your daughter might appreciate the star shows and some of the displayed hardware in the exhibition area. Whether the 16" is still in use I don't know.

 

Tony Owens