New to Astronomy

[John]

It is confusing. There are quite a few decent scopes around for your budget but all have their strengths and weaknesses of course.

Looking at your original post I wonder one option is something like the Celestron Astromaster 130 that you had but perhaps better constructed ?. The Skywatcher  130P might do the job:

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

Its mount does not have a motor drive but it does have slow motion controls so that you can get used to the way that an equatorial mount works and then add a motor drive later if you wanted to ?

A more capable (optically) scope on a simpler mount would be the Skywatcher Skyliner 150 dobsonian. You can still take the lunar snapshots with that and the views would be even better than the 130mm reflectors provide:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-150p-dobsonian.html

Take your time to think things though though. If you stick with the scopes that First Light Optics list, you can't really go wrong. FLO just don't sell bad scopes plus they provide 1st rate support both pre and post sale.

 

[Mikea]

Unfortunately - confusion is often the way to start! You have to prioritise what is most important and then compromise. You seem to want everything - ( don't we all) - and of course you'll never get it in one package!!

Personally , I will say don't go for a manual mount. Alt-Az is easier to figure than EQ, but once you've set an EQ mount up a few times, you'll wonder what all the fuss was about. Whichever, you want GOTO!

I would hold off on the photography kick if you can for now.

Reflectors will gather more light for a given weight if portability is important and a larger aperture is always better.

Don't be put off by second-hand although the current virus stay at home thingy makes that awkward. If you can find a decent scope on an EQ5 PRO mount, that would be ideal, although the mount is quite heavy!

Consider Skywatcher, Meade or Celestron OTAs.

Sorry if I have added to the confusion, but you should be able to pick out some common threads from all the above good advice from everyone. Come back and ask more when you have had time to digest it all.

[John]

The trouble is, for a £250 budget, the options for a GOTO mount are limited. Much of your budget has gone on the mount leaving a rather smaller and less capable optical scope.

 

 

[sarahsmiffy]

4 hours ago, johninderby said:

It takes standard 1.25” eyepieces and you will be able to attach a phone to it. 

Long focal length so best on moon and planets but will also be able to see DSOs (deep space objects) although the field of view isn’t wide enough to take in the bigger objects. 

With these acrhomatic scopes long focal lengths are popular as it reduces CA (chromatic aberation) which is the false colour around objects. 

At this price range you won’t be able to get a really good scope but more of a usable beginners scope. It actually comes with a decent 26mm eyepiece unlike most beginners scopes though although you’ll probably want another eyepiece of about 10mm.

Thanks which barlow would you recommend fort he bresser 90/900 AZ nano. Any other eye pieces that are a must ?

I've got a celestron moon filter 1.25" so thats covered.

Think im going to settle on the bresser

[johninderby]

Best advice I could give to the beginner on your budget is keep it simple.  Would strongly advise against a cheap EQ mount. More trouble than they are worth.

On your budget a dob or another scope on an alt-az mount is the most practical and the easiest to get started with. A achromatic refractor or a small maksutov or newtonian still gives a lot of options.

 

[johninderby]

For the bresser would get a 10 / 12mm eyepiece first and wait a bit before getting a barlow.

One of these inexpensive ones perhaps the 12mm for now.

https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/revelation-eyepieces.html

There are of course better eyepieces but would wait until you have used the scope a bit.

 

Edited April 12, 2020 by johninderby

[sarahsmiffy]

9 minutes ago, johninderby said:

For the bresser would get a 10mm eyepiece first and wait a bit before getting a barlow.

One of these inexpensive ones perhaps the 12mm for now.

https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/revelation-eyepieces.html

There are of course better eyepieces but would wait until you have used the scope a bit.

 

Thank you. I see Bresser do a phone mount for a 1.25" eyepiece so will get one of those too.

Thank you so much for your patience and help.

I'm glad to see the astronomy world is full of great people !

I think i'll get the bresser, with the 10mm eye piece and phone mount.

[johninderby]

Hold off on the Bresserphone mount. Way overpriced for what it is. You can get better for less.

Links comming up.

[sarahsmiffy]

2 minutes ago, johninderby said:

Hold off on the Bresserphone mount. Way overpriced for what it is. You can get better for less.

Links comming up.

wow -thank you.

[sarahsmiffy]

35 minutes ago, John said:

It is confusing. There are quite a few decent scopes around for your budget but all have their strengths and weaknesses of course.

Looking at your original post I wonder one option is something like the Celestron Astromaster 130 that you had but perhaps better constructed ?. The Skywatcher  130P might do the job:

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

Its mount does not have a motor drive but it does have slow motion controls so that you can get used to the way that an equatorial mount works and then add a motor drive later if you wanted to ?

A more capable (optically) scope on a simpler mount would be the Skywatcher Skyliner 150 dobsonian. You can still take the lunar snapshots with that and the views would be even better than the 130mm reflectors provide:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-150p-dobsonian.html

Take your time to think things though though. If you stick with the scopes that First Light Optics list, you can't really go wrong. FLO just don't sell bad scopes plus they provide 1st rate support both pre and post sale.

 

Thank you !

[johninderby]

This inexpensive one is actually pretty good and better yet cheap. Works well and I had one although now upgraded to the Celestron one. Would get this one for now.

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Mobile-Smart-Phone-Telescope-Adapter-Holder-Mount-Bracket-Spotting-Scope-Adapter/362721881464?hash=item5473e8ad78:g:GVkAAOSwg5tdTUpI

The Celestron one is easier to adjust but several times the price. Perhaps something to consider for the fiture.

https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/celestron-nexyz.html#SID=24

[sarahsmiffy]

Alot of people seem to be recommending the skywatcher dobsonian, are they not awkward to use ?

[johninderby]

3 minutes ago, sarahsmiffy said:

Alot of people seem to be recommending the skywatcher dobsonian, are they not awkward to use ?

They are actually about the easiest type of scope to use. Takes about a minute to learn how to use one. Not as easy to carry but still no problem for most people.

I find a height adjutable stool makes it comfortable to use while seated.

Edited April 12, 2020 by johninderby

[sarahsmiffy]

1 minute ago, johninderby said:

They are actually about the easiest type of scope to use. Takes about a minute to learn how to use one. Not as easy to carry but still no problem for most people.

I find a height adjutable stool makes it comfortable to use while seated.

and i presume i can still attach a phone mount for some pics - not astrophotography level though 

[DaveL59]

The dob's get recommended a lot as the mount is pretty basic so is relatively inexpensive, the real cost cost going into the OTA and optics on them rather than a tripod and EQ/AZ mount. Likely the save "average" eyepieces tho?

Funnily enough I have a sw130EQ2 with RA clockwork drive that doesn't get a lot of use, could be persuaded to part with it. It is the long (1M) tube version and RDF, No boxes tho so unfortunately would not be possible to ship it, I'm only around 25 miles from you if it wasn't for this lockdown lol

 

[johninderby]

With a manual dob you are realy restricted to lunar and planetary images.

Photos taken with a dob.

 

Edited April 12, 2020 by johninderby

[sarahsmiffy]

8 minutes ago, johninderby said:

With a manual dob you are realy restricted to lunar and planetary images.

Photos taken with a dob.

 

thats the sort of image quality i'm looking for.

Really good and much better than my moon from my iphone with the astromaster !

 

Now to decide whether its the bresser 90/900 or a dob !ahhh the choices

[johninderby]

Take your time to decide.  😁

[Louis D]

20 minutes ago, sarahsmiffy said:

Alot of people seem to be recommending the skywatcher dobsonian, are they not awkward to use ?

Quite the opposite.  The mount is rock solid compared to anything using axles for pivots at the same price point.  So much so, you can keep a light touch on the tube to nudge it to follow an object across the sky.  Vibrations settle out very quickly and they are much more immune to crosswinds than a long tube up on a couple of pivot points on a tripod.  Using a tripod mounted scope seated is a real pain.  For me, it's difficult to get them low enough for me to keep my feet on the ground when observing at mid altitudes.  Dobs are pretty easy by comparison.  That 6" Dob's eyepiece height varies from about 40" to 22", give or take.  The eyepiece is always in an easy to access position being at the upper end of the tube rather than at the back end of the tube.  A 6" parabolic mirror will provide sharp, false-color-free views of the moon and planets.  Plus, you can use 2" eyepieces in it someday for wider field views rivaling those of a much shorter focal length scope that can only use 1.25" eyepieces.

[Louis D]

27 minutes ago, sarahsmiffy said:

thats the sort of image quality i'm looking for.

Really good and much better than my moon from my iphone with the astromaster !

Here's an over 15 year old moon photo I took with a 6" Dob at the time and a 2003 Olympus C4000 camera.  I would think modern cameras should be able to do far better.

[Neil H]

Hi I just want to add one thing in the mix were are you going to be viewing from ? What I mean is how level is the site , this what made me go for the EQ mount most of my sites have unlevel ground so it's easy to level a tripod than a dobs base 

This photo was taken with my phone with out phone holder

Edited April 13, 2020 by Neil H

[sarahsmiffy]

What are your views on this - it’s got an EQ4 mount, refractor.

https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/bresser-messier-ar-90900-exos1eq4-telescope.html
Would it allow me to see nebulae and galaxies in the right light ?

im guessing I can also take the odd photo as it’s an EQ mount. I can’t afford and EQ5 mount.

this is at an absolute push financially.

 

im guessing any 1.25 lens would fit and can attach a phone mount.

[sarahsmiffy]

Or this one.

seems I’m going back to a reflector and eq mount

it’s not motor driven, but I’m presuming I can use the dec and ra cables to track. I didn’t use the motor drive on the Astromaster, because, well, I didn’t work at all.

 

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

Edited April 13, 2020 by sarahsmiffy
Forgot link

[bingevader]

Hello,

I only have limited experience of a Newt on an Eq mount, but it is not easy.

To use it properly, and without being a contortionist, you'd need to rotate the OTA in its rings to see down the EP.

[sarahsmiffy]

18 hours ago, johninderby said:

It’s a manual EQ mount not GOTO or motorised. Manual ait-az mounts are easy to use but manual EQ ones aren’t so nice to use.

Perhaps this one? 

https://www.harrisontelescopes.co.uk/acatalog/bresser-nano-90.html

What about this one

has a eq3-2 mount. It’s needs to last me a few years before I upgrade

https://www.rothervalleyoptics.co.uk/skywatcher-evostar-90-eq3-2-telescope.html