Advice for a Noob

[GalaticBoba]

Hello, I want to start stargazing, what telescope should I start with? I'm thinking the Celestron NexStar 8SE. 

Constraints/Requirements;

Budget; £2000 to get started for the basic equipment but happy to spend more if I get significantly better results. 

I would like to eventually get into Astrophotography (will get the equipment for that after a few months of playing with the telescope under a separate budget) I have read the mount on the NexStar might not be strong enough to support a camera. 

I want to hook the mount up to a laptop, wireless is preferable to connect to Stellarium or something similar, so I can press a few buttons from the warmth of my home and have the telescope move to position. And eventually take long exposure photos of the night sky over a few hours. 

I do want an all purpose telescope, deep space and planetary, I will only be casual so would prefer to invest into one decent telescope from the outset. 

I live in the South East of England where there is lots of light pollution, not city bad but still moderate to bad. 

 

Have I missed anything? What do people recommend?

I appreciate any advice given. 

Thanks

[randomic]

56 minutes ago, GalaticBoba said:

I would like to eventually get into Astrophotography

For astrophotography the mount is arguably the most important part. It might well be the most expensive part. Make sure you get an Equatorial mount, alt-az is fine for visual and planetary but difficult to use for long exposures. A common beginner mount is the SkyWatcher HEQ5 Pro. If I was looking for an entry level mount today I would strongly consider the iOptron CEM26 as it's very lightweight for its payload capacity.

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/equatorial-astronomy-mounts/skywatcher-heq5-pro-synscan.html
https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ioptron-mounts/ioptron-cem26-center-balanced-equatorial-goto-mount.html (most recommend the 1.75" tripod for better stability)

There is a learning curve to an EQ mount but it's not too bad, especially with things like iPolar.

 

56 minutes ago, GalaticBoba said:

I do want an all purpose telescope, deep space and planetary

I'm sure this is something every astronomer would love! Sadly, such a telescope doesn't exist. The closest thing is probably a Schmidt–Cassegrain telescope (SCT) but they tend to have very local focal lengths which can be tricky to manage with entry-level equipment and expertise. Wide field targets (like Andromeda) are impossible to capture without putting a lot of effort into a mosaic.

If you were mainly looking at visual, most would recommend a Dobsonian (best aperture for your money) - example https://www.firstlightoptics.com/beginner-telescopes/skywatcher-skyliner-200p-dobsonian.html
If you were mainly looking at DSO imaging, most would recommend a lightweight refractor (SkyWatcher 80ED is popular) - https://www.firstlightoptics.com/pro-series/skywatcher-evostar-80ed-ds-pro-ota.html
If you were mainly looking at planets, visual or imaging, most would recommend a Newtonian - example https://www.firstlightoptics.com/reflectors/skywatcher-explorer-200p-ds-ota.html

There are also Maksutov–Cassegrains and Classical-Cassegrains which, from what I understand, are similar to SCTs (I'm sure someone with more knowledge than me can go over the pros/cons).

 

The most important thing above all else is get equipment that you will realistically use. There's nothing worse than seeing a clear sky and dreading the equipment setup. A scope with a quick setup will generally see far more use.

(maybe you're a masochist like me and consider the debugging part of the hobby)

 

56 minutes ago, GalaticBoba said:

I want to hook the mount up to a laptop, wireless is preferable

Some manufacturers do offer mounts with built-in wifi but it is not necessary for remote control. Almost every mount can be computer driven via a standard called ASCOM. You can plug your mount into astroberry, Stellarmate, ASAIR (all basically raspberry pis with astronomy software) and control them from a phone/tablet/laptop on the same network.

Feel free to ask any questions!

[M40]

Hello GalacticBoba and welcome to the site 👍. I don't have that telescope and have never used a Celestron device so these are just my thoughts. As randomic said, no one telescope does it all but that one certainly does seem to tick a number of boxes, very good brand with lots of future upgrades etc. A quick nose at some reviews tells that the goto is easy to use which as a casual user is good to know. Looks like you have had a look at the info available such as the weight the mount can take. If you would like to go down the astrophotography route later, add the weight of a dslr, plus an eyepiece/lens and a few adapters to the weight of the telescope and make sure it can handle it. The more space between the mount weight limit and the load the better.

Another thing to think about with that telescope is the weight and storage of it. It's quite a lump and I am not sure that the telescope can be stored off the mount, hopefully someone else will confirm that, so it will take up quite some space and will be quite a thing to move. 

Have you found the "field of view" tool at the top of the page? go to resources, astronomy tools and click on field of view. Enter that telescope and a selection of eyepieces to give you an idea of what you could expect to see, not so much the quality of the object viewed, but more of an estimation, it's a really good guide and one of my goto places for looking at different objects with different eyepieces etc. 

Leave some wriggle room in your budget for a few eyepieces, moon filter, dew shield, power supply and a couple of books.

All the best and enjoy

 

 

 

[wimvb]

Hi, and welcome to the bottomless pit that is wonderfull world of amateur astronomy. If you want to start in astrophotography, make this your first investment

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

As for a setup, focal length isn't the most important aspect of a telescope. For someone starting out in deep space astrophotography, I would almost recommend not to go over 1 000 mm in fl. There are plenty of objects in the sky that more than fill a full frame sensor at a focal length that is shorter. And longer fl telescope are difficult to manage for a beginner. Have a look in the imaging sections of this forum to get an idea what people are using.

[vlaiv]

Hi and welcome to SGL.

Like it has been already pointed out - there is no telescope / setup that will do it all.

Astrophotography can get very expensive. It can be done on a budget - but in that case, one should really modify their expectations. These days we have access to vast number of images taken by other people - and it is very easy to think that quality comes as a standard - but it really needs a lot of money, time and talent invested in order to create very good images. On the other hand - decent looking modest images can be taken with very basic equipment - like camera, lens and simple DIY tracking mount (or even tripod without tracking).

Before getting into AP I recommend that you spend some time learning about it - maybe get a book or watch different tutorials on you tube - a lot of people document their work in making an astrophotography.

If you want do it all scope for visual - there is almost such thing - get 8" F/6 dobsonian telescope. Do be careful - scopes of that size are heavy and bulky. You need to store them, transport and set them up for each use and if scope is too large for you - it can become a chore very fast.

In case you still want "do it all" kind of telescope that is smaller in size - thus more manageable and one that will provide you imaging capability as well, then maybe get yourself something like this:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/ts-telescopes/ts-photon-6-f6-advanced-newtonian-telescope-with-metal-tube.html

and put it on mount such as this:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-az-eq5-gt-geq-alt-az-mount.html

Rationale being that for visual use, newtonian type telescope is better served by AltAz type mount (EQ mount gets eyepiece / finder / focuser in very strange positions thus must be constantly rotated in tube rings), F/6 6" telescope will do rather well on deep sky objects for visual and will be good planetary scope at F/6. You can easily connect such mount to computer by using dedicated cable and EQMod (ASCOM driver for SkyWatcher mounts).

Mount can be converted into EQ mode easily (just adjust for latitude) - and can serve as decent beginner AP platform.

There is better / heavier (and more expensive) version of this mount:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-az-eq6-mount.html

but that mount alone is about 20kg of weight.

I do urge you to consider size and weight of this equipment as it is important factor.

 

[GalaticBoba]

Thanks all for your comments, I'm rethinking everything. 

I'm going to first start with getting the right mount. I'll be storing this in a garage with plenty of space, which is only 20m walk to the middle of my garden. So I should be able to carry a 20kg mount this distance, I'm not afraid of a little heavy lifting. Also once or twice a year I would want to show off my telescope to friends, so being able to stick it in the boot of a car would actually be a requirement. 

I like the idea of the combined EQ and AltAz modes of this one;

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/skywatcher-mounts/skywatcher-az-eq6-mount.html

And I might as well get the bigger one, as I assume this will be my forever mount. Do these mounts come in a nice box that folds away and can "easily" be placed in the boot of a car?

 

Although maybe I should be going for a lighter more portable AltAz mount for visuals and a heavier EQ for the AP later down the line. 

The advantage I guess of having two mounts is I could get an AltAz one now and spend more on a couple different types of better scopes.

Maybe between these two, sky-watcher and iOptron seem to be the popular mounts?

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

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/alt-azimuth-astronomy-mounts/ioptron-smartstar-cubepro-az-mount.html

And then later on I get the EQ/HEQ/NEQ - whichever is the heaviest and best, if/when I decide to get into AP. 

 

Now I need to redo my research on scopes, an evening of youtube for me. 

 

Thanks again all. 

 

[M40]

7 minutes ago, GalaticBoba said:

Now I need to redo my research on scopes, an evening of youtube for me. 

🤣 just one evening??? you wish 🤣. Like the rest of us you are now doomed .... have fun looking, it never ends....

[vlaiv]

3 hours ago, GalaticBoba said:

Do these mounts come in a nice box that folds away and can "easily" be placed in the boot of a car?

No, but you can get special bags for storage and transportation like this one:

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p10107_Geoptik-Transport-Bag--Pack-in-Bag--for-Skywatcher-AZ-EQ6.html

It uses polystyrene foam that came with original box and is the right shape to accept it.

Alternative is this:

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/telescope-bags-cases-storage/oklop-padded-bag-for-sky-watcher-eq6-neq6-az-eq6-mounts.html

In any case - those are for mount head only, you'll need to carry counter weights and tripod as well - you can purchase similar bags for those as well.

Btw, I don't bother and just carry delicate stuff on the back seat and tripod and weights in car boot without any sort of bag/cover.

3 hours ago, GalaticBoba said:

Now I need to redo my research on scopes, an evening of youtube for me. 

I think it will be time well spent, and also - you can always ask questions here if you are in doubt about something or just want people's opinions on which is better...

[GalaticBoba]

I was watching some vids and the I didn't realise the setup on those EQ mounts are so complicated, I had it in my head to have the whole thing permanently set up in the garage maybe with the tube separate and then just carry it into the garden and be good to go. That is so not the case. 

I should probably just go for a dobsonian?! Do you all have one of these in storage somewhere? Apparently 8" is the sweet spot, metal focusers vs plastic on a lot of smaller ones and still light enough to easily move around. With the Orion XT8 being a highly recommended one. Not sure what the practical differences between the classic and the plus of these two models are though. 

https://www.holydogwater.co.uk/product/B07KWKKN5C/ 

https://www.holydogwater.co.uk/product/B01M04SRCY/

I think I need to practice with something like this before spending thousands on a setup I may find to annoying to use. 

 

Alternatively I could get this basic mount, any better options? I like this mount as it seems very portable, I could put a variety of scopes on it, not a huge weight capacity though. Further down the line if I get into AP and get an EQ which is when I would start spending the big bucks. 

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-az-gti-wifi/sky-watcher-az-gti-wifi-alt-az-mount-tripod.html

 

Any opinions are appreciated. 

[vlaiv]

55 minutes ago, GalaticBoba said:

I should probably just go for a dobsonian?! Do you all have one of these in storage somewhere? Apparently 8" is the sweet spot, metal focusers vs plastic on a lot of smaller ones and still light enough to easily move around. With the Orion XT8 being a highly recommended one. Not sure what the practical differences between the classic and the plus of these two models are though. 

https://www.holydogwater.co.uk/product/B07KWKKN5C/ 

https://www.holydogwater.co.uk/product/B01M04SRCY/

First advice would be to purchase telescope from a well known supplier of astronomical gear. Avoid amazon and department stores and such (unless you are very confident in what you are purchasing).

Second important point - stocks are quite low at the moment as all C-19 thing has upset worldwide trade and transportation. It is very likely that you'll need to wait a few weeks for your telescope.

Orion XT8, Skywatcher 200p dob, Bresser 8" dob - are in essence very similar instruments (all good quality). They have same capability and only difference is in accessories / eyepieces and mechanics of dob mount (all are quite ok).

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/dobsonians/skywatcher-skyliner-200p-dobsonian.html

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/bresser-telescopes/bresser-messier-8-dobsonian-telescope.html

https://uk.telescope.com/Telescopes/Dobsonian-Telescopes/Classic-Dobsonians/Orion-SkyQuest-XT8-Classic-Dobsonian-Telescope/pc/1306/c/1316/sc/1352/p/109907.uts?refineByCategoryId=1352

Yes, I have one in my basement - SkyWatcher 200p version, and it is often used (not as often as I'd like but that will hopefully change soon).

1 hour ago, GalaticBoba said:

I think I need to practice with something like this before spending thousands on a setup I may find to annoying to use. 

8" dob is really life time visual instrument. Many people never feel the need to upgrade to something bigger.

Just do keep in mind what sort of instrument you are using and what are its strong suits. It is great visual instrument that will show you plenty of stuff - planets, moon, deep sky objects. It is however on undriven mount so you'll have to find objects yourself and track them (not issue for low power views where drift time is in minutes - not ideal for high power views - when you have say 10-15 seconds to observe planet before you have to nudge the scope to recenter it).

This can be changed later by adding equatorial platform that will track the sky for limited amount of time (say half an hour or hour before it needs to be reset):

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p10148_TS-Optics-EQ-Dobsonian-Telescop2-Drive----Platform-for-50--N-S.html

It is best used seated - so get good height adjustable chair, and it is heavy and bulky.

If you are ok with all of that - then it is perfect beginner and advanced observing scope.

1 hour ago, GalaticBoba said:

Alternatively I could get this basic mount, any better options? I like this mount as it seems very portable, I could put a variety of scopes on it, not a huge weight capacity though. Further down the line if I get into AP and get an EQ which is when I would start spending the big bucks. 

https://www.firstlightoptics.com/sky-watcher-az-gti-wifi/sky-watcher-az-gti-wifi-alt-az-mount-tripod.html

AzGti is very nice little mount that can be easily converted to Eq version for wide field astrophotography. That is very good and affordable way to get into astrophotography - but it can only hold lightest / smallest telescopes.

I have one of those as well:

Here it is converted to EQ mode (very DIY) and ready to snap some images of heavens.

It really depends on your budget. I think that AzGti is something that people doing astrophotography should have for wide field applications - but that might not be everyone's interest. It might not be in everyone's budget either - there are cheaper solutions like DIY barn door tracker and similar.

Do keep in mind that:

- it is of limited use as regular mount - it will hold only small telescopes like 100mm Maksutov or maybe 70-80mm light weight ED/APO refractor, but can work in both Az and EQ mode

- it is suited for wide field / low resolution work as AP mount

- it needs a bit of DIY to make it work in EQ mode (need to get wedge, counter weight bar and counter weight and flash special firmware - instructions can be found online)

- it is mass produced item and some people had issues like roughness in tracking or noise or stiff axis - but that can also be fixed (although warranty is void when opening the mount)

[GalaticBoba]

Ok, I'm going to get the XT8 Plus, I am debating the XT10. Not ordered yet, just waiting to see if anyone convinces me to go for the XT10. 

https://uk.telescope.com/Telescopes/Dobsonian-Telescopes/Classic-Dobsonians/Orion-SkyQuest-XT8-PLUS-Dobsonian-Reflector-Telescope/pc/1306/c/1316/sc/1352/p/130550.uts?refineByCategoryId=1352

I will also get an eyepiece, I would like to see what the difference between a high quality one vs the stock eyepieces are like (expensive ones would stay in a box when kids come round). The Plus versions both come with a 28mm and a 10mm. I'm thinking of a TeleVue in a similar size to the 28mm. But there are so many choices! Ethos seems to be the best. 

Am I right in thinking the 10" with a f/4.7 gives a wider field of view better for DSO vs the 8" at f/5.9 potentially better for planets?! Would I benefit from the 100º Ethos for the 10" and maybe an 82° Nagler for the 8". 

 

Assuming I get into this I will be getting more telescopes so I have no preference in what I view immediately. It's more a case of what is the tube I get now best for and what one piece of equipment will best enhance that viewing. 

 

[vlaiv]

1 hour ago, GalaticBoba said:

Ok, I'm going to get the XT8 Plus, I am debating the XT10. Not ordered yet, just waiting to see if anyone convinces me to go for the XT10. 

Do you have any chance to see one in person? Either XT10 or XT8?

Telescopes are, interestingly enough, almost always larger in person than on images.

There are two things to consider when deciding between XT10 and XT8 scopes. First would be added weight and bulk and second would be coma and need for more expensive eyepieces.

First one should be self explanatory (19Kg vs 25Kg), and I'll briefly address the second one. XT8 is F/6 scope where F/6 is ratio of focal length and aperture size 203mm / 1200mm = 1/6 often written as F/6 or just F6. XT10 is F/4.7 scope because 254mm / 1200mm = F/4.7.

Smaller F number is referred to as faster optics means that light hits focal plane at shallower angles. This is important when choosing eyepiece type. Most eyepieces work well with slow scopes (slow being F/8 and larger like F/10 or F/12). As speed of optics increases and field of view of eyepiece increases - edge of the field aberrations also increase.

On fast optics (meaning F/5 or below) only very expensive eyepieces show clear image to the edge of the field. Other start to be blurry some distance to the edge.

Another aspect is important and that is exit pupil of eyepiece. Faster scopes give wider exit pupil than slower scopes. At some point, if exit pupil is wider than what your eye pupil can expand - you'll loose light.

In this particular case, as both scopes are newtonian scopes, there is also coma to worry about. Coma is aberration inherent in parabolic newtonian mirror - faster the scope, more coma it will show. That is off axis aberration that makes stars look like little tear drops at edge of the field.

This is what coma looks like in photo (stars look like little comets - hence the name for aberration):

So to recap - XT8 is slower scope, easier on the eyepieces, while XT10 is faster scope (in fact, rather fast scope) that will require more expensive eyepieces to have pin point stars up to the edge and possibly a coma corrector device to clean up coma in widest views.

2 hours ago, GalaticBoba said:

I will also get an eyepiece, I would like to see what the difference between a high quality one vs the stock eyepieces are like (expensive ones would stay in a box when kids come round). The Plus versions both come with a 28mm and a 10mm. I'm thinking of a TeleVue in a similar size to the 28mm. But there are so many choices! Ethos seems to be the best. 

Am I right in thinking the 10" with a f/4.7 gives a wider field of view better for DSO vs the 8" at f/5.9 potentially better for planets?! Would I benefit from the 100º Ethos for the 10" and maybe an 82° Nagler for the 8". 

From this part of your question, I'm getting the feel that budget is not overly big concern for you - as you are mentioning Ethos eyepieces, in that case - you'll probably be able to afford eyepieces that work well in faster scopes, so that is not as much of a concern. Adding coma corrector is probably not out of the budget either. Only thing to be aware with coma corrector - is that it somewhat complicates observing and adds more glass to optical path. Some people don't like that as more glass means more chance for view to get distorted and dimmed (although with modern technology - that would be minimal).

What I would like to bring to your attention is that choice of eyepieces is very personal thing. Some people prefer large fields of view (like 82° or 100°) some don't. I personally don't like very large AFOVs. I have 82° eyepieces (Explore Scientific range) and although I love the eyepieces for sharpness - I don't really like that large AFOV. Best size for me is around 70° (68° to be precise as that is AFOV that I've used). 62° is also fine and I would not mind using only 62° for the rest of my life - I would not feel like I'm missing out something.

There is also ergonomics of the eyepiece, eye relief - if you are wearing glasses or not. Simple diopter glasses can be removed for observing, but if you have astigmatism and wear cylinder - then you need to observe with glasses - and that means long eye relief eyepieces.

Bottom line - don't rush into getting the most expensive eyepiece as it might not be the best eyepiece for you. In fact - you are yet to learn what you value in eyepieces.

Get some observing experience first and then star building your preferences from there.

10" F/4.7 will not give you wider field of view in comparison to 8" F/6 - both have the same focal length so they will give same magnification and hence field of view with same eyepiece.

With same eyepiece, only differences between the two scopes will be:

1. Everything will be brighter in 10" scope - both targets but also background sky (larger exit pupil)

2. Edge of the field will look better in 8" if you don't get the best eyepieces and use coma corrector. Coma applies only to very low magnifications and large true fields of view

3. 10" will have potential to show you a bit more. A bit more of planetary detail, a bit deeper on deep sky a bit more resolved star clusters and so on.

This is only potential and difference is subtle. Views will much more depend on other factors.

8" in darker skies will simply outclass 10" in light pollution. Even 4" will show more in dark skies than 8" or 10" in town. Here I'm talking about deep sky objects.

8" properly cooled and managed will show better detail on planets than 10" if not properly cooled and managed. 10" has larger mirror - larger piece of glass and cools more slowly. 10" is a bit more sensitive to collimation because it is faster - properly collimated scope will show much more detail than scope out of collimation and so on.

Only if you pay attention to all these details, then yes, 10" will be better, but not by much - difference will be more visible on deep sky objects as planetary detail is much more restricted by atmosphere then by aperture size at this level of aperture size.

2 hours ago, GalaticBoba said:

It's more a case of what is the tube I get now best for and what one piece of equipment will best enhance that viewing. 

Thing that will best enhance the viewing - is the viewing itself.

Getting under the stars and learning things - experience, will bring most rewarding enhancement. Observing is a skill - more you observe, better you become at observing. Your brain / eye system learns this skill and really starts to show you more stuff - you learn to see fainter stuff, you learn to discern detail.

You also learn how to manage your environment (getting dark adapted, using peripheral vision, waiting for deeper darkness, waiting for things to cool and atmosphere to settle and so on) and recognize good and bad conditions for particular type of observing.

You don't have to spend much and get "the best" equipment to have the most fun. Just learning about the sky and understanding what you are seeing and learning a bit about these celestial objects is rewarding thing that brings most of the fun.

[GalaticBoba]

@vlaiv thanks for all the advice it's much appreciated. 

I've ordered the XT8 Plus, if I can get quicker and easier results I'm more likely to take it out. And I'll hold off on getting anything else for now, until I know what I'm doing.

Thanks again. 

 

[Starslayer]

34 minutes ago, vlaiv said:

Do you have any chance to see one in person? Either XT10 or XT8?

Telescopes are, interestingly enough, almost always larger in person than on images.

There are two things to consider when deciding between XT10 and XT8 scopes. First would be added weight and bulk and second would be coma and need for more expensive eyepieces.

First one should be self explanatory (19Kg vs 25Kg), and I'll briefly address the second one. XT8 is F/6 scope where F/6 is ratio of focal length and aperture size 203mm / 1200mm = 1/6 often written as F/6 or just F6. XT10 is F/4.7 scope because 254mm / 1200mm = F/4.7.

Smaller F number is referred to as faster optics means that light hits focal plane at shallower angles. This is important when choosing eyepiece type. Most eyepieces work well with slow scopes (slow being F/8 and larger like F/10 or F/12). As speed of optics increases and field of view of eyepiece increases - edge of the field aberrations also increase.

On fast optics (meaning F/5 or below) only very expensive eyepieces show clear image to the edge of the field. Other start to be blurry some distance to the edge.

Another aspect is important and that is exit pupil of eyepiece. Faster scopes give wider exit pupil than slower scopes. At some point, if exit pupil is wider than what your eye pupil can expand - you'll loose light.

In this particular case, as both scopes are newtonian scopes, there is also coma to worry about. Coma is aberration inherent in parabolic newtonian mirror - faster the scope, more coma it will show. That is off axis aberration that makes stars look like little tear drops at edge of the field.

This is what coma looks like in photo (stars look like little comets - hence the name for aberration):

So to recap - XT8 is slower scope, easier on the eyepieces, while XT10 is faster scope (in fact, rather fast scope) that will require more expensive eyepieces to have pin point stars up to the edge and possibly a coma corrector device to clean up coma in widest views.

From this part of your question, I'm getting the feel that budget is not overly big concern for you - as you are mentioning Ethos eyepieces, in that case - you'll probably be able to afford eyepieces that work well in faster scopes, so that is not as much of a concern. Adding coma corrector is probably not out of the budget either. Only thing to be aware with coma corrector - is that it somewhat complicates observing and adds more glass to optical path. Some people don't like that as more glass means more chance for view to get distorted and dimmed (although with modern technology - that would be minimal).

What I would like to bring to your attention is that choice of eyepieces is very personal thing. Some people prefer large fields of view (like 82° or 100°) some don't. I personally don't like very large AFOVs. I have 82° eyepieces (Explore Scientific range) and although I love the eyepieces for sharpness - I don't really like that large AFOV. Best size for me is around 70° (68° to be precise as that is AFOV that I've used). 62° is also fine and I would not mind using only 62° for the rest of my life - I would not feel like I'm missing out something.

There is also ergonomics of the eyepiece, eye relief - if you are wearing glasses or not. Simple diopter glasses can be removed for observing, but if you have astigmatism and wear cylinder - then you need to observe with glasses - and that means long eye relief eyepieces.

Bottom line - don't rush into getting the most expensive eyepiece as it might not be the best eyepiece for you. In fact - you are yet to learn what you value in eyepieces.

Get some observing experience first and then star building your preferences from there.

10" F/4.7 will not give you wider field of view in comparison to 8" F/6 - both have the same focal length so they will give same magnification and hence field of view with same eyepiece.

With same eyepiece, only differences between the two scopes will be:

1. Everything will be brighter in 10" scope - both targets but also background sky (larger exit pupil)

2. Edge of the field will look better in 8" if you don't get the best eyepieces and use coma corrector. Coma applies only to very low magnifications and large true fields of view

3. 10" will have potential to show you a bit more. A bit more of planetary detail, a bit deeper on deep sky a bit more resolved star clusters and so on.

This is only potential and difference is subtle. Views will much more depend on other factors.

8" in darker skies will simply outclass 10" in light pollution. Even 4" will show more in dark skies than 8" or 10" in town. Here I'm talking about deep sky objects.

8" properly cooled and managed will show better detail on planets than 10" if not properly cooled and managed. 10" has larger mirror - larger piece of glass and cools more slowly. 10" is a bit more sensitive to collimation because it is faster - properly collimated scope will show much more detail than scope out of collimation and so on.

Only if you pay attention to all these details, then yes, 10" will be better, but not by much - difference will be more visible on deep sky objects as planetary detail is much more restricted by atmosphere then by aperture size at this level of aperture size.

Thing that will best enhance the viewing - is the viewing itself.

Getting under the stars and learning things - experience, will bring most rewarding enhancement. Observing is a skill - more you observe, better you become at observing. Your brain / eye system learns this skill and really starts to show you more stuff - you learn to see fainter stuff, you learn to discern detail.

You also learn how to manage your environment (getting dark adapted, using peripheral vision, waiting for deeper darkness, waiting for things to cool and atmosphere to settle and so on) and recognize good and bad conditions for particular type of observing.

You don't have to spend much and get "the best" equipment to have the most fun. Just learning about the sky and understanding what you are seeing and learning a bit about these celestial objects is rewarding thing that brings most of the fun.

As a novice myself I love this reply and the information therein. Not into dobs but….. I have taken my plunge with choice of scope and pm’d the OP with details as I have reiterated so often already.. He has not responded.  That said, Vlaiv has really summed it up at the end and I think the OP should think more about how easy it is to move and therefore use, how simple it is for beginning and what he can realistically expect to see ( or not  ) for the extra buck , or many bucks.  It is not all about the money and I get the feeling the OP is trying to match the buy to the dollars available rather than use the money wisely to buy something that will be realistic to use as a starter kit.  Hope that makes sense and no offence meant. 

[vlaiv]

7 minutes ago, GalaticBoba said:

@vlaiv thanks for all the advice it's much appreciated. 

I've ordered the XT8 Plus, if I can get quicker and easier results I'm more likely to take it out. And I'll hold off on getting anything else for now, until I know what I'm doing.

Thanks again. 

 

It is good time to start with such scope.

Jupiter and Saturn will put on a show in few weeks (although they are low - they are close to opposition now) - and summer sky is full of interesting things to observe.

Moon is best observed when not fully illuminated. For start aim around first and last quarter and observe along the terminator (line separating bright and dark side).

[Starslayer]

Uk telescope.com 

Recommended? ?  

[vlaiv]

4 minutes ago, Starslayer said:

Uk telescope.com 

Recommended? ?  

I think that is just UK part of www.telescope.com - Orion owned telescope web shop.

Orion telescopes is US based and has similar scopes to SkyWatcher and other brands. I think it is more popular in US due to being based there.

If you look US youtube reviews - you'll more often see Orion ShortTube 80mm F/5 being discussed while in Europe it is more often SkyWatcher ST80, but both are really the same scope.

For example, this scope:

https://www.telescope.com/catalog/product.jsp?productId=132684&src=row3col1-prodimage

is the same scope found with different branding like:

https://www.altairastro.com/altair-starwave-115-f7-ed-triplet-refractor-9198-p.asp

https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/product_info.php/info/p3041_TS-Optics-PHOTOLINE-115-mm-f-7-Triplet-Apo---2-5--RAP-focuser.html

used to be sold by StellarVue as well - look up their SV115T, and so on ...

In that sense - it is recommended as it is mostly the same stuff you can also purchase from others, it is just the question of price and customer support. I have no experience with that as I've never ordered from them.

[johninderby]

14 minutes ago, Starslayer said:

Uk telescope.com 

Recommended? ?  

They seem to be OK but are actually based in the US with a warehouse in the Netherlands despite the misleading website address.I believe the prices shown include import duties and taxes.

Edited July 24, 2021 by johninderby

[Starslayer]

19 minutes ago, johninderby said:

They seem to be OK but are actually based in the US with a warehouse in the Netherlands despite the misleading website address.I believe the prices shown include import duties and taxes.

Delivery to uk is quoted significantly more than elsewhere which is part of the reason for asking.  Mmmm. Not sure.  Hope he used the cc. 😉

[GalaticBoba]

I thought I would give an update for the hijacking

I ordered the Orion scope as it was supposed to be in stock this week, however they have just emailed me stating this is not the case, so I cancelled my order. As I paid with CC no refund was necessary as they would not take payment until they shipped the scope. I've just ordered a Sky-Watcher from firstlightoptics instead, long lead times though.