Need help to chose a telescope :(

[Alexmar]

First of all, sorry for that question, i know that alot of articles about that, i have research quite a bit, but i didn't find a answer yet.

First, i live in Brazil, minimun wage here is about 200$, so price is a big hit, my questioning now is, should i get a 900/60 or a 400/70, now, like i did my research and i know that the 900/60 is best for planetary view (Moon jupiter blablabla) and the 400/70 would be better for deep space, now i have one question, i know that more focal length will get more zoom, but lose light and quality, so if i get 900/70, i can make the adjustment to use less focal length for better Deep space (Seems like a obvius question but i want to make sure, since i didn't saw nothing about that), also i want to know the best tradeoff for me looks like the 400/70 would be better since i would have less case scnarions with the 900/60(Moon and planets) and, as we know, we have more Deep space objects to look at then planets.

my current choices are:

Azimutal 700mmx76mm Tssaper. Looks like a very good choice, but i didn't saw many reviews or usage in youtube, so i dont know about it's quality, hopefully you guys can help me with that.

Greika 40070m Refrator Azimutal 70mm Focal 400mm

Lorben 900mm x 60mm

All the options above have the barlow lens(1.5x and 3x) and the optical lens(6mm, 10mm and 20mm). I know that any of thoses models gonnan be god like, but since is my first one, i kinda wanna the best option to start with

Like i said, i live in Brazil, so if you guys have better recomendations, try to send the model and brand, since here Amazon isn't that good, so i use local market. i hope i was clear about everything, english isn't my best language

Also, i have a question, why long focal lenght is bad for deep space? i know it shortens the FOV, but would be simple just to zoom out a little bit? 

Also, i put the topic over images, i think this is wrong, but i was looking for have some footage from telescopes that looks like thoses models, so i could have a better decision making. 

Edited July 25, 2022 by Alexmar

[happy-kat]

Welcome

Where you will be using your telescope the most what is the light pollution like?

You might like this read

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/196278-what-can-i-expect-to-see/

 

 

[Cosmic Geoff]

We won't be familiar with the brands you cite, or their quality.  We are familiar with brands like Celestron and Skywatcher.  You should be aware that low-priced telescopes may be of poor quality.

As for which of the models you cite to choose, be aware that the longer focal length ones should perform better on planets, but the maximum field of view will be set by the lowest power eyepiece in the kit (20mm) giving a field of view of a degree or so. That's enough to give a view of many star clusters etc.

The 70x400 mm scope will give a much wider field at low power, but in practice may not give a good quality image at high power, regardless of what lenses you use on it.

If you have the option of buying a table-top Dobsonian of 130mm aperture (or more) you should consider that option.  If these are not available to you, the longer focal length refractor might be the best option as a general purpose starter scope.

If you have access to a computer, you can download the free program 'Stellarium' which has a field of view add-on where you can enter the details of various telescopes and get an idea of what will apear in the eyepiece.

The vast majority of deep-space objects are very small - it's just a few brighter ones popular with amateur obeervers that have a large angular size.

Edited July 25, 2022 by Cosmic Geoff

[AstroMuni]

10 hours ago, Alexmar said:

Also, i have a question, why long focal lenght is bad for deep space? i know it shortens the FOV, but would be simple just to zoom out a little bit?

Welcome to SGL. You are partly right. But if you have a camera your 'zoom' is only defined by the FL of the objective (as there is no eyepiece in between) and as a result some objects may not fit into your view at all. Hope this makes sense.

As they say get the largest aperture that you can buy as you need to gather as much light as you can and FOV is a factor of both aperture and FL.
Here is a tool to help you visualise https://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/

Edited July 25, 2022 by AstroMuni

[Alexmar]

4 hours ago, happy-kat said:

Welcome

Where you will be using your telescope the most what is the light pollution like?

You might like this read

https://stargazerslounge.com/topic/196278-what-can-i-expect-to-see/

 

 

Quite bad since i live in a big city, but i travel for inner citys quite often, also, there is any problem in using telescopes in beach?

 

3 hours ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

We won't be familiar with the brands you cite, or their quality.  We are familiar with brands like Celestron and Skywatcher.  You should be aware that low-priced telescopes may be of poor quality.

As for which of the models you cite to choose, be aware that the longer focal length ones should perform better on planets, but the maximum field of view will be set by the lowest power eyepiece in the kit (20mm) giving a field of view of a degree or so. That's enough to give a view of many star clusters etc.

The 70x400 mm scope will give a much wider field at low power, but in practice may not give a good quality image at high power, regardless of what lenses you use on it.

If you have the option of buying a table-top Dobsonian of 130mm aperture (or more) you should consider that option.  If these are not available to you, the longer focal length refractor might be the best option as a general purpose starter scope.

If you have access to a computer, you can download the free program 'Stellarium' which has a field of view add-on where you can enter the details of various telescopes and get an idea of what will apear in the eyepiece.

The vast majority of deep-space objects are very small - it's just a few brighter ones popular with amateur obeervers that have a large angular size.

"If you have access to a computer", Brazil is poor but we are not dinosaur lol, JK. Although i could buy expansive telescopes, i just dont want to commit that ammout of money in something i not realy sure if will hook me into, so cuz of that i will chose more starter telescopes, if i get hooked i can go for more expansive ones. Also, i think i going to get the 70/400, since i planing in going to the beach with that, and thoses open mirror(Reflector i guess) can be a pain in the ass to clean, i dont like pain in the ass.

 

1 hour ago, AstroMuni said:

Welcome to SGL. You are partly right. But if you have a camera your 'zoom' is only defined by the FL of the objective (as there is no eyepiece in between) and as a result some objects may not fit into your view at all. Hope this makes sense.

As they say get the largest aperture that you can buy as you need to gather as much light as you can and FOV is a factor of both aperture and FL.
Here is a tool to help you visualise https://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/

That is a realy good tool, thanks man. Also, dont make sense to me lol, i will have to do some research to undertand that event.

[AstroMuni]

16 minutes ago, Alexmar said:

That is a realy good tool, thanks man. Also, dont make sense to me lol, i will have to do some research to undertand that event.

Here is what you can hope to see with the various scopes you have listed. I have assumed you are imaging with a Canon 600D. But you can change your camera or eyepiece and see what it does to your image.

[Elp]

What mount are you planning on using? The mount is the most important part of any setup.

[malc-c]

12 hours ago, Alexmar said:

my current choices are:

Azimutal 700mmx76mm Tssaper. Looks like a very good choice, but i didn't saw many reviews or usage in youtube, so i dont know about it's quality, hopefully you guys can help me with that.

Greika 40070m Refrator Azimutal 70mm Focal 400mm

Lorben 900mm x 60mm

 

 

Azimutal 700mmx76mm Tssaper.

Greika 40070m Refrator Azimutal

And finally Lorben 900mm x 60mm

Of the three the Azimutal 700mmx76mm Tssaper. will IMO be the better scope.  BUT - don't expect much from them.  All three will provide adequate images of the Moon, but are not suitable for seeing deep sky objects as they have very little aperture and the optics will be made to the price point.

My advice would be to save and save until you can afford a decent scope on a better mount. 

[Gonariu]

Try to see if it is convenient to at least assemble a Dobson 1200/150, that is 150 mm of mirror and 1200 mm of focal length instead of buying the optics you have proposed; in the 80s here in Italy it was the way to have an optic that was starting to be a little big without spending too much (before Chinese production the telescopes here were still expensive). Among the instruments proposed by you (I state that I do not know those brands) I would prefer the 900/70 refractor which is certainly superior to the Newton 76/700 as it does not have the obstruction of the secondary, which implies having more contrasted images. By buying a 40mm eyepiece later you would have a magnification of 22.5X which is also good for extended objects (Pleiades, M31 for example).

Edited July 25, 2022 by Gonariu

[AstroMuni]

1 hour ago, malc-c said:

My advice would be to save and save until you can afford a decent scope on a better mount. 

+1 to that advice. @Alexmar what is your budget. I can see that Celestron does sell in Brazil https://www.celestron.com.br/telescopios

[Cosmic Geoff]

15 hours ago, Alexmar said:

Azimutal 700mmx76mm Tssaper

I managed to find out what this is. 

I have to say I have never seen anything good written about Newtonians of such a small aperture.  All one can say is that it must be very cheap to manufacture.  I wonder how big the central obstruction is in comparison to the overall aperture.

76mm aperture is quite small.  A refractor of this size would be preferable, or a larger table-top Dobsonian in which your money is spent on the optics and not on the mount.

[Alexmar]

1 hour ago, AstroMuni said:

+1 to that advice. @Alexmar what is your budget. I can see that Celestron does sell in Brazil https://www.celestron.com.br/telescopios

At first i was looking something for about 100$(About 650 R$), but i am looking for some more expansive(200$) models like some 114mm

 

This models is a 114mm x 1000mm, it seems the brand is Golden Sun.

 

Or this one 114mm x 900mm SkyLife

 

But still, i didn't want a expansive one cuz i dont know if will hook me up, good chance that i will use a couple of times and no more, also, refractor would be better since is somewhat cheaper and is easier to transport, also less maintenance.

But i also want to be able to se some constalations / nebulous. i know it wont be hubble(Or JWST, duno if is the new parameter) quality, but just to see would be good

Edited July 25, 2022 by Alexmar

[Elp]

Those included tripods/mounts will be no good from the off, they will vibrate even with slight wind and take a while to stop for you to view through the scope. I've owned both an eq1 and a cheap Newtonian scope so have experienced it myself. At the very minimum I would recommend an EQ3-2 grade mount but not the EQ version but an alt azimuth version as that will be better to start off with as it will be easier to point the telescope. That, or a small dobsonian telescope which has the mount built in.

Can you buy Celestron or Skywatcher telescopes where you are?

[Alexmar]

20 minutes ago, Elp said:

Those included tripods/mounts will be no good from the off, they will vibrate even with slight wind and take a while to stop for you to view through the scope. I've owned both an eq1 and a cheap Newtonian scope so have experienced it myself. At the very minimum I would recommend an EQ3-2 grade mount but not the EQ version but an alt azimuth version as that will be better to start off with as it will be easier to point the telescope. That, or a small dobsonian telescope which has the mount built in.

Can you buy Celestron or Skywatcher telescopes where you are?

Dont worry, i will glue this mf to the ground if i had to, but i want to focus on the telescope itself, but overall are tripods. I was looking this refractor.

Celestron or Skywatcher, well yes, we have some models, but it seems they are more fancy that good, i see some 70mm x 700mm 7x more expensive that some other models, only diference is the mount, so idk if i will grab some from thoses branch's for the mount. Some Skylife models are cheap here, dont know if Skylife and Skywatcher has some similar tecs

A Tssaper TLES85, 80mm x 500mm. About 200$ (1300 R$)

To much choices. 'me no like'

Edited July 25, 2022 by Alexmar

[malc-c]

54 minutes ago, Alexmar said:

At first i was looking something for about 100$(About 650 R$), but i am looking for some more expansive(200$) models like some 114mm

But still, i didn't want a expansive one cuz i dont know if will hook me up, good chance that i will use a couple of times and no more, also, refractor would be better since is somewhat cheaper and is easier to transport, also less maintenance.

But i also want to be able to se some constalations / nebulous. i know it wont be hubble(Or JWST, duno if is the new parameter) quality, but just to see would be good

Before you spend any money I would suggest you do more research.  The second set of scopes are an improvement over the first, but you are way off the requirement to view deep sky objects, especially if you live under light polluted skies.  The mounts are not stable and the apertures won't collect photons from anything other than the brightest DSO's.   If you want to do imaging then you will need to increase your budget ten fold.

Visually you want see anything like the hubble images.  A lot of people are disappointed when they look at even a bright dso as it turns out to be a small greenish / grey smudge rather then the flamboyant colourful image you see on forums like this, and that will be through a scope costing twice , if not three times you current budget.

Have a search for any astronomy groups in your area.  Join one or ask if you can visit any star parties they may have so you can look through different scopes and see how each one performs and in what price bracket they fall.  If you are disappointed in your expectations and you then realise just how expensive this hobby is in order to get a decent scope then at least you have saved wasting a few hundred dollars by buying any of the above.

If that is not an option, then look at getting a dobsonian telescope, ideally from a recognised brand such as Skywatcher or Celestron.  Steer clear of these cheap scopes.   I used to work for a company that had identical products to those listed in your first post and they really are nothing more than toys.  The Azimutal 700mmx76mm Tssaper being the better as its a reflector but you can bet your life it uses a spherical mirror rather than a parabolic one.  A 8" dobsonian scope  from either if the two manufactures we've stated would be the ideal entry level scope.  

Of course you could ignore all our comments and advice, and get any of the scopes you've listed.... but you will be disappointed.

 

 

[wulfrun]

1 hour ago, Alexmar said:

At first i was looking something for about 100$(About 650 R$), but i am looking for some more expansive(200$) models like some 114mm

 

This models is a 114mm x 1000mm, it seems the brand is Golden Sun.

One to avoid at all costs. It's too short to be 1000mm unless it's a Bird-Jones (or Jones-Bird) design. No-one will have anything good to say about the design as an amateur telescope.

[Alexmar]

1 minute ago, malc-c said:

Before you spend any money I would suggest you do more research.  The second set of scopes are an improvement over the first, but you are way off the requirement to view deep sky objects, especially if you live under light polluted skies.  The mounts are not stable and the apertures won't collect photons from anything other than the brightest DSO's.   If you want to do imaging then you will need to increase your budget ten fold.

Visually you want see anything like the hubble images.  A lot of people are disappointed when they look at even a bright dso as it turns out to be a small greenish / grey smudge rather then the flamboyant colourful image you see on forums like this, and that will be through a scope costing twice , if not three times you current budget.

Have a search for any astronomy groups in your area.  Join one or ask if you can visit any star parties they may have so you can look through different scopes and see how each one performs and in what price bracket they fall.  If you are disappointed in your expectations and you then realise just how expensive this hobby is in order to get a decent scope then at least you have saved wasting a few hundred dollars by buying any of the above.

If that is not an option, then look at getting a dobsonian telescope, ideally from a recognised brand such as Skywatcher or Celestron.  Steer clear of these cheap scopes.   I used to work for a company that had identical products to those listed in your first post and they really are nothing more than toys.  The Azimutal 700mmx76mm Tssaper being the better as its a reflector but you can bet your life it uses a spherical mirror rather than a parabolic one.  A 8" dobsonian scope  from either if the two manufactures we've stated would be the ideal entry level scope.  

Of course you could ignore all our comments and advice, and get any of the scopes you've listed.... but you will be disappointed.

 

 

I know i wont be getting hubble images, you guys are talking too much about waste of money, dont know about the US, but here we can return goods to get back the money for about a week or so, i am more worry about time. so i can test some telescopes, and i was saying, i want to have some experience first, before dump 1k into telescopes

[Elp]

I also think you have to do some more research, look online on YouTube for recommendations. My first scope was a National Geographic Newtonian from that well known online retailer, it was a 114/900, I thought yes a small but decent sized Newtonian with a long focal length. Could I see anything through it? No. I took it completely apart and back together and still nothing, not even during the day pointed at something far away. The tripod wasn't worth the scrap value of the metal it was made from. My next scope was a Skywatcher Capricorn refractor, think around 70mm which was better, I saw the moon and experienced the colour fringing and false colour you get from an acromat refractor, the best use I got from it was a Venus/Jupiter conjunction though the view was quite blurry. Again the tripod was garbage despite this time being an eq1. I realised the eyepieces provided with these scopes are also garbage. So instead of chasing for aperture and focal length I took some time to research properly decent scopes, and consideration for what I wanted to do (imaging and some visual). I then bought a WOZ61 a scope I still have, it is only 61mm aperture and 360mm native focal length, I bought it used at a budget considerably higher than my first two scopes but not excessively so. It then took me a few years to settle on a mount which I found worked for what I wanted to do after buying and selling to get the next purchase. I still have that scope because of the quality, and because I have a general interest in space. Had I been a beginner unsure of whether the hobby was for me the first two scopes will have certainly put me off. It can be a frustrating experience when it doesn't work, if you're using equipment not built for the task this is more so the case.

We are generally recommending Celestron and Skywatcher (only certain models though) as they have a reputation for supplying decent scopes and they usually are available worldwide even if you have to import from a foreign online retailer. You don't have to spend a fortune, but spend wisely, get the right proven equipment recommended from user experiences and you'll get to enjoy the hobby.

Edited July 25, 2022 by Elp

[Alexmar]

7 minutes ago, Elp said:

I also think you have to do some more research, look online on YouTube for recommendations. My first scope was a National Geographic Newtonian from that well known online retailer, it was a 114/900, I thought yes a small but decent sized Newtonian with a long focal length. Could I see anything through it? No. I took it completely apart and back together and still nothing, not even during the day pointed at something far away. The tripod wasn't worth the scrap value of the metal it was made from. My next scope was a Skywatcher Capricorn refractor, think around 70mm which was better, I saw the moon and experienced the colour fringing and false colour you get from an acromat refractor, the best use I got from it was a Venus/Jupiter conjunction though the view was quite blurry. Again the tripod was garbage despite this time being an eq1. I realised the eyepieces provided with these scopes are also garbage. So instead of chasing for aperture and focal length I took some time to research properly decent scopes, and consideration for what I wanted to do (imaging and some visual). I then bought a WOZ61 a scope I still have, it is only 61mm aperture and 360mm native focal length, I bought it used at a budget considerably higher than my first two scopes but not excessively so. It then took me a few years to settle on a mount which I found worked for what I wanted to do after buying and selling to get the next purchase. I still have that scope because of the quality, and because I have a general interest in space. Had I been a beginner unsure of whether the hobby was for me the first two scopes will have certainly put me off. It can be a frustrating experience when it doesn't work, if you're using equipment not built for the task this is more so the case.

We are generally recommending Celestron and Skywatcher (only certain models though) as they have a reputation for supplying decent scopes and they usually are available worldwide even if you have to import from a foreign online retailer. You don't have to spend a fortune, but spend wisely, get the right proven equipment recommended from user experiences and you'll get to enjoy the hobby.

I see, well, i will look better. Is hard to find usefull videos about some telescopes here in Brazil, since the majority of the brands here seems to not be very popular over there, and in Brazil in not a very common hobby. Anyway, thx for the information, i also gonna try some Brazilian forum, hopefully i will have better reviews from the products around here

[happy-kat]

For a outline feel of a smaller telescope the videos by astrobiscuit (I have no affiliation with him) there are a couple though the reviews focus more on what for example the planets would look like. Whilst the brands are different the aperture and focal lengths are similar, though the quality of the lens or mirrors may differ and such any resulting view.

Edited July 25, 2022 by happy-kat
spelling

[happy-kat]

Deep space objects are generally differing in size of grey smudge but it's cool seeing how many million light years it's alway. Double stars are another observing target.

Binocular sky does an excellent binocular observing monthly news letter which also can be read with using a small telescope, I think you're in the northern hemisphere as well.

[Elp]

15 minutes ago, happy-kat said:

Binocular

Actually forgot that, that probably will be the best start on a budget, get some large aperture binoculars which have capability to mount onto a photo tripod for stability.

[malc-c]

1 hour ago, Alexmar said:

I know i wont be getting hubble images, you guys are talking too much about waste of money, dont know about the US, but here we can return goods to get back the money for about a week or so, i am more worry about time. so i can test some telescopes, and i was saying, i want to have some experience first, before dump 1k into telescopes

I think most people would be sensible enough to realise that you won't see the detail that you see in books, but in reality even bright objects like the Orion Nebula are just small fuzzy greenish / grey smudges, even when viewed through an 20cm / 100cm focal length scope costing $1500, and are often disappointed.  This is why so many people now try and attach cameras to the scope to take photos which whilst not being Hubble quality, are still stunning.

We have similar selling laws in the UK, and no doubt most countries have similar return policies.  Most revolve around the product being faulty, and not because you changed your mind as what it produces are not up to your expectations.  We are trying to ensure you don't make a mistake and purchase something that is ultimately a waste of money.  We've suggested a product that hopefully will excite you by giving you some decent foundation on which to start this new hobby for you.  Bottom line is that you can either ignore the advise and suggestions, and go with what you think is decent scope for your money, after all you could always sent it back and get your money back if the retailer agrees to that.

[Alexmar]

5 hours ago, malc-c said:

I think most people would be sensible enough to realise that you won't see the detail that you see in books, but in reality even bright objects like the Orion Nebula are just small fuzzy greenish / grey smudges, even when viewed through an 20cm / 100cm focal length scope costing $1500, and are often disappointed.  This is why so many people now try and attach cameras to the scope to take photos which whilst not being Hubble quality, are still stunning.

We have similar selling laws in the UK, and no doubt most countries have similar return policies.  Most revolve around the product being faulty, and not because you changed your mind as what it produces are not up to your expectations.  We are trying to ensure you don't make a mistake and purchase something that is ultimately a waste of money.  We've suggested a product that hopefully will excite you by giving you some decent foundation on which to start this new hobby for you.  Bottom line is that you can either ignore the advise and suggestions, and go with what you think is decent scope for your money, after all you could always sent it back and get your money back if the retailer agrees to that.

Completely understand that, it make sense, idk if it sounded like i was angry, wasn't my intention, just wanted to make clear that i have reasonable expectation about the performace of thoses telescopes, i am not expecting some 3D model live. It's just a different felling about seeing thoses objects live you know? even if is a tiny spot, like, we know how it looks like through photos from Hubble and JWST, seeing it live is a different felling that i want to experience. 

Seeing Saturn like this would already be awesome for me

 

Also seeing andromeda like this would be cool, but i guess if i do take a 700mm 70m, would probable be worse than that.

 

Anyway, i dont expect 3D model from space, we already have that. Also i will have to take my chances, Celestron telescopes that cost about 100 Dollars, for some reason is as high as 400 Dollars around here, cuz of that i will be taking  my chances with some local telescopes, hopefully i will have some luck.

[Alexmar]

 

Just for you guys have a ideia what i am talking about, this is a PowerSeeker 80EQ  almost double the price. if it was 200$ i would grab it on the spot.