Decent images from something that's not too large that the boss objects

[Starfazed]

Background - enthusiastic about astronomy at school but at a time when telescopes of any optical competence were only affordable to the likes of Patrick Moore. Some recent stargazing at the excellent recently opened Grassholme observatory and seeing how enthused the children were has made me rethink my attitude to affordability, especially after trying out the 8 and 10 inch Skywalker dobbies there that they let people try out.

After a few hours of playing, and many more looking at images and opinions on these fora subsequently, my immediate thoughts were that whilst I'd like to up the game from the 12x50 binoculars I'm currently using, I need to plan carefully around local circumstances. For starters I live in a manor UK city (probably Bortle 8. Across the road (100m to the entrance) is a large park  that in the centre at least gives a large unobstructed viewing area, though the sky is pretty light polluted. At the observatory my immediate frustrations were (1) difficulty star hopping under a near black sky due to lack of familiarity and I'm unlikely to learn starhopping when I can't see many of the dimmer stars visibible to the naked eye, and (2) the speed at which objects [assed through the viewer, which given the effort finding them under light pollution is likely to be frustrating. I expect from time to time we'll want to take a drive to rural skies; I doubt that would be more than maybe once a month, but would want something that could go in the car and be easily set up to maximise viewing time. And of course it needs to be transportable 100m to the park when looking at home.

1. I was initially drawn to the Stellalyra 10 inch dob, the idea of precision two speed focussing and not twisting my neck to look through the viewfinder are positives. But I'm guessing it's bulky, and  I'd need an equatorial platform to keep objects tracking. which seem hard to come by in the UK. Plus the steep learning curve of finding my away around the night sky where I live.

2. Next on the list, a goto Dob. The 250 Skywatcher flex looks fabulous, but I'm not sure how easy it would be to cart 100m down the road (or to the car, which might be parked down the road too). Might be a squeeze to get through the door too. Sack trolley perhaps?

3. Then I spotted the 200PDS Newtonian and HEQ5 with GOTO combo. Equatorial mount, shorter tube but still 200mm aperture, and dual speed focus. I have no experience with EQ mounts but would be willing to learn. I appreciate there's a knack to things like getting the eyepiece in the right position. Also would be better for long exposures if I do decide to explore astrophotography - but I'm unclear whether EQ is still considered important now that GOTO allows tracking for multiple short exposures and image stacking, to give the same overall exposure time as a single long EQ-mounted shot? How transportable would this combination be?

4. Alternatively, should I be ditching the idea of a reflector altogether and instead be looking at a refractor (probably can't afford anything more than 4 inches) or a 6 inch Cassegrain type (e.g. Nexstar 6SE - think the 8SE is over budget). What do people think about the StellaLyra 6" f/12 (in which case what GOTO mount would be advisable)?

Few other points people will want to know.

5. What I want to be using it for, in the city it's going to be limited to what can be seen which will be mostly Moon, major planets and any DSOs that poke through the haze. And on the occasional visit to dark skies it will be whatever I can find in it. But it will be to inspire me, and my children to appreciate the sky above us all the more and learn more about the wonders in it, starting from what we can find and see.

6. I expect it will be nearly all visual at first, though if possible I'd like to be able to add astrophotography or EAA later. I'm budgeting at present for a cheap eyepiece holder for my phone camera,  but would like to have a go at some of the deeper sky objects, and rather like the idea of tinkering with EAA at some later stage to get around issues like image rotation etc as an alternative to an EQ mount.

7. Budget. Not expecting to spend less than £500, could go up to about £1500 new, but seeing some nice stuff (all the above examples) second hand around the £900 mark. My wife's going to kill me if I get the 16 inch dob even though that's within budget and on special offer at the moment from FLO, so it's got to be no more than 10 inches, probably 8 inches tops or smaller. What's package with some form of GOTO will give me the best images from a reasonably transportable package for my budget?

 

[Elp]

It's refreshing you actually have an idea of what you're after in great detail.

Living in a bortle 7 myself you'll have to temper your DSO viewing abilities, solar system is fine, open star clusters fine. Anything else will be extremely difficult to see directly. I can just about make out a very very faint dim smudge of Hercules cluster where I am, and that's with averted vision through a 6 inch telescope. Looking at it directly it's invisible.

Imaging however is a completely different kettle of fish, can usually resolve bright objects in less than 10s and others in 60-120s and then spend hours imaging the same thing to get better signal, though imaging setups go up in price literally astronomically. It's why I image more than view due to the local environment restricting my viewing.

If you want something relatively portable (and I mean portable, not lift and carry a few steps), a small refractor might be the way to go. It's certainly the one I use the most (60mm WO Z61) and hasn't disappointed me in anything I've put it to (even Saturn which was effectively only around 2mm across in real in front of me dimensions). Imaging and visual it's been a fantastic scope. Paired with an azgti and carbon fibre tripod it truly is portable and can be packed into a small bag for further transportation. Its my main setup for imaging on the azgti converted to EQ mode. Automation does however have it's learning curves.

I'd start with the refractor on a manual alt az mount, paired with something like a Rigel quikfinder or telrad finder scope. Use stellarium or sky safari on your mobile phone and star finding and hopping becomes easy in the field. Once you've got some use out of such a setup, then start thinking about imaging.

If you want to image from the off, something like a Dwarf telescope, or pricier EVscope or Stellina might be the way to go though they will eventually be aperture/fixed focal length limited. Utilising a DSLR/mirrorless and lens with a star tracker is a good way to start in imaging too, just look at the Samyang 135mm forum, it's enough to question owning a refractor for imaging.

Edited April 2, 2023 by Elp

[Ags]

If you want to go to a nearby park for observing, I think a dob would be too bulky. Also, if you want to branch into casual imaging, the dob would be unsuitable. You would however be surprised by how much a small frac can show you.

I live in Bortle 8-9 and have done a lot of observing with a Zenithstar 66. Typically I use star hopping with a 50 mm finder scope, it’s not hard  I have generated a range of star hopping charts for double stars and DSOs - you can download these as PDFs from the link in my signature and have a look. They are optimized for mucky urban skies.

FLO sell the same scope I have by the way. it’s great fun for looking at brighter clusters, double stars and brighter nebulae. Unlike @Elp’s experience it shows the Hercules cluster well, just a ball of fuzz though, and brighter plametaries are easily visible. The Moon looks great and I preferred the rendition of Jupiter in the ZS66 to my C6.

For more aperture than the ZS66, consider a Skymax 127 or C6, although these are less suitable for astrophotography.

I’d mount them on an AZGTI and a sturdy carbon fiber tripod.

[Shimrod]

1 hour ago, Starfazed said:

 

3. Then I spotted the 200PDS Newtonian and HEQ5 with GOTO combo. Equatorial mount, shorter tube but still 200mm aperture, and dual speed focus. I have no experience with EQ mounts but would be willing to learn. I appreciate there's a knack to things like getting the eyepiece in the right position. Also would be better for long exposures if I do decide to explore astrophotography - but I'm unclear whether EQ is still considered important now that GOTO allows tracking for multiple short exposures and image stacking, to give the same overall exposure time as a single long EQ-mounted shot? How transportable would this combination be?

 

This would probably be even more awkward to carry than the Dob - at least three separate trips to carry the OTA, mount/tripod then counterweights and accessories.

I would second @Ags suggestion of refractor and AZ-GTI - which can later be converted with a wedge to provide an imaging platform. Alternatively if the park has some picnic benches, consider one of the smaller table-top goto dobs (such as the Heritage Virtuoso) which will be portable and give you a good visual experience.

[Cosmic Geoff]

It seems that you want something of reasonable aperture and also portable for visual use, and are also interested in imaging.

If operating from a city (with light pollution) and occasionally from a remote site ( with limited time) I suggest you really need GoTo if you are going to find much to look at.   A smaller scope, say 6" to 8" aperture would show you enough to keep you amused for quite a while.  You appear to have discounted SCTs (maybe because you didn't try one, unlike the Dobs), but a used 8" GoTo SCT would be within your budget and would be lighter and more portable than a GoTo Newtonian of the same aperture. It would also be easily adaptable for planetary imaging by attaching a planetary camera.

Equatorial GoTo would be a liability for visual use, as an alt-azimuth GoTo is much easier and quicker to set up and does all that is necessary.

You should regard imaging as a totally different project, and I would suggest that rather than plunging into serious deep-sky imaging you start by trying EVAA (q.v.) with a small refractor, a suitable astro camera, and either an alt-az or equatorial GoTo mount.   It might come as a shock to you to discover that even a 4" achro refractor, a ASI224MC camera and an alt-az mount will show as much or more detail on a deep-sky object than the big Dobs you crave. 

The mooted 200mm Newt on a HEQ5 is a beast you wouldn't want to transport further than your back garden, unless you are really keen to use it in a dark-sky area.  It would also be time-consuming to set up, and a beast to use, with the eyepiece potentially getting into awkward and near-inaccessible positions.

[Jules Tohpipi]

22 hours ago, Starfazed said:

2. Next on the list, a goto Dob. The 250 Skywatcher flex looks fabulous, but I'm not sure how easy it would be to cart 100m down the road (or to the car, which might be parked down the road too). Might be a squeeze to get through the door too. Sack trolley perhaps?

I’ve got the Sky-watcher 250 goto dob. Due to all the motors etc it’s very significantly heavier than the manual dobs you’ve already had a play with. Which are lightweights in comparison. Especially if having to lug it somewhere like to the centre of a grassy park. Sack trolley is only suitable for under 10 metres or so and on smoothish ground before all the rattling and bumps knocks it out of collimation or worse. 

Your particular scenario sounds ideal for either a refractor or mak or a small reflector on the Skywatcher AZ-GTI mount. It’s highly portable and the mount is goto and tracks. The youngsters can also connect their mobiles to it over Wi-Fi and control the telescope themselves to move to a selection of objects. Or you can even just push it around and use in full manual mode. Further down the line you can buy add-ons to convert it to equatorial mode for longer exposure photography - if you wish. 
 

A Skymax 127 mak will give you similar magnification and FOV as you’ve experience already with the dobs at the observatory. The view will be slightly dimmer and not quite as detailed but similar scale. Of course DSOs will be much dimmer than the big dobs. 
 

A Skywatcher ST102 refractor will be a different experience with a much wider FOV than the mak and dobs you’ve used. Image scale (magnification) will be smaller. It’s a choice to which presentation you prefer. 
 

A smaller dob will be somewhere between the two.

The AZ-GTI has a 5 kg limit to what telescope you can load onto it - hence the above recommendations. 
 

The above is not to say there are other equally valid options. But just the ones within my own personal experience. 

Edited April 3, 2023 by Jules Tohpipi

[Starfazed]

Many thanks for all the suggestions so far. In response,

On 02/04/2023 at 18:51, Shimrod said:

This would probably be even more awkward to carry than the Dob - at least three separate trips to carry the OTA, mount/tripod then counterweights and accessories.

I would second @Ags suggestion of refractor and AZ-GTI - which can later be converted with a wedge to provide an imaging platform. Alternatively if the park has some picnic benches, consider one of the smaller table-top goto dobs (such as the Heritage Virtuoso) which will be portable and give you a good visual experience.

 

On 03/04/2023 at 10:22, Cosmic Geoff said:

It seems that you want something of reasonable aperture and also portable for visual use, and are also interested in imaging.

If operating from a city (with light pollution) and occasionally from a remote site ( with limited time) I suggest you really need GoTo if you are going to find much to look at.   A smaller scope, say 6" to 8" aperture would show you enough to keep you amused for quite a while.  You appear to have discounted SCTs (maybe because you didn't try one, unlike the Dobs), but a used 8" GoTo SCT would be within your budget and would be lighter and more portable than a GoTo Newtonian of the same aperture. It would also be easily adaptable for planetary imaging by attaching a planetary camera.

Thanks, I was wondering how practical the 250 GOTO would be, and it sounds like it's not going to work if it has to be carried 100m away to set up. Sounds like in reality the scope would be mostly Moon, planets, and any DSOs that are visible through urban haze, with occasional treats to dark skies where it's all hands to the pump to see what's available. Plus maybe a bit of dabbling with EEA.

I hadn't noticed there's a 6 inch Goto version of the Skywatcher for £400, the Heritage Virtuoso GTI.  On paper that looks almost like the perfect solution - probably the largest aperture yet still easily portable telescope with Goto for anywhere close to that budget.

I've never used a Cassegrain type telescope so have no idea what to expect over a reflector of the same aperture. The Skywatcher 127 has a smaller aperture yet costs more than the Virtuoso. The Celestron 6SE has the same aperture yet costs three times as much, and I'd previously discounted the 8 inch SCTs/Mats etc as being above my budget so what extra do they offer above the Virtuoso? Unless I'm missing something, it feels like there's not much inbetween the Virtuoso at 6 inches and spending a great deal more for something at 7 or 8 inches with Goto. is that the case? Are no Goto AZ mounts available for a compact 8 inch reflector like the 200PDS? It feels like I have the budget and leaning for something with a slightly bigger aperture than the Virtuoso, but an 8 inch SCT is probably overkill. If we keep the budget at £1000 and I opt for the Virtuoso 150 that would still leave room for a no-frills 10 inch Dob, though I'd better not tell the other half....

So, with that in mind, can anyone recommend anything at 8 inches (which from brief experience plus looking at lots of images online struck me as being the sweet point for starting to get really nice stuff)?

And if the consensus is to check out the Heritage 150 Virtuoso GTI, besides the obvious mods (focuser PTFE and light shield) are there any extras such as really decent lenses that would take the viewing up a few notches?

 

[Elp]

I suspect your price differences are skewed due to the included mounts. The Celestron SCTs aren't so bad if you're buying them as OTAs, even more so if you're buying them used.

If you're happy with 8 inch aperture, note it won't be very portable at all including taking up room in the house. Due to the size of the Newtonian it'll be like a wind sail at the thought of a slight breeze so your tripod + mount will therefore need to be more substantial = more weight, size and cost. A dobsonian mitigates this somewhat.

The Newtonian will offer more crisp views compared to the SCT due to SCTs being enclosed and needing cool down time (this hasn't really affected the use of mine, I don't really give it time to cool and still use it for imaging and visual), I had a 130pds, but replaced it with a C6 as it was more versatile for my needs and much more compact.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Elp

[Ags]

You pay more for SCTs for the low weight and relative small size. I think they are a bit overpriced new, but there can be bargains. 

Edited April 4, 2023 by Ags

[Cosmic Geoff]

Note that I did have an 8" Newtonian + EQ-5 at one point, and I ditched it in favour of an 8" GoTo SCT, which did not cost me a lot of money, and has proved much easier to use and move around. (It is possible to pick up the whole assembly and carry it outdoors.)

Beyond the 5Kg class, your choice of separate alt-az GoTo mounts is largely confined to convertible AZ/EQ mounts with large price tags.

[Shimrod]

6 hours ago, Starfazed said:

Many thanks for all the suggestions so far. In response,

 

Thanks, I was wondering how practical the 250 GOTO would be, and it sounds like it's not going to work if it has to be carried 100m away to set up. Sounds like in reality the scope would be mostly Moon, planets, and any DSOs that are visible through urban haze, with occasional treats to dark skies where it's all hands to the pump to see what's available. Plus maybe a bit of dabbling with EEA.

I hadn't noticed there's a 6 inch Goto version of the Skywatcher for £400, the Heritage Virtuoso GTI.  On paper that looks almost like the perfect solution - probably the largest aperture yet still easily portable telescope with Goto for anywhere close to that budget.

I've never used a Cassegrain type telescope so have no idea what to expect over a reflector of the same aperture. The Skywatcher 127 has a smaller aperture yet costs more than the Virtuoso. The Celestron 6SE has the same aperture yet costs three times as much, and I'd previously discounted the 8 inch SCTs/Mats etc as being above my budget so what extra do they offer above the Virtuoso? Unless I'm missing something, it feels like there's not much inbetween the Virtuoso at 6 inches and spending a great deal more for something at 7 or 8 inches with Goto. is that the case? Are no Goto AZ mounts available for a compact 8 inch reflector like the 200PDS? It feels like I have the budget and leaning for something with a slightly bigger aperture than the Virtuoso, but an 8 inch SCT is probably overkill. If we keep the budget at £1000 and I opt for the Virtuoso 150 that would still leave room for a no-frills 10 inch Dob, though I'd better not tell the other half....

So, with that in mind, can anyone recommend anything at 8 inches (which from brief experience plus looking at lots of images online struck me as being the sweet point for starting to get really nice stuff)?

And if the consensus is to check out the Heritage 150 Virtuoso GTI, besides the obvious mods (focuser PTFE and light shield) are there any extras such as really decent lenses that would take the viewing up a few notches?

 

If you're asking about the difference between an 8" Newtonian and an 8" SCT, then the key differences (apart from a shorter tube) are that the focal length of the Newtonian will be shorter and the field of view in the SCT will be narrower. There are many objects (especially those visible in light polluted areas) which look much better with a wider field of view. Indeed some objects such as the Pleiades, Orion Nebula and Andromeda galaxy will not fit into the field of view of an 8" SCT so you could be missing out on some of the best targets. If you are still considering the 100m dash down the road to the park, bear in mind that while an 8" SCT might be lighter (around 15-20kg) it is still an awkward lump to carry and you will also be carrying accessories (battery, additional eyepieces etc). 

If you haven't read through it yet, the 'what can I see' thread is worth a look and may help you consider what you might want to achieve visually.  I still think if you want something that is portable (and can be easily loaded into a car), the small refractor on an alt-az mount (manual or goto) or the table top dob might be your best choice.

edit: just for reference, I have an 8" SCT on an AVX mount, but if I want to go any further than my garden, I have an AZ-GTI and choice of 61mm or 80mm refractors which I take out instead.

Edited April 4, 2023 by Shimrod

[Cosmic Geoff]

4 hours ago, Shimrod said:

while an 8" SCT might be lighter (around 15-20kg)

A C8 8" SCT OTA weighs about 6 Kg.  The SE6/8 mount weights about 6Kg.  An 8" f5 Newtonian OTA weighs about 10Kg.  You can expect a Dob base to be as heavy as the OTA. e.g. 60 lbs for the whole Dob outfit. 

[Starfazed]

Thanks - any suggestions for an 8 inch SCT (or Mak, or basically anything that's not a Newtonian), with Goto, and that won't break the bank? I could get a new 200 flextube or used 250 flextube with Goto for in the region of a grand, though sounds like they will be too unwieldy for my needs.

Alternatively FLO have a Celestron C6SLT for £760. That's nearly double the Virtuoso 150 GTI. Same aperture, more compact, longer focal length so less field of view and issues with cooling and dew versus collimation on the Skywatcher 150. What do I gain from paying double and getting the Celestron (or paying triple for the C6 SE)?? If it's better views of the planets in a heavily light polluted area that might possibly sway things, given I struggle to see much else at the moment through the haze. But earlier suggestion above was that in light polluted areas it would be better to go wider in the field of view. Put another way, Why is the 127 SCT so popular when it's got a relatively low aperture?

Bonus question - would any of the StellaLyra Cassegrain or Matsutovs fit on a goto mount and be a credible alternative to the Celestron?

[Shimrod]

12 hours ago, Cosmic Geoff said:

A C8 8" SCT OTA weighs about 6 Kg.  The SE6/8 mount weights about 6Kg.  An 8" f5 Newtonian OTA weighs about 10Kg.  You can expect a Dob base to be as heavy as the OTA. e.g. 60 lbs for the whole Dob outfit. 

I  was counting the whole package in the weight - OTA, ,mount and tripod. Even if 15Kg isn't too much to carry, the shape and size of an 8" SCT make it an awkward thing to carry.

10 hours ago, Starfazed said:

Thanks - any suggestions for an 8 inch SCT (or Mak, or basically anything that's not a Newtonian), with Goto, and that won't break the bank? I could get a new 200 flextube or used 250 flextube with Goto for in the region of a grand, though sounds like they will be too unwieldy for my needs.

 

I'd suggest trying to get to a showroom or local astronomy club to have a look at some telescopes. If you're looking at an 8" SCT have you given up on the idea of taking it down the road to the park?

[Cosmic Geoff]

Yes, you can pay a lot more than the cost of a Virtuoso for a Mak or SCT of similar aperture.  What you have to bear in mind is that the advantage of the more expensive setup may only be apparent once you try using it.  Try, for instance, using a filterwheel or a binoviewer with a Newtonian, or plugging in a planetary camera. Oh dear...

I have a 127mm Celestron Maksutov (similar to the Skywatcher offering). It's a really well-made instrument, a handy compact size, works really well for its aperture and I have no plans to sell it.

I had noticed the Celestron C6 SLT - superficially looking like a bargain, with almost a free mount (if you look at the price of an OTA only). But I acquired the same mount with my Mak, and it's just a beginners' wobble-mount which I try to avoid using.

One can now buy a new Windows 10 laptop for around £100, (yes, really) apparently good enough for basic emailing and typing etc . But would you want one?

My point is that you can buy cheap, or you can buy quality. Which you go for is up to you.

There is also the second-hand market.  SCTs in particular are heavily discounted when used and you can find some real bargains. 

10 hours ago, Starfazed said:

Bonus question - would any of the StellaLyra Cassegrain or Matsutovs fit on a goto mount and be a credible alternative to the Celestron?

You mean the Classic Cassegrains? Attractively priced, but with long focal ratios more suited to planetary work? The problem then is to pick a GoTo mount for it, bearing in mind the remarks above. An AZ/EQ should work, but at a cost.

[Elp]

10 hours ago, Starfazed said:

What do I gain from paying double and getting the Celestron (or paying triple for the C6 SE)??

https://telescopeobserver.com/complete-nexstar-guide-se-slt-evolution-comparison/

[happy-kat]

Within budget is the virtuoso 150p GTi, it's portable and at a height children can use (depending on age), place on a table or stool etc,

it's got freedom find, great with children as the mount can handle being nudged once aligned as it knows where it is

it's got goto, handy when wanting to share looking as can locate targets once aligned

it's got 6 inches of aperture, nice for visual

Attach a camera (ZWO astro camera can be controlled from a phone) and can have a go at EVAA with altaz tracking, see what others are managing with the same mount

An az-gti bundle might give more future change options where you'd have the mount just maybe swap the telescope later for a more imaging aligned one but it's surprising what you can start with.

 

[bosun21]

My two cents worth is for you to buy a Stella Lyra 8” dobsonian for your backyard and a 127 Maksutov go to for your trips to the dark sites. Both together they come in under your budget. If you so desire you can get a quality EQ platform made for you as I did. Whilst the Virtuoso is a decent enough scope it requires a light shroud and the focuser is helical which would struggle with a camera or DSLR. It would also need a platform to sit it on which you would also need to carry the 100m from your car.

Edited April 5, 2023 by bosun21
Typo

[Starfazed]

3 hours ago, bosun21 said:

My two cents worth is for you to buy a Stella Lyra 8” dobsonian for your backyard and a 127 Maksutov go to for your trips to the dark sites. Both together they come in under your budget. If you so desire you can get a quality EQ platform made for you as I did. Whilst the Virtuoso is a decent enough scope it requires a light shroud and the focuser is helical which would struggle with a camera or DSLR. It would also need a platform to sit it on which you would also need to carry the 100m from your car.

For goodness sake don't tell my wife I could get a portable goto and a bigger Dob for less than original budget, she'd kill me if I did that 🙂 Seriously though, there's nowhere to store more than one, and my attraction to the 200 or 250 GOTO was largely that it was much more portable. My back yard is hemmed in by other houses so very limited viewing potential, but there's a nice open field 100m away. But I'd have to carry everything there by hand, and consensus above seemed to be that it was too far to expect something to not need collimating by the time it got there.

Thus thanks to comments so far, I'm leaning somewhat towards the Heritage Virtuoso. I guess not optically quite as good as the 200 GOTO but looks far more compact for the loss of those two inches. The visual calculators of things I might want to watch seem manageable, though it would be nice if the planets could be a bit bigger to avoid disappointing the children..... What would be considered the highest practical magnification on a 150mm 750mm focal length scope (or smallest decent eyepiece), and what advantage if any do I gain by adding a Barlow? If if makes reduces field of view so I'm looking down a straw that's no good. But if it doubles focal length, does that effectively give me back the optical advantage that comes from a compact SCT design scope (like the C6SE, at three times the price)?

[Elp]

A Barlow is no substitute for native focal length as the f ratio increases the perceived image becomes dimmer and any chromatic abberation can become worse depending on paired eyepieces. It not to say it's a bad experience but do temper your expectations. You will be more aware of atmospheric seeing too at higher mag. A TV powermate will be better as they're better corrected but cost more than a humble Barlow which will do 75-80pc of the job. Also note your efforts to keep a planet in view by doubling the focal length will be increased, even more so if your eyepieces are narrow fov like the default 50 degrees.

[Guest]

Before you spend a dime or pound rather, find a astro club and go look at scopes.  Star parties are starting to pop up and amateur astronomers love to show off their toys.  Get your hands on them, ask questions.  Better to wait a while, gather information and make the right decision based on first hand information. 

As to go to, sure they are nice and fairly simple to use, but have you ever considered going old school and using a setting circle and angle gauge?  When properly aligned they are very accurate and once you figure it out you can find most anything you want in under a minute.  

Edited April 6, 2023 by Mike Q

[cajen2]

IMO your best compromise is the Heritage 150p Virtuoso. Yes, you'll need to buy/make a light shroud, but this is easily done, get a stout base for it to sit on (a three-legged stool is ideal) and use PTFE tape for the focuser. But none of this is difficult, you'll be way under budget and you'll get excellent views - the optics are much better than you'd suppose. Above all, it's a portable rig - I can easily pick up my manual version with one hand. The only caveat is whether you'll get on with the helical focuser: it doesn't bother me but some aren't keen.

[Cosmic Geoff]

12 hours ago, Starfazed said:

though it would be nice if the planets could be a bit bigger to avoid disappointing the children..... What would be considered the highest practical magnification on a 150mm 750mm focal length scope (or smallest decent eyepiece), and what advantage if any do I gain by adding a Barlow? If if makes reduces field of view so I'm looking down a straw that's no good. But if it doubles focal length, does that effectively give me back the optical advantage that comes from a compact SCT design scope (like the C6SE, at three times the price)?

You can quite easily get whatever magnification you like with any telescope by fitting a Barlow and/or short focal length eyepiece. Even dimestore telescopes with Hubble pictures of Saturn on the box offer high magnifications.  The question is whether the view is sharp or blurred, and whether the mount is stable enough to make using a high magnification practical.

The highest practical magnification depends on many factors, not least the quality of the atmospheric 'seeing' and also the target. Personally I hardly ever use a higher magnification than 250x with an 8" SCT.

You may well find backyard telescope views of the planets disappointing. Not being a particularly keen-eyed observer, I did, until I resorted to planetary imaging.

All these matters will become much clearer to you once you actually have a telescope and use it.

[Starfazed]

11 hours ago, cajen2 said:

IMO your best compromise is the Heritage 150p Virtuoso. Yes, you'll need to buy/make a light shroud, but this is easily done, get a stout base for it to sit on (a three-legged stool is ideal) and use PTFE tape for the focuser. But none of this is difficult, you'll be way under budget and you'll get excellent views - the optics are much better than you'd suppose. Above all, it's a portable rig - I can easily pick up my manual version with one hand. The only caveat is whether you'll get on with the helical focuser: it doesn't bother me but some aren't keen.

Thanks that's really encouraging to hear. I actually bought a 130 flextube as a Christmas present for a family member a few years ago and got to see it out the box, having since seen Crayfords I appreciate the limitations but expect I could tolerate it. Is it worth getting a Bahtinov mask (would one fit) to assist focus? What eyepieces, Barlows, other accessories if any have you tried it with?

I must be missing something but what's so good about catadioptic scopes of similar aperture that people pay three times the price of this for something like the C6SE, even the basic Celestron SLT or Astro FI  mentioned above is double the price of the Heritage. I appreciate that they have longer focal length at the expense of field of view, but if the atmosphere limits any 6 inch telescope to around 150x magnification, why would that design (or smaller like the 127) be more sought after for planetary observation if the Heritage can deliver the same view in a compact (at lest, once folded away) form factor and with a wider field of view for DSOs?

Finally, I just spotted a handful of elderly looking Meade LX200s of 8 or 10 inch size for between £1000 and £1500 in a second hand telescope store not a million miles away from where I live, but too far to go just for browsing. At the top of my original budget, and I'm guessing they are both technically more complex for a beginner to master and come with the risk of obsolescence and malfunctioning? Or are they so much more superior that they should be snapped up without questioning?

[cajen2]

I've never used a Meade EP of any description, so can't help there. As to a Bahtinov, I've never felt the need for one - I don't find it difficult to focus with the 250p, just different.

In the case of EPs, the 150p certainly rewards good optics. I use a variety, but mostly Baader Morpheus and Pentax XWs. Both really suit the scope. I hardly ever use a Barlow with it.

You're right about the mags: theoretically it should support 300x max, but that's unrealistic at those short focal lengths. I'd say about 200x is its practical limit but it feels more comfortable at 150x.