beginner's telescope, request for advice

[Naltar]

Hello,
I would be grateful for any thoughts/comments and possibly advice on the 'classic' - beginner's telescope. Disclaimer: I'm not the end user, my teenage daughter (17) is. Our 1st telescope purchase, a good few years ago, was a 100% failure (we broke the eyepiece, or mis-attached it and broke it in the process, even before she ever saw the telescope). In the meantime, she's been using... what I can only describe as a cheap-and-nasty 'toy' (how did we get there?!) that we bought for our younger son who had a fleeting interest in birdwatching. Nevertheless, our daughter has kept her interest in astronomy (she's also into astrobiology now).
I've done some basic research on scopes and settled, provisionally, on an Acuter voyager MAK-80 (approx. 165-170 quid), mostly based on the bbc sky at night review and lack of negative reviews elsewhere (other than one hilarious product description on grovers optics). What is additionally attractive to an idiot like me in this scope is that the setup is lightweight, 1.8kg, and comes with a ‘killer’ feature in a teenage context: mobile phone mount. Plus, if I understand correctly, with this scope mirror setup, the image is not reversed, so it can be used as a daylight scope. Occasionally I do take my son on cycling trips (wife and daughter don't enjoy this pastime, sadly), so the scope might get extra usage, as I hate when things sit unused.
Obviously, the 'lightweight' aspect needs a mount / tripod and the combination of light / cheap / nasty has not escaped me  
The dilemma is another telescope in the price range of around 200 quid, Skywatcher Explorer 130. Do I understand it correctly, that with explorer 130 we’d be getting - on paper at least – a significantly 'better' magnification, aperture, plus a tripod (cheap & nasty, presumably) and a red dot finder, plus a couple of other accessories, but losing, primarily, on portability (the ota is about 3.5 kg v.1.8 kg of mak-80), uninverted daylight view and that ‘key’ accessory i.e. mobile phone mount? Whether I like it or not, taking good photos is VERY high on the teenage list of must-have factors. However, given that thread:

- presumably it's not a major problem to get a mobile phone mount off ebay or aliexpress? Would anyone have specific recommendations, before I end up with a pile of mostly-useless plastic mounts? Ali / ebay IS like a box of chocolate.
I have no specific information, but speculate that another drawback of the Skywatcher Explorer 130 might be that it needs a bit more... initial ‘involvement’, e.g. calibration / collimation, or am I wrong?
And what about the quality of the tube assembly for the explorer 130? I do realise 'all' telescopes at this price point come from the same couple of Chinese plants, I'm just worried, that the current price difference between MAK-80 and Skywatcher Explorer 130, around £35 (retail), for which you get a mount/tripod and accessories, is not that large, which might suggest that they 'saved' on the quality of the tube assembly elements in explorer 130.
The last question, going back to the issue of photography and mobile phone mounts, is it not a gimmick, unless combined with motorised movement, given so little light comes in and that the sky, well, 'moves'? Or is it still possible to take decent pics of the moon and perhaps a couple of planets? (well, with a moon filter).
Regards,
N.

[Elp]

If imaging is of prime importance get a ZWO Seestar, nothing will come close to what it'll capture for the size, budget and simplicity of use, though it's limited on planets due to the short focal length.

Imaging via a scope isn't easy, the first priority is a very stable tripod, then a very stable tracking mount (though you don't need tracking if doing solar system objects but it makes it much easier).

For a started scope have you looked at FLOs (this site's sponsor) website as it has a section on starter scopes.

Edited May 16 by Elp

[Varavall]

1 hour ago, Naltar said:

The dilemma is another telescope in the price range of around 200 quid,

 

1 hour ago, Naltar said:

taking good photos is VERY high on the teenage list

Hi

I think these two statements are mutually exclusive! Is the budget really limited to £200? And taking good photos of what?

[happy-kat]

On the website mentioned in the price range indirectly mentioned by the OP could look at the starsense range as that will help find a target. Though the sky constantly moves so image taking is demanding as stars very easily trail and smear. The exception is the Moon and main planets as they are so bright, instead short video clips are taken and then these are processed in such like registax.

Your existing telescope if you share a photo might be easy to get replacement eyepieces, as generally they are a standard size. Or even if not the standard 1.25 size an adapter may be available. 

If you seek day time use too then I wouldn't look at this time an Equatorial mount, as it doesn't move is easy left right up down movements. 

For take out and about when cycling daytime use (note need specialist solar protection for sun viewing with a telescope) then a mak design telescope is much more compact and great for planets Moon etc like a mak102.

Enjoy the research the sky isn't going anywhere.

[Naltar]

15 hours ago, Elp said:

If imaging is of prime importance get a ZWO Seestar, nothing will come close to what it'll capture for the size, budget and simplicity of use, though it's limited on planets due to the short focal length.

Imaging via a scope isn't easy, the first priority is a very stable tripod, then a very stable tracking mount (though you don't need tracking if doing solar system objects but it makes it much easier).

For a started scope have you looked at FLOs (this site's sponsor) website as it has a section on starter scopes.

Sorry, I wasn't clear enough, when I meant 'good photos', I didn't mean 'professional-quality', etc. I meant it from a view-point of a teen-ager, from my observation, for teens, 'good-quality' is 128kbps mp3 files, and when you mention flac and 96khz etc, they give you a blank stare (I'm not arguing for this or that format, just by comparison). Likewise, 'good photos' for them is 'sharp / clearly visible, BIG objects (well, if big, then the Moon).
p.s. unfortunately, the ZWO Seestar is way out of the budget. We generally don't mind spending a lot of money, though I realise that 600 quid is NOT 'a lot' in the scope 'business', but teens' interest are relatively short-lived, and then the purchase gets relatively little use as we have found out with other products, though I'm generally a fan of high-quality products in any field of consumer goods. If interest is sustained long enough, then we'd look at transfer from 'a decent one' to 'a better one'.
p.s. I haven't looked at the FLO, no, thanks for this, I will have a look.
Regards,
N.

[Naltar]

14 hours ago, Varavall said:

 

Hi

I think these two statements are mutually exclusive! Is the budget really limited to £200? And taking good photos of what?

Again, my apologies for using the word 'good', which very much depends on who's using the word (and I should know that 'context rulez'). For an average person, a 'good' photo would be, I imagine, a 'relatively large' and sharp image of the Moon (yes, seriously) and, presumably, a photo of other planets big enough to distinguish them from a star. And, crucially, it's not the photo itself of course, as you can get better ones off 'internets', but a photo taken personally. Something to do with hunter mentality, perhaps

And we're looking to buy a product for somebody who's never looked through a proper telescope, and who's been delighted to capture Moon images with her mobile phone, by putting the phone lens against the viewpiece of a horrible plastic toy scope worth perhaps up to 30 quid. I suspect 'anything' would be a _significant_ improvement over that. If interest is... sustained, then we'll be happy to look higher 

Regards,

N.

[Elp]

The issue is, as you say a teens maybe limited interest, for me, once I saw the moon and Jupiter, Saturn and Mars, well I don't have that much interest in seeing them that much more. My interest is revealing all the wonderful deep sky objects you really cannot see visually but a camera will pick up over time. The point is maybe keep to your initial budget.

But, if you want to see planets large, you really need long focal length (like over 2000mm, a Barlow lens can help you magnify your focal length of a given scope, for example my C6 is 1500mm native, with a 2x Barlow that goes up to 3000mm). Going longer FL makes imaging more difficult as your tripod/mount has to be rock solid to prevent vibrations or dampen quickly when touched (this applies for any time of imaging and also visual), with a mobile of course over an eyepiece you can set a delay timer and take a photo accordingly, but you'll have to take many as you'll be fighting with atmospheric seeing, a dedicated planetary camera takes say 100+ FPS images every second. Also long focal length you'll have to keep nudging the scope along more often than a short FL scope to keep the object in view, something a goto/tracking mount alleviates.

Edited May 17 by Elp

[Naltar]

14 hours ago, happy-kat said:

On the website mentioned in the price range indirectly mentioned by the OP could look at the starsense range as that will help find a target. Though the sky constantly moves so image taking is demanding as stars very easily trail and smear. The exception is the Moon and main planets as they are so bright, instead short video clips are taken and then these are processed in such like registax.

Your existing telescope if you share a photo might be easy to get replacement eyepieces, as generally they are a standard size. Or even if not the standard 1.25 size an adapter may be available. 

If you seek day time use too then I wouldn't look at this time an Equatorial mount, as it doesn't move is easy left right up down movements. 

For take out and about when cycling daytime use (note need specialist solar protection for sun viewing with a telescope) then a mak design telescope is much more compact and great for planets Moon etc like a mak102.

Enjoy the research the sky isn't going anywhere.

Thanks for the tips, re. daylight use, I only mentioned it as a 'potential', it's all so easy to 'think' about taking it on a cycling trip, and very much different actually doing it. That said, SkyMax-102S AZ is... interesting (though 'mobile' daylight use is pretty much discounted given the weight, but it's not essential).

Regards,

N.

[Cosmic Geoff]

From what you say it might be best to buy a low cost dual use telescope (astro/terrestrial). Despite being in astronomy for several years I have never come across the Acuter brand, though it may be OK.  However, IIRC, both Celestron and Sky-watcher make  small Maksutovs suited to portablity and dual use.  On the portability front, one of the forum members made up a back pack for a 127mm Maksutov. However, if the aim is to photograph bright objects (not requiring long exposures or tracking), there is no need to venture further than your backyard.

The further you venture photographically from the Moon, the more difficult taking pictures with a smartphone is likely to become. 

To take impressive planetary images (rather than 'that blob or dot is Jupiter' 🙂) requires some expensive kit.

Edited May 17 by Cosmic Geoff

[happy-kat]

15 minutes ago, Naltar said:

Thanks for the tips, re. daylight use, I only mentioned it as a 'potential', it's all so easy to 'think' about taking it on a cycling trip, and very much different actually doing it. That said, SkyMax-102S AZ is... interesting (though 'mobile' daylight use is pretty much discounted given the weight, but it's not essential).

Regards,

N.

interesting the skymax102 is also bundled with the starquest mount, default is manual but I gather can be used in EQ mode or AZ plus when in EQ arrangement there is a motor that can be bought separately for the mount

[Varavall]

1 hour ago, Naltar said:

And we're looking to buy a product for somebody who's never looked through a proper telescope

Maybe something like this, if you have luck in the bidding

https://www.the-saleroom.com/en-gb/auction-catalogues/hose-rhodes-dickson/catalogue-id-srhos10119/lot-482a563f-fc63-43ce-8471-b16f00ce5b49?queryId=84af771fa950da137f8a6971559a0d0d

If you buy something at a good price of respectable quality, you could probably sell it again for the what you paid.

There are bargains to be had. In the last few years I have ppicked up a couple of Takahashi telescopes for around £300 a piece.

Edited May 17 by Varavall
Additional material

[Carbon Brush]

I would add the usual cautions about an inexperienced buyer considering 2nd hand goods.

The auction price is going to be very high. What with auction house fees, their packing charge, then shipping cost.
The bottom line is way way more than the bid price.
All for a (small) scope that may have problems.
If I lived a few miles from the auction house, I might be tempted to pop my head around the door. But online, based on a single photo - no thank you.

I once bought 'new' Celestron MAK scope from Amazon Warehouse for about 2/3 of new price. Customer return - fully checked, etc.
It had a big blob of grease easily visible inside the corrector plate. Very poor packing. Need I go on?
Fortunately Amazon took it back for refund without argument.

[Second Time Around]

I had the same astro/terrestrial requirements for 2 of my grandkids.  I bought them a Starsense Explorer 70mm refractor (£179). 

In my experience, by far the most common reason for giving up astronomy is not being able to find objects.

The great thing about the Starsense Explorers is that they make finding objects so easy - even my 8 year old had no problem.  You use it with almost any modern smartphone, and there's even an option to set it up so that it talks to you about many of the objects you're looking at.  So it's perfect for today's youngsters.

Also, because the 70mm Starsense Explorer is the least expensive of the series it's very easy to sell for a good price.  Indeed, many of us (including me!) have bought one just for the Starsense Explorer itself.  We've then used a 3D printed adapter to use it on all our scopes.

By the way, don't be tempted by the slightly bigger 80mm model.  It has a smaller field of view, so for instance won't show all the Pleiades all at once.  It also comes with the same mounting as the 70mm and so won't be as stable.

Edited May 18 by Second Time Around
Spelling. Talking is optional.

[Chandra]

3 hours ago, Second Time Around said:

I had the same astro/terrestrial requirements for 2 of my grandkids.  I bought them a Starsense Explorer 70mm refractor (£179). 

In my experience, by far the most common reason for giving up astronomy is not seeing able to find objects.

The great thing about the Starsense Explorers is that they make finding objects so easy - even my 8 year old had no problem.  You use it with almost any modern smartphone, and it even talks to you about many of the objects you're looking at.  So it's perfect for today's youngsters.

Also, because the 70mm Starsense Explorer is the least expensive of the series it's very easy to sell for a good price.  Indeed, many of us (including me!) have bought one just for the Starsense Explorer itself.  We've then used a 3D printed adapter to use it on all our scopes.

By the way, don't be tempted by the slightly bigger 80mm model.  It has a smaller field of view, so for instance won't show all the Pleiades all at once.  It also comes with the same mounting as the 70mm and so won't be as stable.

I very much agree with our fellow's opinion. The Star Sense range from Celestron is an excellent option to get started, although in my case I would reject the 127mm reflector model.

It is an innovative "push to" system that is not based on the gyroscope and accelerometer of your smartphone, nor on encoders installed on the mount, but rather uses the cell phone camera to take images and resolve them in specific software previously installed. The support has a simple mirror whose reflection coincides with the mobile camera. With a few small controls, the correct centering is achieved so that what is displayed in the center of the smartphone camera screen coincides with the optical axis of the telescope. From then on, it becomes a plate solver and is able to orient itself quite precisely in the night sky to guide you in the search for any celestial object, particularly faint objects that you would otherwise spend a lot of time trying to locate with the classic "star jumping" method. Although it usually requires good observing conditions, with clouds or the glare of the full Moon it may fail by not obtaining the necessary references.

Almost two years ago I purchase a 70mm refractor as a gift for a beginner. Before delivering it, I wanted to test both the optical tube and the Star Sense system, and both passed the test with flying colors. I was even surprised by the good optical quality of the lens, which I think makes this tube a great bang for the buck. The stars were very sharpened (it arrived in a perfect collimation status) and, although chromatic aberration was present, it didn't bother me at all (CA ratio = 3.63). The focuser, despite its simplicity (the typical linear r&p), it worked fine. The two eyepieces that came in the pack are basic but correct (I think they are a modified achromatic design, MA), the 2x Barlow is better to change as soon as possible. I added a 6mm Plössl eyepiece to the pack to better complete the magnification range. The mount and tripod were basic, made of very light aluminum, so I devised a device to suspend a weight of at least 2-3 kg from the center of the eyepiece tray, which gave greater stability to the setup. Precisely its lightness makes it a good grab and go.

As Second Time Around explains, the 80mm is tempting, 1cm more aperture for little more money, but you have to consider that there are 20cm more focal length and more weight in the same mount, therefore more lever arm and greater instability... Perhaps the most reasonable option would be to jump to the 102mm, which is already mounted on a seemingly more solid support, but the cost already exceeds, I'm afraid, your budget.

Since the ability of the telescope to take images is important to you, I attach some photos and videos of the Moon and Sun that I took in my tests. They were taken with a Galaxy S20FE and a Celestron NexYZ smartphone adapter. Solar photos, of course, with the corresponding Baader Solar Safety film. In this case, I didn't do the test with planets, but I still think it would be perfectly possible to take short videos as they travel through the field of view, and even also images of some bright DSOs using low-light photography applications.