Upgrading- Which to go for refractor or SCT?

[Patw#73]

Though relatively new to the whole thing, I'm now at the point where i'm ready to upgrade.

I've currently got a nexstar 4se and I've started to notice its shortcomings.

I've got a budget of about £1000 and I am considering either a refractor or a SCT. My question is what are the pros and cons for each. Do the two types lend themselves particularly well to a certain type/style of astronomy, if so what are they?

Any thoughts or comments would be appreciated.

Thanks

[arad85]

SCT - long focal length so high magnifications possible but field of view smaller, lots of light gathering ability for price. Central obstruction causes the image to be not as sharp as through a refractor. Colours not quite as easy to pick out (at least my experience). Larger versions need a solid sturdy stand (pricey). Need to be collimated (but then once you learn how to do that, it isn't an issue).

Refractor - smaller focal length so less magnification, but great for widefield views. Easier to do astrophotography with (take a look in the deep sky imaging section to see what I mean) due to shorter focal length. Image is crisper than SCT due to no central obstruction. Bigger versions/better manufacturers are very costly...

Hope that helps - I'm sure others will add/correct as appropriate.

[Psychobilly]

So thats 1000 for the Scope and Mount then...?

The bug must have bitten pretty well... any preference for Visual or Astrophotography ... now or in the near future?

Sorry to answer a question with more questions but it may well effect teh answer...

Peter...

[Matthew.Blake]

Dobsonians - Skywatcher Skyliner 300P FlexTube AUTO

£1045 for 12" of aperture with tracking so you don't have to keep nudging. Mmmmmm.

[Ben Ritchie]

To add another question to Peter's one, how important is portability to you?

An SCT is a pretty decent "jack of all trades", although to me the decreasing price of refractors has taken away many of the reasons to own a smaller (8" or below) ones. A refractor will give high-quality views, but has fairly limited aperture and won't be popping faint galaxies unless you're under ultra-dark skies.

If you're purely visual and don't need portability then a 10" or 12" dobsonian is huge "bang for the buck",you need to find your way around the sky for yourself but that quickly becomes easier and there are plenty of people here to help you as you get started.

[pbyrne]

The dreaded fever claims another victim.

Do you have any particular targets in mind?

The SCT is great for the moon and planets and narrower fields of view.

The refractor is a wonderful piece of kit for those stunning views of the Milky Way.

There are a number of other considerations with refractors, there are short focal length instruments, f/5, f/6 and longer focal lengths f/10. Again the shorter focal lengths are for wide field views with the longer focal lengths for the moon, planets and doubles. A long focal length refractor is a long instrument and you might find yourself lying on the ground to observe.

Sorry to be asking more questions of you but it's important you know exactly what you are after.

FWIW i'd like to add my vote for the dob.

Paul

[Patw#73]

Portability and space are quite important constraints for me, so i think a dob would be a bit too unwieldy.

At the moment I'm loving visual and getting to know the sky out there, but I've been playing with a neximage so I'm thinking that I'm going to need something suitable for astrophotography.

Why didn't some one warn me that astronomy is so addictive?!

[Patw#73]

Just to answer the question on targets.

I started off wanting to concentrate on lunar and planetry observing but then got hooked trying to split tricky doubles, and after that got a bit frustrated not quite being able to get good views of clusters and nebulars.

So i suppose i want a bit of everything. Is it that i may have to sacrifice one aspect in favour of another?

[Psychobilly]

Addictive and can get very expensive...

The most important thing.. is get the choice of mount right... chances are a larger proportion of the budget will be (if not it should be) spent on the mount... A decent mount will allow you to use a far greater range of scopes on it in the future...

I wish I had gone for a decent GEM mount (EQ-6) ratehr than the fork mounted CPC800XLT... although I haev been lucky enough to be able to overcome most of its shortcommings by making my own Pier and wedge... to use it in EQ mode... I spend mopst of my time (well at least i think i used to seeign as its so long since i was able to get out last) imaging through a piggy backed short tube refractor using modified Canon DSLR's... The SCT was largely used just as a guidescope although I ahev since added a seperate guiding setup so can image through both the Refractor and the SCT at teh same time...

Have a look around and see what you think will interest you the most...

Peter...

Theres really not a "one scope" solution...

Peter...

[blinky]

I would say the SCT gives you the best of both - F10 for high mag/narrow FoV but add a reducer £70 or so and you have an F6 scope. That was my reason for getting one, Oh and it's smaller and less weildy than a newt.

[Matthew.Blake]

Why not upgrade your mount to an EQ6 then carry on saving for a bigger tube to put on it. Once you have the EQ6 you won't need another mount for a long while and can just look at buying OTAs.

[neilmack]

Someone once described a telescope as a compromise you look through. A thousand pounds spent on a refractor and on an SCT will produce two dramatically different sets of compromises - and the only judge can be you. Before spending your money you really need to take - or make - every opportunity to look through competing designs and decide which delivers what you're looking for. Years ago I wasted a small fortune on compound telescopes that offered great value for money, light grasp, magnification. But I didn't enjoy any of them. Now I know that **for me** only a refractor will do. But they're terribly expensive - and cumbersome - in the larger apertures so most of us refractor enthusiasts settle for much less aperture than users of mirror telescopes. In short, your own eyes will tell you which is the right telescope - so get to every club meet and star party you can!

The advice to look at the mount is very sound. A solid accurate mount will let any instrument give of its best - and conversely too small a mount will limit the performance of the best telescope.

Good luck with your quest.

Neil McCaughan

[Catanonia]

interesting thread as I am too comtemplating a Newt / SCT to compliment my two refractors and the info here is good.

Thanks