First Telescopes

[TheBFG]

This has probably been covered but i have been reading alot of advice for newbies like myself and nowhere that i have seen does it mention size, weight and ease of use.

eg. The best telescope is the one you use most.

I think people should be made aware about size ease of setup up etc when looking.

If this is a useless thread the please delete:iamwithstupid:

Oops probably the wrong thread aswell

[JamesM]

I don't think you're wrong there. I will always bang on (though not always a popular view) about the fact that people should ALWAYS try before they buy. To qualify this, I will always suggest, particularly to newbies, that they go along to observation nights via a local astronomy club, join and contact people on this forum to check out whether there is a local observing group in their area or lastly (the best one of all) getting along to a star party.

The star party is the best for a newbie because it will showcase the widest selection of kit, unlike certain retail outlets that only demonstrate certain makes that they are agents for. More importantly, all astronomers will modify the kit to improve it (e.g spotter scopes, focusing mechanisms etc) and thereby provide evidence of the failings of the original purchase. Also by talking to these astronomers, you can glean the reasons why they bought that model as opposed to other similar kit.

Lastly, and the one I feel most passionately about is that by having, as you rightly suggest, better knowledge about what you're buying, you will be less likely to be disappointed. I can never understand what a 'beginner's scope' is? I don't go into an opticians and ask for a beginner's pair of glasses! Will the scope match a person's expectation - well it might if they were in a position to make an informed choice about what they were getting. Some manufacturers detail the specification of a mirror or a lenses which can help as a starting point. One night I overheard a fellow observer talking to a newbie about his scope's mirror with the comment, "...looks like you've got a good one there", but why should it be that there is any 'gamble" in it at all. I've never seen written on the side of the box, "well you pays your money and you takes a chance" and it's simply not good enough. Sure the kit today is far better AND cheaper than it has ever been, but my point is that in the absence of any benchmark standard, a new person is unable to quantify exactly what they're buying and ultimatley whether it will fulfill their expectations. Some bright spark writing to the Sky At Night magazine suggested that maybe they could help instigate or at least promote the idea of a standards scheme whereby any scope that was not 'approved' was clearly not worth buying and would result in helping the market to get rid of those silly scopes that advertise 400X magnification - guess what, they weren't interested! Compared to the number of sites selling equipment, I have only seen a handful of sites that give any indication of what a person is likely to see through a certain size or type of scope.

Apologies for banging on there but like you I too wish there was more information but then, I might not have discovered this forum.

Clear skies

James

[robhal9000]

Hi,

That's something I try to stress re: expectations and 'ease of use'. Especially at this time of the year. My short frac on a tripod is great for just grabbing for a quick look around on these short nights.

I recently advised a member of our gaming group (Legion of Sparta, LoSC) on which scope to get as a starter, and a little SW Black Diamond Mak 90 was the result, because it ticked the boxes and now he is just waiting for a clear night:-). Dobs and Newts didn't even get a mention because various, non-aperture, factors were more important.

[LukeSkywatcher]

I wont harp on about my 1st scope being a 90EQ. I was just happy to be able to afford a scope with the EP at the right end for me (wheelchair user). I didnt consider that the whole setup weighed 28Lbs and that i would have to make 3-4 trips indoors to bring all the parts outside and put it together. 3-4 trips inside would be fine if i actually had a wheelchair ramp at my backdoor...............but i dont so it took a hell of a lot of effort.

Anywhoo.............now i have a SW Heritage 130P Dob and i can carry it with one hand and be outside and setup in a couple of mins.

I cant sing this scopes praises enough and i do tend to harp on about it (if and when) but i dont care because it really has opened up this hobby for me.

My 90EQ is now relagated to being purely for solar observing and i have trimmed it down by removing the counter weights and basically use it as an ALT-az now for observing the sun.

When astronomy gear deals you lemons................make lemonade.

[Capricorn]

Many have said that your best scope is the one you use the most. Equally it is often lost in the torrent of opinion.

I have 3 scopes and the one I use the most is the oldest, smallest and cheapest one, also the lowest specification. But it is easy to use, I can pick it up in one hand and go anywhere.

On the CN site someone posted about their excellent experience of an ED 80, seems they were very impressed and mentioned a bigger scope. The next post said never, never, never sell the 80 as it is an almost universally good do anything scope. Never see that on UK forums.

[kniclander]

maybe the truth is, everyone loves the scopes they own:). I guess, so long as you

stay away from things that are really poorly mounted you will have a great time with whatever you have because being out under the stars is just great:)

[brantuk]

It might be worth mentioning that anyone buying a first scope of any sort is not going to be using it much in the summer. They need to be hardy enough to spend long nights in the freezing cold depths of winter to do anything really useful with it.

I'm sure a lot of folk have ideas of warm summer nights in the garden with familly and friends, whereas the reality is you'll find yourself on your own at 3 in the morning, off the beaten track in a dark layby or farmers field somewhere due to light pollution lol.

It's not just a question of picking a scope.

[Ogri]

My first purchase of a starter 'scope, was a SW Heritage 130P like Paul's, for my father. And a very good 'scope it is too.

My second starter 'scope purchase (my own) had different parameters to the 'scope dad had (including the fact that it be 'different' to the Heritage 130P so dad could enjoy a different experience using it too), and included reasoning such as brantuk's "It might be worth mentioning that anyone buying a first scope of any sort is not going to be using it much in the summer. " I think that truth is very, very important.

My demands of the 'scope were:

Must be within the limit of what I can physically take on my motorbike when touring;

Be light;

Quick and easy to set up, as well as pack up and store;

Easy to use;

Good for widefield DSO use until such time as I acquire mastery of light strengths so I don't damage my eyes (specific health based grounds to myself, and not specifically applicable to anyone else);

'Ok' for Moon and Planets once I do, until I can get another telescope that'd be better in that regard;

Hopefully brilliant value for what it is;

A purchase I can always keep, and will always 'want' to keep;

Terrestrial use as well as astronomy, to 'double the value', in line with 'the best 'scope is the one you use the most' (something which makes it highly usable in that otherwise fairly inactive Summer period too);

Standard focuser interface, so I can upgrade diagonals (and focuser eventually) and get a selection of eyepieces and filters that should be usable with any follow on 'scope.

It finally came down to an ST102 on an AZ3 vs. an ST120 on an AZ3 (despite wanting an EQ mount at some point, such a mount is right out to carry for motorbike touring, and as a bonus, the AZ3 package from FLO came with the terrestrial 45* diagonal, which meant I could pretty much dive straight in for a 2" mirror diagonal).

I read many reviews (and then some!), many raving in favour, some raving against, and finally settled on the ST120, prepared to put up with perhaps excessive CA.

It's done what I wanted it to do, dad enjoys the views through it as well, I'm really getting on top of the filtering now (budget has meant that's slower than I would have liked, but that's ok, I just stuck to the nice DSO stuff), I can see the Moon and Planets 'ok' (it's surprised me in good viewing, with very nice views at 150 x mag), the CA is nowhere near as bad as I was led to believe, it really is terrific for terrestrial use, and . . . .

I would buy this 'scope again in a heartbeat.

A Dob is on the agenda now, so please don't think I am 'anti-Dob' or anti-reflector. But it's perhaps easy to disregard the sheer value that some refractor packages offer, and if motorbike touring hadn't been such a particular importance to me, I could have been strongly tempted by this route Evostar - Skywatcher Evostar 90 (EQ3-2) and then added a complementary 150p OTA at some point (and motors *grins*).

I've rambled on again, sorry.

[pwalsh61]

As someone who has yet to buy a 'scope I can vouch for the fact there are almost as many opinions out there as there are stars! I'm a terrible procrastinator so see-saw between a refractor or a newt, EQ or Alt-Az, manual or synscan/go-to, DSOs or Solar System. Oh, and I'd like to do imaging too! Just when I think I've made up my mind, I see something that sways me the other way!

Though some images published give details of equipment used, they don't always convey how much work goes in to producing the final image. Consequently, newcomers may get the impression that all they have to do is attach a DSLR to a scope, point it at a galaxy/nebula, press the shutter release and hey presto, an image to rival anything Hubble can produce!

Reality (as I see it anyway):

1. Serious imaging requires serious outlay, primarily on the mount which should be rock-solid and be able to track accurately and smoothly over long periods.
   
2. The less the mount is disturbed, the better, so an ideal situation would be for it to be pillar-mounted in a converted shed/observatory.
   
3. The top-notch mounts and tripods are hefty items. Though setting up may be OK, taking down is likely to be more problemmatic, bearing in mind it will be late (or v.v early! ) so tiredness will increase the apparent weight of items. Tiredness means increased likelihood of accident with unpleasant consequences for 'scope and/or observer!
   
4. DSOs require as much aperture as possible but short focal length (f/5 or faster)
   
5. SSOs (Solar System Objects) require long focal length to get the magnification required to resolve details. Aperture is also important, to counteract the loss of light brought on by high magnification
   
6. There's no "one size fits all" 'scope!
   
7. Where there's a problem with light pollution, use of a dark site is desirable. This, in turn, means that any equipment should be easily transportable and easy to set up quickly.
   

The following view North from my back garden shows an example of the light pollution I have to contend with:

Twitpic - Share photos on Twitter

18mm, ISO1600 13s @ f5.0 23:23 12 Jun 2010

Though a fair proportion of the light is residual twilight, and the trees are blocking a couple of nearby sodium lights. Unfortunately they're deciduous trees, so when darker nights return and darker northern skies the street lights will become more intrusive. Can't win, eh?!

As others have said, newcomers should be encouraged to attend star parties and get chatting with others and ask to see the same object (Orion nebula, for example) through different scopes.

Paul

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

For beginners scopes portability is indeed really important, and I would downplay the need for "serious imaging" requirements (serious DSO imaging is not really for beginners). To really get hooked on the hobby you need a decent alrounder, and the Newtonian design is probably best in terms of inches per euro/pound/dollar/ningi/insert currency here. It is not best in terms of portability, the crown there goes to SCTs and their ilk.

Despite the remarks of Paul, my SCT is quite all right for DSOs, provided I do not do any imaging! For ease of transport to dark locations (or holidays) a Mak or SCT or other Cassegrain derivative is ideal. Even my 8" can be set up on an equatorial mount quickly, a 5 or 6" is a doddle to set up and use a lot. The only drawback of these scopes is their price, when compared to similar aperture Newtonians.

[eddie3000]

I am a newbie too in this astronomy hobby, so I'm not really the right person to decide what a beginner's scope is. But I believe in one thing based on my own experience, something I read over and over in various forums too. If you don't have loads of cash and you really are serious about getting into a hobby, get yourself decent stuff, even if it means saving for some time, and stay away from cheap stuff! Buying cheap stuff is a waste of money. Patience pays for itself. (I have to admit I nearly bought a cheaper scope a couple of times, and now I'm glad I didn't).

I couldn't afford to buy the whole kit in one go, so I first bought myself a decent equatorial mount over a year ago, which I have successfully used for astrophotography using just my DSLR and a lens. After a year of saving, I have finally forked out for a decent scope and a few eps.

Basically, if you are poor, spend good money on good stuff. I, unfortunately, have learned the hard way with other hobbies.

[Macavity]

I think the twin factors of observing site and physical capabilities are very significant. Or rather, if both are good, you certainly have greater flexibility. I'm also quite careful not to (overly?) recommend (denigrate!) equipment which I have never actually used. But that's not a bad life principle generally?

Folks are generally accommodating and gentle re. other peoples first choices. But, looking back, I do start to wonder if my foray into astronomy was not delayed by the onetime notion that there was this "minimum requirement" for a useful scope. Mine were often quite a bit below this! It good to learn critical appraisal, less good to reject ideas outright? Fortunately, decent scopes are much more affordable now...

[Capricorn]

Find that here (UK) there is as Macavity says an idea that you need at least a minimum size, and often this isn't small.

Secondly, too much of a cry of it has to be a dob. Sorry it really gets boring.

If you visit something like cloudy nights there are sections that cover astronomy with a 60mm scope. They are well read and much advice and support given.

If you said you were going to get a 60mm scope here you would get told a waste of time, don't bother, are you having a joke and they cannot see anything so why waste your time/money.

Have seen one or two posted here when people have mentioned 60mm scopes they could get. Sometimes free.

The CN/US approach is you are getting into astronomy so welcome to the madhouse and here's some advice, information, pointers.

Someone on CN said a 60 mm is not the ideal way to start, but it is very often the way that many do. You have to start somewhere and if it is going to be 60mm then stop being critical and be supportive.

[Llamanaut]

I think this is a valid and very important post so thanks for raising it. When i bought my 300p dob the thing that took me aback most was the size of the beast despite me reading up on the scope nowheer does it mention the area it covers. Its a absolutely fantastic scope and i love it dearly but i can imagine some people would read the literature and not expect it to arrive in 3 huge boxes weighing 45 kg! The largest box was the size of a coffin, i kid you not!!! I started on a 60mm tasco at 14 and saw plenty, my father in law gave me a 60mm prinz astral 400 for free and i used that successfully for a few months, i bought a 76mm reflector from scopes n skies and had some exquiste if small views but views neverthe less! My bresser 70mm reflector gives me more than adequate views of the moons craters and rilles and with a solar filter i regulalrly look at the sun... who says size is everything... the important thing is getting out amongst the stars and enjoying what you do.

When i bought the 300 i expected to see deep sky objects from my back garden... wrong! I failed to locate the leo triplets despite having a scope the size of jodderel bank... however when i took it to a dark sky site just 10 miles outside of town the triplets were there all along!

[Moonshane]

this is a great discussion. it's really interesting to see everyone's views and different criteria when choosing scopes. agree with the advice to try and get a look through the equipment you wish to buy. ideally as has been said link up with someone, anyone and you'll get good advice from them and off this forum.

although I am a relative newbie myself (I only really started in October) I am very fortunate that at last as my wife is now working again (after our joint decision she should be at home with the girls - deciding to become a teacher - getting her A levels and a 2:1 English BA - and then a job - she's not only amazing for putting up with my obsessions!) that we have some spare cash to allow 'spends' and also that I had some valuable but unused books to sell to buy equipment.

therefore as with most of the hobbies I get involved in, I dived straight in at the deep end and bought a 120mm refractor (the Celestron below) which I really like and will probably always keep. I bought this specific one as it was 'going cheap' at £269 rather than £400 and got good reviews etc. It also satisfied my need for good images, a good mount and was also closer to the birdwatching scopes I had used previously than the others I saw.

this was quite quickly followed maybe 3 months later by a 150mm reflector and liking this and after a lot of help on this forum, decided to plunge in and get a 12" dobsonian and sell the smaller reflector. The dob is now the first scope I 'reach for' and definitely my preferred choice.

I like the scopes for different reasons and again decided early on that for me at least two scopes would be a good thing. here's a summary of the good and bad etc for the scopes I have I hope it helps someone else.

Refractor

Pin sharp optics and great contrast

Nice mount tracks objects well

Nice viewing position

Quick cool down

No maintainence

Takes up much more room than the dob

Slow set up/break down time (but no major cooling issues)

Looks like a proper scope

Excellent for moon, planets, double stars, open clusters and brighter DSOs

Struggles with galaxies and although globulars are easily found, not much resolution

Dobsonian

Sharp optics and good contrast but not to standard of refractor - diffractions spikes present

Simple mount is rock slid with almost no vibration even if knocked or when moving and focusing

Regular collimation required (I do this for every session but it takes less than a couple of minutes).

Easy to track targets

Nice viewing position

Slow cool down

Takes up much less room despite size

Quick set up/break down time - but cooling about an hour

Looks like a cannon - very impressive

As good if not better than the refractor for for moon, planets, but sometimes not double stars. Open clusters and DSOs are far better

Galaxies still dim but much more noticeable even in LP sky

Globulars are easily found, and occasionally jaw dropping as are a number of the brighter DSOs.

Both of these scopes are keepers for me. I also decided a while ago to buy good quality eyepieces and have not regretted this for a minute but that's another story.

The trouble with this hobby is that there's so much shiny gear for us Magpies that we all 'need' and you can get carried away. I cannot recall who said this but another member's comments stuck with me.

It went along the lines of buy scope A and maybe eyepiece B. See how you get on with that for at least a month or two, maybe more. While using them, make mental or physical notes about what you feel you cannot achieve with the gear you have. If you still feel that you need it after the above period then research it and buy what will fill this need. Making each purchase on this basis will make it a more efficient way of building your collection of gear and for a specific reason/need.

This is really good advice. Also, think about buying used. most of my gear is bought used and I have never been sold a lemon yet. if you do, like a used car, you do not lose the depreciation from new and can always sell again for not much less if for some reason you don't get on with it. Don't keep gear you won't use as there's always a willing buyer for most things and you can then fund your next purchase. There's a constant churning of good gear on here. eventually it is bought by someone that settles on it and it remains with them.

Sorry I have rambled on a bit here but this looks like a thread that will be useful for beginners and therefore I thought it a good idea to say what I like about the scopes I have.

[Earl]

Not really along the same as this thread but is does fit in...

Hubble images have opened the eyes of many people to the beauty of the universe, and have drawn many people into the hobby, but at the same time its a two edged sword, as all these nice things are not visible as we see them in the photos.

[michael.h.f.wilkinson]

True indeed, a colleague of mine was quite disappointed when I showed him his first REAL galaxy. He like M57 though, and Saturn of course.

[ollypenrice]

I agree that this has been a thread which has produced very high quality observations. (I suppose that that just means ones with which I generally agree! Oh dear, the arrogance...)

Butting in rather late like this I would go back to an early post that said 'Get along to star party (or astrosoc) and have go with various scopes.' What advice could be better than that?'

Capricorn said 'On the CN site someone posted about their excellent experience of an ED 80, seems they were very impressed and mentioned a bigger scope. The next post said never, never, never sell the 80 as it is an almost universally good do anything scope. Never see that on UK forums.'

I don't know why he (she?) said that because the ED 80 has to be the most raved about small scope ever made, and rightly so. I have never owned one but have seen plenty in action down here and I think, and have often said, that they are quite marvellous. In any imaging based thread this little scope turns up as the super hero which it is. My only disagreement with Capricorn concerns what is said about the ED80 on this forum. We clearly agree that it is a little cracker! I don't have one because we have an FSQ85 at Geerrraaannggg!!! money but if we didn't, I'd have an ED80.

Try before you buy? But of course, if you possibly can.

Again, a great thread.

Olly

[R2-ditt0]

as a newbie I know that my second scope will be smaller than my 10"newt....portable and easy/quick to set up....that being said.....I love my 10"

[Si W]

I agree with James, what is a beginner's Telescope ?, as far as i'm concerned, there isn't one, the job of a telescope is to gather light, the bigger the lense and/or Mirror, the more light, also the quality of the Glass used, and coating on it, the type of mount, is it manual, or Goto, what about the quality of the build, and then you have all the add on's, GPS, LNT etc, etc (A mine field). It took me over a year surfing the net, looking at reviews to find the one i wanted, and it came down to two, the LXD 75 SN10 or LX90 8in, i went with the LXD for a number of reasons, price per aperture is good, it's also an F4, so quite fast for AP, i have always liked EQ mounts, since i've owned a couple in the past. I would advice people, go look in the shop, when i mean that, good telescope dealer's, visit or join a local club, and a forum like SGL, there's loads of people out there with a wealth of experience in there own telescope's, and dont be scared to ask the questions, and last but by no means least, take your time, and plan ahead. I'm very happy with my scope, and yes, it's got it's pro's and con's, but the pro's are a lot more than the con's.

[Moonshane]

as a newbie I know that my second scope will be smaller than my 10"newt....portable and easy/quick to set up....that being said.....I love my 10"

this is just how I feel. I don't use my refractor that often now but it's really good occasionally and the difference in sharpness on stars is noticeable.

I think the only scope I'd buy next is a short tube refractor for wide field views. Just need to think of a suitable justification to my wife for a third scope first........it's small, it's cute, maybe the kids can use it, you love scanning about and finding coloured doubles and shooting stars don't you? that kind of thing.

[TheBFG]

Thanks for all the input and obsevations.

[andyr]

as a newbie I know that my second scope will be smaller than my 10"newt....portable and easy/quick to set up....that being said.....I love my 10"

I'd have agreed to this right upto to yesterday when I aquired an 8" Newt , looks like my 3rd scope will now be a more portable one, probably a Mak.... or similar....

[Ags]

I am happy with my Celestron NexStar 4se. Its good enough for the solar system and double stars and shows some the smaller and brighter DSOs quite well (on good nights). It is light enough to carry outside without a struggle and the mount is fairly stable. The goto function is good enough that you can find many targets, with only a little additional looking and panning about. I would love a bigger aperture but I know i would not cope physically with the weight and tube dimensions.