Jump to content

not another newb!

Karl Sagan

By Karl Sagan
in Welcome

Recommended Posts

Karl Sagan

Karl Sagan

Posted
Posted

Hi

What a great site! My journey here has been a long one. After being born with an interest in science, I left religion (Islam), studied Physics at Uni, and discovered a new prophet in Sagan afterwards.

Hubble images catalysed my interest in astronomy (which studying the subject at University never did!), so after performing a few google searches I ended up here. Funny thing was this site just kept appearing the number 1 search! Are there no other forums like this around globally??

Anyhow with my limited sqandoolies, I guess I can only afford a cheaper telescope. I live 10 miles west of manchester so I have ruled out the possibility of getting any deep sky images, and set my limits on being able to see Jupiter & Saturn.

As a newb & lover of cosy warmth, I want to be able to find them with minimal discomfort & want a goto telescope. Its looks like this skywatcher synscan is the best compromise SkyWatcher Startravel 102 SynScan AZ GOTO 102mm Refractor Telescope.

My question is will I see anything other than an indistinguisable white dot of these objects using a 102mm refracting telescope as that one is? Any links to discussion on skywatcher synscan series would be most useful

Thanks a mill

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Dave S

Dave S

Posted
Posted

Hi Karl Welcome to SGL.

I believe that your chosen scope has good reviews. I have the MAK version as opposed to the refractor and the optics are excellent. Stars will always appear as dots but planets such as Jupiter and Saturn will show detail that will blow you away. I don't know what your light pollution is like but the scope is well capable of showing bright dso's such as M42, M31 etc.

Do a search of the forum using the keywords and you will find lots of postings on your kit.

Cheers

Dave...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Karl Sagan

Karl Sagan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I thought mine was a MAK too?

Anyhow with hindsight would you have gone for the equivalent refractor?

Also do you think there is much difference in viewable surface detail between 70mm & 102mm refractors? I dont know if its worth spending the extra £100, as I could use it towards peripeherals like better webcam or camera.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dave S

Dave S

Posted
Posted

I Wouldn't have gone for the equivalent because the one I chose has a specific purpose which is it needs to go in the car with all the camping kit and race gear. So I needed the very short tube and goto capability. It is the first step in an overall buying plan of which a reflector and a refractor are part of the picture.

I'm not a planetary observing expert so I can't comment on the comparison of surface detail between the two aperture sizes but no doubt there will be someone in know along soon.

As a usual rule though the bigger the aperture size the better.

Dave...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
russ

russ

Posted
Posted
I thought mine was a MAK too?

Anyhow with hindsight would you have gone for the equivalent refractor?

Also do you think there is much difference in viewable surface detail between 70mm & 102mm refractors? I dont know if its worth spending the extra £100, as I could use it towards peripeherals like better webcam or camera.

Hi and welcome to SGL Karl.

The Mak is the one you are more likely after. The refractor in your link is more of a low power telescope majoring in wonderful widefield views of the heavens. The Mak excels at top notch views of the moon and planets........Saturn and Jupiter will be excellent in the Mak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesM

JamesM

Posted
Posted

Hi Karl and welcome to the forum.

First off there are a number of forums out there. "Stargazers Lounge" is UK's biggest but the Sky@Night website also has a forum. "Ice In Space" is for the southern hemisphere which has good reviews on kit and provides a good excuse to see new constellations and Deep Sky Objects (DSO's) some of which are amazing. The most well known forum would probably be "Cloudy Nights" which is American based and for me, is the best with regards to equipment reviews with comprehensive detailed write up's that I sometimes pretend to understand. :icon_eek: In fact many people here also appear on that forum as well though maybe under a different tag. In my biased opinion, I feel Stargazers to be very friendly and welcoming and less intense (some might say "entrenched" :evil6:) than Cloudy Nights where individuals who are extremely knowledgeable (with kit to match!) seem to occasionally get involved in public spats that in my view seem a little heavy handed and at times have put people off from participating, which clearly defeats the object of having forums. I'm sure that all of us use all the forums all the time and depends on what you're looking for. On the kit front, it is important to note that a familiar bit of kit here in the UK such as a "Skywatcher" mount, is referred to as an "Atlas" mount in North America - so occasionally you have to do a bit of marketing homework.:D:D

I have no direct experience of the kit you have listed above but with any refractor, "Chromatic Aberration" (colour fringing) is the major concern and can be minimized by either having a long tube which is labelled F8 or more, namely that the tube is considered long in relation to the size of the objective lens (e.g focal length of tube 1000mm divided by objective lens of 102mm = F9.8) I have no idea what the Focal Length of your intended scope is but if you do this calculation you will have some idea how well 'controlled' you might expect a bright image to appear. This is important because you mentioned about how well you might expect the scope to perform in revealing detail and colour fringing will obstruct detail. Lens coatings, the amount and type of glass used are other means by which this aberration problem can be overcome. The key here is that with a refractor, the shorter tube, the more compensations have to be built in to minimize colour distortion which of course translates into a higher price. Achromatic needs to be a minimum length tube, Aprochromatic can be shorter but will be a lot more expensive. All lenses are coated these days but the law of physics will limit to what extent colour can be controlled with the achromatic type.

In summary, a scope producing a lot of false colour when observing the planets or the moon will hamper the ability to focuse on detail. Having said that, if you are looking at nebulosity or galaxies where light emission are much lower, then colour fringing will not be a problem. Apologies for rambling, just want to give you as full a picture as possible.

Clear skies

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Karl Sagan

Karl Sagan

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks all. Yes it appears that 102mm has a shorter focal length (F5) and is a compromise for terrestrial & astronomy viewings. My fault, I wrote it off initially, and then saw its spec again and forgot about its short focal length.

The smaller apertured 70mm is the only one in its goto range thats a refractor with a long (F10) focal length

SkyWatcher Mercury 707 SynScan AZ GOTO 70mm Refractor Telescope

In a well lit area like Manchester, do you think I am unlikely to get anything other than a blobby single colur blur, with no surface detail, as an excuse for a planet with a 70mm aperture on a refractor? The only reason why I want a refractor over & above a reflector is that its for home use within the city.

Is there any place I can go to view what these different telescopes produce.

I have tried youtube, but they only tend to show vids of planets with bin lid size apertures. Not sure if thats because they are the only ones capable of producing such images, or whether only serious enthusiasts post their videos up??

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JamesM

JamesM

Posted
Posted

Karl, although the two week BBC stargazing Live is nearly at its end, most local astro socieities and observing clubs run observation evenings as part of their outreach objectives. I would Goggle some local clubs and see if you can get a long. Please don't rush the purchase process (I know what its like to get want to get started :icon_eek:) the stars aren't going anywhere and buying the 'wrong' kit will be the biggest killer to any enthusiasm. You might be horrified to know that I spent about a year observing through as much kit as possible of all sizes to judge what was worth having and whether it was going to meet my expectations. A lot of kit gets resold because people rushed to buy the wrong type of scope or the aperture was not sufficient - that's not a comment on budget because of course you can buy what you can afford but it is easy to put your money into kit that's not suited to your needs.

So look for the local public observation nights - you won't regret it.

Clear skies

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites
perrin6

perrin6

Posted
Posted

Hello Karl,:icon_eek:

Having just checked out a light pollution map of the area west of Manchester, you may be wise to concentrate on non-deep sky objects. If I was living under such skies I would probably opt for a scope that is suitable for studying the planets, the moon, and stellar objects such as double stars and clusters, however I think the rule still applies that the bigger the aperture, the fainter the objects will be that are visible. It's just that what you see in a large telescope under heavy light-polution would be visible with a smaller one in darker skies.

What options you have depends mainly on your budget. Generally, dobsonians are the best value for money because their mounts are much simpler than equatorial ones with motors for following the skies motion. If your heart is set on astrophotography then an equatorially-mounted scope is what you need. If you want to be a visual observer only, then a dobsonian is the best value for money.

So what's your budget, roughly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Orion_the_Hunter

Orion_the_Hunter

Posted
Posted

Hi Karl, I am a noob too. As I am also looking for a 'scope, I have decided that being able to see deep space objects is not possible on my budget/requirements.

The best option I found was something like the Skywatcher Skymax 127, slightly bigger bro of the ...102.

These, I believe, will give pretty decent views of the planets, double stars and brighter DSOs.

If you buy a book called 'Turn Left at Orion', it will tell you how to find plenty of things with this telescope.

Also, many people here say that it is better not to have a 'goto' 'scope at first - it is better to learn your way around the sky yourself; and, as GOTO adds significantly to the price, you may be able to afford a bigger scope without it.

Let us all know how you get on,

Ed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.