Allround beginner scope

[tms48]

I am looking for something that is very portable and simple to use, would a Skywatcher Heritage 130p be suitable. I am more concerned about a reaonable field of view rather than high magnification. Any other suggestions would be welcomed, my budget is around £150

[umadog]

Welcome!

That sounds pretty reasonable to me. You could also look for second hand Dobs. Perhaps you can get yourself a 6" or even an 8".

[LukeSkywatcher]

The Heritage is EXTREMELY portable and gives great views. umadog is right though. You could probably pick up a second hand 6-8" Dob for your budget. They wouldnt be AS portable but still very portable for most people.

I'm in a wheelchair so the Heritage was the obvious choice for me.

The FOV and magnification are down to the EP's that you buy. The EP's that come with the Heritage give a FOV of 50 degrees. This is pretty standard across most supplied EP's.

[rowan46]

welcome to sgl and ditto all of the above

[tms48]

Thanks for comments but it seems the next size up 150mm dobsonians are 1200mm long so nowhere near as portable. Ithink I will be far more likely to take out a small light unit rather than a larger unit. plus its a lot easier to store away.

[LukeSkywatcher]

You can get flextube Dobs (the Heritage is a small flextube) but they would be well off your budget.

They say that "the best scope for you is the scope that you use often". If this means the Heritage 130P then i can assure you that you can do a LOT worse.

There is an alternative scope if you ever plan of taking images Dobs are not good for imaging). The alternative is the SW 130P Explorer. It is essentially the same optics as the Heritage but it is a solid tube and comes on an equatorial mount. It is the same dimensions as the Heritage. However, the EQ mount would be heavier then the Dob mount on the Heritage due to materials its made with and counter weights etc.

Certainly i can highly recommend the Heritage. You wont be let down by it.

[JamesM]

Your choice would indeed be portable and simple to use. Magnification is not the most important need but resolution is and that's where aperture comes in. I don't like the term 'beginner scope' because to me, beginners are in need of very good telescopes to sustain their interest at the beginning - after all I don't go into Specsavers and ask for a beginners pair of glasses.

If your budget is fixed, then I would go for the 130 but if not I would go down the used market (UK Astro Buy & Sell) to pick up an 8" because that size is what makes the difference. FLO sells the 8" at £270, I would expect to pay around 60-65% used, which will require a revised budget of £175 - so it is possible.

I hope I don't sound too prescriptive but would like you to have the best visual experience.

Clear skies

James

[LukeSkywatcher]

Your choice would indeed be portable and simple to use. Magnification is not the most important need but resolution is and that's where aperture comes in. I don't like the term 'beginner scope' because to me, beginners are in need of very good telescopes to sustain their interest at the beginning - after all I don't go into Specsavers and ask for a beginners pair of glasses.

If your budget is fixed, then I would go for the 130 but if not I would go down the used market (UK Astro Buy & Sell) to pick up an 8" because that size is what makes the difference. FLO sells the 8" at £270, I would expect to pay around 60-65% used, which will require a revised budget of £175 - so it is possible.

I hope I don't sound too prescriptive but would like you to have the best visual experience.

Clear skies

James

This is why i also suggested a 6-8" Dob.

BUT

I honestly feel that portability is more important then the quality of views. No good having a scope with killer views if you cant move the thing around easily or store it. Its much better to go for a smaller scope (such as the 130P on ANY mount) that has a proven track record as one of the finest smaller aperture scopes that is "entry level". You will use it more then a lumbering beast of a BIGGER Dob.

I have a 90mm refractor on an EQ2 mount. For me it is USELESS because it is 1000mm long, has a big fiddly EQ tripod, a mount that weighs the same as a medium size dog and counter weights that weigh the same as a hefty newborn baby. To move it 10 foot to my observing location i have to dismantle it................move it in 4 lots and the reassemble it IN THE DARK.

With the Heritage i move the whole scope in one piece with one hand and i am observing within a couple of mins.

So portability is to me the most important factor to make the most of this hobby.

OK i know the views with the 130P are better then the 90EQ but that is besides the point.

P.S.~~~the 90mm refrac gives me better views of planets.

[rowan46]

I agree with LukeSkywatcher a bigger dob would give a better view but if you can't use it its no good at all. I have a nexstar 5 its not the best scope in the world but most times I use it I carry it on my back to a darker site . I have no view in my back garden and don't drive consequently this is the biggest scope I can carry comfortably in terms of space and lightness. The saying in visual astronomy is "apparture is king" but the corrollary to that statement is you must be able to use it. besides that if you are driving out to darker skies you will see almost as much with a smaller scope as you would with one a couple of inches bigger from a light polluted urban site

[rowan46]

in the sixties when I was growing up the recommended apparture for serious amateurs was 4" nowadays its 6" because of light pollution. It strikes me that if you are going to a darker site 4" should be adequate

[LukeSkywatcher]

I've no experience with it, but i would think a smaller scope (4-5") at a dark sky location will perform as well as a bigger scope (6-8") from a light polluted are.

[JamesM]

Paul, I think you had better read my comments in light of the fact that they were being prepared and submitted when only umadog's comments were on screen and so my comments were intended to be an extension of his suggestions. I believe you have slightly jumped the gun with your terse response and as helpful as your comments are meant to be, in the light of what I have read, I total disagree with what you say.

The question of mobility is relative to the individual. I regularly observe at a dark site with many older retired guys who ALL own 12" scopes and happily assemble them from out of their cars. They feel the views they get make the effort of travelling and dealing with the cold worthwhile. Sure there are smaller, lighter scopes but if a scope doesn't show you much what's the point in getting it out of the box? This is clearly evidenced by the number of small used scopes that keep coming up for sell as their owners pursue more aperture.

When I first started I asked myself, if these small scopes were any good, how is it that so many member's signatures list scopes that are 8" and above - and here I am being recommended that I should start with something small - the 'beginner's' scope. A new guy the other day was apologising in his welcoming introduction to the forum for wanting to buy a big expensive scope. Even in my own astro club there appears to be this 'wisdom' that you should start small and work your way up - absolute rubbish. You see relatively few larger scopes coming up for sale which to me would suggest that they are happily being used and that although mobility is a consideration, for many it clearly isn't the most important one.

I recognised the point made about the budget and so attempted to find a solution through the used scope route. Again I was responding to the original post and umadog's response. Your comments regarding my post, no matter how well intended are misplaced.

Clear skies

James

[rowan46]

James I owe you an apology As I have realised I was replying on the wrong thread however it is a fair point that when we hear scope the first thing many of us say is get bigger when perhaps our first question should be why you have chosen this size. you are correct in that 90% of time its because of finance or ignorance that a small scope is chosen but not always and although its fair of you to say you may not get a satisfactory view from a smaller scope its also fair to say that many people do hence the reason they upgrade and not give up entirely as I say I apologise because I got the wrong end of the stick and thought I was replying to a different thread but I feel both views have validity.

[Manok101]

My advice is do research into it, and as to my experience, I chose a 4.5 inch dob, not really intending to do photography. I enjoy this scope a lot.

[brantuk]

All great advice above, and to enhance that advice here's my two pence worth:

Often new starters are on a tight budget so a small scope is recommended to fit the budget. Also - some are just dabbling to see if they actually "like" the hobby and don't want a large initial outlay "just in case".

However, you'll see the phrase "aperture is king" bandied about, and indeed a lot of large expensive dobs appear in signatures. You'll also notice small appos alonside the the large dobs sometimes, and a variety of Maks, Schmitts, achros and mounting solutions.

If you're a hoarder like me you'll hang on to everything, but some folk like to change scope regularly and experience different "types" of viewing and/or imaging setups.

Ultimately it's all down to your personal criteria which may include: specific objects, observing, imaging, portability, storage, location relative to light pollution, age and pupil size, "the missus" lol, goto, tracking, push to, EQ or Alt AZ, frequency of use, convenience, cost of essential extras, perceived learning curve, budget etc, and a host of other stuff. Some like a range of scopes to cover all eventualities and conditions.

The more of those issues you can answer up front (imho) the closer you get to a sensible choice. Hope that helps more than it confuses - good luck