Portable telescope for home and camping

[Bone_Idle]

Hello all, I've just registered after lurking for a while. I've put a short post in the Welcome forum, but I am looking for a bit of guidance.

I've been thinking of buying a telescope for a while, years in fact, on and off, but it's something I never really got down to. I think too many other hobbies got in the way. Anyway, talking to a friend we both came to the conclusion it was time to do something about it. We both started with the idea of an 8inch Dobsonian, the Skyliner 200p, but have now headed in separate directions....

For my friend, he is prepared to pay up to £500 and wants a scope for use in his garden. I was thinking along a more budget line, and then decided it would be nice to get something more portable. This led me to reading a great review of the Skywatcher Heritage 130p, which seems to fold up into a compact package. The reason for portable is that I go camping a lot, and the locations are generally remote, with far less light pollution. It would be nice to have a telescope that would start me in the right direction, be portable enough for camping, but would still allow me some good views from the garden.

Sorry for rambling on a bit. I'm really just looking for confirmation that my choice is a reasonable one, and would be interested in any other telescopes that might fit the bill.

I'm happy to concentrate on the optics rather than fancy mounts, tracking or gizomos, I think part of the fun of learning will be locating and tracking myself.

I'd appreciate any thoughts.

[perrin6]

Dobsonian mounted 130mm, 150mm, 200mm - all great easy to use 'scopes, once you learn how to 'star hop'. Even the 130mm will show plenty under a dark sky.

[perrin6]

Remember to get a good star atlas (and a planisphere perhaps), to help you find galaxies etc, a red-light torch and learn a few constellations. Have a bit of practise finding objects with the telescope before you go or else you will be fiddling about for hours at the campsite, not be able to find anything and the experience might put you off the whole business forever ! Happy camping !

[msinclairinork]

An ultra portable soloution might also be somthing like a Skywatcher startravel 80 refractor on say somthing like a EQ1 table top mount. Very cheap very portable and quite pleasing.

It wouldn't be especialy great on the plannets as the Dob would but if you are looking for portability I dont think it would get much better than this. Also another advantage would be you wouldn't have to collminate where as hyking the dob around alot i would think you would collminate quite offten. But saying that i dont think it's a very difficult procedure with practice.

Good luck!

Michael

[E621Keith]

Do you want to go camping and bring a telescope along or go observing and bring the camping gear along?

If it is the former, I'd go for a ultra portable package. I second the ST80 + table EQ1, or a 60-70mm refractor on photographic tripod, or a good pair of binoculars.

If it's the latter, the 130p dob may be a good choice.

Can I assume you go backpacking & camp rather driving & camp?

[rowan46]

if youve got £500 why not get both the skyliner 200p and the heritage 130p youve only spent 400 and you've both got what you wanted?

[Bone_Idle]

Hello,

Thanks for all the advice, I'd not considered the other options, so I will take a look at those as well, I am a keen photographer and have a reasonably good tripod, so the refractor could be an option.

Camping would generally be driving to the site, but a lot we go to are pretty remote, so light pollution is nothing like in the suburbs! I'd consider hiking away from the site though.

I did find a video on YouTube with someone demonstrating the 130P, and it does appear quite compact, so I think it's probable still top of the list.

I'll no doubt have a lot of questions, but this seems like a very friendly and helpful place.

[oreed]

It was suggested to me to look at sumerianoptics German company, the 6" is €450.

This is what umadog said "Finally, if you want the ultimate in portability check this out this:

Sumerian Optics

They're hand-made and I think your budget stretches to his 6". Incredibly, the 10" is airline carry-on, weighs under 10 kg, and costs 900 Euros. Disadvantages: set-up time will take longer than a solid tube. Doesn't come with a shroud. The ultra-portables must be <F5 so they'll be picky with eyepieces. Can't use the very heaviest eyepieces (e.g. 31mm Nagler)."

I must admit I would like one of these at some point. As an artist I appreciate the aesthetics of this scope as much as anything, but I can already hear others on this forum shouting at me "function before form", I know.

[jgs001]

I use an ST80 clone as my camping scope, reason is it's small and fits in a medium size maplins aluminium flight bag with my ep's, star diagonal etc so is well protected. It also won't need collimating etc once I get there. Not an ideal mount, but I stick it on a camera tripod, it works. It means I can also fit the case in the car along with everything else I need to.

[JamesM]

Using a camera tripod is fine but the declination axis (up & down) is limited for some objects higher in the sky - If going in that direction I would be looking for a different head to be used on it at least.

James

[Bone_Idle]

I've spent a bit of time over lunch looking further into some of the suggestions. I'm starting to consider the StarTravel 80 as well. It looks very compact and can be purchased with a table top tripod and EQ1, however, it seems it can also be attached to a camera tripod, so is quite versatile.

At the moment I feel I'm changing my mind more than my wife, which is quite worrying, but I'm thinking that coming in right at the bottom, with something that I can take camping with minimum fuss would be a good way to get into things. It's also something I would keep, rather than replace, when I do move up to an 8inch (or larger) Dob.

[Enrico]

Hi there - I'm a newcomer too, and bought the Skywatcher Heritage after too much researching and pondering online over christmas.

In the end I'm just glad I made a decision and bought something! The Heritage is very portable and easy to carry/set-up. If you are camping by car, and not expecting to lug it about in a back-pack then it is an entirely sensible proposition. Otherwise I'd look at some of the smaller refractors - lots of the Meade ones come up on ebay for "reasonable" prices, but I expect that there won't be any bargains until the buzz of the BBC programme from early in the new year calms down a bit (in fact there might be a lot of bargains around when people who were enthused by the programme and have bought something realise that it's not for them!!).

Buy something - you wont regret it.

[acey]

I have various portable instruments for when I'm travelling and luggage room is tight. Celestron 80mm f5 refractor (same sort of optics as the SkyWatcher), a 100mm Yukon folding refractor, and binos (10x50, 9x63, 15x70). Any of these give lovely views of deep-sky objects at a dark site. My grab-and-go back-garden scope is an 8-inch dob and my main observing instrument is a 12" which is fine for driving to dark sites, but not the sort of thing for a quick peek.

Short focal-length instruments are great for portability but not so great for high-power viewing (e.g. planets), and higher magnification also requires more stable (i.e. heavier) mounts. In the end it's all about compromises - or getting several scopes that cover all bases.

Among my small portable instruments, the most used is the Yukon spotting scope. Optically it's not the finest by any means, but it has a built-in zoom lens so I don't need to take any other gear, just the scope (which has its own carry bag) and a Manfrotto camera tripod.

The "best" scope is not necessarily the one with biggest aperture or fanciest optics or most glowing reviews - it's whatever you enjoy using.

[Bone_Idle]

I've also had a look at the Skymax 90 (Maksutov-Cassegrain), these seem better suited to planets, and I'm quite interested in viewing the planets. the seem to be better suited to higher magnifications and are available in table top and standard EQ1 mount.

Is this a viable alternative?

[Rusty Strings]

The longer focal length (F13) of a the Skymax 90 will result in the reduced field of view and higher contrast that suits planetary and double star viewing, The F5 ST80 will have a greater FOV and will give better views of galaxies nebula etc. The limiting factor will be the relatively small aperture.

If it were me I would go for the star travel as they make a good guide scope on an imaging setup and I may be wrong here, but, a refractor with an erecting diagonal would make a better terrestrial scope for watching wildlife than a Mak.

[Bone_Idle]

Things have changed significantly, literally overnight. I casually mentioned to my wife that I was thinking of buying a budget telescope whiles we were watching a recording of the Planets and she was really up for the idea! Even saying that there's no point buying at the bottom end and wishing you'd spend a bit more. This means my budget is up to £250-£300. (maybe a bit more).

How much of a compromise on planets would a Startravel 120 be? It's a slightly longer FL than the 90 (600mm rather than 500mm), would it give me reasonable views of the planets with a decent EP and Barlow?

Would I be better spending slightly more on an Evostar 120? The compromise here being the size, when we go camping the car and roof box tend to be brimming!

I am pretty sold on the idea of a refractor now, it's just finding one that suits.

The only other option I've seen is the Skymax 127, don’t know much about Maksutov-Cassegrain's and their capabilities, but would it be a reasonable option. They're very compact!

[msinclairinork]

The ST120 would be no compromise than the ST80, on the contrary it would be be more suited for planets with the longer focal legnth.

Remember to buget for the mount...this realy is increadibly important! my minimum recomendation would be a Skywatcher EQ5 or its twin a Celestron CG5 which is identical apart from it has slightly thicker (better) tripod legs. The CG5 is not manufactured anymore but the are always on the second hand market for around £120.

Although this items are starting to get bigger and heavier they are not rediculisly big. And the what it would mean to your viewing pleasure i think would be worth the sacrifice.

I think you would be quite happy with a ST120 on either a EQ5 mount or CG5. That also shouldn't break the bank.

Good luck, Keep us posted!

Michael

[Bone_Idle]

The ST120 is certainly coming to the fore. My wife definitely wants something to take on camping trips.

It seems to come with the EQ3-2 mount, is that not up to the job?

I also think it can be had with the AZ3, is that a viable option?

[msinclairinork]

Good stuff!

Yea an EQ3-2 would certainly suit your needs.

I would pick the EQ3-2 over a Alt/az myself.

The difference between an EQ mount and an Alt/az is the Alt/az you just point and shoot sort of thing, just up/down & left/right movment. This is ok but with the rapid rotation of the earth which soon comes very apparent through a telescope, your object will drift out of the FOV very quickly. So constant adjustments have to be made to keep it in place..and with a cheepish mount this causes alot of shaking around which is a real pain.

The EQ mount however just takes a LITTLE more know how in the initial set up, but after you do it even once it will click, and then you can be 'polar alighined' Within seconds and ready to start using. The big advantage with this is that once you have done this simple procedure all you will have to do to keep your object in view is adjust the one axis. Ok a little tweak on the other every now and again dependent on how good your polar alignment is. This makes life much easier in the end, also with this mount you can add a motor to it which will then track your object for you, thus releaving you from having to adjust anything thus a stable image in the eyepeace and if you leave the scope for even an hour and come back to it your object should still be there.

I think most others would agree with me here that the better option out the two is the EQ3-2.

Hope that helps.

Michael

[E621Keith]

If it is planets you are after, I'd suggest spending a bit more on the Evostar or Skymax 127. The longer focal length (and higher F ratio) of the Evostar is less taxing on the optics, so you'd get less chromatic aberration than the Startravel. The Skymax will have no problem with chromatic aberration and it's more compact, but the high f ratio makes it much weaker on deep skies.

If you choose the Evostar, I'd recommended finding one on a EQ5 rather than EQ3-2, because the former is more stable and more suited for high power viewing of planets. Also, the longer tube length of the Evostar place more stress on the mount.

[msinclairinork]

All good points from Keith to consider.

Michael

[perrin6]

Bone idle - (you can't be if you like hiking!)

I presume you drive to the campsite. How much room will you have in the car and how much are you willing to spend ? I'd be a bit dubious about the startravels performance on planets like Keith. I'm not sure but the 130p might outperform the startravel 120. Anybody out there know for sure? The refractor is a short-focal ratiod achromat and so will have chromatic aberation and the 130p will have no chrom. aber. but has a contrast-reducing secondary mirror so which would be best I wonder. They'd both be about the same for low power views I reckon, but how about high powered ?

[Bone_Idle]

Michael, thanks for that explanation, very clear and I think I'm sold on an EQ mount now. Even if I go for plan B (or C or D or whatever I'm upto now!)

Keith - I've found a good price on the Evostar120 with EQ 5, my main concern is portability.

Alan - your idea brings be full circle, and it was something that was keeping me awake last night. I was wondering if a better option would be a Dob for home and a compromise scope for camping (plan D). After all, it wouldn't be used extensively when camping. I was thinking for the same money I could get something like a Skyliner 150P and either an evostar 90 or ST90.

All great advice and plenty of food for thought. I've also found that the Bradford Astronomical society meet at the local football club, so I'm going to go along and maybe actually look through a few different scopes and get an idea of what their strengths and weaknesses are.

I think my main problem is that I'm not sure what I want to see, I suspect I want to see everything, but I don't think there's a single scope that will do everything well.

[perrin6]

I think my main problem is that I'm not sure what I want to see, I suspect I want to see everything, but I don't think there's a single scope that will do everything well.

Under really dark skies I'd probably be so busy gawping agog at fantastic sights of galaxies, nebulae and the milky way, I might feel more than a 10 second look at a planet would be wasting valuable time ! Are you sure you couldnt pack a skyliner flex-tube 8 or 10 inch in that car (by leaving out unnecessary things like clean underwear etc). That and a wide-field low power eyepiece - well I'd consider selling my grandmother to finance such an experience !

[E621Keith]

Nick, I would worry about portability of the Evostar 120 if you drive to your observation site.

When I was an undergraduate taking part in many of my university's Astrosoc's observation trips, I used to pack the entire set up in a 75L rucksac (Bresser version of the scope, EQ5 head, counter weight, batteries, eyepieces & accessories case, DSLR camera and a sleeping bag) and travelled by public transports (London buses, tube and train). The tripod had to be carried externally, though.

While I wouldn't consider the scope to be highly portable, it is portable enough to be carried backpacking if the goal of your camping trip was observing, and certainly portable enough if you drive.