Beginners Scope ??

[Chris E]

Hi Chris - you've got some great help there from lw24. I'd only add a couple of general points.

All scopes can see everything to a greater or lesser degree. Go for largest aperture within budget when choosing a newtonian reflector. Light grab is important.

Refractors are great but demand good quality optics which are expensive - they're used a lot for photography (also very expensive).

Maks and Sct's have a compound arrangement of mirrors and lenses to achieve a longer focal length on a shorter tube. As such they're great for imaging planets and moon.

Choice of mount is important. Dobsonians are alt/az mounts and keep the cost down so you can get greater apertures. Not usually accurate enough for imaging outside the solar system. If you want to image dso's then an equatorial mount with RA tracking is a minimum requirement. Goto elecronics will consume budget which may be better spent on mount/optics/aperture.

It's a technical hobby that does sound challenging - but remember that once you've made a choice you'll only have the one scope to deal with - so it will be a lot easier once you've decided.

Hope that helps

(oh.... and alt/az mounts move up/down left/right - dead easy. EQ mounts move in RA and Dec and rely on polar alignment which reflects the way Earth spins, and the movement of stars round the pole star - great for learning the relationship between the heavens and Earth)

Sorry to be a pain Brant, but this is really hard work at the mo, But you say "refractors are great but demand good Optics" which are expensive, what are the optics for ?? Don't they come with the scope, or do you have to buy optics aswell as the scope, also, people are talking about mounts, I thought the mounts also came with the scope when you bought it ??, Or is it like buying a car, you can have a certain car but you want to change the Wheels on it (mounts). Sorry for the incompitance, but this is really doing my head in now.

Chris

[lw24]

Right.

Optics, are either the lens/es in Refractors or mirrors in Reflectors. The 'optics' always come with the telescope, you cannot buy new 'optics' for a telescope.

The mount is the tripod + mount head on which you mount the telescope tube. Normally, they do come with the telescope, as a package, but some people prefer to buy just a telescope tube on its own, and then choose a different mount than the one that came with the package.

No problems.

[Chris E]

Right.

Optics, are either the lens/es in Refractors or mirrors in Reflectors. The 'optics' always come with the telescope, you cannot buy new 'optics' for a telescope.

The mount is the tripod + mount head on which you mount the telescope tube. Normally, they do come with the telescope, as a package, but some people prefer to buy just a telescope tube on its own, and then choose a different mount than the one that came with the package.

No problems.

Cheers for that LW, Also just read on someone elses post about "long exposure imaging" I guess I'll need a scope that does that too ???.One day in the not too disatnt future (because I'm probably getting on peoples nerves with stupid questions) I'll post " I would like this scope, that does this, a mount that will do that, can see the moon, DSO's , saturn, and will let me mount a normal digital camera to take pics, and see what answers I get ,

Chris

[brantuk]

Yeah - sorry Chris - I was referring to glass optics as opposed to mirrors - but I missed out the critical word in there. Glass tends to be considerably more expensive than mirrors for the same aperture is what I was meaning to say.

Yes you can either buy a complete package - or you can by the bits separately (like buying hifi). I wouldn't worry about polar alignment - it's only needed on EQ mounts. A lot of folk say it's harder to do than using an alt/az mount. Well I tend to disagree with that - the difference in setup time is only a couple of mins and polar alignment is dead easy once you know what you're doing.

I like both types of mount - I've had a few of each. I just feel the EQ mounts give you a better idea of how everything moves around Earth, rising and setting of objects, and seasonal changes. It's a part of astronomy that I feel should be understood early in a starters learning. So I allways recommend a the EQ mount. It's only my opinion though and the choice is entirely yours

[lw24]

Chris,

Feel free to post your criteria now, I feel that I (+ other members of this forum) could find the perfect telescope for you.

Starting on what you posted earlier -> "can see the moon". Basically every telescope can see the Moon in good detail, so I'd leave that out of your criteria, as you'll probably end up getting a telescope that has more than 100mm aperture (aperture = size of primary lens in a refractor, or primary mirror in a reflector). 100mm aperture and onwards can show a great deal of detail on the Moon.

You said that you want one that will let you mount a digital camera. Is this a DSLR (e.g Canon 500D) or a normal Digital Camera (e.g. Fuji Finepix). If it's a normal Digital Camera, then all you'll need is this: Skywatcher Universal Camera Adapter.

Luke

[Chris E]

Ok Lw, you asked for it lol, here goes, I could have 3-£400 to spend, Would like as big a lense as poss maybe 200 mm 8inch,and a good "F" focal ratio, quick cooldown,

as least Collimation needed (Straight forward setup) Still unsure whether to go for a Refractor or Reflector (read below about mounts)..Hardly any chromatic abbration...

Unsure of mount because I would like least fiddly, but understand what Brant uk means about learning which way the earth and other things spin/rise etc, so i don't now whether to go for an EQ or an Azimuth mount, ( Don't know what a GOTO is)...

Don't know what long exposure is (is that the digital camera or the scope), and most of all ( I've copied these names from peoples pics they have put on here) I would like to see Saturn (In as good a detail as possible) Galaxy's, M42, M31 Andromida, M82, Milkyway, M51, and Helix Nebula, ...I don't have a DSLR, but have a Samsung digital camera with 15x optical zoom, and 12.1 megapixel and would love to take pics to print off or show on SGL ..Easy as that people,

Your help pls lol

Chris

[John]

OK - my suggestion is to forget about imaging for now. Invest your £400 in an 8" F/6 dobsonian and a good guide to the night skies. Enjoy visual astonomy for a while as you research what's involved in moving into the "black arts" of imaging.

Heres a great scope for visual:

Dobsonians - Skywatcher Skyliner 200P Dobsonian

[lw24]

The telescope posted above (Skywatcher Skyliner 200p Dobsonian) is a great telescope for visual observations, on a very easy to use mount (Dobsonian mount).

All you have to do is push it and tilt it to make it point wherever you want it. Simples

Your digital camera could easy be held in place by a Skywatcher Universal Camera Adaptor

All you do, is attach your digital camera to the screw on the flat plate, then clamp the end onto the eyepiece, and adjust the distance of the camera from the eyepiece. This will enable you to get some nice shots of the Moon, Saturn, Jupiter and a few other bright objects.

I'd leave out long exposure astrophotography for the moment. All long exposure means, is to leave a camera (normally a DSLR) attached to the telescope for a long amount of time (e.g. 30 minutes), in order to capture alot of the detail. For this, you need an Equatorial Mount with tracking motors = Extremely Expensive!

For now, I'd buy either a Skywatcher Skyliner 200p Dobsonian or Skyliner 150p Dobsonian, depending on how much room you have to store your telescope. I'd reccommend trying to see one in real life before you make the purchase.

I'd also recommend buying a Hotech Laser Collimator. This will make collimation extremely easy. Watch this video:

So, I'd recommend buying:

Skywatcher Skyliner 150p/200p Dobsonian

Hotech Laser Collimator

No problems

Clear Skies

[Chris E]

The telescope posted above (Skywatcher Skyliner 200p Dobsonian) is a great telescope for visual observations, on a very easy to use mount (Dobsonian mount).

All you have to do is push it and tilt it to make it point wherever you want it. Simples

Your digital camera could easy be held in place by a Skywatcher Universal Camera Adaptor

All you do, is attach your digital camera to the screw on the flat plate, then clamp the end onto the eyepiece, and adjust the distance of the camera from the eyepiece. This will enable you to get some nice shots of the Moon, Saturn, Jupiter and a few other bright objects.

I'd leave out long exposure astrophotography for the moment. All long exposure means, is to leave a camera (normally a DSLR) attached to the telescope for a long amount of time (e.g. 30 minutes), in order to capture alot of the detail. For this, you need an Equatorial Mount with tracking motors = Extremely Expensive!

For now, I'd buy either a Skywatcher Skyliner 200p Dobsonian or Skyliner 150p Dobsonian, depending on how much room you have to store your telescope. I'd reccommend trying to see one in real life before you make the purchase.

I'd also recommend buying a Hotech Laser Collimator. This will make collimation extremely easy. Watch this video:

So, I'd recommend buying:

Skywatcher Skyliner 150p/200p Dobsonian

Hotech Laser Collimator

No problems

Clear Skies

Cheers Lw, really appreciate that ))))))......Forgot to add, I'd like to track the ISS and Shuttle....Sorry to be a pain

[Chris E]

ps, does that Dobsonian come with a mount, or sit on a flat surface, I've looked at the pic and surely you don't just sit it flat on something ???.....Maybe something with a motorized mount for tracking ???.....

Really glad you guys are helping, its getting slightly easier for me now, I'm just frightned of getting ripped off at the local telescope shop (Lincoln)

[ZEbbEDY]

Ive got a 200p dob on order

Can easy get an eq6 mount at a later date

[NickK]

Chris - I think you're suffering from information overload.

Stop. Get back to basics:

1. Focus on what you want to see as a requirement - build a priority list.

Answering this will be difficult because you don't know what scopes offer in performance for what purpose. Every scope has it's pros and cons - only by understanding your priorities will you have a direction.

2. Start simple - from there you will gain experience and know what direction you want to head in.

For example - this is how it worked out for me:

First scope - priorities:

1. Learning what's up there by forcing myself to star hop.

2. Low cost - I came to the conclusion that you have to put the stake in the sand to give yourself a reference point.

3. Pick up and go - something that doesn't take ages to get out there and look, needed to be mobile too.

Now I wanted, like everyone, a scope to cover moon, planets, stars, nebulae etc.

I decided on just going for a simple manual mount and refractor. I chose the Vixen A80Mf (910mm fl, f11.4) with porta mount.

The scope has allowed me to see the moon in great detail (thanks to the fl), forced me to star hop and learn more about the stars rather than the technology. It also gave me experience.

I got to see my first nebula - M42 (the great orion nebula) as a very dim smudge (think blue on black between the stars).

Wow moments - the moon and M42.

Disappointments - the lack of being able to see any other nebulas, galaxies etc. I know now this is down to the small aperture and high f-ratio along with light pollution.

So I decided to make a jump forward, I knew that to get Nebulae I'd have to go for a larger aperture and have a 'faster' (lower f-ratio). I knew I'd got the Vixen for higher focal length for the moon etc.

I also wanted to try some astrophotography. I was still unsure about what focal lengths etc would result in the best move in this direction. I bought a second hand ATIK 16ic guide camera for £250 from the for sale forum and tried it with the Vixen.. knowing it would give me further experience.

It gave me serious steep learning curve - everything from focusing, moving the mount (manually) through to finding the damn object.

I set myself a budget.. somewhere between £2-3K.

Priorities:

1. Deep Space Objects - maximise the DSOs that I couldn't see visually by using astrophotography.

2. EQ mount.

3. Portable.

4. Not too massive (I have a small place and a large scope would cause problems!)

After much looking I was convinced I wanted a Vixen VC200L and a Vixen GOTO EQ mount but I thought I'd throw open the discussion as a thread on here - in short I'm glad I did.

As luck would have it, there was a refractor in the for sale forum and I saw the logic of getting the best mount in your budget as the tracking (nothing todo with GOTO) has to be as accurate as possible.

The problem was I was that the VC200L has a long 1800mm focal length and is f9.0 although a focal reducer would make the scope a 1260mm focal length and f6.3.

Two rules in astrophotography appeared from the discussions:

* under 1000mm focal length for any mount that costs less than £4K

* f-ratio is king to reduce the time required to take exposures - a maximum of f7, preferably as low as possible.

Grrr..

It wasn't until someone suggested the refractor for sale and EQ6 as an option.

Reading up on the refractor it had good reviews and others were circling with the view to buy it. So I decided that the refractor with an EQ6 mount would be it.. oh and if I was going to have a scope then I'd better get myself a better eyepiece than the bundled ones that came with the Vixen..

So I got:

* SW NEQ6 Pro mount

* Pentax 105 SDP (105mm, 675mm fl, f6.38)

* Baader Hyperion 13mm EP

I was extremely nervous considering the cost.. I took (read manhandle - the EQ6 is ~40Kg!) the mount out along with the scope and EP for a non-powered, fully manual first light.

Gobsmacked.

I could see M42 is more detail, the core was brighter with more of it. I could see the individual stars in there too but I had a problem.. I couldn't recognise where all the stars I knew were in the sea of stars!

So I managed to hop over to Pliaedes (I can never spell it!) where the I failed to recognise it! Too much nebulosity and additional stars!

Also found open clusters for the first time but I was still lost! So I started getting to grips with the polar alignment and GOTO.. I can see galaxies, often quite faint outlines/smudges however since getting the light pollution filter I can make out some details in them.

For the photography side of things - well that's improving since attending SGL6 star party. Just being there, I learnt a load of things.

I had a look through a couple of dob - good views, with coma (ie warping of the stars at the edges of the field of view). The 1/10th wave dob (high accuracy mirrors) showed a better image but lacked the ability to see the spirals of galaxies that the large dob showed.

All these I could see and more with my little 105mm if I used a camera.

At SGL6 I showed someone that was using bundled EPs what the difference was by using EPs such as Baader Hyperions on a very small saturn (675mm focal length means a 13mm EP only gives about x51 magnification):

* William Optics 7mm - showed saturn although not as crisply as the Hyperion and without good separation of the planet and rings.

* Baader Hyperion 13mm - shows saturn where you can make out the curve of the rings across the planet and that planet curves.

* Nagler 7mm - showed the same view but almost holographic in detail but not surprising considering the cost!

That gave me a good pointer to the EPs sizes I wanted. So I bought:

* BH 3.5mm for 192x magnification for moon and planets

* BH 31mm for wide wide field! (It's so wide it's needs a 2" focuser connection)

Tried it again with Saturn - the views were gob smacking. The 3.5mm EP gave a much larger image and with good detail. The high magnification means less light (thus only good for brighter targets - no dim DSOs!).

Pointing the 3.5mm EP at M42 and you can split the core stars so wide it's stupid! The nebulosity is there still although darker (again due to the high magnification). The 31mm EP I need to get an 2" extender for the focuser but through another 500mm focal length scope at night it was like looking at a mass of stars with a high brightness.

I got some great images from SGL6 by just using my EQ6 and the old secondhand ATIK 16ic guide camera as an imaging camera! Not glossy mag pics but ones that I'm very proud of.

I wouldn't sell my current scope as really offers great flexibility, it may not be the best at everything - it is a master at photography, good at visual and with a few additions (EP & Barlow) it's pretty good for planets.

So there you have it - I thought giving an example of how I got to where I am at the moment would be a good way to give you an idea on how to approach this mass of information. Whatever you choose will not be your final scope, however given a bit of thought you get towards your priorities, possibly those will change over time too!

[Chris E]

Chris - I think you're suffering from information overload.

Stop. Get back to basics:

1. Focus on what you want to see as a requirement - build a priority list.

Answering this will be difficult because you don't know what scopes offer in performance for what purpose. Every scope has it's pros and cons - only by understanding your priorities will you have a direction.

2. Start simple - from there you will gain experience and know what direction you want to head in.

For example - this is how it worked out for me:

First scope - priorities:

1. Learning what's up there by forcing myself to star hop.

2. Low cost - I came to the conclusion that you have to put the stake in the sand to give yourself a reference point.

3. Pick up and go - something that doesn't take ages to get out there and look, needed to be mobile too.

Now I wanted, like everyone, a scope to cover moon, planets, stars, nebulae etc.

I decided on just going for a simple manual mount and refractor. I chose the Vixen A80Mf (910mm fl, f11.4) with porta mount.

The scope has allowed me to see the moon in great detail (thanks to the fl), forced me to star hop and learn more about the stars rather than the technology. It also gave me experience.

I got to see my first nebula - M42 (the great orion nebula) as a very dim smudge (think blue on black between the stars).

Wow moments - the moon and M42.

Disappointments - the lack of being able to see any other nebulas, galaxies etc. I know now this is down to the small aperture and high f-ratio along with light pollution.

So I decided to make a jump forward, I knew that to get Nebulae I'd have to go for a larger aperture and have a 'faster' (lower f-ratio). I knew I'd got the Vixen for higher focal length for the moon etc.

I also wanted to try some astrophotography. I was still unsure about what focal lengths etc would result in the best move in this direction. I bought a second hand ATIK 16ic guide camera for £250 from the for sale forum and tried it with the Vixen.. knowing it would give me further experience.

It gave me serious steep learning curve - everything from focusing, moving the mount (manually) through to finding the damn object.

I set myself a budget.. somewhere between £2-3K.

Priorities:

1. Deep Space Objects - maximise the DSOs that I couldn't see visually by using astrophotography.

2. EQ mount.

3. Portable.

4. Not too massive (I have a small place and a large scope would cause problems!)

After much looking I was convinced I wanted a Vixen VC200L and a Vixen GOTO EQ mount but I thought I'd throw open the discussion as a thread on here - in short I'm glad I did.

As luck would have it, there was a refractor in the for sale forum and I saw the logic of getting the best mount in your budget as the tracking (nothing todo with GOTO) has to be as accurate as possible.

The problem was I was that the VC200L has a long 1800mm focal length and is f9.0 although a focal reducer would make the scope a 1260mm focal length and f6.3.

Two rules in astrophotography appeared from the discussions:

* under 1000mm focal length for any mount that costs less than £4K

* f-ratio is king to reduce the time required to take exposures - a maximum of f7, preferably as low as possible.

Grrr..

It wasn't until someone suggested the refractor for sale and EQ6 as an option.

Reading up on the refractor it had good reviews and others were circling with the view to buy it. So I decided that the refractor with an EQ6 mount would be it.. oh and if I was going to have a scope then I'd better get myself a better eyepiece than the bundled ones that came with the Vixen..

So I got:

* SW NEQ6 Pro mount

* Pentax 105 SDP (105mm, 675mm fl, f6.38)

* Baader Hyperion 13mm EP

I was extremely nervous considering the cost.. I took (read manhandle - the EQ6 is ~40Kg!) the mount out along with the scope and EP for a non-powered, fully manual first light.

Gobsmacked.

I could see M42 is more detail, the core was brighter with more of it. I could see the individual stars in there too but I had a problem.. I couldn't recognise where all the stars I knew were in the sea of stars!

So I managed to hop over to Pliaedes (I can never spell it!) where the I failed to recognise it! Too much nebulosity and additional stars!

Also found open clusters for the first time but I was still lost! So I started getting to grips with the polar alignment and GOTO.. I can see galaxies, often quite faint outlines/smudges however since getting the light pollution filter I can make out some details in them.

For the photography side of things - well that's improving since attending SGL6 star party. Just being there, I learnt a load of things.

I had a look through a couple of dob - good views, with coma (ie warping of the stars at the edges of the field of view). The 1/10th wave dob (high accuracy mirrors) showed a better image but lacked the ability to see the spirals of galaxies that the large dob showed.

All these I could see and more with my little 105mm if I used a camera.

At SGL6 I showed someone that was using bundled EPs what the difference was by using EPs such as Baader Hyperions on a very small saturn (675mm focal length means a 13mm EP only gives about x51 magnification):

* William Optics 7mm - showed saturn although not as crisply as the Hyperion and without good separation of the planet and rings.

* Baader Hyperion 13mm - shows saturn where you can make out the curve of the rings across the planet and that planet curves.

* Nagler 7mm - showed the same view but almost holographic in detail but not surprising considering the cost!

That gave me a good pointer to the EPs sizes I wanted. So I bought:

* BH 3.5mm for 192x magnification for moon and planets

* BH 31mm for wide wide field! (It's so wide it's needs a 2" focuser connection)

Tried it again with Saturn - the views were gob smacking. The 3.5mm EP gave a much larger image and with good detail. The high magnification means less light (thus only good for brighter targets - no dim DSOs!).

Pointing the 3.5mm EP at M42 and you can split the core stars so wide it's stupid! The nebulosity is there still although darker (again due to the high magnification). The 31mm EP I need to get an 2" extender for the focuser but through another 500mm focal length scope at night it was like looking at a mass of stars with a high brightness.

I got some great images from SGL6 by just using my EQ6 and the old secondhand ATIK 16ic guide camera as an imaging camera! Not glossy mag pics but ones that I'm very proud of.

I wouldn't sell my current scope as really offers great flexibility, it may not be the best at everything - it is a master at photography, good at visual and with a few additions (EP & Barlow) it's pretty good for planets.

So there you have it - I thought giving an example of how I got to where I am at the moment would be a good way to give you an idea on how to approach this mass of information. Whatever you choose will not be your final scope, however given a bit of thought you get towards your priorities, possibly those will change over time too!

Cheers Nick, wow what a review, yeh I was/still am confused, and I'm getting really frustrated, In my head I know what I want to see, (Saturn in detail) and some of the M's (M42/31 etc and Nebula's), I'm frightned to death of walking into my shop in town and them telling me "oh yes sir, this will pick those out no problem" and then I unpack it all and it doesn't, I'm only gonna get one chance at this as its taken weeks for the wife to come around to it, she still hasn't fully agreed I can have one lol, Which is why I want a very good one to start with as she may not let me spend loads of money upgrading mounts, eyepieces etc, ... So in short, Saturn in detail is a high priority and the M's too.....I'd like someone to say "Chris, you need this diameter lense, this F/ focal ratio thinghy, and this mount" to see all the things you want to see..

But the help I've had from you guys is unbelievable, I just dont understand it, and its winding me up lol

Chris

[swamp thing]

Hi Chris

Sounds like you need to get in contact with your local society and go along to one of their public viewing nights or have a look in the social groups, at the top of the page under community.

There is bound to be someone nearby.

That way you'll get to look through a variety of scopes of different size and design and chat with the owners on pros, cons and prices.

You can't beat hands on seeing in the flesh experience.

That said a 6" f/8 Dob is IMO the best all round starter scope.

It is big enough to give good views of the Moon and Planets and will show a wide variety of deep sky objects.

It won't break the bank, it's light and very portable.

Collimating f/8 is straight forward and once done will remain accurate for ages (unless you drop it or whack it pretty hard).

Sure there are more complicated elaborate designs but 6" dob once collimated (1st time use) is plonk on ground start viewing. Nothing else is that quick and easy to use.

Regards Steve

[Chris E]

Ok, so If the wife would let me spend a bit more, would this be ok for a beginner ??? Dobsonians - Skywatcher Skyliner 250PX Dobsonian

Chris

[NickK]

Only thing is the pics don't give the full size of a dob...

http://stargazerslounge.com/equipment-help/89216-skyliner-250px-flex-tube-auto-tracking-dobsonian.html

Here's a good reference against a shed door.

The flex version reports weights of: OTA ca. 15kg - Rocker box ca. 13kg. So expect a bit heavier with the non-flex.

[twotter]

Yes.

The only advisories are 1)can you lift it and 2)can you store it?

I have the Skyliner 200P because of #1

[GazK]

Chris, collimation is a piece of ****. It looks complicated - imagine if I wrote down how to ride a bike. "When the bike veers left, lean left and turn the wheel left. When the bike overcorrects right, lean right and steer right". You'd never get on a bike would you? Collimation is the same. Hard to describe, easy to do. Two minutes work tops.

[Chris E]

Chris, collimation is a piece of ****. It looks complicated - imagine if I wrote down how to ride a bike. "When the bike veers left, lean left and turn the wheel left. When the bike overcorrects right, lean right and steer right". You'd never get on a bike would you? Collimation is the same. Hard to describe, easy to do. Two minutes work tops.

Cheers Gaz, Yeah the collimation bit does worry me, I take it you have to collimate ALL telescopes, refractor, reflector, etc ...I went up to Manchester at the weekend to see relatives, and he's lent me a " Meade 8" cessegrain" thinghy...to see how I get on with stargazing...Haven't seen a flipping thing yet lol, not even the moon (( I think my wife is coming around to the idea of letting me have a scope, its just taking the plunge of which one, I'd like a dead easy out of the box caps off look at stuff scope, about 8" ...

Will let you know how I get on with this Meade

Chris

[NickK]

Refractors - no collimation needed unless it's had a really hard knock.. at which point the optics are likely to break!

[Chris E]

ok, I'm sorry for being lazy, but this is confusing me now, could someone pls post the differances between the dob skywatcher 200p and the 200px, theres a couple of hundred quid differance...But I think I'm getting closer to my 1st, scope ))))))) Ps, are these reflector or refractor scopes...Sorry again, I know I'm being a pain (((

Dobsonians - Skywatcher Skyliner 200P Dobsonian

Dobsonians - Skywatcher Skyliner 250PX Dobsonian

Chris

[NickK]

Both are 1200mm focal length, so both would show the same field of view.

The difference is aperture and because f-ratio=fl/aperture:

200P = 200mm (8") f5.9 (ie f6).

250PX = 250mm (10") f5

The 250 will be wider than the 200 and consequently heavier.

Can't see any other differences.

[lw24]

Although it's less aperture, I'd go for the Skyliner 150P, due to it being lighter, and having a higher f/ number; resulting in less collimation needed.

[GazK]

Don't overlook the importance of size - the best telescope is the one you will use. I have the 250px, but the collapsible variety. If I had a solid tube 250px it would be too much of a faff for me to set up, and it would gather dust.

A 6" scope you will use will give you better views than a 10" that never leaves the garage!

I also think you may have reached the point of analysis overload - I do this a lot myself and have learned to recognise the signs. Any of the scopes on your shortlist will give great views - if you're down to worrying about whether the 6" or 8" variety of a particular type of scope is the one for you, it's time to go and see them in the flesh to make a final choice.

[Chris E]

Ok I think its best to go and have a look at some insted of getting on everyones nerves on here , but don't have much choice at this shop, unless there's more inside...

East of England Binoculars Astronomical Telescopes

Comments welcome on any of them ;-)

Chris