I'm looking for a $500-$1,000 investment right now. but if I wait a few months I can put more money into it. I just want to make sure I get a quality product so if I need to spend more money I'll be more than willing.
1) weight is not an issue
2) The idea of taking pictures sounds really neat to me so if it's a possibility I'd be willing to spend the money for it.
3) Like I said $500-$1,000 right now but I'm willing to go higher (or lower if applicable)
One thing to note is that I'm new to this. So I also don't want to get a product that I'll be in over my head with.
Thanks a lot for the responses.
EDIT: After looking at telescope .com there seems to be a bunch of telescopes in my price range and under. Maybe I won't have to spend as much as I thought?
Before you decide, you should research the different types of telescopes to see which aspect of astronomy you find most appealing.
Let me break it down for you. There are three basic types of telescopes.
1. Reflector - A reflector is basically a giant tube with a mirror in the back and a little one, set at an angle, in the front. No lenses or anything.
Advantage: In telescopes, aperture is king. The bigger (wider not longer) the telescope the better. With a reflector, you get most aperture per dollar. You can get a 12 inch reflector for under $1,000 and 12 inches is huge for a telescope. Most reflectors are often called "Dobsonians."
Disadvantage: Reflectors cannot be used for take photos (save for a few super high end ones) and they are typically very large in size and very heavy. They're also fragile, and require some maintenance (collimation with a laser, which is easy to learn).
2. Refractor - A refrator is basically a small tube with lenses. No mirrors (except for the diagonal on the back). I have a refractor (Televue 76).
Advantage: Refractors typically have the best image quality in terms of sharpness and clarity. Also, most refractors are designed for taking photos and with the proper mount you can take very high quality images with them. Refractors are also typically very small and compact.
Disadvantages: They're very small and you have little aperture to work with. In photo taking, aperture is not that big of a deal. But when used visually, you typically don't see very much through a refractors because they're so small for the money (say a $1k reflector vs a $1k refractor). You also need a specialized mount (EQ mount) if you plan to take photos with it.
3. Schmidt-Cassegrain - This type is a combination of the both. It has a mirror and a lens.
Advantage: SCs can be used well for taking photos and visually because you can get decent aperture and you can get decent photos with them. They're also not that heavy. They're a middleground in almost every way, weight, cost, size, photo ability.
Disadvantage: They're a middle ground. If you REALLY want to take photos, you'll find they won't be as clear as a refractor (stars won't be pinpoint sharp). If you REALLY want to use them visually, they're not as big as a reflector for the same price.
Side note: Do you live in a city or in the country? I really think people who live in the city should second guess if they really want a telescope. Light pollution is a real killer when it comes to astronomy. You can still see stuff from the city (I live in the city), but not nearly as much. Really decide this is something you want to spend money on. I think people are disappointed at what they can or cannot see when it comes to astronomy. They think they'll see Jupiter like the Voyager satellite saw it (the planets are very small when looking through most telescopes). Or they'll see a galaxy like it was shown in a city (in reality, most nebulas and galaxy are shown in greyscale, not color). You need a camera to get any color out of anything except a planet, that's the appeal of astrophotography. Really shop around the think about it before you make a choice. Also, PM me if you're ready to buy, I know a guy who works for a major telescope retailer and he'll give you the best price possible. But really do your homework before you decide.