Help me buy a telescope

[JMapleton]

Why wouldn't he want to get

http://www.scientificsonline.com/astroscan-plus-telescope.html

until he finds out he has a long term interest in viewing.

You know, I've heard a lot of good things about that scope, but I've never used one myself.

 

[yhelothar]

Why wouldn't he want to get

http://www.scientificsonline.com/astroscan-plus-telescope.html

until he finds out he has a long term interest in viewing.

I have one of those.

What are you supposed to expect to see with one of these? I took it to camping where there was some really dark skies... the milky way was visible. The orion nebula looked like a faint smudge. This thing isn't powerful enough to get a good view on celestial objects, so I thought it'd at least fare well for deep sky ones.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Do not buy the Orion SkyQuest dobs, they are, in my personal opinion, difficult to assemble. There are other 8 inch dobs using a clutch system out there that is much easier and safer to use.

But for your situation, if you are just looking to view, I would look for a nice 8 inch dobsonian. They can be had around $350.

As for the binocs, you need good binocs to star gaze with, avoid those el cheapos. Anything below $150 is going to be pure junk and just give you a headache.

I've owned two Orion dobs, the first one bought when I was in high school, and both were easy to assemble. The optical tube is preassembled, you only have to put together the base, and it didn't take more than a few minutes. No different from a piece of Ikea furniture.

I know when I bought the first one, it was one of the best ones available. Nowadays, perhaps other brands have surpassed the Orion in quality, but if you're on a budget they're still a very good deal.

I just started doing astronomy 2years ago and went with a 10inch Orion Dob to start with (Go for it!!). To be honest I didn't know what to expect, in the end I was floored with the views. The two starting eyepieces are a good introduction, but it was not until a year later that I could afford a Televue Ethos 13mm eyepiece that I got that "holy shit!" moment. Suffice to say I have added a few accessories (a telrad, cooling fan + battery pack, 13mm Ethos, 2 inch Televue Barlow 2x) over these last 2 years. Equipment is a huge deal in this hobby, and damn it is expensive! As others have mention cloudynights is an AWESOME resource.

Currently trying to figure out if it is possible (lol money!) to get a 25 inch dobsonian classic, or 22 inch ultra compact from Obsession. Holy god I want either of them LOL! And yea I got to see through a 25 inch once last year...

LOL aperture fever strikes again!

How much do these eyepieces cost? What kinda stuff can you see?!

The sky is the limit. Usually when you're buying expensive eyepieces, you're looking to improve your apparent field of view while also increasing optical quality. High quality eyepieces often offer a wider apparent field of view than cheap ones. The ones that come with a telescope usually have about a 50° apparent FOV, but premium ones go all the way up to 80°, giving you a "spacewalk" experience. They also determine magnification.

 

[JMapleton]

The sky is the limit. Usually when you're buying expensive eyepieces, you're looking to improve your apparent field of view while also increasing optical quality. High quality eyepieces often offer a wider apparent field of view than cheap ones. The ones that come with a telescope usually have about a 50° apparent FOV, but premium ones go all the way up to 80°, giving you a "spacewalk" experience. They also determine magnification.

Believe it or not, they make 120 degree EPs now.

http://www.astronomics.com/main/pro...SHVWMWFRC43G9LK595R250JH90/product_id/ES12009

 

[sjwaste]

Thanks guys. I appreciate all of the info.

I don't think I want to spend $250 on the Astroscan. If I'm going in for $250, I'd rather spend a little more if I need to and get what I would if I were still interested. This is one thing I can bear the risk of losing interest, because I don't think I will.

The 8" dob seems to be the most popular rec from everyone. Is it worth going up to a 10" or does the marginal improvement not warrant the cost?

JM - I'll take your advice on binocs and spend a little more if I need to.

Thanks!

 

[silverpig]

I don't think you'd get much out of 1 second exposures. Most of mine are closer to 2 minutes. You can still do back to back to back etc exposures without touching anything with a DSLR, if you have the right software for it.

If you're really into it, yeah CCD is the way to go, but they're terribly expensive for a decent one and you can only use them for astro photos. I like using my DSLR for other things.

Keeping the exposures short keeps the noise down. It's been a while since I've done it, and 1 second is probably too short, but maybe 5 seconds was what I used to use. Of course you have to take hundreds of exposures, but those include flat fields and dark fields too.

 

[Spacehead]

The 8" dob seems to be the most popular rec from everyone. Is it worth going up to a 10" or does the marginal improvement not warrant the cost?

I'd still go with the 8". It's a good all-around scope.

JM - I'll take your advice on binocs and spend a little more if I need to.

Not really a deal breaker, but look & see if any binoculars you like have a threaded hole for mounting to a tripod or monopole. Could come in handy in the future, especially if you get high magnification.

 

[dud]

I don't think I want to spend $250 on the Astroscan. If I'm going in for $250, I'd rather spend a little more if I need to and get what I would if I were still interested. This is one thing I can bear the risk of losing interest, because I don't think I will.

You are at significant risk of losing interest in this hobby if you start out with inferior/poor equipment. Avoid the cheap Meade/Celestron scopes as they trully will disappoint. The binocular path is the one of least risk/cost. I highly recommend this route.

I have been in the hobby for about 35 years and currently have one scope and one pair of GIANT binos. If money is tight get a pair of fairly good 20x80 or larger binos, possibly with a mount/tripod as these get heavy. You mentioned that your budget is $500. You will be hard-pressed to find a quality scope for the price but may I recommend the one scope that I have bought, owned and NOT sold ... a vintage orange-tube Celestron C8. These usually perform very well (if taken care of) and are great values. Here is one for your consideration for $450:


http://www.cloudynights.com/classifieds/showproduct.php?product=57352&sort=&cat=11&page=1

 

[AstroManLuca]

You are at significant risk of losing interest in this hobby if you start out with inferior/poor equipment. Avoid the cheap Meade/Celestron scopes as they trully will disappoint. The binocular path is the one of least risk/cost. I highly recommend this route.

I have been in the hobby for about 35 years and currently have one scope and one pair of GIANT binos. If money is tight get a pair of fairly good 20x80 or larger binos, possibly with a mount/tripod as these get heavy. You mentioned that your budget is $500. You will be hard-pressed to find a quality scope for the price but may I recommend the one scope that I have bought, owned and NOT sold ... a vintage orange-tube Celestron C8. These usually perform very well (if taken care of) and are great values. Here is one for your consideration for $450:


http://www.cloudynights.com/classifieds/showproduct.php?product=57352&sort=&cat=11&page=1

Interesting idea.

I've used giant binos before at an astronomy meet and they were quite impressive. Large binoculars give great views - binocular vision really does improve image quality, because humans are naturally adapted to using both eyes. I actually use an eyepatch when looking through my telescope just so I can relax the muscles in my face instead of squinting.

The disadvantage is the best magnification you'll get with large binos is 20 or 30x, but for anything other than planets you'll want low magnification anyway. The other cool thing about binoculars is they have a wide field of view that pushes you to "explore." Instead of seeking out one object with a telescope, and getting frustrated when you can't find it, you can just kind of hop around and look at clusters and stuff in the milky way.

One problem with binoculars is finding a good mounting system. It's hard to get a good view of objects that are higher than about 60° without mashing your face up against the tripod. There are systems that can deal with that, such as parallelogram mounts, mirror mounts (where you look up by looking down into a mirror), and fork mounts, but they're expensive. So yeah, you're probably looking at $500 if you go for big binoculars as well. Not that they aren't worth it. I admit that if I had spent my telescope money on large binoculars and a quality mounting system, I'd probably use it a lot more since it's much lighter and more compact.

 

[AstroManLuca]

OP, one thing I'd recommend - go to Stellafane in August. I made the trip when I was in high school and it was well worth it.

http://stellafane.org/

It's an astronomy convention in Vermont that focuses on homemade telescopes, although of course lots of people bring prebuilt ones too. The craftsmanship on the homemade ones is really outstanding though. Everyone's really friendly and will gladly let you borrow a look from their scope. Some of the bigger ones have lines to use them.

You bring a tent and sleeping bag and camp out, and hope for clear skies.

 

[alkemyst]

For binoculars, you want low magnification, large aperture, and nicely coated optics. Low magnification means you won't see as much shake when you hold them, and the things you see will be brighter. The ones you linked to are good.

I have 8x50s from Minolta - they're halfway to night-vision! I can look through them at dusk when my eyes can't make out anything and see lots of detail.

Edit: Amazon is really hard to search, but here are some interesting choices if you wanted to pay more:
http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-Action-7...2556835&sr=1-8
Edit2: Found the cheap version of these.

Amazon told me Celestrons are on sale, so I looked there next:
http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-7202...556889&sr=1-12
http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-7202...556889&sr=1-21

The above binoculars are nice, but realize they're bulkier and heavier, so you might find them more inconvenient.

For star gazing binoculars you'd use a tripod.

 

[JMapleton]

Keeping the exposures short keeps the noise down. It's been a while since I've done it, and 1 second is probably too short, but maybe 5 seconds was what I used to use. Of course you have to take hundreds of exposures, but those include flat fields and dark fields too.

Maybe you had a different sort of camera. Noise on my DSLR is more about the ISO. I can leave the shutter open all day and not have any noise, as long as the ISO is low (under 800).

The shortest exposure I would ever work with is maybe 15 seconds.

 

[ManBearPig]

I am more conflicted about what to do now than I was before this thread.

 

[TechAZ]

I apologize if my questions are invasive on the OP, but I am in roughly the same position.

My budget is roughly $800 tops, and all of the reading I have done on cloudy nights and other sites have not helped me make my decision any easier. I would love to do astrophotography, but if I'm understanding things correctly I would suffer a major hit towards what I can see if I want to stay within my budget (even though I already have a DSLR).

Is there a better set up than this considering my budget?

http://www.hayneedle.com/sale/zhumellz10deluxedobsonianultimatetelescopepackage.cfm

http://www.hayneedle.com/sale/zhumell2inch2xedbarlowlenswithcompressionrings.cfm


Any feedback is appreciated.

 

[jupiter57]

You'll catch "Aperture Fever"!
That's what happened to me. I started with a simple $175 Tasco 60mm, wanted to see more, moved to a 6" Reflector, still not satisfied, went to a 10" Reflector. Kept my scope purchases under control, never going over a 16" Dobsonian.

I knew I had to draw the line after I spent $1000 on a single eyepiece, and was seriously considering getting a 25" Obsession, the big trailer mounted job.
Currently have a 10" Meade LX200.
Still look longingly at the bigger scopes, but my better judgement keeps m in check.

 

[alkemyst]

I apologize if my questions are invasive on the OP, but I am in roughly the same position.

My budget is roughly $800 tops, and all of the reading I have done on cloudy nights and other sites have not helped me make my decision any easier. I would love to do astrophotography, but if I'm understanding things correctly I would suffer a major hit towards what I can see if I want to stay within my budget (even though I already have a DSLR).

Is there a better set up than this considering my budget?

http://www.hayneedle.com/sale/zhumellz10deluxedobsonianultimatetelescopepackage.cfm

http://www.hayneedle.com/sale/zhumell2inch2xedbarlowlenswithcompressionrings.cfm


Any feedback is appreciated.

Make sure you review the XT10 by Orion, the Z10's main competition. Also check the astronomy forums for coupon codes.

The XT10 and Z10 both have loyal followers.

 

[silverpig]

Maybe you had a different sort of camera. Noise on my DSLR is more about the ISO. I can leave the shutter open all day and not have any noise, as long as the ISO is low (under 800).

The shortest exposure I would ever work with is maybe 15 seconds.

I used a few. One was a peltier cooled 1k x 1k CCD. The other was a little smaller and was liquid nitrogen cooled.

Thermal noise from the telescope being at ~10C on observing nights drowns out a lot of sources.

To get the really faint stuff you cool your CCD to get the IR noise as low as possible and take dark field images of the inside of the camera with the shutter closed to measure whatever IR is left. Every 30 minutes or so you take ~10 or so dark fields, average them, and then you subtract the dark fields from the next set of images you take so you properly zero them out.

With a CCD that sensitive, the really bright stuff will cause some of the pixels to bleed over into others, so you have to keep the exposures short. This means taking a lot of them.

And then there's taking away the dirt from the optics, so you use flat field images to correct for that.

I haven't done it for a long time, but as I recall, the procedure is something like:

20 flats (taken of the bright sky just around sunset)
20 darks
Then wait for your target to come up
10 R
10 G
10 B
10 darks
10 R
10 G
10 B
10 darks

and you repeat until you have the area you want mapped out. Then in post processing you average the set of 20 flats and each set of 10 darks, then subtract the darks from the following 30 RGB shots (or whatever filter you used). You then divide all of the RGB shots by the flat field to get ride of the dust on the optics. Then you align the images, stitch them all together and colorize.

The last observing run I did was a map of the Pleiades with a 42cm scope. I can't for the life of me find the image though

 

[BarkingGhostar]

For a true newbie to the world of astronomy, just knowing what kind/type of telescope can be a chore. Looking at the large varieties of telescopes often reminds me of kingdoms of biology, with each delving into a massive offering in each.

For instance, why would one buy a Newtonian scope over a non-Newtonian scope? I can go look at telescope type definitions, but without knowing their suited applications a first time buying newbie, such as myself, would be lost.

And yes, I know there is a local astronomy club in my area, but they seem overly formal and not really open to the completed unadulterated newbie.

 

[alkemyst]

Most of the telescope forums have FAQs, the Dobsonian's are usually the best bang for buck for the hobbist types. I was looking seriously a couple years ago for my wife at the Z/XT 6-10's.

She ended up with a Pentax 8x40 PCF WP II set of binoculars and a Pentax N tripod adapter. She can watch animals and stars nicely...the moon comes out decent as well.

 

[Ken g6]

For star gazing binoculars you'd use a tripod.

Sure, if that's all he's getting. For using them with a telescope, I find a non-tripod model better for low-power scanning; then use the telescope for a closer/better view.

 

[chris9641]

I bought this as my first telescope, as the price per inch of the mirror was the best deal I could find. Being my first telescope I don't really know how well it performs compared to other brands, but my novice eyes are impressed. It's also easy to store... I couldn't find any other brands using the pull-out truss design so that is a plus too.

 

[Bashbelly]

This as your first telescope. Save yourself all the grief of wanting to upgrade at a later date and just spend a small fortune up front.

 

[adlep]

This as your first telescope. Save yourself all the grief of wanting to upgrade at a later date and just spend a small fortune up front.

Wow, there isn't anything better you can buy unless you are willing to build your own observatory.

 

[JMapleton]

I apologize if my questions are invasive on the OP, but I am in roughly the same position.

My budget is roughly $800 tops, and all of the reading I have done on cloudy nights and other sites have not helped me make my decision any easier. I would love to do astrophotography, but if I'm understanding things correctly I would suffer a major hit towards what I can see if I want to stay within my budget (even though I already have a DSLR).

Is there a better set up than this considering my budget?

http://www.hayneedle.com/sale/zhumellz10deluxedobsonianultimatetelescopepackage.cfm

http://www.hayneedle.com/sale/zhumell2inch2xedbarlowlenswithcompressionrings.cfm


Any feedback is appreciated.

You cannot do astrophotography with Dobsonian telescopes, if you're looking to do that, avoid Dobs. I would look at a Schmidt Cassegrain with a quality mount, like the Celestron SE series.

 

[JMapleton]

Wow, there isn't anything better you can buy unless you are willing to build your own observatory.

I'd rather have....

http://www.takahashi-europe.com/en/FET-300.php

Seven figures for this one.