Recommend me a telescope?

af_thefragile

Sorry if you guys get asked this question a lot but I've always been fascinated with the night sky and the heavens. When I was a kid I used to spend hours checking out the night sky with a pair of binoculars I had (which sadly broke one day when I dropped it ), I still can name most constellations and stars in the night sky... Anyway since a long time I've been wanting to expand into astrophotography and such.

I'm looking to spend around 500eur for a good telescope, one I can attach my DSLR camera to and take some cool shots of the planets, star clusters, nebulae, probably even the ISS etc.

Thanks.

endacl

af_thefragile wrote: »

Sorry if you guys get asked this question a lot but I've always been fascinated with the night sky and the heavens. When I was a kid I used to spend hours checking out the night sky with a pair of binoculars I had (which sadly broke one day when I dropped it ), I still can name most constellations and stars in the night sky... Anyway since a long time I've been wanting to expand into astrophotography and such.

I'm looking to spend around 500eur for a good telescope, one I can attach my DSLR camera to and take some cool shots of the planets, star clusters, nebulae, probably even the ISS etc.

Thanks.

Answer here. Get what he got.

http://touch.boards.ie/thread/2056662225?page=1#post_79095216

af_thefragile

What would you think of this one:

http://www.camera.ie/products/celestron-astromaster-130eq-md-307x-motorized-telescope

Its about the same diameter as the skywatcher telescope but much cheaper and doesn't have that skyscan controller thing which I'm not sure I'ld really need. I would prefer to find the objects on my own...

Although the skywatcher telescome has better optics I think...

endacl

af_thefragile wrote: »

What would you think of this one:

http://www.camera.ie/products/celestron-astromaster-130eq-md-307x-motorized-telescope

Its about the same diameter as the skywatcher telescope but much cheaper and doesn't have that skyscan controller thing which I'm not sure I'ld really need. I would prefer to find the objects on my own...

Although the skywatcher telescome has better optics I think...

Celestron is a solid brand. At this price point, there would be little between the optics. Depends what you want to look at. Some designs will perform better than others on different targets.

Nothing wrong with this one. I'd advise setting a budget and shopping around for the biggest eyeball (aperture) you can find.

af_thefragile

Well I'ld mostly like to look at planets and the bright nebulae, galaxies etc.

Both the celestron and the skywatcher telescope seem to have similar diameter aperture. Only they're different styles so the skywatcher has a larger focal length. But I read what really matters is the size of the aperture as that relates to the clarity and detail of the image you'll see and the focal length can always be increased by adding barlow lens. Although there's probably a bit more to it than that...

I'ld prefer a telescope without the electronic finder thing as they make it more expensive and I'ld prefer to find the objects on my own. Pressing buttons and letting the telescope do all the searching seems to take away the fun from it all...

Also I'ld prefer to not spend a lot of money but I'll put 500eur as my upper limit...

This one has a larger aperture too...
http://www.camera.ie/products/celestron-omni-xlt-150n

robertxxx

af_thefragile wrote: »

Well I'ld mostly like to look at planets and the bright nebulae, galaxies etc.

Both the celestron and the skywatcher telescope seem to have similar diameter aperture. Only they're different styles so the skywatcher has a larger focal length. But I read what really matters is the size of the aperture as that relates to the clarity and detail of the image you'll see and the focal length can always be increased by adding barlow lens. Although there's probably a bit more to it than that...

I'ld prefer a telescope without the electronic finder thing as they make it more expensive and I'ld prefer to find the objects on my own. Pressing buttons and letting the telescope do all the searching seems to take away the fun from it all...

Also I'ld prefer to not spend a lot of money but I'll put 500eur as my upper limit...

This one has a larger aperture too...
http://www.camera.ie/products/celestron-omni-xlt-150n

8 inch Dobson
http://www.green-witch.com/acatalog/Dobsonian_Range.html

af_thefragile

robertxxx wrote: »

8 inch Dobson
http://www.green-witch.com/acatalog/Dobsonian_Range.html

Actually that is the one I've been looking at lately. Its cheap and bigger too...

http://www.ktectelescopes.ie/By-Manufacturer/Skywatcher/Skywatcher-Dobsonian-Telescopes/Skywatcher-Skyliner-200P-Parabolic-Dobsonian-Telescope.html

Plug

af_thefragile wrote: »

Actually that is the one I've been looking at lately. Its cheap and bigger too...

http://www.ktectelescopes.ie/By-Manufacturer/Skywatcher/Skywatcher-Dobsonian-Telescopes/Skywatcher-Skyliner-200P-Parabolic-Dobsonian-Telescope.html

Would you buy one of these? 8 inch full goto with 3 or 4 eye peices. 500 quid in kilkenny. but im in OZ at the moment so I can arrange something.

endacl

Plug wrote: »

af_thefragile wrote: »

Actually that is the one I've been looking at lately. Its cheap and bigger too...

http://www.ktectelescopes.ie/By-Manufacturer/Skywatcher/Skywatcher-Dobsonian-Telescopes/Skywatcher-Skyliner-200P-Parabolic-Dobsonian-Telescope.html

Would you buy one of these? 8 inch full goto with 3 or 4 eye peices. 500 quid in kilkenny. but im in OZ at the moment so I can arrange something.

Now that would be a niiiiice starter scope....

Gremlin

af_thefragile wrote: »

I'm looking to spend around 500eur for a good telescope, one I can attach my DSLR camera to and take some cool shots of the planets, star clusters, nebulae, probably even the ISS etc.

It depends a lot on what you call 'cool'. You may be just happy to record anything at all but if you want really top notch photography you will need to expand the budget a bit. The dobsonians menationed above are great visual scopes but they are just that. The only photography you will be doing through those is maybe a very quick snap of the moon.

If you want to take images of planets you need a tracking telescope. If you want to take quality photos of deep sky stuff you need a scope which is computerised and has the ability to add an autoguider at some point.

My suggestion, stick with the visual for the moment and see how the interest develops.

D.

af_thefragile

Well I do realise I'll never be able to get NASA like images from a little backyard telescope so yeah, the telescope will be primarily for visual purposes.

Although would you think it'ld be better to get a smaller telescope with a motorized mount for autotracking like this one: http://www.camera.ie/products/celestron-astromaster-130eq-md-307x-motorized-telescope
As you can get long exposures of the objects through the camera so you might see more.

Or would the detail of a bigger 8 inch dobsonian will be superior especially when it comes to deep sky objects? As there seems to be plenty of variables when it comes to taking clear pictures of the night sky. There would be vibrations from the telescope, distortion from the sky and air itself so a simple long exposure shot from the camera wouldn't be enough...?

Also what is the real advantage of the skyscan thing other than finding the objects for you and basically doing all the hard work? Would it be of any particular advantage when looking at deep sky objects?


Plug's telescope does look like a pretty good piece of kit tough...

endacl

af_thefragile wrote: »

Well I do realise I'll never be able to get NASA like images from a little backyard telescope so yeah, the telescope will be primarily for visual purposes.

Although would you think it'ld be better to get a smaller telescope with a motorized mount for autotracking like this one: http://www.camera.ie/products/celestron-astromaster-130eq-md-307x-motorized-telescope
As you can get long exposures of the objects through the camera so you might see more.

Or would the detail of a bigger 8 inch dobsonian will be superior especially when it comes to deep sky objects? As there seems to be plenty of variables when it comes to taking clear pictures of the night sky. There would be vibrations from the telescope, distortion from the sky and air itself so a simple long exposure shot from the camera wouldn't be enough...?

Also what is the real advantage of the skyscan thing other than finding the objects for you and basically doing all the hard work? Would it be of any particular advantage when looking at deep sky objects?


Plug's telescope does look like a pretty good piece of kit tough...

8 inch dob would give vastly superior views, especially of deep sky objects. The skyscan, if it tracks, would keep an object in the field of view and means you wouldn't have to constantly adjust pan and tilt, which could be a pain using an alt-az mount, especially when using higher magnification eyepieces.

Plug's offer is a good 'un. I'd be tempted myself if I didn't already have something similar.

Don't really have time to go into astrophotography details. It's a huge area. Many ways to skin a cat and all that....

Personally, i'd recommend starting with visual, and worry about photos later down the line.

henbane

Plug wrote: »

Would you buy one of these? 8 inch full goto with 3 or 4 eye peices. 500 quid in kilkenny. but im in OZ at the moment so I can arrange something.

How old is it? Is there anything wrong with it?

What are the 3-4 eyepieces?

With the flex-tube does it need collimation on every use? What's needed to power it for an evenings use?

Kencollins

To the poster above...

I bought a telescope from Plug last year, very nice guy and honest information.

With a "dobsonian", it is actually a newtonian telescope on a dobsonian mount. As with all newtonians, primary mirror colimation would be essential at the start of every viewing session.

Primary mirror collimation is really easy to do. On Skywatcher scopes is it done by making a tiny hole in the centre of the viewing cap cover, then looking through that tiny hole into the scope. You then use the three adjusters on the bottom of the scope to make the reflection of the tiny hole in the lens cap line up with a specially placed circle on the mirror (put there by the factory).

The whole process takes 20 seconds. If you ever need justification as to weather it needs to be done or not, just bring the scope outside, let it cool down, and look at jupiter. It will be hard to see a clear image, and you will find yourself squinting a lot. Then collimate the scope, and see the difference...

Plug, if that scope is still available coming up to christmas I might just be tempted to take it....the old 5" needs a bit of an upgrade!