Gift advice for portable/rugged telescope please

[stir-crazy]

Hi,

I want to get my girlfriend a telescope for christmas, and want to get one that we can take camping with us. I'm much more concerned with power (ie, I want to see the most I can see!) over weight, and ideally something that's made just for this kind of purpose.

I saw one in Wal*Mart for about $225, which is about what I'd like to spend. It was totally computerized/motorized, which seemed extra cool.

We're not even novice stargazers, more aspiring novices, so a good starter that fits all the above criteria would be awesome.

Any advice on either models or where to go? All advice greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance!

I'm in Sacramento, if that helps any at all.

[farmerj]

I am by no means an expert, however everything I've read and heard suggests staying far away from department store telescopes.

You are probably going to want to look for a smaller refractor for that price and portability. Companys to look at are Orion, Celestron and Meade for a good entry level telescope. I've just started using my telescope, and the most helpful thing i've found is a good beginners book on astronomy.

[aurora]

Do research first, and then buy from a reputable vendor or manufacturer.

Look at some of the other threads in this area of the board, lots of links and books have been recommended.

If you just buy something because it looks cool in the store, there is a good chance you will be disappointed.

[3rd Rock]

DON'T buy from a department store. The best advice is to wander down to the newsagents and buy this months astronomy magazine (sky & telescope is a good one) and then look at the ads (new AND second hand). You will wind up with a better scope than anything you could ever hope to buy from Walmart.

Underneath the glossy packaging, the Department store scope will be little more than a toy. You aren't talking about spending very much money, but you can get better value by going to the specialists.

Jon

[hansolo1]

if you live in california you should take a visit to a scope city retailer, why don't yo get her a gift certificate for scope city and let her pick out her own scope for 200 dollars buy a good pair of binoculars

[stir-crazy]

Sounds pretty reasonable, thanks. I hear the December issue has some reviews that I'll probably want.

I've also heard it might be better to skip the computer/motorization for this price range, as that probably means I'm trading in the optics for the bells and whistles.

Thanks all!

[aurora]

If you are going to backpack with the scope, you probably want to skip all electronics all together, thereby avoiding the need to carry a heavy battery, or a number of disposable batteries.

But if by camping you meant, pitch the tent next to the car, then that would not be an issue.

I would suggest checking out a short tube refractor, as it could do double duty as a night scope as well as a daytime spotting scope. Although some of the small maksutov's could work for this as well.

A mount with manual slow motion controls would be nice, but look for quality and don't go for a flimsy mount.

[JohnW]

I'm much more concerned with power (ie, I want to see the most I can see!)
Power isn't what determines how much you can see. The main function of a telescope isn't to make things bigger, it's to collect light. So the thing which determines how much you can see isn't the power, it's the aperture, i.e. the diameter of your main lens or mirror. You'll need high power for planets and double stars, but low power for everything else. You'll be surprised how big things like the Orion Nebula and Double Cluster are - the main problem with many objects isn't that they're small, it's that they're faint.

Department store telescopes often say things like "600x magnification!!" in big colourful letters on the box. There's no point mincing words about this - they're lying. If you have superb optics and incredible viewing conditions, the highest possible useful magnification is about 60x per inch of aperture. Most Wal-Mart telescopes are in the 2-4" range. I'll let you do the calculations.

Based on what you've said about your needs, I agree with aurora that a short-tube refractor would be a good fit - refractors are more robust and easier to maintain than the other designs. I don't have any specific recommendations at your price range, but you should try before you buy if possible - bad refractors can be absolutely horrific. If you can increase your budget, take a look at Stellarvue or William Optics.

[aurora]

Caveat: the following is my personal opinion, based on what I use a scope for. It may not be the best solution for you or for someone you know.

For a knockabout scope, or a second scope, or a portable scope to do double duty as a daytime spotting scope, I like the 80 mm shorttube refractor, like this version sold by Orion:

Orion 80mm Short Tube scope only (http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?
itemID=330&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=4&iSubCat=13&iProductID=330)

As the scope alone is under $200, I don't have to worry too much about accidently dropping it or something. It would be bad if I damaged it or lost it to theft, but it wouldn't be the end of the world, either.

I put mine on a nice bogen camera tripod, with a rather expensive slow motion pan head. However, here is a version on an alt az mount

Scope on alt az tripod (http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=448&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=4&iSubCat=13&iProductID=448)

Since I want it to be portable, and quick to set up, and to use it in the daytime, I use an alt az mount instead of a GEM (German Equatorial), and I go completely non-motorized as well.

Downside: the scope has a focal length of only 400 mm. The maximum useful magnification is probably not much over 100x, and since it is an achromat, there is false color on bright objects like Jupiter. And, the aperture is only 80mm (a little over 3 inches if my math is correct) so it doesn't gather nearly as much light as a larger scope.

However, it makes a nice rich field scope and gives good low power views. And from a truly dark site it is amazing how much one can see with such a small scope.

[stir-crazy]

Okay, having researched a bit more, I've decided to postpone the delivery, and up my budget too. This Mead 2130 (http://www.opticsplanet.net/meade-ds-2130lnt-130mm-computerized-reflector-telescope-20133.html) is what I'm thinking of; it seems like I can get a lot of quality viewing in.

And I totally dig the computerized part of it; it seems like it will make it easy to find a variety of locations and feed/maintain our interest Actually, it's also because I love gadgets, and can imagine myself getting frustrated trying to find multiple targets.

Seems pretty much a solid $400 everywhere I look. Which is a bit more than I wanted to spend, but the 5" aperature and computer deal just made it sound too cool.

[turbo-1]

You asked for portable and rugged. The Meade you linked to is fairly portable, but "rugged"? Not.

For less money, you can get a telescope that has over 2-1/2 times the light-gathering capacity of that 5" Meade, and you won't have to worry about batteries, power cords, flakey electronics, etc.

http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=366&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=4&iSubCat=8&iProductID=366

Use the extra money to buy a decent set of charts or a star atlas and learn your way around the sky. You and your girlfriend will have a great time getting to know where the "wow" objects are located. There are a heck of a lot more "wow" objects visible in an 8" scope than in a 5" - remember you want light-gathering capacity, not raw magnification. In a cheap scope, all magnification does for you is to make a bad image worse.

[Charlie in Dayton]

Consider an alternative...two pairs of 7x50 - 8x42 - 9x63 - 10x50 binoculars and a good star map...you can both look at the same time, and learn the sky together...

[Kaptain K]

Consider an alternative...two pairs of 7x50 - 8x42 - 9x63 - 10x50 binoculars and a good star map...you can both look at the same time, and learn the sky together...
Or a pair of binocs and a parallelogram mount and take turns finding things and then share with the other person.:)

[rockinreel]

If you want to hike up a mountain with backpacks, and pull the scope out, then this scope (http://shopping.discovery.com/product-59071.html?tcp=Telescopes-Top5-01-MeadeETX80BBTelescop) is for you. Comes with backpack, compass, and autostar with 1400 objects. It's not big aperature, but sure does seem pretty cool, selling for $300. Saw it in the Astonomy Magazine, December issue.

Oh, I had to add that batteries are a problem. Seem to only last 2 - 3 hours in my Celestron 8i SE before the hand control gets buggy. All the advice you get from the experienced scope owners really needs to be considered. You HAVE to have a jump battery for GoTo scopes, with cig adapter, for long nights (and batteries for when you accidentally lose power connection and have to re-align). These goto's with 34,000 objects is mostly of faint stars you will never view.

[aurora]

Did the original poster ever come back and read the replies?

[randb]

Dont get the 2130 by Meade. I heard a lot of bad things about it.

[stir-crazy]

I've been checking in on here very often; thank you all so much for the tips.

I also had a good conversation with the guy at stellarvue.com, and though I do aspire to get one of his scopes, it's simply a little bit too much for me at the moment (about $750, but wow! they seem quality)

He/y'all did talk me out completely of getting the computer assisted guidance; makes prefect sense, and I'd just as soon put the $'s into the optics.

I'm currently leaning towards a 6" Dobsonian now, in good part due to the price, and even more, because of the weight. We do some pretty serious hiking at times (in the Sierra Nevada), and 40lbs is already a very significant addition, though one I'm willing to make. (So yes, I'm a real camper, the car is far far far far far away from our tent).

As far as binoc's are concerned, I don't see the value of those if what I'm really hoping to view are deep-sky objects; seems I'd get the most out of the telescope, right?

Again, thank you all so very much for the advice, and I'll keep on checking in, and keep you updated too with what I get (some time off yet) and how things go!

[redshifter]

How far do you intend to pack your scope? The weight isn't the only issue, the mount will be pretty bulky to carry for a hike.

PS: You'd be surprised at how many deep sky objects you can see with a good pair of 70mm or 80mm binocs. IMO worth your consideration. You also should consider checking out a star party in your area and get a feel for what will work for you in your situation.

[Dave Mitsky]

I've been checking in on here very often; thank you all so much for the tips.

I also had a good conversation with the guy at stellarvue.com, and though I do aspire to get one of his scopes, it's simply a little bit too much for me at the moment (about $750, but wow! they seem quality)

He/y'all did talk me out completely of getting the computer assisted guidance; makes prefect sense, and I'd just as soon put the $'s into the optics.

I'm currently leaning towards a 6" Dobsonian now, in good part due to the price, and even more, because of the weight. We do some pretty serious hiking at times (in the Sierra Nevada), and 40lbs is already a very significant addition, though one I'm willing to make. (So yes, I'm a real camper, the car is far far far far far away from our tent).

As far as binoc's are concerned, I don't see the value of those if what I'm really hoping to view are deep-sky objects; seems I'd get the most out of the telescope, right?

Again, thank you all so very much for the advice, and I'll keep on checking in, and keep you updated too with what I get (some time off yet) and how things go!

Unless you buy something like the ultralightweight but ultraexpensive ($1,995 base price) Infinity Uti6c f/5 (see http://www.infinityscopes.com/Uti6c.htm for further information) or build your own version (see http://www.fmilsom.demon.co.uk/Travelscope-6_inch.htm and http://www.ladyandtramp.com/6-inch/ for plans), hiking with a typical 6 inch Dobsonian is pretty much out of the question, IMO.

Dave Mitksy

[Kaptain K]

Another downside to hiking with a dob (or any newtonian scope) is that collimation is critical. Spending a half an hour twiddling screws and looking to see if you got it right at every stop would get real old real fast!
A 5" Mak or SC is much more portable and much more rugged than a 6" dob, without giving away much in light gathering power!

[Dave Mitsky]

I agree. A 5" compound telescope (or perhaps a 3" apochromatic refractor, which will be expensive) is the best option.

Dave Mitsky

[aurora]

I've been checking in on here very often; thank you all so much for the tips.


Yes, you have. I don't know why I didn't realize that, maybe I was thinking of another thread here and a different person who asked a question and then never commented again.