Recommendations

[ERJenkins]

Just beginning to make my first forays into this potentially great hobby but despite having a look around the internet a bit I’m undecided as to what to do. First, as you might expect, I looked at telescopes- I’m quite willing to spend a fair amount (not a fortune for now though). I found the “ETX Premier Edition UHTC” scope which starts at £540. It has the “Automatic Alignment” and “SmartFinder” functions which would (at least in part solve the problem of finding a great number of objects. This function sounds great- but does anyone have any thoughts or even experiences of it?
Apart from telescopes does anyone have any advice? Books etc. I already know a fair amount of the science involved (although I imagine quantum physics won’t come in too useful but still) but I get the impression that joining clubs and suchlike is par for the course- any views?
I don’t really want to start with binoculars or anything too amateur but do I have to spend more than £540 to get a good experience? The version I looked at has a “Series 4000 Super Plossl 26mm Eyepiece (1.25")” and “1250mm” (I presume this is the aperture) are these good or would I do better with a larger telescope of the same price without these special functions?
Anyway, I’d be very grateful if anyone could help (thanks in advance for any replies)
Thanks,
Eliot

[redshifter]

First, I strongly recommend you spend some time at your local astronomy club and star parties - get an idea of what type of telescope you like best, they all have their strong and weak points. What works for some may or may not work for you. Second, binoculars are a great way to start out, don't discount them as 'too amateur'. I've been into astronomy almost 10 yrs and still spend a good 50% of my observing time in summer with binocs.

IMO, hands down the 'best' starter scope is a 6" to 8" dobsonian reflector for the following reasons:
1) Inexpensive - if you find you don't like the astronomy thing after all, you haven't plunked down too much $$.
2) Perform pretty well on all types of objects and at the 400 price point will outperform other types of scopes on many DSO's (deep sky objects)
3) Inherently stable - many scopes at the price point of a 6" dob will have unstable, clunky mounts
4) Simple, easy to modify
5) Very easy to set up (after collimation, which isn't too difficult or time consuming either once you've done it a couple times)
6) Their manual design forces you to learn the sky

A decent 6" dob can be had for around $300 here in the US. Whatever you do, don't buy any dept. store scope that sells for cheap and boasts "600 power" or some such nonsense and comes in a nice shiny box with pretty pictures of various astronomical objects. You'll just be disappointed with the shakey mount, crummy optics, and poor quality accessories. The Meade ETX you mention isn't a bad scope (though for the same $ you can get more aperature - which will usually allow you to see more objects), but I'd recommend you get some familiarity with all the different scopes out there.

FWIW, I started out fiddling with a freind of a freind's 60mm Tasco refractor which was a complete pile of junk (see my comments above about cheap dept. store scopes). I had an 8" dob for a few years and then upgraded to a 10" dob. Based on my experience and observing through different types of scopes, I'm very happy with my 10" dob. Here it is: http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=93768&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=4&iSubCat=9&iProductID=93768 The 6" or 8" versions of those scopes would be fine as well as the intelliscope versions. Personally, finding the object myself is half the fun though, so I prefer the non-intelliscope versions.

What is your budget?

[ERJenkins]

Thanks for the advice.
As you say- there is no point in spending a lot straight away when the hobby may be short lived, however, my budget would probably be about $600-$1000.
The reason for this is that my interest in viewing the nearer by objects is limited (not non-existent obviously). I’m more interested in observing nebulae and good quality (with a limit on budget of course) deep space objects. This is also the main reason why I’m less inclined towards binoculars (I have a good pair of Leica's though so I’ll have a look on a clear night).. Maybe there are differences in the type of telescope best for this? - Perhaps size is of paramount importance?

[Dave Mitsky]

Aperture is the second most important factor in DSO observing. Dark skies are absolutely necessary for viewing dim nebulae and galaxies.

Dave Mitsky

[redshifter]

At the 600-1000 price point and your desire for viewing DSO's, I'd say an 8" or 10" dob is your best bet. You may even be able to get into a 12" dob and stay under 1000, but 12" dobs are very large and bulky, you'll need a fairly large station wagon or van to haul a 12" around. Truss style dobs, while more compact, generally will be beyond your budget. Also, make sure you have access to a dark sky site as Dave mentions above.

[Dave Mitsky]

I agree. A 10" solid tube Dob would be a good choice.

Here are a couple that are available in the UK:

http://www.orionoptics.co.uk/acatalog/Dobsonians.html

http://www.dhinds.co.uk/pages/fullProd.php?id=420

Dave Mitsky

[ERJenkins]

The 10" Celestron looks about right- thanks guys.

[redshifter]

Looks pretty good! Let us know how you like it. Plus, we'd love to spend your $$ recommending upgrades and/or eyepieces... :)

[turbo-1]

Orion sells a 12" dob for $869. It's a bulky rig, but it hits the price-point really well. Stay away from the Intelliscope or Go-To stuff. Spend your money on a good set of charts and perhaps a copy of Tirion's Uranometria and learn your way around the sky. The fun of the hobby, IMO, is the knowledge you gain by learning your way around the sky.

Before you spend a dime, though, you would be well-advised to find a local astronomy club and attend a few star parties to see what kind of objects you are intrigued by, and which telescopes are best-suited to observing them. One of the great features of astronomy clubs is that some members are obsessed by aperture fever or feature-creep, and they trade and sell scopes to finance their new acquisitions. You may find a really great deal on a used scope, and they often trade for 1/2 the original retail price, plus you get to try them out before you buy.

Every telescope is a compromise. I own a 6" f:8 apochromatic refractor from Astro-Physics. It's a good all-around scope for me because of the high contrast and the lack of a central obstruction. The downside is the high cost, although at the time, Roland's reputation was not as well-established and his prices were very reasonable.

[Wolverine]

Stay away from the Intelliscope...

Just out of curiosity, any particular reason(s) why?

[turbo-1]

Just out of curiosity, any particular reason(s) why?Because learning the night sky and the locations of the objects you are most interested in is important. If I wanted to just look at pretty objects, I could go the SDSS site or IRSA and look to my heart's content. If I wanted a scope that could slew to NGC 7603 in a few seconds, I could buy one, but it would not satisfy my urge to learn the night sky. I have spent many hours scanning ares of the sky finding interesting faint-fuzzies, and identifying them with Uranometria or Tirion's other fine sky charts. When you can say to yourself "center on star x with a XXmm ocular, swing two fields in RA and slightly up in declination to see if that faint galaxy is visible", you've got a familiarity with the sky that cannot be bought for love or money. As an amateur with a modest scope (6" f:8 APO) I'm not going to make any earth-shattering discoveries, but I like being able to navigate without the help of a computerized mount. For this reason, I like to encourage beginners to learn their way around. It's a way to foster interest in observational astonomy. I can't imagine keeping my interest up while punching galaxy designations into a keypad and having the mount find the object for me.

[Wolverine]

Ah, I see. I was wondering if there was a technical or hardware concern behind your statement about the IS.

To each their own, certainly. I too am much more of a "hunter" and derive great pleasure from being able to successfully navigate my way around, spending time and effort with charts to really learn the night skies.

That being said, ERJenkins expressed interest in having keypad features available at his fingertips to assist in locating DSOs. In the case of Orion's dobs (since the recommendation was made above), if that's a feature that he would find desirable, it would probably be wise to opt for one of the IntelliScope models out of the gate as the base is already designed to accmodate the necessary alt-az encoders. As such, if he were interested in using the IntelliScope system & object locator, those accessories are not just "add-ons" to their SkyQuest models at a later time. (I'm not sure the encoders can even be purchased separately, and if they can, you'd have to perform some skilled modifications to the base in order to install them.)

It should also be noted that the IntelliScope models aren't like motorized "go-to" mounts. "Push-to" would describe them more accurately, as the input of a given object into the keypad doesn't automatically take you to your destination of choice; it just estimates, based on your location (and after performing the necessary 2-star alignment to calibrate the system) how many degrees in which directions you must manually move the tube in order to get the object in the eyepiece. When correctly installed and calibrated, the system is delightfully accurate as a guide, but it's not an automatic process by any means.

I've had my XT-10IS for a couple of years now. My reasoning was that it was (just my preference, of course), more desirable to have the IntelliScope capability and not need it than to want it and not have it. If you want to go into "hunting" mode, all you have to do is unplug the object locator (or leave it switched off). If you're having difficulty manually locating a particular object (especially faint DSOs), it's a nice thing to fall back on and may help alleviate a newcomer's frustration in learning where the goodies are.

[Kaptain K]

I agree with Wolverine. Get the Intelliscope. Even if you don't get the keypad at first, it can always be added later. The plain dob cannot be upgraded later.

[JohnW]

Electronic assistance can be a real time-saver, especially in light-polluted skies. But I think it's really important to at least have some experience of star-hopping. Apart from anything else, one night your batteries will die and you'll have left the spares at home. I agree with Kaptain K's suggestion - get the Intelliscope-enabled version, and add the controller later.

[Dave Mitsky]

Electronic assistance can be a real time-saver, especially in light-polluted skies. But I think it's really important to at least have some experience of star-hopping. Apart from anything else, one night your batteries will die and you'll have left the spares at home. I agree with Kaptain K's suggestion - get the Intelliscope-enabled version, and add the controller later.

I'll second that.

Dave Mitsky

[turbo-1]

I agree with Wolverine. Get the Intelliscope. Even if you don't get the keypad at first, it can always be added later. The plain dob cannot be upgraded later.I agree with you and with Wolverine, if you're going to go electronic. I'm an old-school guy, though, and prefer to spend my money on great charts, eyepieces, etc. I love books, and Burnham's, DSOH, and Uranometria others are rich resources and are guides for planning during cloudy nights. I would never spend a dime to computerize my Astro-Physics 706 mount. It does its job and I do mine.

[Wolverine]

Electronic assistance can be a real time-saver, especially in light-polluted skies. But I think it's really important to at least have some experience of star-hopping.

Thirded. :)

[Charlie in Dayton]

I'm going to put my two cents in for binoculars.

I have numerous sets, some average (boxes of junkers for stargaze show'n'tells), some good (7x50 / 9x63 / 10x50 for solar / 12x60 / 20x80's aka The Beasts). Even after three years, I'm learning new sky features. Last weekend, two new M's, a new NGC, a new constellation, and search fields for two other NGC's. This was done with the 9's and the 12's, nothing stronger.

I am The Binocular Astronomer in the club, and bino astronomy is my schtick for our club show'n'tells. When I can show kids Alcor/Mizar, or M31, or The Coathanger, and in the binos they can see more of the sky around it and get an idea of where these things are, I think they learn more.

If someone is getting a start, my recommendations are:
a decent quality pair of binoculars, 7x to 12x and 40 to 70mm aperture max (anything bigger is hard to hold, especially for kids)

a good book (Chet Raymo's '365 Starry Nights' or Phil Harrington's 'Touring the Universe with Binoculars')

at least three months (and 6 - 12 would be better) just learning the sky and watching the moon and planets and stars and satellites and the ISS and all that other stuff go by...

Thus endeth today's lesson...

[Maksutov]

I'm going to put my two cents in for binoculars.[edit]Thus endeth today's lesson...Good lesson, El CiD. There's something about using both eyes, even at low power, that gives the sky such a vibrant aspect. It's like having "super" eyes.