Specific telescope shopping (please help!)

[AK]

I'm hoping someone can help me understand more precisely what I'm looking for.

I have a decent amount of money ($500-$900) to spend on a new telescope. I had planned to get Lasik eye surgery to celebrate graduating college, but my corneas are too thin for the high level of correction I need, so at least some of the money is available to spend. I've observed visually and with binoculars for years but never owned a quality telescope.

What I want to know is what I can get for this price that is of acceptable quality, and what I should get that is best suited to what I intend to view. I am most interested in planetary science and not deep sky objects. I most enjoy observing planets and their moons.

For this, what should I look at? Reflector or refractor? Focal length? Eyepieces? Objective size? I was hoping to get at least a 6" but more like a 10"+ is what I'm hoping to be able to get (if I need it).

A friend's father bought his mother a telescope for Christmas recently. It's computerized, can locate certain targets automatically and can "bookmark" interesting sights. I don't have any info on the price tag, though. Is this feasible in such a range?

Also would like a mount that is easy/quick to set up.

Any help would be greatly appreciated!

[Glom]

A nice fat Dob!

[Wally]

If you're not that interested in deep sky stuff, and only want to concentrate on planetary observation, then 1) you don't need a large aperture scope (4" would be plenty) 2) you'll want a higher F ratio (i.e. longer focal length. Gives you higher mag. with a given ep) 3) ideally, you'll want an apochromatic refractor. It'll give you the sharpest, highest contrast image, and corrects for abberation (color distortion common to refractors). Darn expensive though, them apo's!!!

check out the Meade XT series. They're Mak. cessegrains, so you'll lose a bit of contract compared to a apo refractor. But they are computer driven, and have fine optics overall.

[gethen]

You might check out the end of the year Sky and Telescope Skywatch issue, which lists a variety of scopes in price ranges from about $200 and up. After I had an idea of the type of scope I wanted, I spent lots of time with that magazine to get an idea of what my money would buy.

Edited to add:
Here (http://www.findgift.com/gift-ideas/pid-22871/) is a link.

[SiriMurthy]

So, you want to buy a telescope?

Have you visited this link?

http://www.badastronomy.com/bitesize/scopefaq.html

That answers most of your questions.

[Kaptain K]

If you're not that interested in deep sky stuff, and only want to concentrate on planetary observation, then 1) you don't need a large aperture scope (4" would be plenty) 2) you'll want a higher F ratio (i.e. longer focal length. Gives you higher mag. with a given ep) 3) ideally, you'll want an apochromatic refractor. It'll give you the sharpest, highest contrast image, and corrects for abberation (color distortion common to refractors). Darn expensive though, them apo's!!!
Orion has just come out with a budget apo. 80mm f/7.5 $429. Unfortunately, that is for the optical tube only. No finder, no eyepieces, no mount, no tripod, etc. Adding an adequate mount, tripod, finder and a couple of EP's will push the price to a Kbuck (or more).

There is a review in the Feb 2004 issue of Sky & Telescope.

[skyglow1]

If you're not that interested in deep sky stuff, and only want to concentrate on planetary observation, then 1) you don't need a large aperture scope (4" would be plenty) 2) you'll want a higher F ratio (i.e. longer focal length. Gives you higher mag. with a given ep) 3) ideally, you'll want an apochromatic refractor. It'll give you the sharpest, highest contrast image, and corrects for abberation (color distortion common to refractors). Darn expensive though, them apo's!!!
Orion has just come out with a budget apo. 80mm f/7.5 $429. Unfortunately, that is for the optical tube only. No finder, no eyepieces, no mount, no tripod, etc. Adding an adequate mount, tripod, finder and a couple of EP's will push the price to a Kbuck (or more).

There is a review in the Feb 2004 issue of Sky & Telescope.

Yes, that was the scop I was thinking about. Apos, short for apochromatics, produce exxellent images of planets. This Apo is ideal because of its cheap price tag. Just bye another equatorial mount and a few shot focal lenght eyepieces on youre on your way.

skyglow1

[AK]

Thanks everyone for your responses... they've been a big help in my search. Still refining things, though I want to hurry it up so I can have my scope sooner!

Does anyone know specifically how much I'd be looking at for a computerized mount, like if it fits that kind of range (which may be a bit more flexible, I don't know yet).

Also, what kind of eyepieces, etc, should I get, and ballpark, what kind of F ratio and aperture do I need to reliably observe, for example, Uranus' 5 large moons, and at least Triton...

Thanks again!

[Tensor]

Does anyone know specifically how much I'd be looking at for a computerized mount, like if it fits that kind of range (which may be a bit more flexible, I don't know yet).Also, what kind of eyepieces, etc, should I get, and ballpark...

Have you looked the the Meade LXD55s? They come with the computerized GO-TO mount and tripod. In your range (500-900) you'd be looking at the 6" or 8" Schmidt-newtonians or the 5" or 6" refractors. A little stretch of your budget would include the 10" SN. The refractors, while not an APO, have, in my experience (6" refractor), excellent optics. The bonus for one of these is this: if you order before the 29th of Febuary, you can order Meade's 30th anniversary eyepiece sale. You get seven additional eyepieces and a carrying case for $99 ($650 if ordered separately). Hope this helped.

what kind of F ratio and aperture do I need to reliably observe, for example, Uranus' 5 large moons, and at least Triton...

Hmmmm, if you want to see the above, (and still stay in your budget) you will probably have to go with a larger aperture scope, (probably a dobsonian) and forget the computerized mount.

[SarahMc]

Have you looked the the Meade LXD55s? They come with the computerized GO-TO mount and tripod. In your range (500-900) you'd be looking at the 6" or 8" Schmidt-newtonians or the 5" or 6" refractors. A little stretch of your budget would include the 10" SN.

Tensor, what's your opinion of the LXD55 mount? I've been considering Meade's new refractors for a while - for my daughter specificly. I've heard varying opinions about the quality and durability, as well as the precision of the mount. I'd rather have the option of buying the refractor without the mount, and then fitting it to a CG-5 or larger.

Opinions seem to be very good about the optics themselves (for an achromat), but the mount is an entirely different issue.

[starnut]

AK...have you been to the table mountain star party?Star parties are a real good way to check out the different hardware.Thom Jenkins is one of the founding fathers of the event and he is real nice.I have been down both the refractor road and the big light bucket route.I have kept my 5 inch f/8 triplet and sold the circus cannon 17.5 dob.I am seriously considering the Celestron nexstar4 as a grab and go scope.They are chinese maks and dont weigh too much.Remember....'the best scope is the one you use'.......

[lolife]

Get a 10" dob. Wait and get something computerized once you have surfed the sky for a year or two. I see too many people fumbling with computers and hand controllers and manuals when they could be easily looking at the sky.

Don't get me wrong, I have a computerized telescope which I love (Takahashi with Losmandy) but everyone's first telescope should be unplugged, IMHO.

For eyepieces, don't worry about super expensive super high-quality stuff right away. Just get a nice range from maybe 5mm to 40mm or so. You'll find you use one or two almost all the time and then you can buy expensive ones in that range.

Most people like "fast" scopes for deep sky (low f-ratio) and "slow" scopes for planetary viewing. Something in the middle (f/8 or so) can do both.

If your interest was exclusively planetary, I would say you need to spend more money than you indicated and get a nice refractor. Mine was several thousand dollars.

[Tensor]

Tensor, what's your opinion of the LXD55 mount?

The mount itself, is not the problem IMHO, it's the tripod.

I have had no problem with the GEM head moving the 6" OTA around (of course, at max slew, it will wake the neighbors :wink: ). If balanced properly, it does everything asked of it (this is a big key, of course most times balancing is a once a quarter or so thing). The one caveat I would have would be if you were doing long exposure astrophotography with the 6" refractor or the 10" SN. The additional weight of the guidescope would probably make it very unstable. The amount of "flex" in the tripod gives me about 5-7 seconds of damping(3-5 sec with vibration pads). There are some tricks to stiffen the tripod or in my case, I'm planning on building my own tripod out of oak (I do woodworking), which should alleviate the problems with the tripod.

I've been considering Meade's new refractors for a while - for my daughter specificly.

If your thinking about getting one for your daughter, you'll probably want the 5". The OTA is 15lbs, while the OTA for the 6" is 27lbs. I don't know your daughter, but if she's like my two (20 , 17), 27lbs would be too much for her to handle when it comes time mount it.

I've heard varying opinions about the quality and durability, as well as the precision of the mount.

Yeah, I did too, and used your suggestion to AK and finally joined the local club. My opinion on this is when they first came out (2002) Meade definitely hit or miss with quality problems. Although on reflection, this may be due to it being a new design because the last four clubmemebers (five including me) who have gotten the LXD55 series have had no problems with the quality (not counting the one that was obviously damaged during shipment) of either the mount or optics. Like I said before however, the tripod is another story. As far as durability, I can't say. I haven't had it long enough for that to have come up. Others in our club have not had problems with it, as far as I know. I have had no problem with precision either, although I do train the drives about once a month (usually while setting up at our dark sky site) Another option can be found on LXD55.com. They offer a service called Hypertune (http://lxd55.com/HyperTune/), which I plan on having done if I ever have a problem (they also sell a do it yourself kit)

I'd rather have the option of buying the refractor without the mount, and then fitting it to a CG-5 or larger.

If you get the 5", you should have no problems. Get the whole thing and you could always find a smaller scope to put on the mount. One of our clubmembers did exactly that. He bought the 10" SN, mounted that on one of his other beefier mounts, and used the mount that came with it to give his TeleVue NP101 GO-TO capability.

Opinions seem to be very good about the optics themselves (for an achromat),

I've gotten nice comments from confirmed APO types about the small amount of CA for an achro and the contrast is really outstanding. But, it is an achro and does show Chromatic aberation on the brighter objects. Using a filter usually takes care of most of the problem.

but the mount is an entirely different issue.

Well, to summarize this long and winding post, Optics Good(for an achro; GEM head, so far so good; tripod, not so good. Again, though, it appears that the tripod and GEM head problem really only occurs with the 10" SN and the 6" refractor, due to the weight of the OTA (oh, and that they use 3 and 2 10lb counterweights, respectively. That's a lot of weight up there.
You just have to remember that you are getting quite good optics and go-to capability for less than $1000. Plus a large group of owners who have had time to work out the kinks and show you a few tricks. See LXD55.com or the yahoo group Meade refractors. For a first scope, or first serious scope, (or in my case, the best my budget will allow with one in college and one starting next year) I think it's quite a value.

I didn't mean to ramble on, but the issues percieved on this series isn't really cut and dried, IMHO. If you want more info or an exapnsion of a point, feel free to PM me.

[AK]

Hmm, thanks Tensor, I'll definitely take a look at the Meade LXD55s. Definitely sounds promising, I'm just still wondering what the lower limit is going to be on visible magnitude objects. Maybe Miranda is pushing it but I would like to be able to find at least magnitude 14 or so objects. (The eyepiece bonus sounds like a great deal, though.)

I guess I should mention the price range isn't an absolute limit, that's just what I have set aside in a separate account that can be used. I have a new job which, although not hugely lucrative, should allow me to save some money that could be added to the pile.

starnut: I can't say I've even heard of it. Where is it held? If you mean Table Rock in Boise, I'm 300+ miles to the north and it's not a place I enjoy spending a lot of time. I probably won't be down that way until next winter, but if you know of a star party in this area (I live in Moscow, ID, on the ID/WA border... nearest large city is Spokane, WA but it's a good 90 miles away).

lolife: It's not really my first telescope. I had a small one as a child that I got a lot of use out of. I also have had, until this week, 11x80 binocs I've been using. A nice refractor is exactly what I want but it will be months/years before I have several thousand dollars available to spend on such a venture. :cry:

I'll look into those Dobs, too...

[starnut]

Ak, Table mountaim is in ellensburg, wa.I know its a fair piece from you but its good place for 'window shopping'.I dont have a lxd-55 but I do have a lxd-650 with a 130 apo on it.Its a pretty 'nervous' mount upwards of 250x.The lxd-55 schmidt-newt is a lot of glass for the buck though.Best of luck.


cheers

[Tensor]

Hmm, thanks Tensor, I'll definitely take a look at the Meade
LXD55s. Definitely sounds promising, I'm just still wondering what the lower limit is going to be on visible magnitude objects. Maybe Miranda is pushing it but I would like to be able to find at least magnitude 14 or so objects. (The eyepiece bonus sounds like a great deal, though.)

From the Meade (http://www.meade.com/catalog/lxd55/lxd55_specs.html) specification page on their Website (http://meade.com/) AR-6 (6' refractor) the limiting visual magnitude is 13.5. For the 8" and 10" SN it is 14 and 14.5 repectively. Now, unless you are at a dark site, I wouldn't trust those by a couple of magnitudes.

I guess I should mention the price range isn't an absolute limit, that's just what I have set aside in a separate account that can be used. I have a new job which, although not hugely lucrative, should allow me to save some money that could be added to the pile.

That's why I gave you a range. My 6" came in at just over $1,000 after shipping and taxes. The AR-5 is about $200 less. The 8" SN is about $75 less ( or about $75 more with UHTC). The 10" SN is about $100 more (or 250 more with UHTC)

A nice refractor is exactly what I want but it will be months/years before I have several thousand dollars available to spend on such a venture. :cry:

I hear ya. Oh for an Astro-Physics 155 Starfire. Or as I pointed out in another thread this (http://www.astronomics.com/main/product.asp?n1=2&t1=2&myStype=Refractors&styp=1&bU RL=tTakahashi%2Easp&vid=2&product%5Ftype%5Fid=1&sk u=T2003&op=) one.

I'll look into those Dobs, too...

Good idea, keep your options open. Again, as starnut pointed out, Star parties are a great way to look through different scopes and help you figure out what you want, or, in some cases, what you don't want. When your looking through different scopes, you can get a better idea of the limits of each type of scope. Just make sure the scopes have approximately the same manification when you're comparing views, or you may not get a true read if the scopes are looking at the same thing.

[AK]

From the Meade (http://www.meade.com/catalog/lxd55/lxd55_specs.html) specification page on their Website (http://meade.com/) AR-6 (6' refractor) the limiting visual magnitude is 13.5. For the 8" and 10" SN it is 14 and 14.5 repectively. Now, unless you are at a dark site, I wouldn't trust those by a couple of magnitudes.

Hmm, 13.5 is the magnitude of Triton. I live in the middle of nowhere, so luckily I don't have to go far to find really dark skies. For an apochromatic refractor with a computerized mount, that's a pretty acceptable magnitude, even if it's probably difficult to actually see objects that dim.

That's why I gave you a range. My 6" came in at just over $1,000 after shipping and taxes. The AR-5 is about $200 less. The 8" SN is about $75 less ( or about $75 more with UHTC). The 10" SN is about $100 more (or 250 more with UHTC)


With those Plössl eyepieces, this is looking quite reasonable. I may just have to get one... 8)

[SarahMc]

Thanks, Tensor. My daughter is an amazon, like her mother and her aunt. I'm pretty sure she could handle the weight during setup, but I'd probably go for the 5" anyhow. I doubt she'll want to do any photography, and if she did, she could use my SCT anyhow. This will be a purely visual use scope that she can use on her own. My kids have had an ETX 125 for a few years now, and they're getting old enough now to get their own, individually. This new purchase will be the first of three (or maybe two - one will get the ETX, or I'll sell it off).

Thanks again, lots of good info there to digest.

[starnut]

Hmm, 13.5 is the magnitude of Triton. I live in the middle of nowhere, so luckily I don't have to go far to find really dark skies. For an apochromatic refractor with a computerized mount, that's a pretty acceptable magnitude, even if it's probably difficult to actually see objects that dim.


AK I live in Spokane first off. All of the refractors in the LXD-55 sieries are 'acromats'. This wont be a problem with 'fiant fuzzies' but it will with bright planets at high magnifications. You will learn what "Purple Haze" means to celestial peepers like me.Mag 14 seeing isnt all that common in this neck of the woods any way. I'm prety thrilled when I can see the polar caps on Mars. Apochromatic scopes have a lot more contrast than acromats (focal lengths being equal). What Im saying is that on average days you might only see Triton's shadow in transit rather than directly. If you want I'll find out about star parties in Spokane. You should realy try before you buy. Failing that I recommend 'Cloudy Nights Reviews' or google up 'ol Ed Ting and read what people have to say. I hate to see folks talk themselves into something they regret.








Unless they sell it on 'E-Bay' :D





cheers

[AK]

Arrrgh, I just made a really long post and a board error swallowed my answer. Have to try and collect my thoughts again. :x

starnut: I've heard that about the "Purple Haze", but I've also heard that a Minus Violet filter solves this problem simply and cheaply.

If you could find out about star parties in this area in the near future, that would be great. I'm itching to get a new scope and so the sooner the better. And if you happen to know any good shops in Spokane or have scopes you want to show me or anything like that, I'm currently working a research job with extremely flexible hours and so a little jaunt to Spokane would be an easy feat to manage.

Seeing Triton's shadow in transit would be very cool as well, though I'm having trouble understanding why it would be easier to see a relatively dim shadow on another body than see such a high-albedo object directly...

----

Anyway, the question I was trying to express with the earlier version of this post concerns comparing refractors to reflectors again. This is probably purely a judgement call, but I'd like to know what you scope people think: is the supposed better view afforded by a refractor (when viewing solar system objects) enough of an advantage to justify having it over a similarly priced reflector with a larger aperture and higher magnitude it can resolve? Like, is it "worth it" to get a 6" refractor over the 8" reflector when the latter can collect more light?

Ran across a webpage hosting images taken with the LXD55 series. I tried to compare scope views from, for example, the 8" SN to the 6" AR, but I was never able to distinguish why the quality of pictures varied because of scope performance or good vs. poor photography.

Thanks everyone for your insight.

[aurora]

There are a lot of web sites that list astronomy clubs (and, yes, there is a club in Spokane).

Sky & Telescope:
http://skyandtelescope.com/resources/organizations/

Astronomy League (US Only)
http://www.astroleague.org/al/general/society.html

Astronomy Magazine
http://www.astronomy.com/Clubs/findaclub.asp

If all else fails, do a Google Search.

Also, there is a very active yahoogroup that deals with telescopes, and they seem to discuss refractors just about every day. If you join the group, you can search the old messages and get all sorts of information.

[Tensor]

All of the refractors in the LXD-55 sieries are 'acromats'. This wont be a problem with 'fiant fuzzies' but it will with bright planets at high magnifications. You will learn what "Purple Haze" means to celestial peepers like me.

Oh dear. Starnut, I thought I qualified my comments about the lxd55 achros well enough. If you thought otherwise, maybe I didn't. :-?

I hate to see folks talk themselves into something they regret.

Well, I must say, I haven't regretted it. Would I rather have an APO, yes. Can I afford one at this time, no. I will say that , personally, I would not get one of the Meade "ED" refractors. If I'm going to pay that price for an OTA, I would go with AP, Takahashi, or one of the other APOs. He was asking about scopes, with go-to if possible, in his price range and I still think the LXD55s are a great value, for what he has to spend (not to mention the extra eyepieces). Give me a larger budget and I'd get an AP in a heartbeat. Well, lets say, get put on the list, to get put on the list, to order one. :)
I do agree with you suggestion (and I think I pointed this out earlier) to go to a star party, look through and talk with the owners of those scopes that one would be thinking of buying. I went to one because the scope I "knew" I was going to order would be there. After talking to the owner and actully using it, I spent the rest of that night and next day looking over and talking with the owners of all the other scopes I had considered.

[starnut]

Give me a larger budget and I'd get an AP in a heartbeat. Well, lets say, get put on the list, to get put on the list, to order one.



Tensor, I know what you mean!! It only took six months when I ordered my 130 EDT a dozen years ago :D . In no way am I poking sticks at your scope. Its a red hot value my man! When I retire my 'next big thing' will be an 'acromat' from Bary Griener(sp?). They are classic long focus achros. Nothing like a 12" refractor with a twenty foot tube!! 8)



cheers

[Tensor]

When I retire my 'next big thing' will be an 'acromat' from Bary Griener(sp?). They are classic long focus achros. Nothing like a 12" refractor with a twenty foot tube!! 8)

Did you check out the link I posted several posts up, on the 8" Takahashi? The link is on the word "this". Tube length is 2000mm, or about 8 feet, on a florite APO.

[AK]

I hate to see folks talk themselves into something they regret.

I should mention that, even if I don't end up with the "perfect" scope, going from virtually no equipment to a big scope with Go-to capability will still be great... not anything I'd regret. 8)

Any thoughts on my last post? I'd really like to know what experienced users think...

[starnut]

AK, you wont regret it at all, very nice scope :D



Tensor, I looked allright. The price tag will probably kill me, but I suppose that if I get used to eating alpo and milk bones soon I could afford it in the next epoch or two :o .



cheers guys.

[lolife]

Anyway, the question I was trying to express with the earlier version of this post concerns comparing refractors to reflectors again. This is probably purely a judgement call, but I'd like to know what you scope people think: is the supposed better view afforded by a refractor (when viewing solar system objects) enough of an advantage to justify having it over a similarly priced reflector with a larger aperture and higher magnitude it can resolve? Like, is it "worth it" to get a 6" refractor over the 8" reflector when the latter can collect more light?

This is much debated. I think most people would argue that an inch of refractor is worth 2 or 3 inches of reflector (for planetary work). Whether justified or not, people love their refractors, especially the planet lovers.

I've seen great views of the planets through big dobs, though. For limiting magnitude and resolution, they win. Refractors have better contrast (less scattered light) and steadier views (no tube currents).