Chatroom
 

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > Science and Space > Astronomical Observing, Equipment and Accessories
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

   

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 20-April-2003, 08:52 AM
Brise79 Brise79 is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 7
Default buying telescope

Hi,
I have decided that i will buy a good telescope this year, but i cant decide on which type to get. Schmidt,refelctor or refractor?type. I guess it really depends what i want to look at with the telescope, well for the time being it'll be the moon, and a few planets, saturn is my flavour of the month.
Over time though i will want to see clusters etc, so if anyone could recommend something suitable,and of course the most cost effective!
i would be most grateful.
Regards
__________________
Murphy was an optimist.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 20-April-2003, 12:25 PM
Glom's Avatar
Glom Glom is offline
Order of Kilopi
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: West London, England
Posts: 8,424
Send a message via MSN to Glom
Default

[BA impersonation]You do know there is a website attached to this board.[/BA impersonation] :P

Look here.

For Lunar and planetary astronomy, refractors tend to be better, but they don't look as good. :wink:
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 20-April-2003, 12:27 PM
Kaptain K's Avatar
Kaptain K Kaptain K is offline
Order of Kilopi
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Elgin, Tx
Posts: 7,674
Default

1) Aperture rules. A good big scope beats a good small scope in both light gathering power and resolution.
2) Aperture for aperture and quality for quality, refractors are more expensive than Schmidt-Cassegrains, which are more expensive than Newtonians.
3) The best scope is one that gets used. Big is good, if it gets used. A big scope that sits in the garage or closet because it is a pain in the posterior to haul out is worth less than a small one that gets used every clear night. Schmidt-Cassegrains and Maksutov-Cassegrains score big points here due to their folded light path. They pack a lot of aperture into a small package.
4) Don't skimp on the mount. A good rock solid mount makes observing fun and easy. A shaky mount that wiggles with every touch or vagrant breeze makes for frustrating observing.
5) A computerized GOTO scope will increase the ratio of obsering time to finding time.

The BA has a page on buying a scope here:

http://www.badastronomy.com/bitesize/scopefaq.html
__________________
Any day you wake up on "the right side of the dirt" is a good day.

T. Anderson
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 20-April-2003, 02:41 PM
Brise79 Brise79 is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Ireland
Posts: 7
Default

thanks,
i did look up some info on them, but you cant beat personal experience.
cheers
__________________
Murphy was an optimist.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 20-April-2003, 03:51 PM
nexus nexus is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 60
Default

I started out a couple years ago with a NexStar 8, my parents gave me for Christmas, it is an 8 inch, computerized, Schmidt-Cassegrain from Celestron. If you don't mind spending the money I think it's a good beginner scope. I'm glad I didn't have to start out finding things manually, however it is a good learning experience. It really depends on how much time you are willing to spend with the 'scope. With one that is computerized you can start out with a list of objects and find them all in less than an hour. Another thing to consider is the light pollution where you live. My 8 inch is wonderful at high altitude away from light pollution, but there is a lot I can't see from my house. If you buy a smaller telescope it might be much less useful in a city, but it will be much easier to transport.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 20-April-2003, 07:26 PM
Vermonter's Avatar
Vermonter Vermonter is offline
Established Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Republic of Vermont
Posts: 1,173
Send a message via AIM to Vermonter
Default

Heh. My first and current telescope is a 60mm Star Explorer (K-Mart Special) with an aluminum tripod. They say that scopes like these drive people away due to the bad quality...it's increasing my patience and skill.

I can observe the 4 large moons of Jupiter (they look like white dots), and Jup itself is a white blob. I can find it in 30 seconds if I'm lucky.

I've observed Luna with my eyepieces (and suffered having one eye readjust to the glare...that's kinda fun, having day vision in one eye and night vision in the other).

I observed Saturn, but a twig was going right over it (or perhaps that was a ring?). Stars like Sirius and Betelguese are nice to watch, I've seen them flicker and flash all sorts of colors.

The 2.4" I have is alright...but I need something BIGGER! Once I get the moolah together I'm buying that scope from SouthofHeaven if he still has it.

Cheers,
~Josh
__________________
"4th Law of Modern Thermodynamics: Where Mihoshi is, Chaos Reigns." ~W. Hakubi
"Gun control is hitting your target; Recycling is reloading your brass." ~ Lex of Dirty Work.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 21-April-2003, 02:52 AM
SouthofHeaven SouthofHeaven is offline
Established Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 105
Send a message via Yahoo to SouthofHeaven
Default

Stil got it and I sent you picture.s I'm not getting rid of it until you're ready. And I hzv yet to decide what I want as a replacement, so I can still use it until you're ready. The other night I went out sans scope and just star gazed. Haven't done that in a while. I just love as your eyes get adapted the more stars pop up. Its like 5th ave in NYC right before 5 pm/ The people(stars) trickle in then wham! Thousands!!
__________________
"The big yellow one's the Sun!!!!"
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 21-April-2003, 03:19 AM
Vermonter's Avatar
Vermonter Vermonter is offline
Established Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: The Republic of Vermont
Posts: 1,173
Send a message via AIM to Vermonter
Default

Yeah, I got the pictures. It's a beauty of a scope. Thanks for sending the pics my way. Hopefully I can scrounge the $$$ for it soon.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 21-April-2003, 04:51 AM
Sdoradus Sdoradus is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 7
Default

Hi Brise & Everybody

Guess Im listed as a newbie but I do have a bit of experience. In any case I would like to echo Captain K's comments with only a minor addition. If it is at all possible try to get hold of the closest astronomy club and see when they are holding a star party. I have found amateur astronomers extremely generous in allowing others to look through all kinds of equipment prior to making a purchase. Even at the regional star parties in my area (when I was more active) I had lots of folks looking through scopes I had built in order to get an idea of both the type and size scope they might really want. I sent Glom a shot of one of them (hope he doesn't mind) just in case he has a method to share shots with others.

PS- My first telescope was a 3 1/2 inch Edmund back in about 54. Not sure what my folks paid for it but it was about $29 bucks and worth the investment to get a kid into a life time hobby.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 21-April-2003, 03:41 PM
gethen's Avatar
gethen gethen is offline
Established Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: the great white north
Posts: 2,401
Default

Echoing the comments about a scope you can really use. Mine is an 8" Newtonian, which is not terribly heavy, but the mount and tripod are pretty hefty. I had considered smaller, because I'm not very large, but my spouse assured me that I should get the larger one I really wanted as he would be delighted to help move it. He has been so far, and once he gets the mount where I want it, I don't need any help. But, I sometimes regret not being totally self-sufficient. I can move the mount by myself, but it's heavy. I'm very happy with the scope itself--set it up first time, put the spotting scope on Orion and almost instantly I was looking at the nebula. And that's one other bit of advice. I was reasonably familiar with the main constellations and knew where to look, which makes star-hopping lots of fun. If you aren't familiar with the night sky, it pays to learn about it before trying to use the scope.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 21-April-2003, 03:51 PM
dgruss23's Avatar
dgruss23 dgruss23 is offline
Order of Kilopi
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Upstate New York
Posts: 4,290
Default

The advice to check out different scopes at a star party is good advice. I personally prefer the sharp images of a good refractor, but the large aperatures of newtonians are nice too - if portability is not an issue. If you have a good pair of binoculars you can see more than enough to keep you busy while you're trying to decide what scope would fit best your needs.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 22-April-2003, 05:42 AM
Dickenmeyer Dickenmeyer is offline
Established Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: McCordsville, IN
Posts: 332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdoradus
PS- My first telescope was a 3 1/2 inch Edmund .
So was mine, but an f/5 fork mounted newtonian, not the Astroscan. Got it second hand for $75 in '85 to look for Halley. It was okay for lunar observing and actually was pretty good on open clusters and scanning Milky Way star fields but useless for much else. The focuser broke on it last year and in October I finally broke down and ordered a new scope, a Meade 8 inch Schmidt Newtonian, which finally arrived in February. It's a lot of scope for the money, less than $800 for the scope and a whole boatload of accessories only brought the total up to about $1500 (okay, maybe I went overboard just a little). I do wish the tripod was a tiny little bit stouter, but the optics are superb and it's pretty easy to use. I've not gotten to use it as much as I'd like though, weather and my schedule haven't been too kind yet.
__________________
If you can't dazzle 'em with dexterity, baffle 'em with BS.
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 22-April-2003, 07:44 AM
Sdoradus Sdoradus is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 7
Default

Dickenmeyer

Afraid that mine was nothing as fancy as the Astroscan since it was purchased back in 1954. In any case I managed to upgrade a bit as the years passed by building every type of scope I could think of. Hopefully I have now set things up so I can link to some of the shots taken over the years but will try with this one I finished in 1986. Hope the link works.

http://home.attbi.com/~sdoradus/JaneScope1.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 22-April-2003, 04:59 PM
Kaptain K's Avatar
Kaptain K Kaptain K is offline
Order of Kilopi
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Elgin, Tx
Posts: 7,674
Default

Quote:
...I do wish the tripod was a tiny little bit stouter...
I have read that you can stabilize a mount by hanging a weight from the center of the tripod head (got an old barbell set laying around?).
__________________
Any day you wake up on "the right side of the dirt" is a good day.

T. Anderson
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 22-April-2003, 09:56 PM
SollyLama SollyLama is offline
Established Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 185
Default

I currently have a Meade EXT-70, which is small but I love it. I'm fiddling around with astro-photography so I like the computer tracking. I'm looking to get a good 8-10 inch scope this summer.
Remember that you can get a MUCH larger scope for the same price as a small GoTo scope.
I hear great things about the EXT-90 though.
Reply With Quote
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 23-April-2003, 02:09 AM
Charlie in Dayton Charlie in Dayton is offline
Established Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: ...three guesses, and the first two don't count...
Posts: 2,010
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdoradus
Dickenmeyer

Afraid that mine was nothing as fancy as the Astroscan since it was purchased back in 1954. In any case I managed to upgrade a bit as the years passed by building every type of scope I could think of. Hopefully I have now set things up so I can link to some of the shots taken over the years but will try with this one I finished in 1986. Hope the link works.

http://home.attbi.com/~sdoradus/JaneScope1.jpg
!! !! !! !!

Holy Expletive Deleted!

Details on that monster!!! Aperture? f ratio? Foods your significant other is allergic to, so you can marry me after the funeral?

Wow......
__________________
"If a tree is cut down in the rainforest, and is used to make paper to print a book, and the book is really bad, and there's nobody that will read it, do you still hear a sucking sound?"
Charlie in Dayton, A.AsC.
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 23-April-2003, 02:31 AM
Sdoradus Sdoradus is offline
Newbie
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 7
Default

Aperture-36"
F/Ratio -F-4.17 on primary with a field flattener at focusser base that also holds optional 2" filters and takes it to 5.6. Rotating off axis mask available for primary running from 15 1/2" down to 6" which in each case of course shifts the f/ratio.
Wife -Not a chance. It would upset our grandchildren.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 25-April-2003, 05:13 AM
Dickenmeyer Dickenmeyer is offline
Established Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: McCordsville, IN
Posts: 332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdoradus
... this one I finished in 1986. Hope the link works.

http://home.attbi.com/~sdoradus/JaneScope1.jpg
Uh...wow. So how many families live in that thing when you're not using it?
__________________
If you can't dazzle 'em with dexterity, baffle 'em with BS.
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 25-April-2003, 05:16 AM
Dickenmeyer Dickenmeyer is offline
Established Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: McCordsville, IN
Posts: 332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kaptain K
Quote:
...I do wish the tripod was a tiny little bit stouter...
I have read that you can stabilize a mount by hanging a weight from the center of the tripod head (got an old barbell set laying around?).
On one of the Yahoo boards (I think), someone suggested a gallon jug of water. I'll have to try something like that, I want it as steady as I can get it when I start wasting film on beginner astrophotography.
__________________
If you can't dazzle 'em with dexterity, baffle 'em with BS.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:53 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0
©  2006 Bad Astronomy and Universe Today