Hello All,

I'm just starting to get back into astronomy after having a cheapie (junk) telescope as a kid. I think I have found the scope but I have some questions I'm not sure on. Here is the scope I thinking of buying:

Celestron C10-NGT

http://www.celestron.com:80/c2/produ...D=11&ProdID=63

I understand you kind of get what you pay for on eyepieces, so If I was going to buy just a couple to start off what are two of the most versatile? I would really like to try some astrophotography but I want to get comfortable with the scope first, so that's my main goal for now.

Is one brand of eyepieces better value for the money than others?

What about a Barlow? Is this something everyone should have in their arsenal?

Is there anything else (accessories) that would be very helpful to a newbie that should be purchased with the scope? Laser Collminator?

I appreciate any and all feedback. I'm sure I will have a bunch more questions as I learn by trial and error. I've already learned a lot just lurking on this forum.

I personally don't know this scope, but looking at the picture, I think the finder leaves a lot to be desired. I would prefer a right angle eyepiece since trying to look through that finder at zenith is an exercise in contortionism.

But with the computerized features, you may not even need a finder.

-Veeger

You don't say why you pick an equatorial mount over a Dobsonian type. I've only seen one of these scopes and the mount was too light for the scope, at least for me it was yet the whole scope was about 100 lb, no fun to carry and set up. This was a couple years ago so things may have changed but I doubt it. Certainly it's not as steady as a far lighter Dob mount by quite a margin. It works pretty well on the 6" but by the time the lever arm of a 10" comes into play as well as the added weight it doesn't do very well. Not what I'd want out of an equatorial but then I'm picky too.

Some, not all, beginners find them confusing as well. You have some experience so this may not be an issue. If you plan on planetary photography you do need some sort of drive or if you plan to have half the neighborhood in for a look they are nice. But I'd go with the 8 as the largest this mount and tripod handle well.
See reviews of the mount:
http://www.excelsis.com/1.0/entry.ph...=31&entryid=37
If you don't need the drive Dob's are far more solid and easier to use. For a few hundred more (certainly less total than this scope) you could add a basic drive platform that would be far more solid than this mount. At least the one I saw certainly didn't impress me.

I didn't find a straight through finder a problem even at the zenith my first 30 years in the hobby, Next 10 is was more of a problem, after that I don't do the zenith any more. I find right angle finders confusing but that's because I didn't use one for 50 years. If you go that route get an erecting one. A bit more expensive but not as confusing, to me anyway.

As for eyepieces it comes with one 20mm that's of reasonable quality. You'd want one for lower power, say a 30mm and one for higher power, say about 15mm. Then coupled with a good barlow such as the Klee 2.8x by University Optics you'd cover about all the powers the atmosphere will allow you to use. With my 10" f/5 (almost the same as this scope) I find I use my 20mm and 16mm eyepieces with the Klee for higher powers almost 90% of the time. But my 20 has a 65 degree apparent field of view rather than the 50 of their supplied 20. The 16 though has only 45 degrees, less than today's plossls. A Dob might benefit more from that 65 degree apparent field of view since it isn't driven. Still the 20 that it comes with is a reasonable eyepiece, or was in the one I saw.

Rick

lawsman,

What's your budget? With the scope picked, you've indicated it to be around $1500. Is this true? If so, and if you're set on an equatorial mount, I suggest the Orion Atlas mounted scopes. At about 70 lbs. it isn't light, but it will be far more stable than the Celestron mount, which looks unstable even through the screen for that 10 in.

And now the standard questions (some of which have already been put forth):
What kind of viewing do you want to do? As already asked above, what is your budget? Is portability an issue? Have you been to star parties and seen what these big scopes look like up close? Have you been to star parties and looked through any scopes recently? Etc., etc, ...

In answer to the questions you've already asked:

With regard to eyepieces, you very much do get what you pay for. The best brands are Televue and Pentax. However, don't buy anything from them yet. Stick with some good, cheap ones for now. Meade, Celestron, and Orion all make acceptable starting eyepieces. Rick already answered the versatility question.

For Barlows: If you have thousands of dollars to spend, no, a Barlow isn't necessary, because you can just buy an ultra-premium eyepiece at every focal length. For those of us with less disposable income than that, yes, a Barlow can be a very useful tool. Chosen carefully, a 2 or 3x Barlow can double the number of focal lengths available to you for merely $80-100.

Other accessories: A laser collimator is not necessary at this stage. There is simply too much slop from a variety of areas for them to be very helpful, unless they're barlowed. Instead, collimate via collimation cap or Chesire eyepiece. Google will provide a wealth of information on actually performing the collimation itself.

thank you all for your feedback. I mainly picked this scope because I thought I would be able grow into it later on, especially when I wanted to do some atrophoto stuff. I thought about a Dob but everything I read says it's terrible for astrophotos, so I didn't want to buy two scopes. My budget is around $1500 but I'm not dead set on buying anything right now. I'm going to a couple star parties this week and hoping for clear skies. A 100 lbs scope is not a big problem but it isn't something I want to be moving (carrying) far distances either. Is the Orion scope better than the Celestron? I looked at it as well. One of the reasons I went with a 10" was because there isn't much price difference between a 8" and 10", so I figured buy the bigger one....

Thanks again for all your help and feedback!

What would you guys recommend for a good scope to grow into? I really want to do some astrophoto stuff so that would be an end goal down the road. I'm totally open to input...

thanks.....mitch

lawsman,

If you are set on an equatorial mount, and want to do astrophotography without buying another scope, then yes, get the Orion over the Celestron. Astrophotography requires a rock-steady mount, and the Orion mount/scope has 20 lbs. on the Celestron of identical size. It will be far more stable. Get the 8" model for now; for photography, big aperture isn't necessary. In fact, the best astrophotos are often taken from 4 or 5-inch apochromatic refractors. If you end up wanting to go bigger in a Newtonian design, you can always buy a 10-in. optical tube assembly (OTA) later anyways, for about $500.

In any case, if you get the scope, and find that 100 lbs. of scope is simply too much for you, Orion has one of the best return policies (and customer service) in the business. Remember, the best scope for you is the one you use most often.

If your goal is deep sky astrophotography (you don't say) then there's no way that mount will work. The Orion Atlas is just able to do it. I have a friend with a 10" f/5 on that mount. It worked but not what he wanted. He sold the 10" Newtonian and put a 9.25" SCT on it. Now it's steady enough for real work.

I imaged for years with a 10" f/5 on several mounts better than the Atlas and wasn't happy with any of them. I spent more time fighting the mount than doing any real work. Unfortunately, mounts that can handle a newtonian with its lever arm cost well over your total budget. You still need a scope.

Because of this problem you'll note many imaging with SCT scopes if they want aperture and with short APO refractors like an ED80. Less expensive mounts can carry them and work quite well.

Now it is possible to do some good work with a Dob on a drive platform. They are now made that interface with a guider same as a normal GEM or fork mount. I don't consider them easy to use but it is a solid lower cost alternative. Get the Dob now and the platform later. Or if you get a tube type dob, it can be put on a good equatorial mount later for only the cost of the mount.

The reason you found so little price difference between the 8 and 10 is they are using a mount suited at best for a 6" scope and then put the 8 and 10 on it. When you see that you can be quite confident to expect the mount is suited only for the smallest of the scopes. Sort of usable for the middle one and way over its head for the large one. This has been the standard practice for decades unfortunately.

But its hard to beat a 8" SCT on a solid GEM mount for astrophotography of all types. The 8" is a good match for seeing and they can go surprisingly deep.

For wide field you can go with the 80ED refractor at f/6 or so. There are years of targets for such scopes. That would be in your budget. But you'd still want a visual scope and a good 8 or 10" dob would do that. Both aren't quite in your budget but start with the dob and then move to the other. On a basic platform it can do planetary photography just fine.

Here's a link to a typical shot with such a refractor.
The Monkey's Head

He has mounted that 80mm f/6 refractor on the mount Celestron uses for the 10" you were looking at he considers it barely adequate for the 80mm refractor!
This is his comment:
"The ASGT mount is bare minimum for guided, long exposure photography with
light weight loads; lots of friction, backlash, and striction, and very sensitive to load distribution. One must plan on rebalancing the RA axis every hour, properly adjusting the anti-backlash, and really ride the controls while guiding."
Visit his site and click the equipment link. You'll see he uses far more expensive mounts for scopes with less lever arm than a 10" Newtonian even with these mounts. Note he no longer uses this mount even for such a small scope. They are now on a CGE.

Rick

ctcoker & RickJ,

thank you for for your time in replying and giving me some advice! Rick, what do you guys think of the Lightbridge, is that a good Dob or would you recommend something else? I didn't realize you could get a motor drive for a dob, it's so damn big (must be run by a Volkswagen motor). I was looking at a Dob at first just because of the ease of use and bang for the buck.

Meade does not offer an expensive stepper motor drive system option for its LightBridge truss-tube Dobs like the premium Dob manufacturers such as Starmaster and Obsession do. The alternative is the Dob-Driver II which you would have to install yourself or an equatorial (Poncet) platform.

However, if you really have your heart set on doing imaging an 8-inch Schmidt-Cassegrain with an adequate mount, dual axis drive, periodic error correction, and some sort of manual or autoguiding system is probably a more satisfactory option, without spending a small fortune.

Keep in mind that the mount and drive are more important for astrophotography than the telescope itself.

Telescopic astrophotography/imaging for the most part is rather expensive and can be quite complex. There are rather "steep learning curves" involved in learning the proper techniques for both capturing images and processing them. Michael Covington's book Astrophotography for the Amateur comes highly recommended.

You should consult these sites to get a feel for what astrophotography is all about:

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaver...29/primer.html

http://www.eclipsechaser.com/eclink/...c/aphotsmt.htm

http://www.astronomyforbeginners.com/astrophotography/

http://www.photosig.com/articles/390/article

http://www.geologynet.com/astronomy/...hotography.htm

http://www.fvastro.org/articles/digital/

http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/TOC_AP.HTM

http://www.astrocruise.com/guide.htm

http://www.covingtoninnovations.com/...300Dastro.html

Dave Mitsky

__________________
Chance favors the prepared mind.
De gustibus non est disputandum.
Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

Platforms aren't big at all, they are the size of the dob's base and a few inches thick. Google "Drive platforms" then Google poncet for information on these. You'll find how to build them or where you can buy them. Many advertise in the astronomy magazines as well. Since the motion is very slow the motor doesn't need to be very powerful at all. They use the same stepper motors as conventional drives.

A truss dob is often the way to go for 12.5" and larger sizes as they are easier and lighter to move. But you do have to assemble them once there. (I do have a friend with a 30" Obsession he carries full assembled in a huge trailer behind a BIG pickup. Yes, he's a native Texan but now lives in Nebraska.) That means accurately collimating them each time if you plan on any planetary viewing. I'm picky and hate viewing through a scope with the collimation even a tad off. Others aren't bothered in the least by this. Especially when viewing nebula and galaxies. But when it comes to planetary nebula, globulars and even open clusters you lose very faint stars and detail with poor collimation. Also I see a loss of contrast in them. A shroud helps but the solid tube well blackened seems to me to be better. Rarely do they need recollimation after transporting and if they do it is usually just a minor tweak. So if you can fit it in the car, I'd go with a solid tube. Otherwise the truss. Of course others will not agree. That's why both are commonly seen. My preference isn't yours nor should it be. That's why I say go to a star party and hope you can find examples of both to decide for yourself.

If your site is windy, the truss can be an advantage as it won't shake as much but most dobs are so darn solid I've never found that to be a problem but I've seen others who say it is for them.

Either work the same on a drive platform so that's not an issue.

While I don't consider the Lightbridge the best truss dob out there, I doubt you'll find any better at the price. It is a very usable scope with many happy users. Certainly on par with solid tube dobs like Orion's. Its more which style works best for you.

Rick

thanks guys, I'm looking at some of those links you posted. it will take me a little while to figure out what I'm going to do. My first star party is tomorrow night. I hope the sky cooperates!

There's a full moon tomorrow, so it won't be all that cooperative (at least for DSO viewing) no matter what the weather is like.

Nick

__________________
--
Nick Theodorakis