So.... I've decided to finally go ahead and purchase a telescope, and have been doing some research trying to decide what would fit my needs.

I had begun to settle on this guy:
http://www.owlastronomy.com/KGOTO.htm

but, as I often do, I succumbed to a bit of "Well, let's see what I could get for just $50 more". After a few iterations of that, I'm now seriously considering this one:

http://www.astronomics.com/main/prod...ct_id/ETXLS6SC

As you can see, I'm flexible on price, although I wouldn't want to go much higher than the Meade. This purchase probably won't actually get made until Spring, so I have a few months to set money aside. I'd rather delay the purchase a bit and do it right than rush out to buy a piece of junk that I'll be itching to upgrade after 2 months.

My main interest would be in viewing planets, and some DSOs (nebulae, galaxies, etc...). I'd also like to be able to do a bit of astrophotography. Nothing major, probably using something along the lines of the Meade LPI. I consider some sort of GoTo to be a must have, and would like to be able to control it from my laptop as well.

My main viewing location would be my back yard, located in a small town. There are streetlights nearby, but they're fairly dim. On a clear night the stars are very visible. I'd also like something that could reasonably be packed up and taken camping. More of a size issue on that, not concerned about weight. I'll definitely add bonus points for included, or reasonably priced, carrying cases.

Being a hopeless gadget freak, the Meade obviously appeals to that side of me. I like the self aligning feature, and the "Astronomer Inside" software seems like it would be great for the kids (ok, ok, me too.... )

It just seems to me that for that kind of money I could cut out some of the more gimmicky features and end up with something of higher quality overall.

Any suggestions on something in that price range that would better suit my desires?

So you went through the "Well, let's see what I could get for just $50 more" iteration about twenty times huh?

The 3.5" scope might lead to aperture-fever and the 6" Meade seems a bit overpriced to me.

Have you looked at:

http://www.telescope.com/control/pro...oduct_id=09756

An 8" GOTO Cass for a bit less money.

http://www.telescope.com/control/pro...duct_id=09945/

The 6" version for quite a bit less.

Neither includes a camera, but then again, I'm not quite sure what the point of that Meade cam is anyway. Unless I'm reading it wrong, it's an astronomical camera that doesn't actually use the optics of the telescope. I'm pretty sure you could get the same effect with your current camera and liberal use of duct tape.

I'll definitely look into those. I was thinking I had read some very poor reviews regarding Celestron's goto not maintaining alignment, but I've read so many reviews lately I could very easily be confusing them with someone else. Assuming that works well, I do like those scopes a lot.

Regarding the camera on the Meade. It doesn't operate through the optics of the scope. Its main purpose is to help the scope self-align. One of the big "bullet points" for that scope is that it aligns itself to the sky on its own. Just turn it on, come back a few minutes later, and it's ready to go. The camera is so it can center itself on the alignment stars it chooses. I don't really envision that anyone would use it for any kind of serious photography, despite Meade's half-hearted attempt to market it as being useful for such.

The ETX-LS is pretty overpriced. Sure, it has the proprietary Lightswitch, but that probably only saves you a few minutes a night. (I'll admit I've never used it though.) For $600 less you can get a Nexstar 6SE, which has a sizable fanbase and probably better customer support. The 8SE seems slightly undermounted.

I'd also look at Skywatcher USA's offerings. Their EQ5P mounted scopes, which are a great deal to begin with, occasionally go on sale. (The EQ5P 8'' SCT was on sale with a $396 rebate recently.)

__________________
You can't really tell the difference between drunken rambling and sober blogging.

Have you used any of the scopes you are considering? You should definitely get out to a star party and talk to experienced users who can tell/show you the pros and cons of each. Getting some 'hands on' experince would be very beneficial towards making the 'right' decision.

Have you considered a good pair of binoculars?

This is such a common response to telescope recommendation threads. I'm frankly a little baffled by it. Unless you count equipment shows like NEAF or the really big events like Stellafane, there aren't that many places you can be guaranteed to get to see the scope you're interested in. Many people don't even have access to clubs which do regular programs.

Also, binoculars? Seriously? How on Earth can you suggest getting binoculars over a telescope in this price range? There's a certain point where you need to buy a telescope. I'd be more happy with a low end telescope than high end binoculars, personally.

__________________
You can't really tell the difference between drunken rambling and sober blogging.

I'll have to agree with RedShifter on this one. When I first started in this hobby I drove over 3 hours into another state to attend my first star party. I learned more that night than I'd learned in the last year reading and looking at ads. While none of the exact scopes I was thinking about were present there were some similar and I quickly learned that, for me, I was thinking very poorly about the subject and far too trusting of the ads. The trip probably saved me from getting the wrong scope and losing interest in the hobby all together. Also a couple there knew of experienced amateurs in my area I could contact for further help. One, Jess Williams, an elderly and last surviving Scott Joplin musician and avid amateur astronomer helped me build my first scope rather than buy one. Not right for most but was right for me. He and the amateurs at the star party realized that and got me on the right track.

Later I, along with a handful of others, including Jess of course, formed our own astronomy club. That was nearly 50 years ago. We hold at least one star party each month open to the public and run a public observatory at which many scopes are usually present. We've found that the vast majority that come to one of these events for the first time with their new scope leave realizing they should have come before buying as they learned something they never even considered better suited them. It's sad to see and I've seen it all too often. You try to show them how to get the most from their scope but they are so wrapped up realizing they bought poorly that you can't seem to get through to them. Goto scopes top the list of those scopes they wish they hadn't bought. Some are happy with them but they are the minority. Experienced amateurs buying well above beginner level often love them but we don't see many beginners who do. They just aren't the experience they expected. Glitzy advertising was the usual culprit.

I now live in the north woods of Minnesota far from any major town yet I only need drive two hours to attend a monthly star party by an astronomy club. That's better than I had it all those years ago. I expect most have such star parties available to them within that drive time. When you are looking at spending 1000 bucks on a scope that can last a lifetime (I still have that first scope I made as well as the first one I bought, both over 50 years old. They don't wear or go obsolete like TV's, and computers and shouldn't be bought the same way in my opinion.

Of course the two scopes being considered here all have severe limitations and some advantages. All scopes are compromises. There's no such thing as one that isn't a compromise. Only the educated buyer can decide if they are compromises he can live with. No one can answer that for them. So I won't try.

Rick

So far I've only been able to locate two clubs within what I would consider reasonable driving distance. Unfortunately one has no more events scheduled until spring, and the other hasn't been answering the listed phone number or returning messages for the past two weeks. There are a few more about an hour and a half away, but because of the amount of time I have to spend on the road for work and family obligations, long drives are the absolute last thing I want to include in any sort of leisure activity. This is supposed to be fun, not a chore.

As for binoculars, I have a good pair. I'm not looking for new binocs, I'm looking for a telescope.

My main concern is that being a self-confessed gadget freak, I fear that the bells and whistles that have drawn me toward the ETX-LS are costing significant dollars that would be better spent on more aperature, a better mount, or better optics.

I'm also toying with the idea of the Celestron CPC 1100. But since I've also promised my wife we could get a camper in the spring, I think that's a good deal beyond where my toy budget is going to be. At the moment, I'm thinking the NexStar 8SE might be what I end up deciding on.

Would I possibly be better off buying the pieces separately? Perhaps start off with a high quality equatorial goto mount and a cheap-ish OTA, with the idea of upgrading the OTA down the road?

Anyway, as I said earlier, this purchase is still a few months out. At this stage of the game I'm just trying to get a feel for what my options are as well as a ballpark estimate of how much I want to be saving up.

I don't think that it would be cheaper to buy the pieces separately. Skywatcher, for example, lists their EQ5P mount for $895 while they sell telescopes on it for less. (Though Astronomics has it on sale for $550). Yes, you can always upgrade the OTA down the road, but unless you want a specific combination, it's usually the best idea to buy a package. Of course, some packages can be overpriced, so make sure you check the individual prices.

That being said, high end equatorial mounts can be a chore sometimes. There's setup and polar aligning, and Newtonians can get into weird angles. They do have their benefits, namely stability and tracking (an altazimuth tracking mount can't be used for long exposures due to field rotation.)

If you're into tech, remember that most GoTo scopes can be hooked up to a computer and controlled remotely.

But I'm not sure if I should be going this far in recommending stuff. Have you actually had that much experience with other telescopes? Will this be your first telescope? How do you know you want to get a Cassegrain and not a refractor or Newtonian? Careful you don't get yourself into something you can't handle. I might actually suggest you start with something modest, like the Nexstar I mentioned early on. Accessories like eyepieces play into a big part of the cost.

__________________
You can't really tell the difference between drunken rambling and sober blogging.

Why do you consider a star party recommendation 'baffling'? It's by far the best way to get some hands on experience with the type of scope one is interested in. Sure, the exact scopes might not be present, but it's a pretty safe bet that there will be at least a few scopes the OP might be interested in.

And binoculars? Seriously, yes. I never suggested the OP get binocs that cost the OP's entire budget. However, it's a pretty common piece of advice for beginners to start out with binocs. IIRC, the OP didn't elaborate much on his astronomy experience.

I personally would prefer high end binocs over a low end telescope.

Hmmmm....is this a back handed recommendation to attend a star party?

I find this a bit confusing. I understand why it's the case with a manually controlled mount, but with the mount under computer control, it doesn't seem like it would be much harder to rotate 2 axes to keep the scope aimed than to just rotate one. Which brings up another question: How do they get away with charging such ridiculous prices for wedges?

I've had some experience with other scopes, but it's been around 20 years ago. As for a cassegrain over the other options? I don't have my mind made up, really. I do find myself leaning toward a cassegrain simply because they're more compact for a given aperature. This would make it much easier to load up and take along when we go camping, or even just haul it out to a nice dark spot for an evening. (There's a little county park about 3 miles from my house that is absolutely, completely pitch dark...) I haven't ruled out a newtonian, though. I have mostly ruled out refractors simply due to their high price for large aperatures, and it's my understanding that for good viewing of deep space objects, the larger aperature the better...

Part of my reason for posting the thread is to make sure my reasoning is on the right track, so if I'm operating under any erroneous assumptions, please point them out.

You will get field rotation when ever a scope isn't polar aligned. In such a situation the computer or whatever is used to control the scope can follow accurately one point in the image. The rest of the image will rotate around that point. The farther the scope is from perfect polar alignment the faster this rotation is. This will limit deep sky exposure time. A minute will be pushing it in many parts of the sky. You can then stack these to make an image (after aligning and derotating). This gives a fair image but it will be limited by read noise due to all those readouts needed. This prevents faint detail from showing like it would if longer exposures could be used.

At the meridian north is straight up in an alt azimuth scope. But when you point it to either side of the meridian north is at an angle to vertical. This angle is what causes the field to rotate unless the telescope itself rotates or the camera rotates. Major observatories now use alt azimuth mounts and rotate the camera keeping north at a constant angle but so far all attempts to bring this to the amateur level have not succeeded. Meade tried once and failed. When a scope is polar aligned the scope itself rotates keeping north at a constant angle as long as the alignment is perfect. No computer necessary. I took my first deep sky images using a simple barn door equatorial mount tracking manually by turning a screw at a constant rate. Boring but it worked.

You can take fine planetary images with such an alt azimuth computer controlled goto scope however as exposure time is a fraction of a second. Usually this is done with a web cam capable of 15 to 30 frames per second (higher is better) at the light level needed without compression. Several minutes of frames at this rate are then run through software like Registax which picks out the clearest frames and stacks them. Over this time the field will rotate but individual frames won't show it. Registax can automatically derotate the individual images when it stacks them leaving a nice clear image.

For deep sky work with an alt azimuth scope you can use a drive platform that is equatorially aligned. The scope sits atop it and if properly aligned there won't be any image rotation. In fact there are some that have two axes slow motion allowing excellent deep sky photography with an inexpensive Dobsonian mounted scope. But no high tech electronic gadgets to play with.

Note too that the long focal length of a Cassegrain scope will greatly limit your field of view requiring larger sensors to get the same field and longer exposure time to capture that field. Also demands on tracking increase greatly. Only very high price mounts (14x your total gadget budget) can track for more than a couple minutes without guiding. Also when using a CCD at the f ratio of these scopes the field is so small it is quite likely the computer won't always put the object on the chip unless it is a very big one costing more than the scope. These systems are getting better all the time but are not yet as accurate as most beginners think or ads imply. Gears and bearings with the needed accuracy don't come cheap.

As for being unwilling to drive 90 minutes to a star party means to me you don't want this hobby enough to do the work needed. You expect gadgets to do it for you but they only will do it if you understand the basics which you don't or you'd realize the rotation issue. As I mentioned. If I'd not driven the 3 hours each way to my first star party I'd never succeeded in the hobby. It really can be that important. Richard Berry, then editor of Astronomy magazine published an editorial years ago about those who get into this hobby the gadget route. He called them 90 day wonders. I'm just trying to prevent you from becoming yet another one. Over the years I've seen dozens come and go in our club. One did last 9 months but he was the exception.

Rick

Rick

I agree with the other people about attending a star party to 'try' out different types of scopes. When I first became interested in astronomy, I attended several star parties before I even considered buying my own scope. I was a bit naive about telescopes back then because the only ones I had seen were refactors. I didn't even know that other types existed, such as dobs, schmidt-cassegrains, goto scopes etc. I found that dobs suited me the best, as I found them easy to use so my first scope was a 6 inch dob. Then last year, I bought a 10 inch Meade Lightbridge which I absolutely love!! I probably won't buy another scope for a few years now, as everything about it suits me down to the ground.

I like the 'challenge' of being able to find objects in the sky myself and it gives me great satisfaction. I prefer dobs to goto scopes for this reason.

redshifter makes a good point here, a good pair of binos is a great way to get to
understand the night sky as a first step to serious astro viewing.
I have Canon IS 50 binos which I use even more than my Takahashi scope, why?
No set up time, just point and focus, the Pleiades are stunning, the glow in Orions belt
a joy, our moon in such detail.
Wish you well in your choice.
Nokton.

I have binoculars. I'm not in search of new binoculars. I'm in search of a telescope.

Is there some secret handshake I need to know before I'm allowed to shop for a telescope?

Let me guess. They'll teach me the handshake at a star party...

Yep, at least at this forum, you need to prove that you've owned or used multiple telescopes before anyone feels comfortable recommending a scope to you. It's better than it used to be, when people would reply to all telescope recommendation threads with "Orion Skyquest XT8, don't even consider buying anything else for even a moment" and ask no further questions.

It's to protect newbies from having a bad experience. I'm sure you're not going to end up with a department store junk scope, but you can't be guaranteed 100% satisfaction by doing all your research online. It's your call, but be careful.

__________________
You can't really tell the difference between drunken rambling and sober blogging.

Yes there is a secret handshake -- its called knowledge. You don't have it yet or you wouldn't have disagreed about the field rotating in an alt-azimuth scope. Just who was it that asked to be talked out of the telescope purchase? I'm doing so because from what you've asked and said it, and likely the other one, are not right for you, not because you challenged me to do this.

Unfortunately, by far the best place to ask questions and more important, learn what questions to ask, is at an astronomy club's star party where you get hands on experience under your skies. You seem to prefer likely failure over the work needed to succeed. Only after this type of an experience can you shop intelligently. Not one person I've met in all my years in this hobby, over 50, that went for gadgets for their first scope lasted even a year in the hobby. I'm sure such a person exists but of the literally hundreds I've met not one succeeded.

Right now you don't understand how aperture, f ratio, type of mount and other factors unrelated to gadgets can help or hinder you in your experience. Some scopes are a perfect fit for one person and a total disaster for another. Has nothing to do with the quality or cost of the scope but what the user wants from the hobby and what his skies are like. I can't answer those questions and right now neither can you. Though I expect you disagree.

Go slow, learn that gadgets can't replace real knowledge and understanding, most actually hinder acquiring this knowledge it, acquire the knowledge through lots of reading and if at all possible hands on experience with scopes of various types and gadget level, then go shopping. Then you will see through the marketing glitz to what you are really buying. Do your homework then buy. That star party thats too much work is the best and quickest way to do it I know of.

Rick

In my experience with astronomy, I have to travel a bit to get clear night skies. As I live in a small city, there is lots of light pollution, although my backyard isn't too bad for observing, I much prefer really dark skies (who doesn't?) I go to star parties twice a year and the most I travel is 2 hours. I have learnt that with astronomy, I have to put in the effort if I want to succeed in finding objects in the sky. I'm so glad that I didn't buy a telescope before I knew how to use one. I made sure I got lots of experience with scopes and I'm still gaining experience, even after 7 years.

I didn't disagree with anything. I admitted a lack of knowledge on that point and asked for clarification. It was explained well, and I now understand it.

You clearly have very firm beliefs about how this "must" be done. As you have acquired these beliefs over many years of experience, you are certainly entitled to them.

You point out that I lack knowledge. This seems clear, else I wouldn't be asking questions. It's clear that you don't feel I've paid sufficient dues to have earned the right to ask questions yet. It's supposed to get into single digits tonight. If I grab my binoculars and go sit outside in shorts and a t-shirt all night, would that be sufficient dues paying to ask one or two questions?

You assert that I don't understand how aperture could affect the viewing experience. In the time you spent explaining why you don't feel I'm entitled to ask questions, you could have just as easily explained where I'm mistaken on this. You could have explained how a larger aperture does not allow more light to be collected, how this does not in turn allow the eyepiece to magnify the image further while still maintaining detail. You could have explained how larger aperture does not gather more light and allow dimmer objects to be viewed.

As for the star parties, I fully intend to attend some come spring when they start holding events again. In fact, I have the paperwork printed and filled out to join a nearby club. But to be honest, if the "get off my lawn" attitude toward newcomers that you have shown is what I can expect to be prevalent at these gatherings, I think I'll pass. I'd rather go it alone through trial and error. (Which is too bad. It sounded like they'd be fun.)

Good idea about the star parties. I'd suggest holding off buying anything till you get a chance to try a few different types of telescopes out. Trial and error on your own could be costly, and may end up killing any interest in astronomy you have.

You might give this a read: http://scopereviews.com/begin.html That site has reviews of many different types of scopes as well.

I'm not saying don't ask. I've tried to answer them in fact. I am saying you need to do some more homework to know what questions you need to ask. You were well down the road to a likely very bad experience and you seemingly had some inkling as you asked to be talked out of it. I did that because where you were headed leads most to failure in the hobby and I didn't want that to happen. I've brought hundreds into the field in fact, one went on to head the optical team that designed the Gemini 8 meter telescopes and now is designing the thirty meter telescope. Many are now teachers in the field at all levels. But after seeing many fail and lose interest by going at it by the idea of various gadgets doing the work for them I work hard to prevent that. I see many survive department store scopes as a first scope but they don't survive the expensive gadget way you asked to be talked out of.

In a good club you get the hands on help you need. Many clubs loan scopes to beginners so they can learn before they buy. Ours starts beginners with a small refractor on a good mount, moves them up to a 13.5" scope. Along they way they experience many different mounts, a few gadgets including a far superior computer controlled scope that is equatorially mounted and scopes of various capabilities. Then they can go on to make an intelligent decision of what will work for them along with the additional accessories like a star atlas (no computer controlled scope can replace a good star wheel and atlas).

I'm surprised your club doesn't hold star parties this time of the year. We have them every month and that includes the club nearest me in northern Minnesota. The club I founded back in Nebraska holds a big one for the Geminid meteor shower this December and 2 a month all through winter. Dress appropriately and its not bad at all. I fondly remember a great Geminid shower wading through knee deep snow. Sky was fantastic that night even if it was zero F out there.

By all means go to the meeting and tell them what you want out of the hobby. Knowing your skies and conditions they can give some good advice we can only guess at. But go slow, there are many good guides on the net, most major dealers have good advice as do many club websites. Here's a couple to get you started.
http://scopereviews.com/begin.html
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/equipment/basics

Rick

I found it a bit odd myself. Although the cold can be truly bitter here in Iowa, we also get the most beautiful clear skies during the cold months. This is a big part of the reason that goto is an important feature for me (more on this later). What I was told via email is that they were simply having too many event cancellations due to unpredictable weather and the decision was made not to hold public events during the winter.

I did discover that I had misread the schedule. The last public event of the year is tonight. I'll be attending.

Seems like a good club. Dr. Van Allen was involved with it at some point, though I'm not sure to what degree. Pretty nice facilities as well. (Looking forward to taking a peek through the 24". )

http://www.cedar-astronomers.org/paldows.htm

As far as wanting the gadgets to "do it for me". Not at all. I may be new to astronomy, but I've been deeply involved with technology both as a profession and through various hobbies for my entire life. I know full well that technology is a tool that is most effective in the hands of someone who understands the work the technology is doing. I view the gadgetry as a learning tool, not a learning substitute. The other reason for wanting the gadgetry is one I alluded to above. I hate cold weather. Since imaging is something I want to take part in anyway, it would be appealing to set up the scope in the back yard and operate it from my warm, cozy home office on evenings when I can't quite bring myself to sit outside. My fingers and toes are both horrifically sensitive to cold after past run ins with frostbite. My primary interest is still to physically look through the eyepiece and learn the sky. But the ability to operate the equipment remotely is an appealing option to have available, especially since it meshes very well with some of my other hobbies. For example, a home built and automated observatory dome would be right up my alley (although that sort of project will have to wait several years, at least. Due to some career choices I sold the home I owned and will likely be a renter for a good 5 years or so. Once I settle down and buy a place again, that sounds like a very interesting project to tackle.). I'm sure you'll point out that I lack the astronomy experience and knowledge to do a good job of that, and you're exactly right. But the learning is the fun part.

On a different note, I need to man up and apologize for the harsh tone of my last post. Real life has been throwing a good deal of stress at me recently. While that in no way excuses my taking my frustrations out on you, please accept my apology and know that I'm not normally that quick tempered.

Keep in mind that if you're really in to tech, amateur astronomy won't do much for you. You'll find that most GoTo systems are simple and most bundled software is straight out of the mid 90s. There's nothing more for a techie in the ETX-LS than any other GoTo system, since they'll all hook up to a computer, and the "advanced" features are all integrated.

__________________
You can't really tell the difference between drunken rambling and sober blogging.

OK, here's what I was able to learn from my "hands on" time the other night:

1.) I don't think I'm a big fan of refractors. I found the chromatic aberration (I think that's the right term) to be terribly distracting. Granted, it may have just been particularly bad in the specific scope I was looking through, but I still preferred the images from the reflectors. Also, portability. The 6" reflector I was looking through was longer than my car (maybe a slight exaggeration there, but this thing was LONG).

I know refractors have their advantages, and I could see myself owning one down the road, but not as my first/only scope.

2.) I forget the exact size the gentleman said it was (I want to say 17" for some reason), but I very much liked the large dobsonian I looked through. Again, portability is the big issue there. I'm 6'4" and still needed a step stool to reach the eyepiece.

3.) The bare minimum "gadgetry" that I want would be an EQ mount with some sort of drive on the RA. I want the scope to be able to keep an object in the FOV long enough to share the view with family members, including young children who would probably have trouble finding things on their own. Some objects were drifting out of view astonishingly quickly.

Still would prefer full goto functionality.

4.) Given my requirements of large aperture and portability, I remain convinced that a cassegrain of some variety is what I'm looking for.

5.) I definitely want my own scope. The experience was more frustrating than it was enjoyable. I'd like to be able to enjoy the views for more than 30 seconds without feeling guilty about all the people behind me waiting for their turn. In particular, they had the 24" pointed at M15, and I didn't feel comfortable lingering long enough to really appreciate what I was seeing given the number of people waiting behind me.

So far I think I'm leaning toward a goto SCT in the 10" range, with a small assortment of eyepieces. So far I've mostly looked into Meade and Celestron. I also want to look into the offerings from Skywatcher and Orion. Any other quality manufacturers I should consider?

What other questions should I be taking into consideration?

One question that I still have is whether I would be happy dropping down to an 8". It would certainly be easier on the wallet (and my back ). Unfortunately, other than the 6" refractor, they didn't have anything that small set up there.

Based on this picture and Amazon's listed shipping weight of 127 lbs, I would consider the 10" LX200 to be acceptably portable, although at the very, very upper limits of my definition of portability.

I'm also considering getting something small, in the couple hundred dollar range, just to have something to gain some experience with while I save up for what I'm really after. Possibly one of the smaller NexStars if I can find a good price on a used one. This would be done with the intention of either reselling it later, or hanging onto it as something the kids can "play with" on their own. (I have an 8 year old who spends hours on end at my computer exploring Stellarium.) It would also be done with full and complete understanding that a $200 4" scope will perform like a $200 4" scope, not like a $3000 10" scope.

Have you considered ED or Apochromatic refractors? Not really great first scopes because of the price and small aperture, but just wanted to throw them in as a possibility.

I don't think GoTo is necessary with small scopes, but if you really like the Nexstars you can get a 4SE for less than $400 if you factor in the mail in rebate.

__________________
You can't really tell the difference between drunken rambling and sober blogging.

I considered it, but then decided against for precisely the reasons you mentioned. Like I said above, I can see myself getting one someday, but not as my first purchase. Initially I want enough aperture to pull in dim/distant objects. From what I've seen in my research so far, refractors sacrifice this while still costing a good deal more than reflectors.

I'll keep that in mind. If I see a used 4SE or 5SE (or something similar) for around $200 I'll quite likely snap it up.

As for a small scope, I'm thinking the goto is even more important there (in this particular situation) since it will end up getting handed down to the kids. At their age I think that making it easy to find "neat stuff to look at" would hold their attention longer than being presented with a steep learning curve. But then, I could be completely wrong about that. My 8 year old has a list written down here of things she's found in Stellarium that she wants to look up and read about on Wikipedia. What I'm hoping for (and this may not be reasonable at these low price points) is a goto system that would allow her to pan around the sky, and then identify what objects of interest are called so she can look them up later. I've read reviews of higher end scopes that indicate that this can be done, but I don't know if the lower end Nexstars maintain that kind of accuracy. Not a deal breaker, but it would be cool. To that end, I'm also toying with the idea of a SkyScout.

I guess you could say I have dual purposes here. On the one hand, I want to indulge the interests of a 40 year old man who doesn't mind learning the nitty-gritty details, and on the other hand I want to encourage the interest of an 8 year old without throwing in enough "boring stuff" that she gives up and goes inside to watch spongebob.

These are two different goals, and I'm beginning to conclude that it may involve two different purchases.

On that note, if anyone has experience with children that age who have an interest in astronomy, I'd love any advice you may have on how to keep them interested and encourage them to keep learning.

It seems to be a common misconception that GoTo scopes are "easier" and therefore better for beginners and kids. In reality, it seems to be the experienced amateur astronomers who get the most out of it. Really, for a kid, you want something that's easy to operate manually, and can be quickly pointed across the sky. Half the fun is finding the objects, and in fact a lot of times it's quicker to find objects manually than with GoTo. I'm not trying to completely bash computerized scopes, but remember that GoTo is only a feature.

__________________
You can't really tell the difference between drunken rambling and sober blogging.

Which I hope to be sometime in the not ridiculously distant future.


Oh, absolutely agreed.

I guess the problem I'm looking to solve on that front is, once you find the cool object, figuring out what its name is so it can be looked up and learned about. My first thought would be to have a little LED display that tells you it's Aldebaran. Maybe I'm just expecting more from the technology than it can deliver. I don't know how realistic it is to expect an 8 year old to learn how to figure it out from star charts (then again, knowing this kid she just might dive in and learn it in no time).

What would you think of a dob with a skyscout mounted on it like a finder scope?

Yep. I agree. As I said above, I see it as a learning tool, not a learning substitute. Maybe I'm looking at it the wrong way, though.

I haven't used a Skyscout, so I can't comment on their accuracy. But that may be what you're looking for.

__________________
You can't really tell the difference between drunken rambling and sober blogging.