|
It's not the International Year of Astronomy anymore  But who gives a poo poo, go look at some space!I hesitate to call this a megathread, as I haven't seen many astronomy fans around the forums, but hopefully some will come out and some more will take up the hobby. I've only been involved with amateur astronomy for the last 6 months or so, but it's been a blast so far and I've enjoyed sharing it with strangers that happen upon me using my scope. I'll be writing this to appeal mostly to newbies because there are already plenty of resources for people who are already acquainted with the hobby. The two main kinds of astronomy: These two are not necessarily separate, but they're different enough to merit pointing out. Visual Astronomy This is the thing that everyone thinks of when they hear the word astronomy. It's some person sitting on a chair looking through a telescope, but most people don't know how sweet that poo poo can be, look at this: M13 Globular Cluster:  Saturn:  I tried to make these images similar to how it looks live through the eyepiece, but image quality varies widely with equipment. Pretty much any telescope will see saturn well though. There's literally thousands of things to see up there that are worth looking at, it's not just stars. Visual astronomy is much easier than most people think, and cheaper. You can get started with a capable pair of binoculars and a guide book for under $30 on Amazon (binoculars book(used)), and you can start out with a very capable scope for about 300-400 dollars, depending on if you buy new or used. The biggest enemy to visual astronomy is light pollution. This mostly comes from street lights and city lights that project light into the sky instead of down at the ground. If you go outside for a few minutes, chances are you won't be able to see more than 10-20 stars in one half of the sky. If you live in some area where you can see the Milky Way from your front door, congratulations. I hate you. What some astronomers have been doing to deal with this is: Astrophotography Like the word implies, this is taking pictures of the sky. You can get incredible images even in light polluted skies by taking long exposures (anywhere from 1 minute to 1 hour) and stacking multiple exposures on top of each other: Rosette Nebulae:  The problem with astrophotography is generally a cost issue. About the minimum you'd spend to get into this is $1200, but the cost can balloon VERY quickly for better gear. I personally don't do astrophotography, so I don't have much information on it. Gear: I'll only cover telescopes and eyepieces, as there is a crazy amount of telescope gear and I'd run out of room if I tried to cover everything. Telescopes: I will only cover the 3 main types, as they make up the vast majority of what people use. The most important factor when looking at a telescope is the aperture, or the size of the primary light gathering device. Costs vary wildly per inch (or mm) of aperture based on what type of telescope you choose. Reflector/Newtonian:  This is a reflector telescope on a Dobsonian base, which is a very common mount for this type of scope. A reflector is a very simple telescope that is basically made up of two mirrors and an eyepiece. The light first reflects off the primary (larger) mirror at the bottom of the tube, then it reflects off the secondary mirror, which is mounted at a 45 degree angle near the top of the telescope. Finally the light is focused into an eyepiece which you look in to. Pros: Very cheap for the size, you can get an 8" for about $300. Durable. Simple operation and minimal setup time (until you start getting to the HUGE ones). Cons: Bulky (my 8" Dobsonian is about 4 feet long and barely fits in my car). Requires frequent collimation (collimation is essentially lining up the mirrors to obtain the best quality image). Generally does not track stars, so you need to move it by hand, and most varieties will not work well for astrophotography (dobsonian mounts do not track the sky, so you will be limited to 1-2 second exposures). Refractor:  This is what most people think of when they think of telescopes. It's a series of lenses that focus the light down to a point that your eye can handle. This is also a relatively simple type of scope, but they can get costly very fast. These scopes can be mounted on motorized mounts to track the sky and do photography. Pros: Smaller refractors are very manageable and do not require a lot of maintenance. Capable of astrophotography. Capable of tracking stars, instead of being moved by hand. Cons: Cheaper refractors have chromatic abberation (the blue halo you can see on the saturn image earlier). Most expensive per inch/mm of aperture (A high quality 8" refractor can cost about $55,000). Catadioptric:  This is a middle ground between Reflectors and Refractors. The pictured scope is a Schmidt-Cassegrain, but there are other varieties. It uses a series of mirrors and lenses to focus the light to your eye. These telescopes offer large apertures that are short enough to be easily mounted on a motorized mount. These scopes can do star tracking and astrophotography. These scopes are heavy, but compact. Pros: Lots of aperture in a small package. Capable of tracking stars, instead of being moved by hand. Mostly self contained telescope means minimal cleaning. Cons: Susceptible to dewing, so you either need to use a dew shield or electronic heaters (some areas dew more than others, and the weather matters a lot too). Somewhat expensive. Complicated optics, hard to service yourself. Eyepieces: Here is where it gets complicated. Eyepieces are the other half of the telescope equation. Eyepieces determine the FOV (field of view) and the magnification that you will see. The magnification is determined by dividing the focal length of your telescope by the eyepiece focal length. For example, my telescope has a focal length of 1200mm, so with a 10mm eyepiece I would get 120x magnification, and with a 25mm eyepiece it would be 48x. More magnification is not always better, since the more you magnify, the less light you get. If you want to see large dim items (like nebulae and globular clusters), using a lower power eyepiece makes sense. Planetary viewing is almost always done at high magnifications. FOVs vary from 40 degrees (low end eyepieces that come with your scope) to 100 degrees (eyepieces more expensive than my entire telescope, like the Tele Vue Ethos). The two main eyepiece sizes are 1.25" and 2", wider eyepieces generally have higher FOVs and larger focal lengths. How to get started for under $30: If you're interested in astronomy, do yourself a favor and skip running out to buy a telescope. I know, that makes no sense, but trust me. Pick up a pair of binoculars, and a used copy of this book so you can get familiar with the sky. These items together will cost you about $30, and will let you see some of the brighter objects like M31 (Andromeda Galaxy) and the Orion Nebula. Next try to find an astronomy group or star party near you, amateur astronomers are generally very helpful and enjoy showing someone the sky and talking about their scope. You can find these by googling "<your city or state> star party" or "<your city> astronomy". The nice thing about star parties is you get to look through truly incredible setups, but people generally set up all kinds of scopes, from home made reflectors to bus sized monsters:  (Ok, you probably won't see anything that huge, but I've looked through some 20-22 inch scopes myself, and it's absolutely crazy. Resources: Adding to this list as they are posted. http://www.cloudynights.com/ The biggest amateur astronomy forum that I know of. You can find people here with expertise on anything from binocular viewing, to detecting exoplanets around other stars by measuring the light output of the star when the planet transits the star. Also has a classifieds section for buying and selling gear. http://cleardarksky.com/ A great tool for predicting the weather for astronomers. This includes atmospheric transparency and turbulence, as well as cloud cover. http://www.astroleague.org/societies/list A list of astronomical societies by state. http://www.stellarium.org/ Free planetarium software, pretty, simple, but useful. http://www.stargazing.net/astropc/ Another free planetarium, way more complicated, not as pretty. http://www.heavens-above.com/ Want to know when you can see the ISS? Or may just grab a sky chart to print out for a specific time and place? http://www.astromart.com/ Place to buy and sell in the US primarily. http://www.astrobuysell.com/uk/ Astro small ads, buying second hand can save you a fortune. Loztblaz fucked around with this message at 22:01 on Dec 7, 2011 |
#
¿
Jun 17, 2009 04:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 14:37 |
|
|
Jekub posted:Amateur astrophotographer checking in, in my spare time I do this : That's really nice. I've been tempted to take up some photography, but I'd need a new scope first. Been considering a CPC 1100 on a wedge so I can have a capable visual and astrophoto scope in one setup, and still have a mount beefy enough to hold a piggyback refractor without dropping multiple thousands on a equatorial. Gary2863 posted:I made a thread in the Coupons forum about the Galileoscope. These are also great little scopes for the price. I've donated a couple of these myself, and I have one on the way to mess with and give to some kid at a star party.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2009 21:30
|
|
|
jerkstore77 posted:How much of the cost for astrophotography is related to the actual camera? I have a decent DSLR already and have always been interested in astrophotography. As far as I understand it, most of the cost is related to the mounting. A lot can be done with a lower quality scope or camera, but having a mount that can track for long exposures is critical. I'm sure Jekub would know more than I do.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2009 00:18
|
|
|
Not an Anthem posted:Is there an astronomy club site that lists meetups and all that jazz by location? I'd like to find telescope makers in Chicago, if they exist. http://www.chicagoastro.org/ If anyone else is looking for one near you, I added a link at the bottom of the first post that has a list by state.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2009 15:21
|
|
|
jerkstore77 posted:It's kind of cool though because none of this is visible to the naked eye. That's one of my favorite things about astronomy, there's so much more up there than we can see with just the naked eye. My moderate sized scope (Orion XT8i) pulls in about 875 times the light as my eyeball does. You can pretty much look anywhere and see thousands of stars in what looks like a totally dark part of the sky.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2009 17:40
|
|
|
FalconGuy016 posted:I'm incredibly jealous of those of you who can see galaxies. I love the idea of amateur astronomy I just never had time to get into it. But I'm starting to look into it now. I'll echo Jekub's recommendation for a Dobsonian mounted Newtonian telescope. The thing is though, if you are planning on leaving the telescope there, you'll be able to get more aperture for less money, and have a quicker set up time by going with a solid tube scope. Don't get me wrong, truss scopes are great, but you will always spend at least 10 minutes doing setup, and they're more expensive. You can get a brand new 8" dob for 330 dollars (and sometimes free shipping if they're having a special sale, which is about 60 dollars that you don't have to pay). I use an 8" personally, and in pretty dark skies, the views are amazing. Of course, the bigger the scope the better the views. We might be able to recommend something if you gave a budget and let us know if you plan to take it back and forth, or just leave it there. There's also the question of you wanting a computerized object locator system or not.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2009 21:09
|
|
|
FalconGuy016 posted:After thinking a bit, I'd probably just leave it there. Galaxies are extremely far! Fortunately, they are also extremely large. I typically observe with a 14mm and 24mm when I'm looking at galaxies and nebulae, and a 8mm when I'm looking at globular clusters. If I were you, I would try to find a 8" dobsonian, solid tube design. Used this would run you about 350, which leaves you enough left over for a couple solid eyepieces and accessories. Now here's where you have a choice. You can try to find a used scope and save some money, or buy new. I'd probably go for this one if you wanted to get a new one, so that you have some money to spare for an eyepiece or two. You can wait for a free shipping special to save 50 bucks if you want to, they happen every few months it seems. The only issue with this setup is that it only has one eyepiece and the finder is a cheap red dot type. If you're looking for a used scope, try to buy from someone who is also interested in the hobby. They'll always take better care of their gear and often let you try before you buy. If you're buying used, stick to 8" dobsonians from Zhumell, Orion or Meade. There are other makers that are equal or better quality, but they also may require some fixing up. So for your other accessories, I'd suggest: A Telrad finder, ~$35 this is similar to what comes with the scope, but much better. Two eyepieces: Astro-Tech Paradigm 15mm and Astro-Tech Paradigm 8mm, $60 each. These eyepieces have a 60 degree FOV, which isn't amazing, but I personally own these two and find them to be very solid eyepieces for the price. You could get a 68 degree FOV eyepiece for about 40 bucks, but you'll notice some chromatic abberation (colors bleeding on the edges of objects, mostly seen on planets), and other optic issues. You could also skip buying multiple eyepieces and go straight for a (possibly used) Baader Hyperion Click-Stop Zoom, which can do 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24mm. These run about $215 new, and maybe 150 used. This eyepiece is amazing for starting out, since you're getting 5 eyepieces in one (8 with a barlow lens). The only downside is that you do sacrifice a little field of view at the higher powers (40 degree at 8mm). And as Jekub said, try to go to a star party and take a look at everyone's gear. It's not uncommon to find people there that are wanting to get rid of an older scope of theirs if you put out the word that you're wanting to get into the hobby. Loztblaz fucked around with this message at 23:41 on Jul 7, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2009 23:34
|
|
|
ValhallaSmith posted:Also if anyone really wants to get into this take a look in your local area for an amateur observatory. Not too sure how common they are but this is the one near me http://www.graaa.org/veen.html . For some reason west michigan has quite a bit in the way of astronomy facilities. Hell the middle school I went to out here has its own planetarium. Some of the bigger astronomy groups have these too, for instance the place I go to has this observatory set up at the star party grounds, with a pretty nice 16 inch cassegrain. If you're wanting to find one, try to check your local astronomy groups. If they don't have one, they probably know where the nearest one is.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2009 05:23
|
|
|
FalconGuy016 posted:I have a question with field of view in eyepieces. It seems the higher the FOV the more money, but when a eyepiece is say 60 degrees field of view does that literally mean you can see 60 degrees of the sky? How does that work with different magnifications with the same FOV? The amount of sky that a telescope/eyepiece combination can see is the true field of view, which is almost never more than 2 degrees, and usually much less. The apparent field of view is the size of the field that your eye sees when looking through the eyepiece. Low FOV eyepieces are like looking at the galaxy through a circular window, you can only see what's in the middle, and anything outside of that area isn't visible. Higher FOV eyepieces are like sticking your head out of that window, and having your entire field of view full of stars. Loztblaz fucked around with this message at 01:26 on Dec 1, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Jul 17, 2009 04:21
|
|
|
Bolkovr posted:Something hit Jupiter and left a black spot, and it's cloudy here! Dammit. Cloudy here too, I heard about this and really wanted to check it out. It's cool to see all the things discovered by amateurs these days though, as we get tools that are better and better. Some teenager recently discovered an entirely new type of supernova, and now this.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2009 07:26
|
|
|
Here are transit times of the black spot on Jupiter, taken from http://lackawannaastronomicalsociety.org/?page_id=203code:
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2009 21:19
|
|
|
Bolkovr posted:I gave it a shot tonight but the seeing was horrible. I could barely see the 2 bands, let alone any detail. I was clouded in during the transit, but not before or after, oh well.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 22, 2009 22:07
|
|
|
Chad Sexington posted:Just ordered the galileoscope. Glad I got in before the price increase! I wouldn't worry about that. Amateur astronomers are one of the most newbie tolerant groups I've seen. If you want to get an idea of what's out there, I'd recommend a star party instead of a group meeting. Group meetings are mainly about future plans and sometimes you'll have a speaker, but it's more about the group and planning (at least in my experience). That said, you can't go wrong with the Galileoscope, it's amazing for the price.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2009 03:05
|
|
|
Tann posted:Ooh, I'm glad there's already a thread. I'll be getting the book and binoculars to start me off soon. Just a quick question though; how much will light pollution affect the telescopes? I live in a fairly urban area and there're only small parks with no light close to me. Is it going to be worth investing in a telescope? Unfortunately, it's a pretty huge difference. In the darkest skies I've ever been in, I can see things naked eye that I can barely see in my binoculars at home. Find your home on http://www.jshine.net/astronomy/dark_sky/ , If you're in orange or under (orange, yellow, green, blue, grey, black) you should be ok if you go for a dobsonian mounted Newtonian scope eventually. I'm in a red zone, and almost always go to a dark site for longer observing sessions, but it's still possible to see the brighter objects (globular clusters, double stars, planets obviously).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2009 04:11
|
|
|
Tann posted:Cheers for the quick reply but I'm in England. Specifically Kent, Sidcup. Would the proximity to London be a factor or is it more local illumination like street lights? I looked up your general area, and it seems like it would be equal to about an orange rated sky. An easy way to see how good your skies are, is to look at Ursa Minor (the Little Dipper). If you can see all seven stars, you are in much better skies than I am in, probably around blue or yellow quality. It's likely that you'll be missing four of them though, with your proximity to London. Go here to see which stars are what brightness: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ursa_Minor remember that higher magnitude numbers mean dimmer. As for the second question, it depends. Light domes are very annoying if you're near a huge city, they'll wash out a good half of the sky. Local illumination isn't as big of a deal, unless it's visible to you in your observing area, then it's a massive problem. If light is showing through your trees or over your fence, it will cause your eyes to lose their sensitivity to light instantly. Once you have your binoculars and learn your way around the sky a little, I'd recommend driving to a darker place and seeing the huge difference. I wish I could be more helpful with England specific resources, but I'm unfamiliar with those.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2009 05:57
|
|
|
Mugmoor posted:Those Binoculars in the OP look cool but I'd rather buy them in-store somewhere. Is 10x50 the specification I'm looking for then? I found some Falcon Binoculars in a store near me and I'm so tempted to snag 'em. 10x50s are considered a good compromise between portability, cost, and power. The first number is the magnification, the second number is the aperture of the main lens in mm. If you're willing to spend more, you could go for higher magnification, but any higher than 10 and you're going to want something to support it on like a monopod or tripod.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2009 02:48
|
|
|
I tried one briefly a couple weeks ago. It's outstanding for the price, but obviously it won't compare to bigger and better scopes. The base on the one I was using was a little tough to turn, but I suspect that could be fixed by simply loosening the azimuth screw. You have to adjust the knob on the side to lock it in position on the altitude, but it's pretty easy once you get used to it. I would really recommend getting the Accessory Kit that adds two more eyepieces to fill the large gap between 20mm and 4mm, and a finder scope. For 18 bucks or so, it's worth it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 14, 2009 20:12
|
|
|
Mercury Ballistic posted:So my only piece of equipment is a sextant I use for the odd star fix or taking a sunline. I have some night vision I use as well, just when I am bored. I work as a navigator on ships and spend a lot of time looking at the night sky in the middle of the ocean. In the winter of 2007, while off the East Coast of Africa, I saw something that I was hoping someone might be able to identify. Comet McNaught was visible around then, as well as bright as poo poo (visible in the daytime). It wouldn't have moved that quickly though, 45 degrees in 40 minutes is faster than anything other than satellites and meteors.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2009 01:00
|
|
|
SeXReX posted:I need to go for a good hour and a half drive to make it out of orange. Well at least you can do solar observing!  That's some lovely light pollution. I'm glad I don't live in Chicago or NYC at least, the light pollution there is so lovely that you won't be able to see anything other than Venus, Jupiter, and the brightest few stars.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2009 22:35
|
|
|
Jekub posted:I'm back! Nicely done, the dust lanes are really pronounced. Are you shooting in color, or filtering?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2009 05:20
|
|
|
100 HOGS AGREE posted:I've never posted in here before but I just wanted to chime in and say I just finished putting together my Galileoscope that came in the mail today. The moon is a really nice target even for experienced viewers. Tonight is a nearly full moon (ok it's always half illuminated, semantics), but you should still have a terminator to look at. If you don't have a tripod handy, try to find something sturdy to put it on, because anything over 10x or so is too high for holding in your hands. Jupiter is also a decent object, but at 50x maximum, it may be sort of small.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2009 02:17
|
|
|
Funkysauce posted:Really glad I found this thread! I've been messing around with a Meade ETX-90EC that my father in law gave me. I've so far seen Jupiter, Saturn ad Venus. I've only had it since December. I'm pretty clueless about imaging, but as for viewing deep sky objects: get to darker skies. That's really all there is, unfortunately. Try to find a national park near you and stay the night, even the ones that are near cities are huge improvements. A huge telescope in poor light pollution is going to be beaten by a small scope in dark skies every time. There are some light pollution filters that help a little, but I haven't personally used them.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2009 19:13
|
|
|
Crouton posted:I went fishing in southern BC this weekend, and at dusk on Saturday I saw what looked like a big meteor or satellite burning up in the atmosphere, fireball and all. It was only visible for about a second or so before it dipped behind the mountains. Are there any websites or databases that record known meteor strikes? I'd like to find out exactly what it was I saw. http://www.amsmeteors.org/fireball/fireball_log2009.html is the only one that I know of, but it's maintained by amateurs, so it's by no means comprehensive. It doesn't seem to have the one you saw, but you can submit it if you want to: http://www.amsmeteors.org/index.html It's mostly US sightings, but I saw some Canadian ones. I haven't had the fortune to see anything brighter than a large streak, so count yourself lucky. edit: also http://miac.uqac.uquebec.ca/MIAC/index.html but it seems to be down. Loztblaz fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Sep 14, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2009 03:25
|
|
|
comaerror posted:Hey astrogoons. This might seem a rather mundane question, but how does temperature effect your observation sessions, and how does it effect the equipment? I know there's less turbulance in colder weather, but that's about it. I've been thinking of getting back into astronomy (used to do it when I was a kid) since it'd be a good winter hobby (I live in Alaska, so it's dark all drat day in the winter). If you store your telescope in a heated area, you're going to need to leave it outside for an hour or more to equalize the temperature. This can be prevented by storing it in an unheated shed or garage. If you have a motorized scope, you'll have to worry about the grease used to lubricate the gears. Too cold and it seizes up. Too warm from a heater, and you can cause the grease to become too runny, and get into places where it shouldn't be. A SCT will have much longer cooldown times than say, a truss tube dob. Refractors are also slow to cool, but they aren't as dependent on it as telescopes that utilize mirrors.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2009 23:00
|
|
|
Armageddon posted:Hi astronomy buddies You're going to want a non-zooming finder of some type if you don't already have one. You'll be using it a lot more than you would with a tracking mount or go-to. I personally prefer a green laser pointer on a bracket, but many people prefer telrads. For viewing near zenith, there are a couple things you can do about it. I saw someone who put two metal brackets on their dob that they could put dowels in for some leverage on the tube, but that just adds to the bulk of the scope. A different solution is to upgrade the teflon on your rockerbox. Scopestuff.com has Ebony Star laminate in circuar and strip form. I haven't done this to my dob, so you should probably look up what lightbridge owners did, because you may need to change your bearings, or just install the laminate. His site looks pretty amateur, but I've bought from him and had a great experience. Bolkovr posted:Oh shi guys  My astronomy society has (had) a star party scheduled for tonight. Loztblaz fucked around with this message at 20:39 on Sep 19, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2009 20:36
|
|
|
Funkysauce posted:A few Q's if anyone can help. First here's the gear: Not really aside from eyepieces and the telescope, but I do recommend a guidebook of some sort so you can locate objects to look at. Funkysauce posted:2) Are hi-mag UWA eyepieces any good for viewing nebulae or galaxies? Funkysauce posted:3) Are light pollution-reducers worth anything?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2009 00:53
|
|
|
Funkysauce posted:I have a bunch of SP eyepieces ranging from 26mm to 5.5mm I think I should be ok there. Also, believe it or not, I use stellarium to locate what I'm looking at. Pretty good with it too! Oh ok, for some reason I was reading your post as someone starting up the hobby from scratch. You seem pretty set then, go look at some space! Loztblaz fucked around with this message at 20:42 on Sep 29, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2009 20:22
|
|
|
The LCROSS lunar impact is scheduled for Oct 9 at 4:30AM PDT. People in the eastern time zone will most likely not be able to see it live due to the rear end in a top hat sun getting in the way. You'll need a decent sized scope (8" bare minimum, 10+ recommended) to see it, or you can go to a public event and they'll have scopes set up. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LCROSS/impact/index.html You'll also probably be able to view a live stream of it online, but I don't know of one yet. Loztblaz fucked around with this message at 02:27 on Oct 4, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Oct 4, 2009 02:19
|
|
|
dur posted:I just wish the mount was a little more stable - it was really shaking around a lot. Or is that normal-ish for higher zoom levels? Lower end equatorial mounted reflectors generally skimp on the mount, so that's probably your issue. I don't own an equatorial mount, so I don't know if there is anything you can do to reduce the shakiness. Try to avoid touching the scope while using it, and keep it out of the wind as much as you can. Normally wind and touching it for focusing/moving don't cause problems, but you may need to be more careful.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 5, 2009 04:40
|
|
|
Bazanga posted:This thread got me interested in buying a telescope for myself for Christmas and after reading around I stumbled on this: Rokinon 500mm x 70mm Refractor Telescope It really depends on if you want a scope now or not. If you don't mind waiting, you can probably find a 6" reflector on a dobsonian mount for around that price on craigslist. Cheaper refeactors are extremely hit and miss, and I'd be cautious of buying one from a dealer that I'm unfamiliar with. On the good side, that telescope lists realistic magnifications and uses 1.25" eyepieces instead of .925". Many cheaper telescopes say poo poo like "600x!" and it's totally unusable at that magnification. Basically you could do better for the price, but it doesn't look as bad as most. If you're only interested in the moon, planets, and a few select deep sky objects, you should be fine. edit: Upon reading Jekub's post, you'd be better off with a well known brand. For some reason I was thinking that their beginner lines started at around $199, but I was wrong, those skywatchers are pretty decent for the price. Orion also has scopes starting at 100 (well, 50, but that's a pretty small reflector). Loztblaz fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Oct 14, 2009 |
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2009 00:44
|
|
|
Speaking of buying scopes, I landed a great deal on a Nexstar 8 with solar filter and hard case. Now I just need the clouds to clear up and I can enjoy tracking and goto. It's about 8 years old, but in absolutely perfect condition. I may replace the dovetail and mount with something else if viewing at zenith is too awkward due to the mount design.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2009 20:29
|
|
|
Hughmoris posted:There are almost zero listings in craigslist for telescopes. I found one, a Bushnell, local to me for $40: I'd pass, but if you're wanting to spend around 50 bucks you probably won't find much else unless you buy a Celestron Firstscope. This isn't electronic or anything, but it's a decent little scope that will give you much better quality views than a Bushnell. Bushnell/Tasco/Jason are all extremely common on the market for a reason, they're not very good and a lot of people will use them once and quit. If you want to see if you like the hobby, try attending a star party before buying a telescope. Amateurs are always happy to show people what they're looking at, just remember to not use a white flashlight or any white light at all. If you don't have a red flashlight, you can make one with red paper or red cellophane. Check http://www.astroleague.org/societies/list for a list of societies and star parties.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2009 05:45
|
|
|
Crouton posted:Well a friend and I took out my cheap-rear end Craigslist starter telescope for the first time a few nights back (well, the first time that the clouds didn't immediately roll in the second you look in the eyepiece,) and we had a lot of fun just looking around at anything we could identify, stars, planets, whatever. Keeping it at a similar temperature will cut down on dew, but it won't stop it totally. You can also make a dew shield out of cardboard and tape, just wrap it around the end of the lens and extend twice as far as the telescope aperture is wide. Both of these together will cut down on dew quite a bit. You should avoid touching or cleaning lenses unless it's a severe smudge, so wiping off dew isn't the best idea. That said, if you're looking through a cheaper scope and really want to do some viewing, it's not the end of the world. Here's a DIYish guide covering dew prevention with telescopes, you can even use a hair dryer if you don't mind the noise: http://astro.neutral.org/eq/dew.html
|
|
#
¿
Oct 27, 2009 07:50
|
|
|
I really have limited knowledge of astrophotography, but here's a link to a well kept ETX site that includes a section on photography: http://www.weasner.com/etx/menu.html The ETX line is pretty good quality from what I've seen, and if portability is a concern, it's going to be tough to beat. The only question is the tracking. For deep space objects, you're going to need much longer exposure time than you would on solar system objects, and if the mount is unable to track for long periods of time, you may be forced to take short exposures and stack them in a program.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2009 20:47
|
|
|
micron posted:
Celestron is one if the big mass produced brands, but that isn't a bad thing. Their NexStar system is very solid for the price (I use a NexStar 8" SCT). If you want tracking and go-to, you won't do much better than that nexstar unless you buy used . You could probably get a larger go-to scope used, but buying used is a little intimidating when you're new to the hobby. I ended up buying my first scope new, and even though I ended up getting a different one, it was worth it to not worry about support and documentation. If you don't think you need go-to and tracking, you can't go wrong with an Orion XT8 Classic. This is a very simple telescope that has no electronic frills, but you get a lot of aperture (203mm vs 114/130) and a dead simple mount.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 04:31
|
|
|
micron posted:With that Orion how does the stand work? Doesn't look like it comes with any stand\mount and also any accessories. Could I "One day" buy all nessesary equipment? I think I may need a "go do this shithead" type of thing with the budget I have. I'm somewhat flexible either way. I'll assume I'm going to need a few different eye pieces etc. The XT8 mount is a Dobsonian style mount. It's a simple alt-az mount that you operate with your hand, here's the wiki page on this style of telescope if you want to read up on it some more. It does include a decent setup, click the Included Items link and you'll see a full list. Here's the important stuff though: 25mm Sirius Plossl eyepiece (1.25") EZ Finder II reflex sight Collimation cap Dust cap You'll probably want to get a 8-10mm eyepiece for higher magnifications, as the 25mm is only good for 48x. I know this website looks straight out of 1999, but it's legitimate and the eyepieces are decent enough. http://www.owlastronomy.com/superplossl.htm There's much (MUCH) better eyepieces out there, but if you're wanting to stay near the 350 range for a complete setup, that's the easiest way to do it. If you're willing to spend more, the Baader Hyperion 8-24 Click Zoom is an amazing deal for anyone starting out. It runs about 180-200, but it's a zoom eyepiece that allows you to worry less about changing eyepieces in the dark, and concentrate more on space.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 19, 2009 05:46
|
|
|
Dassiell posted:I won a Tasco Luminova Telescope on Club Bing, are these any good? I am pretty sure it is 660x60mm. It's hard to beat free, but it's not a very good scope. You'll be able to see some solar system objects, and some of the bright deep space objects, but that's about it. M45 (Pleiades), M42 (Orion Nebula), and M31 (Andromeda Galaxy) are some objects that are naked eye or nearly naked eye depending on your sky, that should be easy with binoculars or a small refractor. I have no experience with that scope, but you'll probably struggle with tripod and mount stability. You may be able to modify it to make it more stable though, as Jekub described earlier this page, so give that a try if you have problems.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 20, 2009 10:48
|
|
|
Wanderer89 posted:Does anyone have any experience with using green lasers as replacement finderscopes? And can recommend a good mount? I have inherited a nice 1988 celestron powerstar 8" Schmidt-Cassegrain with motorized equatorial wedge setup and moto-focus from my father, which I've since had to take apart and unfreeze the corkscrew gear to operate, but now works great. I also have a 50mW green laser that's powered by two AAAs, ideally I'd like to mount it as a secondary finderscope complete with calibration knobs / external constant power source. I used to use a green laser pointer as a finder scope, but switched to a telrad for several reasons. The biggest reason was not wanting to drill holes on my 8" SCT to mount the pointer, but I also found the telrad easier to use during winter months (laser pointer shows up less in clearer atmospheres) and at star parties. If you still want to use the pointer, you'll need to find out what type of mounting bracket your telescope has for a finder. Most laser pointer brackets now are going to use different dovetails/screw holes than what you have on your scope, which is why a telrad is nice, it just sticks on the tube.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 25, 2009 17:55
|
|
|
You'll only notice the extra 2" of aperture if you have access to good skies (bortle scale green or below). The intelliscope system itself is solid, but they don't tell you everything you need to get it working correctly. The bottom encoder (circular metal disc) slips around when you move the scope unless you tape it down with double sided tape (clear double sided, not the foam stuff). This causes you to be unable to find a drat thing, and caused me a month of frustration until I found out about that 10 cent fix. Also consider the size, the 10" intelliscope is longer than the 8", which may cause problems in transportation. I personally started with an 8" intelliscope and even though I moved on to a goto SCT, I don't regret starting there at all. You may want to try and find a star party before deciding for sure on your purchase, you'll find people more than happy to give advice and let you check out their equipment.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 30, 2009 02:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 14:37 |
|
|
Jekub posted:Also I got this while playign with video capture on the DSLR : Nice. I always love when I'm out observing during a meteor shower and I just happen to get a nice streak across the eyepiece. Of course I have no way of snapping a picture of it so I just yell about it a bit.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2009 00:41
|
|
