|
grover posted:I wanted to get my 7-year old daughter a telescope for christmas. I was thinking about a $50-ish refractor but ended up deciding against it after talking with a few people, because I guess you can't see crap with a telescope like that and it would be boring and just go into a closet? People here seem happy with theirs, but eh For finding objects to look at, try stellarium. It'll show you what's in the sky at any time or date you want to see, and it allows you to adjust the sky quality so you can exclude things that are too faint to see in a red zone. To actually find the objects, it's going to be hard to beat a red flash light and some star charts. If you want to avoid fumbling with a book or binder, a planisphere is easy to toss in your bag, and will show you quite a few objects. If you happen to have an iphone, there's Star Walk and Starmap. Star Walk is simpler, but Starmap has more features. These are basically stellarium-lite, useful to find planets or see when X is rising, but nothing that you can plan a session with.
|
#
¿
Dec 6, 2009 05:19
|
|
I ended up rethinking the gift and decided on a 4.5" reflector instead, that will now be a gift to the whole family. I ended up ordering 
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 17:12 |
|
|
micron posted:I just picked up an 8" intelliscope for 206.50 on ebay (think I did pretty good). I have not picked it up yet but what should I look at or for before payment is made on a used scope? Like what should I inspect etc besides normal broken parts and such? Check the mirror for damage, dust can be cleaned off (if it's REALLY bad, otherwise don't bother). Test out the azimuth movement, since with an intelliscope you can't easily see the teflon bearings without taking the box apart. Make sure the focuser moves easily through it's full movement. Look through the focuser without an eyepiece to check the secondary mirror for problems. If the mirrors are badly damaged, I'd probably walk, but the rest of those issues are easy enough to fix. I'd also suggest at least turning on the intelliscope computer and making sure it works. Look on pages 21 and 22 of the intelliscope manual to see how to enter the diagnostic mode. If this scope is in good condition, you got an amazing deal on it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2009 00:06
|
|
|
boondocksts posted:Has anyone heard anything or gotten to play with the new celestron cgem 1100 HD telescopes? I would love to pick one up for photography and viewing but I'm a little hesitant to spend that much without reading/hearing about user experiences. A guy in my astronomy club bought one, I'll keep an eye out for it at the next star party we have.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2009 20:39
|
|
|
grover posted:That's awesome! Should I be able to see colorful nebula in a 114mm reflector? We had our new telescope out the other night, but were having trouble aiming it, and though we saw many stars that weren't visible to the naked eye, couldn't see anything like google sky seems to suggest we should see. Color in deep sky objects is only really visible in photographs and large scopes, and even then it's just hints. I can barely see some color in the Orion and Lagoon Nebulae with an 8" scope from extremely dark skies. It's more visible in our 18" SCT in the observatory, but that's not exactly an amateur grade telescope. That said, don't let me discourage you, even without color the Orion Nebula is amazing to look at.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2010 02:23
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:Any Astronomy goons in the LA area? I'm thinking of getting into this hobby. I already own a pair of 7x50 binoculars and a military compass and I want to go out one night and look around a bit to see if I like it before dumping any money into this. Any recommendations as to where to go? Try to get familiar with the night sky. Stellarium is free software that gives you an idea of where things are, you could also print out some star charts to take with you. Some of the brighter objects you can see with binoculars at this time of year are the Orion Nebula and the Pleiades. The moon is always nice with binoculars too, and it's just been a full moon so you'll have a terminator to look at. I'd try to observe in a reclining chair of some sort, like a beach chair. If you don't have that, you can make a very ghetto monopod out of a long broom handle, the point is to stabilize the binoculars. You won't be seeing anything incredible with 7x50 binoculars, but you'll be able to see how much more stuff there is up there than you can see with the naked eye, and find out if you think you'd want to spend more time with the hobby.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2010 03:43
|
|
|
Been moving and without internet for a little over a week, those are some amazing images octane2. I don't have the patience for imaging, but I get tempted to try whenever I see work of that quality.INTJ Mastermind posted:Does anyone have experience with the Celestron AstroMaster 130 EQ? I'm leaning towards it over the Orion XT6 / XT8. I don't own one, but eq mounted reflectors are all pretty similar around the 200-300 dollar range. The thing you need to consider is transport time versus setup time. I own a 8" dob and a 8" SCT, so they're similar in visual quality, but I use them for very different things. I can take my SCT outside in one trip, and easily fit my telescope, tripod, observing chair, and eyepiece case/general supply kit in the trunk of my small car. On the other hand my dob takes up the entire trunk and back seat. The other side of this is setup time, I can get my dob set up and align it's computer in under 3 minutes. If I skip the computer alignment, I can get it ready in under a minute. My SCT takes 10-15 to get it mounted on the tripod, north aligned, manually slewed to two stars, and aligned well enough to have reliable go-to. A 8" dob is sort of a hassle to carry around, but you can be observing in a few minutes, while an EQ mounted scope will take more time, especially when you're new to it. As for choosing which astromaster to go with, I would highly recommend waiting and getting the 130. It's a slightly larger aperture, but that's not the most important part. The 114 is on a cheaper mount, the CG-2 versus the 130's CG-3. I have not seen the CG-2 in person, but I've seen the CG-3 and was impressed with it's stability for a relatively budget priced telescope. I also believe that the 114 comes with a built in barlow lens, which can cause you problems if you wish to use your own lens at a later date. Built in barlows also do not play well with some third party eyepieces. If you get the 130, you'll eventually want to pick up an eyepiece for high magnifications, but that shouldn't be more than 20-30 bucks for a plossl. One problem with the astromaster line is the reflex finder. glitch77 has the same scope and I believe replaced the finder pretty quickly. A telrad or rigel finder is an excellent replacement for the stock finder, they both run about 30 bucks or so. INTJ Mastermind posted:The 130EQ is $190, and the 114EQ is $130 (+15 for optional motor drive), both with free UPS shipping. Are these good deals, and should I get the motor drive? That's quite a bit cheaper than amazon, those look like good deals. The motor drive is nice, but ultimately optional. I'd suggest you wait and use the scope a little, and see what you need to upgrade. I'd put a quality finder and a high magnification eyepiece over the motor in the short term. edit: amazon has the 130 eq in stock http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-31045-AstroMaster-Reflector-Telescope/dp/B000MLL6RS Loztblaz fucked around with this message at 22:37 on Jan 18, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2010 22:28
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:Thanks guys. I might get the 130EQ from Amazon, since I have a $50 gift card which will get the price down a bit. A 2x barlow lens would only give you one additional option, since it would make the 20mm eyepiece equal to the 10mm. Consider a 3x barlow, it would allow you to view at 195x and 97.5x, in addition to 65x and 32.5x without the barlow.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2010 19:59
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:That's a pretty good idea with the 3x Barlow, looks to be about the same price as a 4mm eye piece and it gives me 2 extra magnifications. The 20mm is an "erector" eye-piece which presents things right-side-up. That won't interfere with a Barlow will it? As far as I can tell, it's nothing with the 20mm eyepiece (which I'd assume is just a standard plossl, like the 10mm), it's the telescope's optics. A 3x barlow should function just fine, but you may want to do some more research or email a company and ask them. Most smaller astronomy supply companies are very receptive to questions, astronomics.com called me 3 minutes after an order and offered me cheaper shipping that would get to me faster because of their location. A barlow will cause a loss of light, but it's something like 1%. If you compare a 3x barlowed 12mm and a 4mm back and forth, you might be able to see a slight difference in image quality, but it's not worth the cost of having multiple eyepieces right now. If you get hooked on the hobby, then you might consider a suitcase full of Tele-Vue Ethos(Ethoses? Ethoi?).
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2010 21:38
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:Might be a stupid question, but if I balance an EQ mount, do I need to rebalance it when I change the orientation? Once you have it balanced, you won't need to rebalance it until you add/remove weight. Changing between light and heavy eyepieces is generally not enough to need additional counterweight unless you're already straining it with other things.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 21, 2010 21:36
|
|
|
HOLYFLAMINGCRAP posted:I recently read Cosmos by Carl Sagan and have become space obsessed and have been thinking about getting a telescope. The problem is I live in NYC where light pollution is insane and I was wondering if anyone on here lives in NYC and whats your experience with telescopes here. Is it pointless, or can you see alright in the middle of central park maybe? Unfortunately you'll be limited to planets and the moon with light pollution like that. The brightest deep sky objects will be a stretch.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2010 21:37
|
|
|
DorianGravy posted:On a related note, what's the best resource to use to find a good location for stargazing? I'm in a pretty bright city myself, and have been looking at places to drive to. I've taken a look at http://www.jshine.net/astronomy/dark_sky/ and http://cleardarksky.com/, and while I can easily tell what places have good seeing, I can't tell which places are actually conducive to setting up a telescope for a couple hours. Are parks generally the best places? Some of them say things like "closes at dark," which is a little inconvenient. Any tips? If you're not in a club, your best bet will be state parks. A lot of them close their gates at dark and expect people to stay the night, and charge a fee that assumes a overnight stay. I don't know any specific places, but the state parks in the orange area of the jshine.net map to the west of New Brunswick would be a good place to start looking. A bortle scale orange sky isn't great, but you'll instantly notice the difference coming from a white zone. Deep sky viewing is easily possible in this quality of sky, as long as you stick to objects that aren't too dim (I don't know what your equipment is, but magnitude 7 or 8 would probably be your limit, assuming great seeing).
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2010 08:42
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:Also, when using the 3x Barlow on the 10mm eyepiece (200x power), it seems I can't get anything in focus. It bounces between being just slightly out of focus both ways. When I knock it down to 100x power with the 20mm it's a lot better. How can I tell if it's a problem with the Barlow? Atmosphere? Collimation? Am I pushing the telescope too much? 200x power on a 5" scope should be ok? Probably the atmosphere. My "maximum" magnification on my 8" is 350-400x, but i've only been able to hit 350x once and have it be in focus. It's a combination of atmospheric turbulence and temperature changes that makes up what we call seeing. Find your observing area on cleardarksky.com to get a decent prediction of what the sky quality will be like. I'll second Jekub's recommendation for telrad charts and using the rings. It took me a couple nights to get comfortable with mine, but I wouldn't replace it with anything short of a Televue NP101 with a 31mm Nagler which would overload my mount and send me to the poor house.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 10, 2010 20:33
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:The plastic window on the Telrad doesn't have any coatings on it right? It'll be fine to clean with a wet tissue? Yeah, just clean it like any piece of glass.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 13, 2010 04:35
|
|
|
JihadforChrist posted:I recentley dug out a childrens 50X-100X refracting telescope with a 3x finder scope and a small tripod that I had since I was a kid. Since it's a refractor, I'm assuming it's around 50mm aperture. Assuming it's a typical department store refractor, you're pretty much limited to the moon. If you have decent quality optics, you can see Saturn and Jupiter at around 100x quite well, but I'd be surprised if that scope could handle it. The two big challenges are going to be optical quality and mount stability. Optical quality you can't do too much about, just try to stick to lower magnifications. The mount can be reinforced to be more stable, but I can't say how without seeing the scope.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 26, 2010 21:11
|
|
|
micron posted:After a few ebay, craigslist failures and also due to cold weather I gave up looking for a bit. I'm now in the race for a telescope again and have a few more dollars to spend. Recently there was an ETX-125 from meade on ebay for $325 plus shipping which I didn't pull the trigger on (which I'm kicking myself in the rear end for now). Why is it that even the little meade's etx's like the 90 are so drat expensive compared to any other scope around the same size? It depends on the model of the dob, but a lot of their scopes were made out of sonotube instead of aluminum, which makes them significantly heavier. Dobs are hard to gently caress up, so as long as the mirrors are in good shape, the focuser works well, and it holds collimation, you should be set. Just be sure you're willing to handle a 10" dob, it's probably larger and heavier than you think it is.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2010 01:21
|
|
|
You're right, the dark sky map is only an average, if you have some jerkass with lawn floodlights in an otherwise great area it won't show up. I have next to no experience with astrophotography, but the moon and planets are doable on a dob with no tracking, so the ETX-125 would have no problem with it. On a clear night when I would be using 300x on my dob, I had trouble showing planets to people because of the speed. By the time they sat down and adjusted the focus, they would only get maybe 10 seconds of viewing before it was going out of the FOV of the eyepiece. You can adjust this by moving "ahead" of the object so it just enters the eyepiece when they look at it, but overall it's a hassle unless the people you observe with know how to track an object with a dob (not hard at all, but it would take maybe 10 minutes of practice, much more for a kid). A small goto scope will make it easy to see lots of objects easily, and you'll end up using it a lot more than some giant tube. You'd be able to see more things with a larger dob, but if you hardly ever get it out, that aperture is going to waste.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2010 05:45
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:How do I balance my telescope in declination? The problem I'm having is that by sliding the tube back and forth, I can get it to balance when it's level. However, when I rotate the tube slightly on the declination axis, which ever side points towards the ground wants to drop. It sounds like the Telrad may have thrown off your declination balance. I have very limited experience with equatorials, but try sliding the tube back a little in the rings. Here's the 130eq manual, page 10 talks about balancing it in declination.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2010 07:47
|
|
|
Spoot posted:I was wondering if you guys could help me out, I seem to have a little problem. I'm new to astronomy and bought my first telescope recently. I purchased a Celestron Astromaster 114. I can use it I can view the moon alright but when I aim it at the stars all I see is black with both my 10mm and 20mm eyepieces. Shouldn't I at least be seeing the visable stars? When you say you can view the moon alright, is it fuzzy or sharp? It's possible your collimation is out of whack, which can cause you to have problems resolving stars as a pinpoint of light.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2010 03:03
|
|
|
DorianGravy posted:So what is good to look at this time of year? I'm disappointed that Jupiter and M42 aren't up right now, and while I do have a copy of Turn Left at Orion, it's currently 500 miles away. For reference, I have one of these: http://www.telescope.com/control/telescopes/reflector-telescopes/orion-spaceprobe-130st-equatorial-reflector-telescope. In the summer, there are some great and easy to see deep sky objects like M8 and M13. I'd toss out some more information, but I'm browsing on my phone right now. These should all be visible in your scope, but M8 is pretty huge. It's a great binocular object, or naked eye object in very dark skies, but with a telescope you can get some nice nebulosity in the core of it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2010 02:14
|
|
|
Tonight is going to be the peak of the Perseid meteor shower. If your skies are cooperative, go spend some time outside after midnight looking towards the east. It's projected to be ~60-100 meteors per hour.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2010 23:50
|
|
|
Probably my best astronomy purchase was a Baader 8-24mm Zoom eyepiece (~180 used, $225 new if you can find it). Almost all zooms are terrible, but this one is done right. It is a constant zoom with clicks at certain points, and mostly parfocal, so you will only have to do minor focus adjustment. It won't match the FOV or sharpness of a great TeleVue, but I love the convenience of it. They're hard to find due to their popularity, but if you're wanting to take care of the typical range of eyepieces it's a solid purchase. The best part is if you get more into the hobby (or less), you can probably recoup most of your cost, as this eyepiece is a couple years old and still reselling for 80% of it's retail price regularly.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2010 04:37
|
|
|
Metajo Cum Dumpster posted:Also, I have a $50 Celestron 8-24 zoom that works pretty drat well for being 1/4 the price of the Baader click-stop. Hardly any noticeable difference in image quality looking at Jupiter through it at ~21mm vs my 21mm Baader, just slightly smaller fov. I tried an Orion zoom eyepiece a year ago and got really frustrated with the 35° FOV, so I guess I assumed the cheaper zooms were crap. Good to hear that one works well though, it may be a much better buy for someone starting out.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2010 00:19
|
|
|
Well I'm going to take the plunge into some beginner moon and planetary shots. I ripped apart a webcam and got it working as a prime focus CCD. Of course, the clouds moved in so I probably won't get to try it for the next few months.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 7, 2010 03:37
|
|
|
Jekub posted:Which webcam did you get? I've been seeing a lot of people picking up Microsoft's HD Lifecam as it can be fitted into the body of 1.25" eyepiece very easily, it looks like a good easy mod to go for. There are instructions here for how to do the mod. I used a Logitech Quickcam Pro 9000 that I had laying around, it used to be a hacked together security camera when I lived in a shittier area. Looks like we found the same website, here's the conversion for this webcam. The HD Lifecam is way slicker though, fitting into the eyepiece tube like that is really neat. The image quality seems better too, I may pick one up after messing with this one a bit.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 8, 2010 17:50
|
|
|
Wolf on Air posted:I'm interested in seeing some results from that webcam hack of yours, Loztblaz, I'm sort of anticipating how fuckoff expensive the QHY IMG2S will be when it's released (supposedly this month) - it's an ICX285 camera, so it could cost $2000+ if they so choose, but the other IMG cameras have been somewhat reasonably priced, so it ought to depend on what the sensor price delta really is. I want a cheap cooled autoguider that can also do some tricks on its own My first attempt turned out pretty poo poo. I was having trouble getting it to focus, my scope started dewing up pretty fast, and I was using a crappy program to record with. I'll be trying again the next clear night I get with wxAstroCapture and a longer adapter on the webcam so I don't have to turn the focus knob seven miles when I switch between eyepiece and webcam.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2010 22:06
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:I need to mount a 9x50 RACI finderscope. Has anyone ever drilled a hole in their telescope before? Advice? It's pretty simple. The tube of the telescope is only there for structural support and a little light dampening. You obviously want to prevent the metal filings from falling down onto the mirror, so keep the tube horizontal when drilling. It also helps to tape both sides with masking tape, and if you want to be really sure, hold a big rag under the other side of the hole. Make sure it's thick enough to keep your hand safe, though. This is all assuming you're drilling into a newtonian's tube, which if I remember correctly is the type of scope you have. Refractors and SCTs are totally different.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 29, 2010 18:13
|
|
|
Puck42 posted:I'm going to be drilling into my tube this weekend to enlarge the focuser hole so I can add my new crayford 2" focuser. I'd probably take my mirrors out too if I was cutting a hole for the focuser. Puck42 posted:Is it common for eyepieces to always be out of stock? I bought a Hyperion eyepiece and everyone seemed to be out of stock on the drat things. It's going to take a month for it to come in (Hopefully). Was it a Hyperion zoom? They've always had problems keeping them in stock, I'm not sure if it's popularity or manufacturing though.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2010 06:00
|
|
|
punakone posted:Thanks! Yeah the eye pieces frustrate me a bit but last night I had a good look at the Pleiades and the moon and checked Jupiter again, its ok for those but didnt try any galaxies or nebulaes since it was kinda unstable weather. But we did manage to spend four hours standing in a dark field with it so it was fun, even though that isnt a top of the line equipment. It really depends on your budget. If you purchased eyepieces, they would work with other telescopes just fine, as yours uses 1.25" eyepieces. If you're planning on spending less than a couple hundred bucks, then I would probably pick up this eyepiece. It's a budget zoom eyepiece, so you're compromising a little on FOV, but it should be better than your current eyepieces and you have the convenience of not switching. I really like being able to keep an eyepiece in my scope and not needing to bring out a case unless I'm doing extended viewing. It got a favorable mention earlier in the thread, and the amazon rating is solid.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 30, 2010 21:42
|
|
|
polyfractal posted:How effective are the "light pollution" filters for deep-sky observing in a city? Is it just a waste of money or do they actually work? I would love to own a telescope but live inside a city and don't own a car - so getting away from the light pollution will be very difficult. I haven't used one in an area with high light pollution personally, but I've heard people that I observe with singing the praises of narrowband light pollution filters (specifically the Orion Ultrablock) for city observing. They're really only useful for observing nebulae, but if that's something you want to enhance you might want to look into them. As for the ETX90, your primary viewing targets would be within our solar system, but if you do happen to get it out in a dark area it's definitely capable of observing some deep sky objects. Depending on how the light pollution is where you live, some of the brighter deep sky objects could be within your reach from the city as well.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2011 19:06
|
|
|
AceSnyp3r posted:Any input on my options here (or any good ones I've overlooked) would be much appreciated! Like I said, I'm leaning towards the SpaceProbe 130 EQ right now, since it sounds like the most versatile of the bunch for the price. I'd kind of like to try to get back into astronomy before I go back to school next year, but those 10" dobsonian reflectors sound so supremely badass I don't know if I should just wait. One thing to consider is your location. If you live in an area with a lot of light pollution, you're better off getting a more portable scope than some big dobsonian monstrosity, if you intend to travel for better skies. I made this mistake originally, and am much happier with my Nexstar 8i. As for your budget, you're really scraping the bottom of the acceptable telescope range. If you had double the budget, you could start looking into used SCTs with tracking and GoTo mounts, which do a lot to get me out observing more. I'd delay the purchase if it meant upgrading to a 5-6" Nexstar SE or similar scope, but it's never fun to wait. If you do decide to wait, try going to some star parties to see what it's like to observe through various telescopes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2011 22:19
|
|
|
INTJ Mastermind posted:I personally don't understand why people recommend binoculars as a first astronomy purchase. Small terrestial binoculars aren't all that useful for astronomy (very small magnification and aperture) and large ones cost the same as a telescope and require expensive setups to use properly. I probably wouldn't have gone straight from nothing to telescope, and at least in my situation (poor as hell) it gave me enough of a preview to decide to invest a little money in something better. That said, if anyone has newbie suggestions, I'd be glad to add them to the OP.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2011 04:28
|
|
|
Tufty posted:Do I go for the PL with it's increased length and difficulty with storage, narrower FOV, and longer cool down time (though I might have to keep it in the garage so that could be a moot point) but with less coma, easier collimation and more forgivingness with cheaper eyepieces? The 150P also comes with a '1.25/2-inch Crayford focuser' which the 150PL does not. I've read that the longer focal length is better for solar system viewing whilst the shorter one is a bit better at DSOs and more of an all-rounder - is this the case? Either one will be a decent starter scope. I'd probably go with the 150P just because I value portability and FOV.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 8, 2011 02:18
|
|
|
Tufty posted:Thanks a lozt, Loztblaz (sorry). I think I'm gonna go ahead with the 150P. It's a bit over the budget, and it's a joint birthday present from my parents and granddad so I'm going to put some money towards it so I've got a scope that'll last me longer and serve me better. I've got a couple of other people asking me what I want, and I've got a few ideas for accessories. I don't have any experience with the Cheshire, but I've only heard good things, so I don't think you'd regret it. That said, it's probably not necessary yet. The cheap plastic collimation eyepieces that come with Newtonians are decent enough to get you observing, but they are a hassle to use. I only had to tweak the collimation on my 8" dob twice in the 18 months that I used it as a primary scope. It's your call if easier (and slightly better) collimation is worth the money. Both Telrads and Rigels are great, and the Rigel is probably a better choice for a smaller scope. You're right that the viewfinder on that scope (and most budget scopes, for that matter) is junk, and if I could buy one thing for a new telescope kit, it would be a better viewfinder. Absolutely get it. The red flashlight is pretty much required if you plan on consulting charts while observing or moving around without standing in an anthill (this happened to me). It's worth a small investment to not ruin your night vision for 15-30 minutes every time you need some light.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2011 09:39
|
|
|
Tufty posted:Also, you might want to put something about the 'Illustrated Guide to Astronomical Wonders' in the OP. On the UK astronomy forums I've been browsing it's very highly recommended and described as "one step up from TLAO", "does the same thing, but more of it!" and "a far better buy than Turn Left at Orion". I've just ordered a copy from Amazon (couldn't help myself) and since I already have TLAO I'll post my impressions tomorrow and give some goon opinions on how they compare in the eyes of a beginner. That book looks pretty great, I might pick up a cheap used copy just to check it out. I'll include your impressions on the book in the OP once you get a chance to look over it.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2011 19:44
|
|
|
upsciLLion posted:I'm looking at getting an Orion 8 inch dob right now. The guy selling this one (http://seattle.craigslist.org/sno/for/2566055050.html) said he could do $240. Does that seem pretty reasonable? That's a pretty good deal, just be aware that it doesn't come with the Intelliscope Object Locator, which is the little computer that handles the Push-To object finding. You can find them used for about 60-80 bucks if you decide you want to use it later on. Even missing this, I'd go for it if I was in the market for a Dob.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2011 02:54
|
|
|
I think I'm going to make this winter my "astrophotography or bust" winter, after seeing everyone get such a kick out of it. I made a webcam that didn't turn out as well as I had hoped, so I'm going to modify it a little and see if I can't get better performance out of it. It really doesn't help that my Nexstar 8i is missing a focus knob and shakes for way longer than I would like each time I adjust the focus the tiniest bit. I wish motofocus kits weren't so expensive (or that my budget wasn't absolutely tiny).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2011 05:04
|
|
|
Dr. Fabulous posted:And THANK YOU SO MUCH to the OP for the recommendation of binoculars + Turn Left at Orion. What a wonderful combination, and a perfect introduction for the layperson. It was a great starting point for me, I'm glad it's working out for you. I haven't had much eyepiece time this summer since it's been so incredibly hot in Texas, but now that it's cooling down I plan on going through Illustrated Guide to Astronomical Wonders, which looks like it might be even better from the little bit of it that I've browsed.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2011 07:26
|
|
|
wormil posted:I had a cheap 6" Sears refractor when I was teenager, it was fun but the problem I had was tracking things, it really wasn't smooth at all. The second I would get something sighted in, it would move out of view. An Orion 8" is in the works for xmas (looks like a good scope for the price) and I'm wondering how you track with these things? I've read the kits are pretty easy to assemble and align, true? I assume you are talking about an 8" Orion Dobsonian. Most dobs have a knob at the front of the scope that you grab and use to move the scope. It's surprisingly smooth, thanks to the large bearings that the optical tube sits on. I've tracked the ISS well enough to see some detail, but it is annoying if you plan to use the telescope to show objects to other people. Dobs are very easy to assemble, and collimation for reflectors in general is easy once you get the hang of it, but needed more often than other telescope types.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 15, 2011 11:52
|
|
|
Flash Gordon Ramsay posted:My 6 year old wants a telescope for Christmas and I want to get her something that isn't crap. We don't need to see PLuto or anything, just the craters on the moon, the rings of Saturn and the eye of Jupiter. Any suggestions? I'd suggest either an EQ mounted newtonian (cheap, smaller, lighter, but more complicated) or a small dobsonian (easy for a kid to track an object while observing, easy to set up, but larger and heavier). For the EQ mounted newtonian, the Astromaster 130EQ is a solid starting scope. For the price you're getting good (for the price) optics and a decent mount. EQ mounts are more complicated to set up than a dobsonian though, so this would be a good option if you planned on doing most of the setup for a while. For dobsonian mounted newtonians, something in the 6-8 inch range is both easy to set up and use, and very capable depending on where you're viewing from. Most dobs are pretty similar, anything from Orion/Zhumell/Skywatcher will be of similar quality. Once the tube is on the base, a dob is dead simple to use. The only small refractor I have personal experience with is the AT72ED, which may be more than you want to spend ($380 without any accessories or a mount). It's a great grab and go scope though, the entire setup that my friend uses weighs about 10 pounds.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2011 21:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 12, 2024 17:12 |
|
|
Flash Gordon Ramsay posted:I will do all the setup. Hell, it's after her bedtime by the time it gets dark most of the year. This will definitely be a father/daughter activity. Yeah I was assuming that you'd be doing most of the setup, but I totally forgot about the FirstScope that PingtheMerciless brought up, which is a great little scope for a kid. She'd be able to use it on her own a lot sooner than a dob or EQ newtonian. I'd get the accessory kit too, it's worth it. Flash Gordon Ramsay posted:Thanks for the answers. Although I must admit, I don't understand many of your words. Sorry about that, I sort of panic typed that out before heading to an appointment. Go with the FirstScope and ignore all that crap I said up there, at least until you've got some telescope time and know if you want to go further. As for software based star finding, that's the realm of much more expensive and complicated gear. Most smartphone star apps are just for finding where object X is tonight in relation to other objects. Loztblaz fucked around with this message at 05:08 on Dec 8, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2011 04:56
|
|