Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums
Privacy Policy |
Please read our Terms
of Service | Signup and
Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu.... uh, User
Mickey
member
Reged: 09/18/09
Posts: 17
|
|
First I'd like to say, "even though I've owned three telescopes and have viewed the skies off and on over the years, I consider myself a beginner astronomer". I have no starting point, no real knowledge about how best to ask this question other than I've posted below.
I picked up a book called "The Backyard Astronomer's Guide" a while back and have read through about half of if so far. I've also been researching websites like Cloudy Nights, reading blogs, reviews, etc. and taking in so much new information, that it makes me dizzy with so many questions and indecision.
What I have learned from all my research is that as a beginner... I should not rush out and buy a telescope. I intend to take that advice, because I want the right telescope for what I wish to do and make the best choice that's within my budget.
So, I've been researching different kinds of telescopes for the past four months. I started out looking into various "8 inch Schmidt-Cassegrains", then I got real interested in "8 inch Dobsonians" and figured it would be a more cost effective solution. But I would like to eventually do some Astrophotography as well, so I started reading more about "Schmidt-Cassegrains". Then sturdy and solid go-to mounts came into the factor... and the price started increasing more and more. I don't want to drop good money into a mount that I will out grow, but the cost began to exceed the budget I've set for my first real telescope, so it was back to the "Dobsonians".
As I continued my reading on "Schmidt-Cassegrains and Dobsonians", I found there where other things that concerned me, like the weight, would they be easy to setup, would I get tired of hauling them in and out of the house.
Eventually all my research lead me to Refractors and after a lot of thought on this I've finally decided that's almost certainly the direction I'll be going in for my future telescope purchase, because from what I've read about Refractors I'll get the best optic quality, with portability and still be able to stay somewhat close to my budget of $2,800.00
The weight of the Refractors I've been looking at along make them vary desirable and photography I've seen on various websites taken with some of the refractors I've read about look very nice.
What I'm interested in achieving with the telescope I get is first and foremost visual observation of planets, star clusters and nebulas. I'd also like have a scope that is capable of astrophotography as well. After some good advice that keeps true to why I enjoy this hobby, astrophotography is no longer going to factor into my choice of telescopes.
Here are a few Refractors that I've been reading about and really like what I've learned about them so far.
TMB-92 Signature Series
STELLARVUE SV90 APO TRIPLET
Astronomy Technologies AT102ED
To start out with I intend to get a regular (non-computerized) mount. This would allow me to get a decent telescope with an affordable yet good mount to start viewing. Then I could start saving money to purchase a solid goTo mount in the future that I could use for a lifetime and not out grow.
So with all that said I'll get to the point...
Can anyone offer up some Refractor recommendations that hit on the factors listed below, so I can get a good starting point for deeper research into refractors. There's so many to chose from and I figured instead of spending a couple of months just learning about where to start my research... instead I'd ask Refractor owners, "what refractors they recommend, that meets the factors listed below" to help guide me on the right path.
• Visual observation of planets, star clusters and nebulas
• Somewhat compact
• Not too heavy
• Great optics
• Portable and easy to setup
• Feather Focusing
• Fun to use
• Budget of $2,800.00
Also recommendations on a good solid non-computerized mount I could start out with that would be helpful too.
Thanks,
Mickey
Edited by Mickey (10/24/09 03:06 PM)
|
Kal
sage
Reged: 07/31/06
Posts: 201
Loc: Sydney, Australia
|
|
There will be a million different opinions on the scopes that you can get, but I will just mention mounts. For around the $1500 mark, you can get a full goto mount which will carry 40lb which for many people will be all that they will need for astrophotography. Mounts like the Celestron CGEM, or Atlas EQ-G fall into this category. This will still leave $1300 for optics.
--------------------
CG-11 • 130mm f6.3 StarFire EDF Gran Turismo • SV90TBV • ETX90EC • 25x100 BINOCULARS • Toucam 840K hacked to a 900NC • DSI Pro
|
Arctic_Eddie
professor emeritus
Reged: 12/30/07
Posts: 595
Loc: St. Petersburg, FL
|
|
I just ordered an AT80EDTA and will use it on a Nexstar 6SE mount. Later it will sit on a CG-5GT.
--------------------
The shortest distance between one point is an infinitely small circle.
73's de KF4JU
|
Tamiji Homma
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 02/24/07
Posts: 1082
Loc: California, USA
|
|
Hi Mickey,
Welcome to CN.
I wanted to recommend TMB 92SS if I saw your post a few days ago. Astronomics had $1,599 like-new TMB 92SS sale a few days ago. I just checked. It looked sold out. If I were in the market of scope of your criteria, I would have snapped that one in a heartbeat 
I know you would like to use "scope" for multiple duties (visual astronomy, AP, terrestrial view/photography, too?), wide range of targets, grab-n-go, with goto/alt-az mount etc... looking for almost-perfect-setup. Interestingly, your observation location (dark site or light polluted, seeing), observing habits, a day job workload, family duties, etc they affect what actually you use, enjoy and have most fun out of it in big way.
Every parameter has very different weight (priority) depending on you, time, weather, ... It is a very complex function
You haven't mentioned about eyepieces. Eyepiece can be a big expense in the long run. Scope (mainly f ratio) affects quite a bit on what you see out of eyepiece. Faster scope (low f ratio) generally demands higher quality (more expensive in a sense) eyepiece, specially if you like wide view. Going higher magnification, it is exceedingly difficult with faster scope, too. Likely you need Barlow lens, etc.
I guess I am not really helping you. It's just that I am suggesting that you have more parameters to consider deciding what scope you go with, if ultimate purpose buying a scope is "actually observing" and having fun doing so.
Having said all this, if I were you, I would go with TMB 92SS out of your three choices. Again, you would need to allocate good chunk of budget for eyepieces, too.
Good luck in your search.
Tammy
|
Ziggy943
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 08/11/06
Posts: 1508
Loc: Utah
|
|
It sounds like budget contraints are going to limit your choices. Your first scope doesn't have to be your last scope. You don't have to have the Cadillac right out the chute. Pick a scope that will get you started in one area, the area you first want to explore.
Photograhpy is going to be your most expensive option. Maybe put that off for a little while. Pick what is most important to you now and go in that direction.
--------------------
May your skies always be clear,
Ziggy
www.slas.us
4" Mak
#1, 160mm F8 TEC (born 1-18-2007, 27 lbs, 45.5" long), on AP900
6" F17.5 (D&G lens) (first light 6-7-2008)
9" F/14.8 Alvan Clark (1915), on Byers 812
14.25 F/5.5 Newt in a roll off observatory
Others, that have come and gone
|
nyc_nurse
sage
Reged: 07/29/09
Posts: 253
Loc: nyc
|
|
Hi Mickey and welcome! I would suggest you price things out carefully as ancillary cost can add significantly to top out your budget. Here's an example:
AT102ED - $1,200 (free-shipping)
Celestron CG5-GT - $575
Dovetail plate - $70
AT Dielectric 2-inch diagonal - $120
AT Titan II 35mm EP - $160
Meade 5000 Ultra wide 14mm - $160
TMB Planetary 9mm - $60
TMB Planetary 5mm - $60
Subtotal - $2,405
That leaves you about $400. I would suggest you not spend your entire budget allowance at one time since you'll figure out things you'll need once you use your telescope for a few sessions. Things like anti-vibration pads ($44-$60), observing chair ($20 to $170), star charts ($15-$150), red light, and more books, ect.
Besides the telescope and mount choice - I think EP selection is the hardest when starting out. So many options yet often little availability to try things out firsthand. I would recommend you buy from a place with a good return/exchange policy, even if it ends up costing a few extra dollars (Orion Telescope has one of the best). In any case leave yourself some wiggle room with your budget and good luck with your choice!
--------------------
Sam P.
www.agirlandaguy.blogspot.com
Pentax 7X50
TV-102 APO w/ (Starbeam - on backorder  )
Ash Gibraltar w/ SkyTour DSC
NZ3-6, N9T6, N13T6
TV 20 Plossl
Pan 24, 35
Pentax XW10, XW14
|
starrancher
professor emeritus
Reged: 06/09/09
Posts: 577
Loc: Northern Arizona
|
|
Ziggy has a real good point . I myself , & not to discourage anyone from the pursuit of it , have decided that I will never get into the photographic aspect of the hobby . There is a huge learning curve involved in it , & it can be very expensive to achieve the results you see in magazines , books & some of the very fine examples posted by members here . Years of experience & trial & error go into these ultimately fine astrophotos .
The hobby to me is the serenity under the canopy of the night sky & the adventure of seeing the various objects with my own eye through the eyepiece as there is nothing quite like seeing it live with your own eye . In that developing your art of looking as with time & experience there you will learn to see more & more . To me this is a nice relaxing hobby & a release from the stresses of day to day life , but to each his own . All I'm trying to say , I guess , is don't rush into things & this idea may be something to ponder .
Dave
--------------------
LXD75 AR5
LXD75 SN8
Series 4000 Plossls
Misc. other stuff
Fort Rock , Az .
Edited by starrancher (10/24/09 11:30 AM)
|
Ennis
sage
Reged: 09/11/06
Posts: 327
|
|
You wrote: "What I'm interested in achieving with the telescope I get is first and foremost visual observation of planets, star clusters and nebulas. I'd also like have a scope that is capable of astrophotography as well."
My answer: "Get a Sky-Watcher 120ED for $1495. Then get a mount, probably an Orion Sky-View Pro or Sirius. The 120ED will have enough oomph and quality to keep you satisfied for a while. A 100mm refractor is, for most observers, just too small to be their only telescope."
I should add: "Astro-imaging is an expensive and demanding pursuit."
My advice is free and worth every penny.
Ennis
Edited by Ennis (10/24/09 01:52 PM)
|
lightfever
Pooh-Bah
Reged: 09/27/04
Posts: 1272
Loc: Macomb Michigan
|
|
IMHO trying to do everything with one scope is a mistake.
You can get an 8" newt on an Atlas style mount and something like the 80mm EON for imaging and be within your budget. If you want to do visual observing of more than just the brightest nebula 3 or 4 inches of aperture is not enough unless your skies are inky black.
The 80mm also makes a great terrestrial scope. Two scopes just gives more options.
Just my 
--------------------
Mark
Tasco 15-TE 76mm
Sky Watcher 80mm ED
AT-111 Triplet
XT8i (with Woden re-figured mirror)
Discovery 12.5" f/5 Premium DHQ (PDHQ Split-tube Dobsonian)
12.5" f/6.3 Dob (Underconstruction)
Celestron CG-5GT EQ Mount
Celestron C4 EQ Mount
"Life is not about waiting for the storm to pass, but learning to dance in the rain" unknown
|
nyc_nurse
sage
Reged: 07/29/09
Posts: 253
Loc: nyc
|
|
Quote:
A 100mm refractor is just too small to be one's only telescope.
As one of those poor unfortunate souls with only 102mm of aperture as their only telescope  I would have to respectfully disagree. I don't think there is any arbitrary aperture cutoff - really depends on each person, their viewing conditions and intended targets. I for one am truly pleased with 102mm because I can see a cornucopia of objects, including difficult DSO's - I'm picking off the Herschel 400 by the dozens every observing session. With that said, I'm going to be on a short list for an Obsession 25 when I get access to skies to truly appreciate such aperture. 
--------------------
Sam P.
www.agirlandaguy.blogspot.com
Pentax 7X50
TV-102 APO w/ (Starbeam - on backorder )
Ash Gibraltar w/ SkyTour DSC
NZ3-6, N9T6, N13T6
TV 20 Plossl
Pan 24, 35
Pentax XW10, XW14
|
watcher
sage
Reged: 11/21/07
Posts: 406
Loc: NJ
|
|
For AP, the TMB 92SS is the best option. I don't know if it's best for visual though. I have a TMB 80SS, and the optics are superb, but for planets, I like to go to about 200x, and the image gets a little dim in an 80mm scope. At those magnifications, the image is plenty bright in my 120mm scope, but I can't say how much over 80mm you need to go before the image brightness becomes acceptable. In general, though, they usually say that planetary viewing begins at 4 inches. If others can tell you that a 90mm scope gives acceptable visual performance, then the 92SS is the clear winner. If you need to go to 102mm, I believe the AT 102ED would still be a very workable AP scope.
As far as mounts go, there are a few ways you can go within your budget. The lightest, most accurate out of the box, affordable mount is the Vixen GP2. It can handle any of the scopes you mentioned for both visual and AP. They go for about 1250.00 with dual axis control, or 1600.00 with goto. The TMB 92 light and the dual axis is within your budget. The AT 102ED will get goto right off the bat. A little heavier, and not as accurate, are the Meade LXD75, and the Celestron and Sky-Watcher CG-5 gotos. A lot less money, and many use them for good results with AP. They say for AP that the mount is the most important component, but if you found this class mount acceptable, you can add a 4" triplet to your scope choices. For example this mount with this scope. Finally, you can go with the AT 102ED and an Atlas or CGEM, and be loaded for bear. Again fairly good AP results for inexpensive mounts, but they are much less portable if that's an issue. They would however leave you room to grow. maybe an 8" SCT or RC in the future? No problem for this class mount.
Hope this helps with your decision.
Joe
--------------------
(quote)"That does it! Next Big Bang, someone has got to rethink this gettin' old business!" Joe Daugert
-------------------------------------------------
1986 Celestron c-8 (retired)
Celestron Omni XLT 120
Celestron Astromaster 70 AZ
Vixen GP2 mount on Omni XLT tripod (soon to be driven by iOptron GOTO Nova)
Meade 16x50 binoculars
|
SkyscraperJim
professor emeritus
Reged: 07/29/07
Posts: 537
Loc: Providence, RI
|
|
Your budget allows for many options. May I suggest a Tele Vue TV-85 or the TV-102?
For mounts there are many options as well. I have an older model Vixen GP mount that works well.
--------------------
Jim
TMB/APM 130/780 (#185) on G11
TMB/APM/Lomo 80/600
Tele Vue Pronto (#3533) on Half Hitch
|
Mickey
member
Reged: 09/18/09
Posts: 17
|
|
Quote:
Hi Mickey,
Welcome to CN.
I wanted to recommend TMB 92SS if I saw your post a few days ago. Astronomics had $1,599 like-new TMB 92SS sale a few days ago. I just checked. It looked sold out. If I were in the market of scope of your criteria, I would have snapped that one in a heartbeat
The TMB 92SS is the refractor I've read the most about and sounds like it's what I'm looking for. I really dig the idea of have a compact telescope for ease of setup and quick viewing sessions from the driveway.
I know you would like to use "scope" for multiple duties (visual astronomy, AP, terrestrial view/photography, too?), wide range of targets, grab-n-go, with goto/alt-az mount etc... looking for almost-perfect-setup. Interestingly, your observation location (dark site or light polluted, seeing), observing habits, a day job workload, family duties, etc they affect what actually you use, enjoy and have most fun out of it in big way.
Most of my viewing would take place from my driveway after the work day ends. I live on the outskirts of a large city and we certainly have light pollution, so I'll be traveling to dark sky areas to make the most out of my viewing experience as well. The best dark skies location near me are about an hour's drive. So I'm quite certain I'd be more likely to visit dark sky areas if I have a telescope that is easy to transport, doesn't weigh too much and is fun to use.
Every parameter has very different weight (priority) depending on you, time, weather, ... It is a very complex function
You haven't mentioned about eyepieces. Eyepiece can be a big expense in the long run. Scope (mainly f ratio) affects quite a bit on what you see out of eyepiece. Faster scope (low f ratio) generally demands higher quality (more expensive in a sense) eyepiece, specially if you like wide view. Going higher magnification, it is exceedingly difficult with faster scope, too. Likely you need Barlow lens, etc.
Yea, I've got to do my homework on eyepieces. I intend to set up a separate budget for eyepieces. The $2,800.00 budget I have now is to cover the purchase of the telescope and a good non-computerized mount.
I guess I am not really helping you. It's just that I am suggesting that you have more parameters to consider deciding what scope you go with, if ultimate purpose buying a scope is "actually observing" and having fun doing so.
Having said all this, if I were you, I would go with TMB 92SS out of your three choices. Again, you would need to allocate good chunk of budget for eyepieces, too.
Any tips, suggestions and recommendations are helpful. I've got a lot to learn and do not know all the questions I should ask. Thanks for the feedback, Mickey
Good luck in your search.
Tammy
|
Mickey
member
Reged: 09/18/09
Posts: 17
|
|
Quote:
It sounds like budget contraints are going to limit your choices. Your first scope doesn't have to be your last scope. You don't have to have the Cadillac right out the chute. Pick a scope that will get you started in one area, the area you first want to explore.
Photograhpy is going to be your most expensive option. Maybe put that off for a little while. Pick what is most important to you now and go in that direction.
Yea I finally had to set some limits on my budget, because the cost of what I was researching was starting to get out of hand.
I intend to use my refractor mostly for visual observation and eventually for astrophotography as well.
Astrophotography is something I'm interested in and I would certainly like to have a scope I could use that would produce nice clean detailed images. Astrophotography will be a factor in my choice of telescopes, but it is not my priority starting out with and I figure it will take me a few years to accumulate the knowledge I'll need to really enjoy astrophotography.
|
Mickey
member
Reged: 09/18/09
Posts: 17
|
|
Quote:
Ziggy has a real good point . I myself , & not to discourage anyone from the pursuit of it , have decided that I will never get into the photographic aspect of the hobby . There is a huge learning curve involved in it , & it can be very expensive to achieve the results you see in magazines , books & some of the very fine examples posted by members here . Years of experience & trial & error go into these ultimately fine astrophotos .
The hobby to me is the serenity under the canopy of the night sky & the adventure of seeing the various objects with my own eye through the eyepiece as there is nothing quite like seeing it live with your own eye . In that developing your art of looking as with time & experience there you will learn to see more & more . To me this is a nice relaxing hobby & a release from the stresses of day to day life , but to each his own . All I'm trying to say , I guess , is don't rush into things & this idea may be something to ponder .
Dave
Thanks Dave, you reminded me of one of the reasons I enjoy this hobby... the simplicity of just viewing.
When I first started my research for the new telescope I would purchase I was completely consumed with all the bells & whistles and astrophotography was at the top of my priorities. The more I read the more work it seemed to be, the more complicated it would make this hobby, the more expensive it was going to be. My mind is already taxed enough with my daily task at work (technology and computers) and when I'm off work the last thing I want to do is look at a computer and deal with technology. I really just want to unplug from technology and keep my life simple.
As I've learned more from my research of different types of telescope options I have to chose from, I've found myself going from a complicated feature filled telescopes that will take effort to transport, to a more simplified approach. Your comment was just what I needed to keep me on track!
|
Mickey
member
Reged: 09/18/09
Posts: 17
|
|
Quote:
You wrote: "What I'm interested in achieving with the telescope I get is first and foremost visual observation of planets, star clusters and nebulas. I'd also like have a scope that is capable of astrophotography as well."
My answer: "Get a Sky-Watcher 120ED for $1495. Then get a mount, probably an Orion Sky-View Pro or Sirius. The 120ED will have enough oomph and quality to keep you satisfied for a while. A 100mm refractor is, for most observers, just too small to be their only telescope."
I should add: "Astro-imaging is an expensive and demanding pursuit."
My advice is free and worth every penny.
Ennis
Hey Ennis, I've thrown astrophotography out the window... it's no longer a factor in my choice of scopes. I'm going to keep my hobby simple and visual. I'm going to look into the Sky-Watcher 120ED. Thanks for the advice.
Mickey
|
Mickey
member
Reged: 09/18/09
Posts: 17
|
|
Thanks Joe,
This is very helpful. I'm going to look into these scopes and mounts.
|
Mike Holland
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 12/22/06
Posts: 877
|
|
I recommend considering these two scopes: Orion 100 ED ($680), and Astro-Tech 102 ED ($1195). The first scope is of an optical performance level on par with nearly any scope on the market, and years after its introduction, is still the best buy in small refractors. It's definitely a classic.
The Astro-Tech scope may perform nearly as well, though its optics will likely be a little less sharp, and its color performance may be a little less perfect, both owing to its shorter focal ratio. What you gain with that scope is that it's shorter in size and focal length, so it's easier to mount and gives you a wider field of view for any given eyepiece. Also, it has the amazing FeatherTouch focuser, which many of us consider the best on the market today.
Both scopes are sold by companies with excellent reputations and outstanding customer service.
For eyepieces my recommendations would depend on which scope you decided on. Still, since those scopes are well under your budget, I recommend Nagler eyepieces. Those give outstanding star images from one edge of the field to the other, and though they are expensive, you'll probably like them enough to keep them for the rest of your life. They present huge fields of view compared to most eyepieces, something you'll appreciate the more you observe.
Two Naglers and a good barlow will get you far if you plan the focal lengths carefully. Add a simple alt-azimuth mount and a laser pointer to aim the scope, and you'll have something very easy to store and use. You're going to discover that ease-of-use is critical in your enjoyment of astronomy.
One more thing: do budget for an observing chair. You'll see a lot more that way because you'll be much more comfortable sitting than standing.
Mike
--------------------
NP-101/FeatherTouch/Gibraltar/Naglers and Panoptics
_______________________________________________
Optiphile [OP-teh-FILE] -noun, one who appreciates or obsesses over fine optical equipment, generally telescopes, binoculars, binoviewers, or photographic lenses.
|
watcher
sage
Reged: 11/21/07
Posts: 406
Loc: NJ
|
|
Quote:
Hey Ennis, I've thrown astrophotography out the window... it's no longer a factor in my choice of scopes. I'm going to keep my hobby simple and visual. I'm going to look into the Sky-Watcher 120ED. Thanks for the advice.
Mickey
If you're truly giving up on AP, your 2800.00 budget could get you a Celestron CPC 1100! Although the fork & tube assembly is a bit heavy at 65 lbs.,it's still fairly portable considering the wow factor the views would be. The mount is easier to set up than an EQ, and you don't have to chase the eyepiece while viewing. If that's too much scope for you, how about this. For your budget, you can get a Celestron 8SE, light, very portable, and easy to set up, and still get the Sky-Watcher mount and a Stellarvue 70mm ED if you wanted to try your hand at AP. You would still have money left over for a camera and some accessories.
Just giving you another way to approach the decision.
Joe
--------------------
(quote)"That does it! Next Big Bang, someone has got to rethink this gettin' old business!" Joe Daugert
-------------------------------------------------
1986 Celestron c-8 (retired)
Celestron Omni XLT 120
Celestron Astromaster 70 AZ
Vixen GP2 mount on Omni XLT tripod (soon to be driven by iOptron GOTO Nova)
Meade 16x50 binoculars
|
carlcat
sage
Reged: 11/26/07
Posts: 256
Loc: Northern California
|
|
Since you're no longer interested in AP, I would recommend two scopes, the 100ed for moon and planets and the Orion 120 for deep sky. You can pick up the 120ST second hand for around
200 smackers.
|
|
36 registered and 24 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: desertstars, Remy Bosio, Jason B, LLEEGE
Print Thread
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Thread views: 1522
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
[Re: 