Thoughts on why companies can't or won't produce a reasonable priced telescope?

On Feb 3, 3:54*am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
I was talking to a group of parents recently where the subject of
introducing their kids to science specifically astronomy came up.

Much was made about the fact that one either has to buy junk or pay a
significant price for a starter scope.

They had a good point.

No, they didn't. You must first define what they meant by "junk" and
"significant price."

The fact that the mags couldn't do a real review if they had to
doesn't help.

We have also seen prices drop *for what one can buy since the Chinese
has entered the market...evidence there has been price fixing in
place.

You should start a telescope company and undercut the competition.
Show us the way.

I had one mother discuss her experiences on CN where she sought advice
as to which scope to buy for her son...what a train wreck.

The advice of serveral CNers was to spend several thousand dollars on
a scope...anything else was deemed inferior.

You should provide a link to that discussion on CN, if possible.

Since the parents wanted to introduce their kids to science, they
could consider building telescopes as a family project. There are
books, magazine articles and Web sites giving plans, details and ideas
for such projects.

They could start with a Galileoscope or build something similar from
lenses bought separately.

Of course, one does not always save money when building from parts.
However, that would only help these parents appreciate what a good
deal they would be getting if they bought a ready-made scope in
today's market.

On Feb 4, 3:16*am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Feb 3, 2:54*am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:





I was talking to a group of parents recently where the subject of
introducing their kids to science specifically astronomy came up.

Much was made about the fact that one either has to buy junk or pay a
significant price for a starter scope.

They had a good point.

The fact that the mags couldn't do a real review if they had to
doesn't help.

We have also seen prices drop *for what one can buy since the Chinese
has entered the market...evidence there has been price fixing in
place.

I had one mother discuss her experiences on CN where she sought advice
as to which scope to buy for her son...what a train wreck.

The advice of serveral CNers was to spend several thousand dollars on
a scope...anything else was deemed inferior.

Well for a dollar amount let's try this...

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_d...rican_family_s...

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_does_...n_family_spend...

So $800 - $935 for a family for Christmas.

Average family of 4 so $200 - 233.

I believe this is on the high side since the amounts they show would
be for all gifts for all people the family gives to.

So...what telescope can one buy for $200 - 233 ...no more...for a
child?

The Orion Funscope 76mm and SkyScanner 100mm are well below that
amount, the Starblast 4.5 roughly that amount. Since you gave an
_average_ budget of $233 there must be many families who can even
afford the XT-6 ($279.95 + S&H as of Feb 2011.) Those on a strict
budget could wait to see if the Firstscope goes on sale for $19 again,
buy one, and let Santa keep it hidden away until next Christmas.

Any more questions?

On 2/3/2011 8:58 PM, Davoud wrote:


"Significant price" has greatly differing meanings
in a Third-World country like the USA.

Show me someone under the age of 30 who isn't a Liberal and I'll show
you someone that has no Heart. Show me someone over the age of 40 that
isn't Conservative and I'll show you someone who has no Brain.


Bill
--

William R. Mattil

http://www.celestial-images.com

A few years ago I could recommend the $15, 50mm aperture Galileoscope
as a usable first telescope for those on a tight budget.
Unfortunately, a recent search revealed that this telescope is now
available for $50! At the new price I can no longer recommend the
Galileoscope (which I've used to observe lunar craters, Jupiter's
moons, Saturn's ring, Uranus, Neptune and a surprising number of
deepsky objects).

Yet, as others have noted, there are far more options available today
as far as price and quality go than there was when I got my first
'real' telescope (a 60 or 65mm, single-element, plastic objective
refractor in a heavy cardboard tube) in 1967 or '68. For $100 to $150
one can easily find a better telescope than the one I started with.

Unfortunately, most modern day newbies are likely to be far more
ignorant concerning astronomy and telescopes than I was. Prior to
getting my first telescope (as a Christmas present) I had read
everything I could find pertaining to amateur astronomy and
telescopes. I knew about reflectors and refractors. I knew how to
tell the difference between a planet and a star via naked-eye
observations alone. I even knew not to expect to see things as they
appeared in photographs. In other words I knew what I could
realisticly expect from a modest, beginner's telescope. For a
beginner (at any age) that has sufficient drive and interest to
educate themselves I seriously doubt that there exists a telescope
that could be called 'junk'! A determined, educated newbie could
manage to use even the most unusable telescope out there -- even if it
means making design modifications first.

When it comes to recommending a first telescope to someone who lacks
any 'real' interest in astronomy (hasn't bothered to try to read all
he/she can about the subject) one ends up pretty close to the old no-
win situation. No matter what telescope they get, they're not going
to see those bright, colorful, highly-detailed images they are
expecting. Thus most will quickly place the telescope (even if it
costed a few thousand dollars) into the nearest closet and forget
about the telescope and astronomy.

Perhaps we need to forget about recommending telescopes to newbies.
Instead we could simply suggest that they spend some quality time in
the nearest library and/or find a willing mentor.

Sketcher,
To sketch is to see.

On Feb 3, 3:54*am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
I was talking to a group of parents recently where the subject of
introducing their kids to science specifically astronomy came up.

I don't think the quality of the telescope is nearly as important as
the interest level of the child.

My parents probably spent about $50 for my first telescope, a 3-inch
reflector made by Edmund Scientific. It had a plastic tube, a wobbly
tripod mount, and cardboard tubes for the eyepieces, but I absolutely
loved it and the objects that I could find and observe with it. I
tracked down about 80 of the Messier objects as a 10 or 11-year-old;
the rest were a little too faint.

In other words a kid (today) with a $100 telescope and a high-level of
interest is going to get a lot more use out of his or her instrument
than another kid with a $1000 telescope and only a passing interest in
astronomy. I would advise concerned parents to purchase a cheap
telescope and see if the kid's interest holds up. If it does, then
purchase or build a more substantial instrument a couple of years
later.

On Feb 4, 2:16*am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Feb 3, 2:54*am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:





I was talking to a group of parents recently where the subject of
introducing their kids to science specifically astronomy came up.

Much was made about the fact that one either has to buy junk or pay a
significant price for a starter scope.

They had a good point.

The fact that the mags couldn't do a real review if they had to
doesn't help.

We have also seen prices drop *for what one can buy since the Chinese
has entered the market...evidence there has been price fixing in
place.

I had one mother discuss her experiences on CN where she sought advice
as to which scope to buy for her son...what a train wreck.

The advice of serveral CNers was to spend several thousand dollars on
a scope...anything else was deemed inferior.

Well for a dollar amount let's try this...

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_much_d...rican_family_s...

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_does_...n_family_spend...

So $800 - $935 for a family for Christmas.

Average family of 4 so $200 - 233.

I believe this is on the high side since the amounts they show would
be for all gifts for all people the family gives to.

So...what telescope can one buy for $200 - 233 ...no more...for a
child?

TMT


Trying reading Sky and Telescope! The latest issue contains a review
of 3 scopes costing about $100. The SpaceProbe 3" f9 reflector got
very high marks as did the SkyScanner 100mm. As pointed out by another
poster some of started with the Edmund 3" reflector and were able to
find most of the Messier objects.

This sounds like an attempt to smear CN rather than a real complaint

On Feb 3, 8:54*am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
I was talking to a group of parents recently where the subject of
introducing their kids to science specifically astronomy came up.

Much was made about the fact that one either has to buy junk or pay a
significant price for a starter scope.


Astronomy does not begin and end with magnification equipment as that
can hinder the multi-faceted aspect of astronomy as it does for so
many readers here.A parent acting as a parent and not having an
allegiance to anything but their children's welfare introduces to
astronomy without telescopes in imitation of the actual history of
astronomy,for instance,using time lapse footage of the Earth
overtaking the planets,then taking the teenager out and showing them
the respective planets and how it was actually done -

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap011220.html

Of course,as many here owe more to empiricism and Newton in particular
than they do to their children,kids never get to enjoy the context of
what they see in the celestial arena -

"For to the earth planetary motions appear sometimes direct, sometimes
stationary, nay, and sometimes retrograde. But from the sun they are
always seen direct,..." Newton

I will speak for those who have no voice and suffer limitations
imposed on them by people who have no love of astronomy or much
else,many good kids who can't find their way through the obfuscation
that block some of the clean and clear insights of astronomy.







They had a good point.

The fact that the mags couldn't do a real review if they had to
doesn't help.

We have also seen prices drop *for what one can buy since the Chinese
has entered the market...evidence there has been price fixing in
place.

I had one mother discuss her experiences on CN where she sought advice
as to which scope to buy for her son...what a train wreck.

The advice of serveral CNers was to spend several thousand dollars on
a scope...anything else was deemed inferior.

I (Brian Tung) wrote:
So the advice of a few goldeneyes was unreasonable.

John Savard wrote:
Generally speaking, the difference between a 75mm aperture refractor
and a 150mm aperture reflector are reproducible and objective, due to
the diffraction limit.

Look at my quote in its context and you'll see that I was talking
about advice that any scope less than several thousand dollars
was not worth it. You can get a good 150 mm reflector for far
less than that.

--
Brian Tung (posting from Google Groups)
The Astronomy Corner at http://www.astronomycorner.net/
Unofficial C5+ Page at http://www.astronomycorner.net/c5plus/
My PleiadAtlas Page at http://www.astronomycorner.net/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ at http://www.astronomycorner.net/reference/faq.html

In article ,
wrote:
On Feb 3, 3:54*am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
I was talking to a group of parents recently where the subject of
introducing their kids to science specifically astronomy came up.

I don't think the quality of the telescope is nearly as important as
the interest level of the child.

Also, access to dark skies is important. I see people growing up in the
city in disbelief about seeing Jupiter so strongly once put in a rural
location all the time.

My parents probably spent about $50 for my first telescope, a 3-inch
reflector made by Edmund Scientific. It had a plastic tube, a wobbly
tripod mount, and cardboard tubes for the eyepieces, but I absolutely
loved it and the objects that I could find and observe with it. I
tracked down about 80 of the Messier objects as a 10 or 11-year-old;
the rest were a little too faint.

In other words a kid (today) with a $100 telescope and a high-level of
interest is going to get a lot more use out of his or her instrument
than another kid with a $1000 telescope and only a passing interest in
astronomy. I would advise concerned parents to purchase a cheap
telescope and see if the kid's interest holds up. If it does, then
purchase or build a more substantial instrument a couple of years
later.

Also some guidance and some literature. Even the monthlies in
"astronomy" go a long way.

-- mrr

In article ,
oriel36 wrote:
On Feb 3, 8:54*am, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
I was talking to a group of parents recently where the subject of
introducing their kids to science specifically astronomy came up.

Much was made about the fact that one either has to buy junk or pay a
significant price for a starter scope.


Astronomy does not begin and end with magnification equipment as that
can hinder the multi-faceted aspect of astronomy as it does for so
many readers here.A parent acting as a parent and not having an
allegiance to anything but their children's welfare introduces to
astronomy without telescopes in imitation of the actual history of
astronomy,for instance,using time lapse footage of the Earth
overtaking the planets,then taking the teenager out and showing them
the respective planets and how it was actually done -

Good advice. And as an add-on, a set of good binoculars that
gather light well is a good next step. You should be able to make
out M51, Jupiters moons and the crescent of Venus in these.

-- mrr ... agreeing with oriel for the second time in a week