|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
£200 to spend on a telescope. ideas please
Anybody any suggestions on what I should be looking for in a telescope. I am
a total novice and have about £200 to spend. I basically want the best for my money, but something that I will still enjoy using when I have more knowledge and experience. An idea on where to buy as well. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
£200 to spend on a telescope. ideas please
On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 21:53:29 GMT, "Richard"
wrote: Anybody any suggestions on what I should be looking for in a telescope. I am a total novice and have about £200 to spend. I basically want the best for my money, but something that I will still enjoy using when I have more knowledge and experience. An idea on where to buy as well. I bought a SKYWATCHER SKYMAX-90 (EQ1) from Sherwoods http://www.sherwoods-photo.com/sky_w...atcher_fs.html - phoned in the order one day, got the scope two days later. Just over your 200squids, at 225. Good for looking at the Moon in some detail, you can see Saturn and its ring (I say ring because you can't differentiate the rings or anything). What I found as a newbie was getting some basic idea of what you can and can't see. So, for example, you don't see Mars as a red disk, and Saturn you can see the ring(s) as I say, but you see a smallish white disk and the ring around it. I go this scope on account of it being recommended as a good starter scope for looking at planets. Having used it several times and enjoyed it, I now sort of regret now having spent more for a bigger scope to get better views, although it's not clear to me what extra the next model up would give by way of an improved view. What I would like to see is a website that gives some indication of what you see with a Sxymax 90, a 102 and the 127 model. Some websites have cracking photos, but these are taken from 'stacking' lots of different photoes taken by a camera, and it's not clear to me whether you see the same looking through the eyepiece as what finally comes out on the photo. Mark Watson Best SF - www.bestsf.net Best SF reviews: classic and current short SF Best SF Gateway: online short SF |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
£200 to spend on a telescope. ideas please
"Mark Watson" wrote in message news On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 21:53:29 GMT, "Richard" wrote: Anybody any suggestions on what I should be looking for in a telescope. I am a total novice and have about £200 to spend. I basically want the best for my money, but something that I will still enjoy using when I have more knowledge and experience. An idea on where to buy as well. Tal make good telescopes and are reasonably priced. The net can provide some good deals. Martin |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
£200 to spend on a telescope. ideas please
http://www.telescopehouse.co.uk/down...e=3_Powers.pdf
this gives some info on what to expect to see depending on what sort of telescope you have "Mark Watson" wrote in message news On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 21:53:29 GMT, "Richard" wrote: Anybody any suggestions on what I should be looking for in a telescope. I am a total novice and have about £200 to spend. I basically want the best for my money, but something that I will still enjoy using when I have more knowledge and experience. An idea on where to buy as well. I bought a SKYWATCHER SKYMAX-90 (EQ1) from Sherwoods http://www.sherwoods-photo.com/sky_w...atcher_fs.html - phoned in the order one day, got the scope two days later. Just over your 200squids, at 225. Good for looking at the Moon in some detail, you can see Saturn and its ring (I say ring because you can't differentiate the rings or anything). What I found as a newbie was getting some basic idea of what you can and can't see. So, for example, you don't see Mars as a red disk, and Saturn you can see the ring(s) as I say, but you see a smallish white disk and the ring around it. I go this scope on account of it being recommended as a good starter scope for looking at planets. Having used it several times and enjoyed it, I now sort of regret now having spent more for a bigger scope to get better views, although it's not clear to me what extra the next model up would give by way of an improved view. What I would like to see is a website that gives some indication of what you see with a Sxymax 90, a 102 and the 127 model. Some websites have cracking photos, but these are taken from 'stacking' lots of different photoes taken by a camera, and it's not clear to me whether you see the same looking through the eyepiece as what finally comes out on the photo. Mark Watson Best SF - www.bestsf.net Best SF reviews: classic and current short SF Best SF Gateway: online short SF |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
£200 to spend on a telescope. ideas please
"Richard" wrote in message ...
http://www.telescopehouse.co.uk/down...e=3_Powers.pdf this gives some info on what to expect to see depending on what sort of telescope you have "Mark Watson" wrote in message news On Tue, 04 Nov 2003 21:53:29 GMT, "Richard" wrote: Anybody any suggestions on what I should be looking for in a telescope. I am a total novice and have about £200 to spend. I basically want the best for my money, but something that I will still enjoy using when I have more knowledge and experience. An idea on where to buy as well. I bought a SKYWATCHER SKYMAX-90 (EQ1) from Sherwoods http://www.sherwoods-photo.com/sky_w...atcher_fs.html - phoned in the order one day, got the scope two days later. Just over your 200squids, at 225. Good for looking at the Moon in some detail, you can see Saturn and its ring (I say ring because you can't differentiate the rings or anything). What I found as a newbie was getting some basic idea of what you can and can't see. So, for example, you don't see Mars as a red disk, and Saturn you can see the ring(s) as I say, but you see a smallish white disk and the ring around it. I go this scope on account of it being recommended as a good starter scope for looking at planets. Having used it several times and enjoyed it, I now sort of regret now having spent more for a bigger scope to get better views, although it's not clear to me what extra the next model up would give by way of an improved view. What I would like to see is a website that gives some indication of what you see with a Sxymax 90, a 102 and the 127 model. Some websites have cracking photos, but these are taken from 'stacking' lots of different photoes taken by a camera, and it's not clear to me whether you see the same looking through the eyepiece as what finally comes out on the photo. Mark Watson Best SF - www.bestsf.net Best SF reviews: classic and current short SF Best SF Gateway: online short SF Just an idea which you invite. Have you considered the purchase of a good set of binoculars? I am sure that the money which you have to spend would maybe be better spent on a good set of these than a lower quality telescope. I started out with binoculars 9X63 Bresser which I have used for several years, very good for learning your way around the sky, and give great views of quite a lot of objects of interest. I put off buying a telescope until I was sure I could afford a quality scope which would hopefully last me years. In addition if you pursue this route your binoculars will remain useful throughout your astronomy hobby years. Just a thought. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
£200 to spend on a telescope. ideas please
Snip
Just an idea which you invite. Have you considered the purchase of a good set of binoculars? I am sure that the money which you have to spend would maybe be better spent on a good set of these than a lower quality telescope. I started out with binoculars 9X63 Bresser which I have used for several years, very good for learning your way around the sky, and give great views of quite a lot of objects of interest. I put off buying a telescope until I was sure I could afford a quality scope which would hopefully last me years. In addition if you pursue this route your binoculars will remain useful throughout your astronomy hobby years. Just a thought. I was going to suggest that. I tried :-) to get away with spending less that £150 or so.......... here is how I ended up with some binoculars that I'm glad I bought. 1) After trying out contact lenses for the first time this year, I wandered outside one night having picked up my ancient pair of 8x40 binoculars (Swift) and rediscovered that feeling that I might easily fall into the bucket of stars visible if you lie on your back and point the bins at the milky way. This set me on a quest for better optics, and bins that you can use with specs on. 10x50 was my first thought. 2) I tried Minolta Classic II Wide Angle Binoculars (£69) which gave me another magnitude's worth of stars (approx!), but the distortions were worse than my ancient Swifts - and they were not comfortable with specs on. Back to the shop for... 3) An own-brand 80mm spotting scope (which I intended to use for wide field only, i.e. ignoring the higher power eyepiece) for £129 - however the astigmatism and blur at higher power (if you have it, you can't avoid trying it) was too annoying, and I spent about a week looking for the dumbell nebula (for the first time) with no success. This scope duly went back to the shop. 4) After some digging, head scratching and fussing over exit pupils, apertures, eye releif etc, I ordered Pentax 16x60 WP binoculars over the internet. These cost £159 and have fully multicoated optics, and are much better quality than the spotting scope, despite the fact that there are two tubes! They are good for use in the day time, and best of all can be whipped outside in about 30 seconds. I found the dumbell nebula in about 5 minutes with these. I am still thinking of buying some 10x50's for their wider field, but I'll keep the 16x60s. There is a minor problem with flare on bright point objects (e.g. mars) but nothing is perfect for this price. The 16x magnification tends to dim light pollution and let stars shine through, and is useful for looking at the moon. Saturn can be made out to be flattened but I haven't seen the rings. I've even seen M31 through double-glazing with them. Now all I want is a) a switch for the street lamp at the bottom of the garden b) more binoculars c) dark skies in summer (when it is warm!). |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
£200 to spend on a telescope. ideas please
You could try getting a second hand scope, www.ukastroads.co.uk is a good
site Larry "Richard" wrote in message ... Anybody any suggestions on what I should be looking for in a telescope. I am a total novice and have about £200 to spend. I basically want the best for my money, but something that I will still enjoy using when I have more knowledge and experience. An idea on where to buy as well. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
£200 to spend on a telescope. ideas please
thanks for the info. how do these look?
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...125985-5284432 One thing I would concerned about with binoculars is the view is not going to be steady enough for me to be able to study things. And what does the 20*60 signify? Thanks "Alan" wrote in message ... Snip Just an idea which you invite. Have you considered the purchase of a good set of binoculars? I am sure that the money which you have to spend would maybe be better spent on a good set of these than a lower quality telescope. I started out with binoculars 9X63 Bresser which I have used for several years, very good for learning your way around the sky, and give great views of quite a lot of objects of interest. I put off buying a telescope until I was sure I could afford a quality scope which would hopefully last me years. In addition if you pursue this route your binoculars will remain useful throughout your astronomy hobby years. Just a thought. I was going to suggest that. I tried :-) to get away with spending less that £150 or so.......... here is how I ended up with some binoculars that I'm glad I bought. 1) After trying out contact lenses for the first time this year, I wandered outside one night having picked up my ancient pair of 8x40 binoculars (Swift) and rediscovered that feeling that I might easily fall into the bucket of stars visible if you lie on your back and point the bins at the milky way. This set me on a quest for better optics, and bins that you can use with specs on. 10x50 was my first thought. 2) I tried Minolta Classic II Wide Angle Binoculars (£69) which gave me another magnitude's worth of stars (approx!), but the distortions were worse than my ancient Swifts - and they were not comfortable with specs on. Back to the shop for... 3) An own-brand 80mm spotting scope (which I intended to use for wide field only, i.e. ignoring the higher power eyepiece) for £129 - however the astigmatism and blur at higher power (if you have it, you can't avoid trying it) was too annoying, and I spent about a week looking for the dumbell nebula (for the first time) with no success. This scope duly went back to the shop. 4) After some digging, head scratching and fussing over exit pupils, apertures, eye releif etc, I ordered Pentax 16x60 WP binoculars over the internet. These cost £159 and have fully multicoated optics, and are much better quality than the spotting scope, despite the fact that there are two tubes! They are good for use in the day time, and best of all can be whipped outside in about 30 seconds. I found the dumbell nebula in about 5 minutes with these. I am still thinking of buying some 10x50's for their wider field, but I'll keep the 16x60s. There is a minor problem with flare on bright point objects (e.g. mars) but nothing is perfect for this price. The 16x magnification tends to dim light pollution and let stars shine through, and is useful for looking at the moon. Saturn can be made out to be flattened but I haven't seen the rings. I've even seen M31 through double-glazing with them. Now all I want is a) a switch for the street lamp at the bottom of the garden b) more binoculars c) dark skies in summer (when it is warm!). |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
£200 to spend on a telescope. ideas please
In message , Richard
wrote thanks for the info. how do these look? http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/...125985-5284432 One thing I would concerned about with binoculars is the view is not going to be steady enough for me to be able to study things. And what does the 20*60 signify? Many binoculars can be mounted with little difficulty to a tripod as can these as the description says that they have a socket. 20*60 will mean 20 times magnification with 60mm diameter objective lenses. 20 times mag. in my view makes them too strong to hand hold 60 mm objectives should mean nice bright images. -- Roger 52:54:41N 01:30:05W Orion 127mm Maksutov. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
£200 to spend on a telescope. ideas please
They are the same as mine, except they magnify 20 times (mine do 16). This
is the first number in the 20*60. The second number is the diameter of the front lens in mm. These bins have good reviews on a website called 'cloudy nights' (this link is the review for the ones I have http://www.cloudynights.com/breviews/pentax16.htm but I think there is also one for the 20x60 ones). I must admit I'm guessing that the 'V' (five) range is the same as the 'WP' (waterproof) - seems to be. I would expect the 20x magnification to be quite tricky to hold steady - the 16x ones are just on the limit for this really (more magnification = more shake). However, that seems a really good price (£136 - the standard price for mine seems to be £199 but I got them for £159). As with all things, it depends what you want and there is always a compromise. My 16x60s are good for hand holding for a quick look, and great on a tripod for a more careful study. If you don't have really really dark skies, then higher magnification helps punch through the skyglow to dig out dimmer stars, but also dims galaxies and nebulae - so you don't want to over do it. Also, higher magnification means smaller field of view, which makes it trickier to 'star hop' around the sky and spoils the 'bucketfull of stars' wow factor. I would definitely want a lower magnification pair to complement 20x60 (e.g. 10x50). Have a read of the reviews. You will appreciate these binoculars if you wear specs, as you can see all the field of view with them still on (without pressing your specs into your nose painfully hard). I think for the money you won't get better quality optics for the same light gathering ablity and ease of use (i.e. comfort with specs) and build quality ..........unless anyone knows different? But you will need a tripod or a good trick with your elbows to hold them steady .............. "Richard" wrote in message ... thanks for the info. how do these look? http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/..._electronics_1 _1/026-1125985-5284432 One thing I would concerned about with binoculars is the view is not going to be steady enough for me to be able to study things. And what does the 20*60 signify? Thanks "Alan" wrote in message ... Snip Just an idea which you invite. Have you considered the purchase of a good set of binoculars? I am sure that the money which you have to spend would maybe be better spent on a good set of these than a lower quality telescope. I started out with binoculars 9X63 Bresser which I have used for several years, very good for learning your way around the sky, and give great views of quite a lot of objects of interest. I put off buying a telescope until I was sure I could afford a quality scope which would hopefully last me years. In addition if you pursue this route your binoculars will remain useful throughout your astronomy hobby years. Just a thought. I was going to suggest that. I tried :-) to get away with spending less that £150 or so.......... here is how I ended up with some binoculars that I'm glad I bought. 1) After trying out contact lenses for the first time this year, I wandered outside one night having picked up my ancient pair of 8x40 binoculars (Swift) and rediscovered that feeling that I might easily fall into the bucket of stars visible if you lie on your back and point the bins at the milky way. This set me on a quest for better optics, and bins that you can use with specs on. 10x50 was my first thought. 2) I tried Minolta Classic II Wide Angle Binoculars (£69) which gave me another magnitude's worth of stars (approx!), but the distortions were worse than my ancient Swifts - and they were not comfortable with specs on. Back to the shop for... 3) An own-brand 80mm spotting scope (which I intended to use for wide field only, i.e. ignoring the higher power eyepiece) for £129 - however the astigmatism and blur at higher power (if you have it, you can't avoid trying it) was too annoying, and I spent about a week looking for the dumbell nebula (for the first time) with no success. This scope duly went back to the shop. 4) After some digging, head scratching and fussing over exit pupils, apertures, eye releif etc, I ordered Pentax 16x60 WP binoculars over the internet. These cost £159 and have fully multicoated optics, and are much better quality than the spotting scope, despite the fact that there are two tubes! They are good for use in the day time, and best of all can be whipped outside in about 30 seconds. I found the dumbell nebula in about 5 minutes with these. I am still thinking of buying some 10x50's for their wider field, but I'll keep the 16x60s. There is a minor problem with flare on bright point objects (e.g. mars) but nothing is perfect for this price. The 16x magnification tends to dim light pollution and let stars shine through, and is useful for looking at the moon. Saturn can be made out to be flattened but I haven't seen the rings. I've even seen M31 through double-glazing with them. Now all I want is a) a switch for the street lamp at the bottom of the garden b) more binoculars c) dark skies in summer (when it is warm!). |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
NASA Announces New Name For Space Infrared Telescope Facility | Ron Baalke | History | 0 | December 18th 03 10:59 PM |
World's Single Largest Telescope Mirror Moves To The LBT | Ron Baalke | Technology | 0 | November 11th 03 08:16 AM |
Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation Awards $17.5 Million For Thirty-Meter Telescope Plans | Ron Baalke | Technology | 0 | October 18th 03 01:08 AM |
Sky & Telescope News Bulletin - August 29, 2003 | Ron Baalke | Misc | 0 | August 30th 03 01:51 AM |