Thinking aloud - next steps

Hello,

I am trying to revive my childhood interest in astronomy, and bought some
16x60 binoculars a couple of months ago. I am pleased with these, and have
found the Andromeda spiral and m27 plus a couple of binaries.

I am thinking of buying something else to go with the binoculars, on a
budget that might stretch to £500, but I want to chew over the trade-off
between portability and optical performance. My fear is that if I spend all
of the money on a scope, the views from my back garden (with streetlight)
might not encourage me to get the thing out and stand in the cold with it
very often. I also can't see myself driving to a dark site to stand on my
own for long enough to justify setting up a scope there.

However, even from my light-polluted back garden, if I hide behind a parasol
I can see the milky way and see Alcor easily naked eye, and see all of ursa
minor after a while, so my limiting magnitude must be around 5?

I'm wondering whether to get something like a 6 inch reflector, or a smaller
refractor, or another (i.e. different spec) pair of binoculars. I think I'm
more intrested in deep sky than planets, but would like to show the family
views of these now and then.

Cheers

Alan

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:26:37 -0000, "Alan" wrote:

Hello,

I am trying to revive my childhood interest in astronomy, and bought some
16x60 binoculars a couple of months ago. I am pleased with these, and have
found the Andromeda spiral and m27 plus a couple of binaries.

I am thinking of buying something else to go with the binoculars, on a
budget that might stretch to £500, but I want to chew over the trade-off
between portability and optical performance. My fear is that if I spend all
of the money on a scope, the views from my back garden (with streetlight)
might not encourage me to get the thing out and stand in the cold with it
very often. I also can't see myself driving to a dark site to stand on my
own for long enough to justify setting up a scope there.

However, even from my light-polluted back garden, if I hide behind a parasol
I can see the milky way and see Alcor easily naked eye, and see all of ursa
minor after a while, so my limiting magnitude must be around 5?

I'm wondering whether to get something like a 6 inch reflector, or a smaller
refractor, or another (i.e. different spec) pair of binoculars. I think I'm
more intrested in deep sky than planets, but would like to show the family
views of these now and then.

Cheers

Alan


Well you're not doing too badly with mag5 skies - many people have to
put up with more light pollution than that. Still, it does rather
limit your ability to see faint fuzzies so a light bucket isn't much
use to you. Planetary and lunar viewing would not be affected by the
light pollution though so a medium-sized reflector (8" or thereabouts)
or refractor (4"-5") would still be worth having. It's also amazing
what a CCD camera can pull out of unpromising skies too. Big
binoculars (80 to 100mm class) really need dark skies to work well,
they operate at low (relatively) magnification so unfortunately they
show the sky glow too.

ChrisH

UK Astro Ads: http://www.UKAstroAds.co.uk

"Alan" wrote:

Hello,

I am trying to revive my childhood interest in astronomy, and bought some
16x60 binoculars a couple of months ago. I am pleased with these, and have
found the Andromeda spiral and m27 plus a couple of binaries.

Wish I could remember that much from my childhood.

SNIP

Almost any scope will give the family decent views of Jupiter and
Saturn - enough to produce a visceral wow anyway.

I more and more incline towards a scope that's easy to put up. I love
my EQ6 mounted refractor and the 10inch reflector but it is a chore
dragging it all out into the garden and takes enough time for the
cloud to roll in just before I'm ready to go.

I've tended to avoid SCTs and Maksutovs because they are a bit long in
the focal length but that could be pure prejudice. If I was starting
again (ie still had some budget to blow) I think I'd get an 8 inch
newtonian about f5 on an HEQ5. Nice solid mount but reasonably
portable, and enough aperture to reveal new sights to me for longer
than I'm likely to last.

-----------------------------
Martin Frey
http://www.hadastro.org.uk
N 51 01 52.2 E 0 47 21.1
-----------------------------

"ChrisH" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 15:26:37 -0000, "Alan" wrote:

Hello,

I am trying to revive my childhood interest in astronomy, and bought some
16x60 binoculars a couple of months ago. I am pleased with these, and
have
found the Andromeda spiral and m27 plus a couple of binaries.

I am thinking of buying something else to go with the binoculars, on a
budget that might stretch to £500, but I want to chew over the trade-off
between portability and optical performance. My fear is that if I spend
all
of the money on a scope, the views from my back garden (with streetlight)
might not encourage me to get the thing out and stand in the cold with it
very often. I also can't see myself driving to a dark site to stand on my
own for long enough to justify setting up a scope there.

However, even from my light-polluted back garden, if I hide behind a
parasol
I can see the milky way and see Alcor easily naked eye, and see all of
ursa
minor after a while, so my limiting magnitude must be around 5?

I'm wondering whether to get something like a 6 inch reflector, or a
smaller
refractor, or another (i.e. different spec) pair of binoculars. I think
I'm
more intrested in deep sky than planets, but would like to show the
family
views of these now and then.

Cheers

Alan


Well you're not doing too badly with mag5 skies - many people have to
put up with more light pollution than that. Still, it does rather
limit your ability to see faint fuzzies so a light bucket isn't much
use to you. Planetary and lunar viewing would not be affected by the
light pollution though so a medium-sized reflector (8" or thereabouts)
or refractor (4"-5") would still be worth having. It's also amazing
what a CCD camera can pull out of unpromising skies too. Big
binoculars (80 to 100mm class) really need dark skies to work well,
they operate at low (relatively) magnification so unfortunately they
show the sky glow too.

ChrisH

UK Astro Ads: http://www.UKAstroAds.co.uk

Thanks Chris, your conclusion about big binoculars is kind of where I was
headed - this is why I decided not to get some lower magnification ones.

Is an 8 inch reflector really within my budget (£500), bearing in mind I'd
probably need a motorised EQ mount too (if I'm going to be using higher
magnifications to beat skyglow) ?

Am I right to conclude that rich field only goes with dark skies?

I have never used a higher magnification scope (assuming that the bigger
aperture would go with a higher magnification) at all - childhood 50mm toy
and my binoculars are all I've had really - and I'm struggling to visualise
what can be seen with them - I'd hate to spend lots of cash and see one star
at a time due to the narrow field (I'm sure this isn't the case :-)).

Cheers

Alan

"Martin Frey" wrote in message
...
"Alan" wrote:

Hello,

I am trying to revive my childhood interest in astronomy, and bought some
16x60 binoculars a couple of months ago. I am pleased with these, and
have
found the Andromeda spiral and m27 plus a couple of binaries.

Wish I could remember that much from my childhood.

SNIP

Almost any scope will give the family decent views of Jupiter and
Saturn - enough to produce a visceral wow anyway.

I more and more incline towards a scope that's easy to put up. I love
my EQ6 mounted refractor and the 10inch reflector but it is a chore
dragging it all out into the garden and takes enough time for the
cloud to roll in just before I'm ready to go.

I've tended to avoid SCTs and Maksutovs because they are a bit long in
the focal length but that could be pure prejudice. If I was starting
again (ie still had some budget to blow) I think I'd get an 8 inch
newtonian about f5 on an HEQ5. Nice solid mount but reasonably
portable, and enough aperture to reveal new sights to me for longer
than I'm likely to last.

-----------------------------
Martin Frey
http://www.hadastro.org.uk
N 51 01 52.2 E 0 47 21.1
-----------------------------

Something like this then?
(website chosen at random from a quick search)
http://www.wokinghamphotographic.co....kymax200px.htm

By the way, I love that streetlamp screen on your website. Unfortunately I
have nothing to hide one behind, unless I come up with some multi-stage
telescopic fold-out mechanism ...........

My problem with bigger scopes is that I'll have to go further down the
garden (I think) which is a) closer to the streetlamp and b) triggers a
security light from the other direction.

Food for thought ............

Cheers

Alan

On Tue, 18 Nov 2003 18:23:39 -0000, "Alan" wrote:

Thanks Chris, your conclusion about big binoculars is kind of where I was
headed - this is why I decided not to get some lower magnification ones.

Is an 8 inch reflector really within my budget (£500), bearing in mind I'd
probably need a motorised EQ mount too (if I'm going to be using higher
magnifications to beat skyglow) ?


New price? you're at the bottom end of the scale - and don't forget
you need eyepieces to go with the scope. An 8" f/6 Europa costs £500
but I don't think that includes the drives.

Am I right to conclude that rich field only goes with dark skies?

It does imply low magnification so skyglow is a problem - it robs you
of the faint stars and nebulosity.


I have never used a higher magnification scope (assuming that the bigger
aperture would go with a higher magnification) at all - childhood 50mm toy
and my binoculars are all I've had really - and I'm struggling to visualise
what can be seen with them - I'd hate to spend lots of cash and see one star
at a time due to the narrow field (I'm sure this isn't the case :-)).

Cheers

Alan


Some objects require higher magnification, like most planetary nebulae
and globular clusters, nearer (larger) galaxies look better with
lower magnification (say, 50x or lower). So much depends on the
particular object (size, surface brightness, structural contrast) that
there is no rule that suits all. As I said, mag5 skies are fairly good
from your home, and you could see a lot with an 8" reflector. An OIII
or UHC filter would help you to find faint planetary nebulae under
these conditions, however nothing but dark skies will do for faint
galaxies - that's what you would miss.

ChrisH


UK Astro Ads: http://www.UKAstroAds.co.uk

"Alan" wrote:

By the way, I love that streetlamp screen on your website. Unfortunately I
have nothing to hide one behind, unless I come up with some multi-stage
telescopic fold-out mechanism ...........

My problem with bigger scopes is that I'll have to go further down the
garden (I think) which is a) closer to the streetlamp and b) triggers a
security light from the other direction.

Food for thought ............

Thanks, Alan. The screen works and is lasting well.

I slightly hope it will rot because the mark 2 version might work
better and be more discreet. Instead of a large screen it will have
what someone in this group described as a candle snuffer and instead
of sliding up it will swing through 180 degrees..

-----------------------------
Martin Frey
http://www.hadastro.org.uk
N 51 01 52.2 E 0 47 21.1
-----------------------------