Refractor vs. Reflector?

So...How about one of Orion Telescope's "Starblast" 'scopes? I've heard
of quite a few astronomers getting those as "grab & go" 'scopes (don't
own one, but apparently they are quite popular)...
Steve B.

No idea...

You'll have to get input on that from others here

IFFF you buy from a "real" telescope company thats a VERY good start in a
purchase decision...and orion is one such company...


small telescopes of decent quality are ALOT of fun and most astromers, even
ones with 10k$ monster scopes have small ones (scopes that is, not what they
are compensating for

I kid, I kid....

There a time and place for big scopes and small ones....

Buttt.....when your at the very low end of real telescope
size/price....spending just a little more money gets you ALOT more
scope/performance....

Now, if you can only truelly afford the lower cost/size models, tell the folks
whats the max you can afford and they will point you in the right direction...

Now, if you can afford to spend a little more than that.....an extra hundred or
so is gonna make a BIG difference in what you can see with the scope you get
for a bit more money...

Im sure the folks here can give more helpful specifics..

take care

Blll

SCB wrote:

So...How about one of Orion Telescope's "Starblast" 'scopes? I've heard
of quite a few astronomers getting those as "grab & go" 'scopes (don't
own one, but apparently they are quite popular)...


An earlier post in this thread recommended the Starblast and had a link
to an online review.

Phil

But if you are considering a refractor, the 4" Orion (100mm) on the cg-4 mount
between 300 and 400 dollars would beat the 3 1/2 (90mm) Orion on the spindley
junk mount for about fifty dollars less.

Orion used to sell a nice beginners refractor on a decent mount, the SVD 90,
but they discontinued that, and now the 4" is the the first size they offer on
a decent mount. The Stellarvue 80, nicely mounted, will cost a little more,
but would also fit the bill (www.Stellarvue.com).

I don't think anyone is producing a decent 60 mm scope now, simply because
there are a lot of nice 80-100mm objectives being produced at a reasonable
cost.

As many have pointed out, the chinese are turning out cheap dobs that are hard
to beat inch for inch. But for a child, a refractor is hard to beat for the
simplicity. That's how I started. The point is, to match the Japanese
refractor of thirty years ago in todays dollars, go with a Chinese refractor of
at least 90 mm on a mimimum of a cg-4 size mount.

just my .02

jt

On Sun, 05 Sep 2004 01:50:38 GMT, "Martin R. Howell"
wrote:

I never have figured out how collimation got such a bad reputation for the
beginner. It really is a rather straightforward and easy process to
master.

I think the real problem is with telescopes so poorly made they won't
stay in collimation.

OT: Sitting on the couch and idly pushing the channel button on the
remote I caught a snippet of one of those home redocrating shows on
TLC where the "victim" was a science teacher who kept a Meade Dob in
one corner of her living room. Nice, I thought, a telescope that gets
looked through instead of just looked at.

I think a 6" dob makes a good first telescope. Nowadays they are not
hugely expensive. You don't need goto so much as a good finder and a
good star atlas.

(Marc Wolfe) wrote in message . com...

1: Refractor vs. reflector - I'm pretty much down with a refractor to
start, nothing too expensive in case he outgrows his interest. I'm
leaning towards the refractor because: it can also be used as a
terrestrial; they don't require periodic re-collimation; no cool down
time; seemingly more accessible to a kid who while smart still has the
patience of a kid.

Those are good points, but the degree to which they apply depends on
the specific telescopes in question, and the issue of accessibility is
likely to favor a certain type of reflector, actually (more below).

I'm currently looking at a Bushnell 700 by 60mm model, 5MM and 20 MM
eyepieces.

As a rule, do not buy anything from companies such as Bushnell and
Tasco--they sell telescopes based only on hype, not real performance.
The eyepieces they supply, for example, are pure junk by today's
standards. Additionally, a 60mm telescope from any company is
probably too small for those just starting out (objects may appear too
faint, especially under light pollution).

According to telescopes.com it's appropriate for deep
space and planetary viewing, whereas comparable 3.5" reflectors are
limited to planetary viewing.

There is no truth to this statement whatsoever. Any decent
beginner-level telescope will show you both deep-sky objects and
planets, with their degree of specialization based almost entirely on
general parameters such as aperture and focal length, rather than
design type. Until you gain some experience and figure out what you
really want, the main tradeoff to keep in mind is price versus
aperture, along with ease of use.

2: Mounts. The Bushnell model comes with a yoke mount - there's also
one with an "easy track" mount. While I found a great deal of
comparative information about altazim and equatorial mounts (pros and
cons)I didn't find any information on the yoke or easy mounts.

If you desire accessibility, especially for young children, I would
recommend a Dobsonian-mounted reflector (Dob for short). The
advantages of this mount a low cost, a high degree of stability,
and general ease of setup and use. It is basically a large alt-az
mount that sits directly on the ground, with eyepiece height provided
by the telescope tube itself, being a Newtonian (eyepiece at the
front). Its main weakness is that it's not practical for terrestrial
use, but do not underestimate the significance of its strengths--other
types of mount in this price range are comparatively flimsy and
frustrating to use, even for experienced observers.

OK, let's get down to the nitty-gritty. ;-) You don't seem to be
willing to risk a lot of money, so this will be an important
consideration. Remember that I'm only here to help, not to push you,
but the reality is that at this stage, the less telescope you buy, the
more likely you or your son would be to lose interest--yet another one
of life's little paradoxes. Simply put, a few extra bucks and some
good decisions can make the difference between frustration and
enjoyment. First off, Orion is a reputable retailer that has some
decent options (and a nice website).

If you really want a refractor, so that you can use it terrestrially
or on the beach with a tripod, take a look at these:

http://tinyurl.com/6xmx8
http://tinyurl.com/6trt9
http://tinyurl.com/6dg2r
http://tinyurl.com/5fe6s

The ShortTube 80 is a nice little telescope that should be stable
enough on these mounts, due to its small size, and is well-favored for
its wide field of view (an inherent advantage of short focal length
telescopes). Unfortunately, unless you buy additional eyepieces for
higher magnification, you're not going to get great views of the
planets, and even if you do, there will be quite a bit of false color
in the image. Additionally, while the included correct-image diagonal
is appropriate for terrestrial use, you'll probably want to get a star
diagonal for astronomical use, which is an additional purchase.
Obviously, this is more of a specialty scope than a beginner's scope.

The 90mm telescope has a more general-purpose focal length to go along
with its slightly larger aperture. You should be able to see some
detail on the planets with the 10mm eyepiece, and take in most every
large deep-sky object that you can see with the 25mm eyepiece.
However, I'm not sure how stable it would be on that mount, having
never used this exact telescope. It's not too heavy, so I think that
it should work alright (I hope).

So much for the refractors--now look at this 6" Dob:

http://tinyurl.com/38ls5

It's currently on sale, so for a substantially lower price, you can
get 6" (about 152mm) of aperture on a rock-steady mount. This is
actually the smallest telescope that I would recommend for beginners,
especially those who have some doubt as to what they're getting into.
8" would be better if it's the only telescope that you'll ever buy,
but if you won't pay that price, then 6" should start you off quite
well. Yeah, it needs some time to cool, so set it up outside a
half-hour or more ahead of time. It needs to be collimated from time
to time, but at f/8, precise collimation is not that critical; take
good care of the telescope, and you may not have to do it for years at
a time. This is a bargain--more capable, easier to use, and less
costly than the other options. Be sure to shop around, because there
may be even better deals out there.

If you think that a 6" Dob might be too large for your son, the
following telescope would be a good alternative:

http://tinyurl.com/lb2p

I say go for the 6", though (or bigger if you want!)--he'll grow into
it. :-)


- Robert Cook

Thanks to all who replied. The information supplied was very helpful. Based
on that I've revised my initial decision as follows:

1. Ixnay on the Bushnell line. I chose Bushnell for name familiarity from
hunting optics way back in the 80s. Either the brand has declined or their
astronomy line isn't comparable.

2. Orion products look very tasty. I'm not hard up for cash and I didn't mean
to imply a $200 ceiling was all I could afford, just that I wasn't sure his
Lordship's interest in astronomy would continue and didn't see spending a mint
on a passing fancy. It's more important to me that I don't kill his interest
by getting a scope that's inadequate.

3. I'm now considering the Orion short tube 80, and the Starblast. I'd prefer
the 80 since I can use it for terrestrial viewing also, but the choice hinges
more on quick usability. Remember, I'm dealing with a 6 year old who can tell
you why Sol won't end up as a black hole but still has a 6 year old attention
span. More than 10 minutes of setup and he'll lose the mood (exactly the
opposite of dealing with the missus ;-).

If I buy the 80 I'll need to buy a tripod and if I buy the Starblast I'll need
to figure out a platform for setup since most of our viewing will be in the
field (camping, parks, beach). I'm assuming the DOB base of the blast either
is or can be tapped for a tripod.

Mounts. Should I buy an EQ or an altaz if I go with the 80? How long does an
EQ take to set up and calibrate? I'm pretty certain the altaz is point and
shoot.

Thanks for the feedback, this is a great group.

Marc

In article ,
(MrAoD) wrote:

Thanks to all who replied. The information supplied was very helpful. Based
on that I've revised my initial decision as follows:

1. Ixnay on the Bushnell line. I chose Bushnell for name familiarity from
hunting optics way back in the 80s. Either the brand has declined or their
astronomy line isn't comparable.

2. Orion products look very tasty. I'm not hard up for cash and I didn't
mean
to imply a $200 ceiling was all I could afford, just that I wasn't sure his
Lordship's interest in astronomy would continue and didn't see spending a
mint
on a passing fancy. It's more important to me that I don't kill his interest
by getting a scope that's inadequate.

3. I'm now considering the Orion short tube 80, and the Starblast. I'd
prefer
the 80 since I can use it for terrestrial viewing also, but the choice hinges
more on quick usability. Remember, I'm dealing with a 6 year old who can
tell
you why Sol won't end up as a black hole but still has a 6 year old attention
span. More than 10 minutes of setup and he'll lose the mood (exactly the
opposite of dealing with the missus ;-).

If I buy the 80 I'll need to buy a tripod and if I buy the Starblast I'll
need
to figure out a platform for setup since most of our viewing will be in the
field (camping, parks, beach). I'm assuming the DOB base of the blast either
is or can be tapped for a tripod.

Mounts. Should I buy an EQ or an altaz if I go with the 80? How long does
an
EQ take to set up and calibrate? I'm pretty certain the altaz is point and
shoot.

Thanks for the feedback, this is a great group.

Marc


Marc - I'd recommend the alt/az as a start. Definitely more
convenient for the terrestrial viewing you're also interested in, and
the learning curve for "his Lordship" won't be nearly as steep or
potentially frustrating.

Dusty
--
"Nothing is faster than the speed of light.
To prove this to yourself, try opening the
refrigerator door before thelight comes on."

Refractors are OK if you have a lot of money to put into getting quality, like
Takahashi, AP, and other very reputable brands. Bushnell is currently a scope
of ill repute.
A good reflector is a far better value than a refractor, and the collimation is
not really THAT much of a pain once you are used to doing it. It is seldom
needed after the first time. The only person who deserves a refractor (50mm
with peep scope) is Shawn Grant.
Clear, Dark, Steady Skies!
(And considerate neighbors!!!)

I personally believe that the Starblast would be a good choice, but did you see
the 70mm refractor on the EQ mount? It is a light mount, but probably would be
a nice starter. Either one of these would be a nice starter. I suspect that
the 70mm would give better, but dimmer, images.
Clear, Dark, Steady Skies!
(And considerate neighbors!!!)

Forget Bushnell,
Gary Hand at Handsonoptics is in Damascus MD, about an hour from
Northern VA (I am in Alexandria). His store is just besides the
McDonalds on Rt 27. He is one of the best sources around. His website
is www.handsonoptics.com . He will try to make a sale you understand,
but he sells good stuff at a good price. I buy my stuff there. You won't
get screwed by Gary.
Tks
Tom Tolley
Alexandria VA.


Marc Wolfe wrote:
Disclaimer: I'm a newbie, not just to the group but to amateur
astronomy as well. I've got a good math/sci background and I've done
a great deal of research both in the group and elsewhere so I *think*
I've got a basic grasp of what's involved.

Background: I'm getting into this because my 6 year old son is
incredibly into astronomy and has been for the past 8-10 months. OK,
I'm intrigued as well.

We've bought introductory books with lots of pictures but a lot of
text as well, I'd estimate the reading level level at 4th or 5th grade
- I or my wife do most, but not all of the reading. Now my son wants
to see the planets and stars IRL.

So here are a couple of issues I'm facing in purchasing his first
telescope.

1: Refractor vs. reflector - I'm pretty much down with a refractor to
start, nothing too expensive in case he outgrows his interest. I'm
leaning towards the refractor because: it can also be used as a
terrestrial; they don't require periodic re-collimation; no cool down
time; seemingly more accessible to a kid who while smart still has the
patience of a kid.

I'm currently looking at a Bushnell 700 by 60mm model, 5MM and 20 MM
eyepieces. According to telescopes.com it's appropriate for deep
space and planetary viewing, whereas comparable 3.5" reflectors are
limited to planetary viewing.

2: Mounts. The Bushnell model comes with a yoke mount - there's also
one with an "easy track" mount. While I found a great deal of
comparative information about altazim and equatorial mounts (pros and
cons)I didn't find any information on the yoke or easy mounts.

3: Then there's this:
http://www.telescopes.com/products/B...Inch_5807.html.

Cons: A bit more expensive than the others models I've looked at and
no hope of using it for terrestrial viewing if his Lordship loses
interest in the skies. Cradle mount - we won't always be using this
where there's a nice flat elevated surface handy, like beaches.

Pros: Suitable for planetary and deep space viewing; very portable,
easy setup.

4: Lastly, I'm in the Northern Virginia area. Does anyone have
recommendations for a local telescope store with knowledgeable
salespeople?

Your comments will be gratefully appreciated.

Marc Wolfe