Hi from a newbie from Melbourne

[Luca.C]

Hi,

my name is Luca and I am from Melbourne.

I've been interested in astronomy for a very long time, and now it's time to finally get a telescope, though I am still quite confused.

Good news is that, given that this is my wife's bday present for my 40th, the budget could reach approx $1,500.

As of the choice of the telescope, I was hoping to get some
advices from you guys.

First of all, the idea is to start with basic sky watching with a focus on deep sky (galaxies and nebulae) and later on upgrade parts of the telescope for astrophotography. So first feature would be upgradeabilty.

Second feature is transportability. I live in an apartment and having a big telescope would be an issue. Also I want to keep it away from my kids reach. Plus the area where I live has lots od light pollution so I assume I will have to travel in dark areas.

In terms of set up of the telescope, on one side I think I would be patient enough to align it, but on the other side I am concerned about getting frustrated if this becomes challenging. I really don't want to end up putting the telescope in a store!

Thanks for any suggestion!

[sil]

welcome to the nuthouse.

$1,500 will get you an ok beginners scope, but upgradeability is not a feature telescopes have. It can be done of course, but its not as simple as buy "this the scope" plus "this upgrade package" and your first criteria is already at odds with itself and can kill your use of a telescope for any purpose.

for astrophotography you really want an Equatorial mount (EQ) but its poor for visual use, for visual you want an Altitude-Azimuth mount (AltAz) but its poor for photography. Most people have both for the appropriate usage.

What people call a "telescope" really consists of three main parts: the Optical Tube Assembly (OTA, th telescope tube itself), a Mount (this is the mechanism that connects the OTA to the tripod and can offer motorised movement for tracking), the base (tripod, box, or post that provides a firm solid foundation to hold the mount and OTA). These all play their part and can all be replaced later on but on a budget if you make a poor initial purchase (which many do, going for the setup that "looks impressive").

You can use ANY telescope in light polluted skies but will gain improvement from a dark site. Its the eyepieces that determine the quality of the view and a single good eyepiece can cost $1,500 itself for this reason. Cheap eyepieces and particular the ones supplied when you buy a telescope will be poor and often a reason for putting people off using their telescope because they are uncomfortable to use.

All this stuff has been said and resaid many times. But if you want to make a good decision you need to experience some telescopes and eyepieces, get yourself to an astronomy club outing where you can chat to other owners, have a look through various eyepieces and see for yourself if its what you want. Number one, astrophotos do not show what these things look like through an eyepiece, galaxies and nebula are not bright and colourful, you'll be seeing in greyscale with your eyes. Planets won't fill the eyepiece view either but they are impressive to see for yourself even as a small dot.

Failing that just buy a dobsonian. Great for beginners and simple to use, photography difficult but not impossible. Or maybe a SCT on Alt Az mount (goto ideal, and Wedge available as option to help photography.)Maybe Celestron 5SE (has built in wedge, GOTO, and portable). Seriously you're asking what many people do "I want a scope that does everything and I've got peanuts to pay". The 5se is a great allrounder but slow so will struggle
with galaxies and other "faint fuzzies" while a dobsonian is great for that sort of thing (even in light pollution) but poor if you're serious about astrophotography. Its why there are so many confusing options, each type has its strengths and weaknesses, technically they can all do visual plus astrophotography but none are perfect for both at any price.

[Malcolm]

An 8" GOTO dobsonian is probably close to your budget and later on you could look for an astro video camera, such as the IMX224 or the Revolution Imager. With that you can take short vids up to 30 secs exposure (before field rotation sets in) and stack to a single image.
An 8" or 10" dob can fit across the backseat of a car, the base needs a good bit of boot space, better if you have an RV. The best scope is the one you will use the most, that's portability, set up time, weight and so on.
Look at www.andrewscom.com.au website, there's usually a sale on.
Go to a meet up if you can find one in your area. Good luck. :-)

[gaseous]

As Sil and Malcolm alluded to, no one telescope is ever going to be all things to all people. A $1500 budget, while it doesn't seem insignificant for a first scope, probably won't stretch far at all into the astrophotography side of things, as this can be a hellishly expensive branch of amateur astronomy. If your primary concern is focusing on DSOs and learning the sky, then aperture is your friend and a dobsonian is probably the best value for money in this area, particularly if you can get to a dark site. However you do live in an apartment, and unless you have a lift I'd possibly have reservations about a dob, as lugging one up and down stairs would be asking for trouble on several fronts (damaging the scope, damaging your back, etc).

[m11]

Hi Luca,

Welcome to an exciting hobby!

Sil, Malcolm and Patrick have provided excellent advice and recommendations in regards starting off.

I am still new into Astronomy but I an share my experiences starting off. I found that visual Astronomy is a better option for me starting off. Astrophotography can be frustrating to pick up without a decent understanding of the sky and scopes/guiding/alignment and the complications with additional cabling/power on top. I generally have limited time with family and work commitments - Astrophotography takes a lot of time to get right.

$1500 is a decent budget for a visual scope and you should be able to get 1-2 good eyepieces as well. Starting off you need to determine whether you want a manual or goto system. Starting off I found a goto system helped a lot but you need to learn some bright stars to align.

If I had to start off again, I would get a 8inch goto dob as the ideal compromise for portability and ease of use. Any 10inch scope SCT or Dob I have found starts getting heavy to carry unless you get wheels or a trolley.

Another thing is if the scope can be broken down and transported and if you have a partner in crime to observe with you :). Having another person helps and its more fun to share the experience.

I have used my dob to do basic EAA which uses software to stack and stack short sec exposures.

Hope this helps. :)

Mel

[Luca.C]

Thank you all for your very thorough advices, much appreciated! And thanks for helping me understanding the astronomy glossary!

When I say "upgradeable" I mean for instance that I could get an OTA on a not so expensive EQ tripod for the time being. If this hobby gets serious I would then spend more money to replace the tripod with an expensier one. And when I am ready for astrophotography (and have more money) get a motor drive.

But perhaps my knowledge on scopes is so limited that I may miss some other factors.

I've been thinking a lot of a 8 inch dob, and still am concerned about its size. I really don't want to keep it in the living room as a piece of furniture or targeted by the kids - unfortunately I am limited by living in an apartment.

My main purpose remains nocturnal sky watching, AP is really not a priority now.

What would be an alternative to a dob in order to contain sizes?

Many thanks again!

[Luca.C]

Thanks Mel,

the 8 inch dob with goto seems a pretty good solution, only concern is the size of the scope that is going to be stored somewhere in my apartment - likely to be the living room unless I store it at my parents place.

Would a collapsible dob help?

I think I need to take some time to join the local astro society and have a better idea of weight and sizes.

Cheers,

[Luca.C]

Thanks mate,

Yes, I've been looking at andrewscom website - i think I will end up buying from them though I haven't decided on the scope yet.

A 8 inch dob with goto it's a pretty attractive solution to me, though not sure sizewise.

What's your opinion on something like a Celestron 6SE compared to the above mentioned dob?
I am still not sure if the extra cost for the 6se is worthwhile.

Thanks

[m11]

Hi Luca,

I have the Celestron 6se and its a great scope. The ota is compact and the goto is pretty good. I find it a bit dim for deep sky observing but for planets and moon is pretty good. I picked my one second for a good price.

The funny thing is i find the 6se takes more space for me as i have it ready to go and setup with the tripod. The dob is pretty compact and i have it on its mount as well. The 6se will take more time to cool down outside as compared to the dob as well which maybe a factor if you are limited in viewing time outside. Most of the time i end using binos for a quick 5 min view of the sky :P

I can take a photo of both if you want a comparison if you want?

I guess you need to work what you see as value and what you would want to use more. The scope you are comfortable with and ok to move outside frequently is the best value :thumbsup:

A collapsible will help with portability and the weight of the scope. If you get a dob i recommend to get a collimation tool like a laser collimation tool. Pretty easy to do.
The funny thing I thought I would only get one scope in my lifetime. How wrong i was! Wait also until you see the eyepieces out there as well. I have found you never stop being on the lookup for the next upgrade :rofl:

[Malcolm]

I think your best bet is to go with the 8" collapsible GOTO SkyWatcher. You'll have enough to get a 2" GSO Barlow and a GSO 2" 32mm lens as well from the same site. The collapsible cools very quickly, having an open tube and is easy to carry. I owned one of these, not a GOTO though. Since then upgraded to a 10" solid OTA 10" GOTO. Aperture is king, and the dob is known as a light bucket. The first mod you do should be fitting leveling feet, buy these at Bunnings, and a small spirit level, so you can get the base level which is important for GOTO tracking. I fitted three small blocks and then the adjustable feet. If I don't have power on-site I use one of those jumper packs from Autobarn that has a cig lighter output on it. One advantage of a collapsible is that if you cannot achieve forward focus, you can always lower the struts 30mm or so to get that sweet spot of focus. You'll probably need some sort of adjustable height chair to save your back as well. The whole thing is a bit of a learning curve, but don't be dissuaded by it, it's never too late to learn something new. Download Stellarium, and if you have an Android phone, drop me a pm. And when the scope is delivered, it'll be cloudy or pissing down rain for sure. LOL! :-)

[gaseous]

Luca,

I've got both the collapsible 8" goto and 16" goto skywatcher scopes, and the 8" is reasonably easy to move. Without too much effort I can pick it up by the handles in one piece and moved 20m or so to the backyard. If you were taking it down stairs the OTA can be easily taken off in about 10 seconds, and making two trips should be easy enough for someone in good health. The base is about 550mm across so a decent wardrobe should be deep enough to keep little fingers off it, and collapsed it's maybe 1m high. You should be able to score an 8" goto for around the $1500 mark, and while the eyepieces aren't brilliant, they should be sufficient to get you started. If you go through Andrews, their GSO superview eyepieces for around $90 are good value too.

[m11]

Celestron 6se

[m11]

8 inch dob size. A goto 8inch will be heavier with the motors.

[pfitzgerald]

Hi Luca (and welcome to IIS)
Before buying any gear might I suggest that you consider joining the Astronomical Society of Victoria. As well as holding Star Parties - where you would have the opportunity to look at and through a variety of different telescopes - with owners willing to share their knowledge with you - there is also the opportunity to hire, for a very reasonable fee, a Dobsonian type scope which you can then test drive to see if it meets your needs. Just a thought...
Kind regards.
Paul

[Lognic04]

Just to let you know, although it seems like it you CANT do any astrophotography with the 6se, because it is alt-az (tracks the stars the wrong way for astrophotography!), and the fact that is it very slow (f/10) makes it very difficult even on an EQ mount, so in my opinion steer clear!

[m11]

Hi Luca,

One question I forgot to ask is if you have had experience with looking through a scope?


Mel

[xelasnave]

I have been looking at an 8 inch on a decent equatorial mount on Andrews Communication site at $1700.
That would be my choice.
It listed as an astro imaging package.
Add a DSLR and you are away.

I believe one can get away without guiding if you are properly aligned and take short exposures..

In fact I may buy one myself.
But the main thing to remember is if viewing or doing photography (ignoring filters which help with photos) is that things won't be too flash in the city..

The main thing is a dark site and then even small binos are very useful.
I have a 12 inch and frankly I enjoy my 80mm binos more.
Also in a dark site a 6 inch works for me.

So I suggest the scope for $1700 or buy something smaller and cheaper...after a while it will either stay unused or you will have learnt more and know what you want...and that can cost $15000 and more.

Good luck...just do it before your eyes go on you.

Alex

[Nebulous]

:)

Hi Logan,

Why do you say that you can't do astrophotography with an Alt-Az mount?

Any point in the sky can be identified by coordinates along two axes, and keeping track of that is not a hard task for a computer. Surely the issue isn't just the type of mount it's the accuracy of the gearing and programming in that mount?

I can't see why a good quality alt-az tracking mount shouldn't be able to track a location accurately. If a mount can track one axis accurately then why not two? Presumably you would have to allow for the effect of field rotation but I'm guessing that might be possible to correct (realign) with the processing software, provided the exposures aren't too long? No? I guess it depends on how long the exposures are before things get blurry.

This is pure speculation on my part as I have only used a variety of alt-az mounts for basic non-tracking astrophotography so far, but others do seem to manage it. The guy in this video for instance:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekGg-xBIYng

Clearly he's done a huge amount of post processing, but he seems genuine enough. Is he too good to be true? :)

Cheers,

Chris

[xelasnave]

Chris
I think there is a problem called field rotation.

Alex

[xelasnave]

Many sites but here is one.

http://calgary.rasc.ca/field_rotation.htm

Alex

[Nebulous]

Thanks Alex, :) Yes, that's clearly a problem, and I had just edited my post to mention that, (before reading yours - believe it or not :) ) because I'd left it out originally ...doh... :)


But there's always a period of time before the effect of field rotation cuts in. I can take simple exposures on a tripod for up to 20secs without losing star shape. Once I use a scope the time drops dramatically, but I can still get clear shots. I'm imagining that I could possibly take a whole row of short shots, realign them to correct the rotation, and then stack them. But I may be way off the mark! I've never tried stacking, so I may have a completely wrong idea about what it can achieve.

There's a site that I have visited before which explains the field rotation issue very clearly. They say that it rules out "long exposure" photography, but it left me unclear as to how long is "long" :) I suppose it depends on the telescope. I guess I'm just going to have to try it out and see. :)

http://www.astronomyasylum.com/telescopemountstutorial.html

I'd like to know how the guy in that video did it though.

EDIT: He says "Programs used were, Deepskystacker to stack the images & StarTools to process the images. Because of field rotation I am limited to around 60s depending on position of DSO. The mount is not modified in any way."

60 secs sounds like an age to me. Is his location so much more favourable than mine as far as the general effects of field rotation go? I know that it makes a big difference how far out from the centre of rotation an object is... but 60 seconds sounds like a long time. I guess I'll just have to give it a go... :)

[xelasnave]

I have not tried it but I bet if you used a static tripod with a high iso on your camera and stacked and cropped you would get a pleasing result result for many objects.
When I started with astro photos I was lucky to get 30 seconds problems so I would stack 50 or more ...not the best but that had to do until I got a decent mount.
And if I start again I will get say a canon 70d forget auto guide and expose for as long as possible and stack those ...
But like all things try what you think works even if something does not work you learn stuff.

Alex

[xelasnave]

And you can have fun doing the Moon and learn things...
Alex

[Nebulous]

So true. :thumbsup:

I've spent a lot of my life learning by trial and error and i still enjoy the method. :)

I need to find a site to read up about stacking, because I still really don't know what it achieves. I'm assuming that it can combine details that appeared in one frame but not another, but I don't know if you can end up with a brighter star from 20 dimmer shots, or whether you just get a nicer looking dim star?! :)

[xelasnave]

I am not up with what's available these days but there was a program registax? And deep sky stacker both free but get your hands on a stacker program and start learning...
I will have a look what's around but you could have a look...use google...its new but a wonderful thing;)
Alex

[xelasnave]

Try this.
http://deepskystacker.free.fr/english/index.html
Alex

[xelasnave]

I took photos of the Moon thru a six inch refractor by holding a 2 meg camera at the eye piece..came out pretty good. I was very happy. Played with it in a photo shop program..brightness contrast sharpness not knowing what I was doing but I was so proud of those early shots...back in 2003 I think.
We would use web cams and stack those...you would be surprised to see how 3000 captures of Saturn stacked looked.
Good luck.
Alex

[Nebulous]

Hi Luca,

Apologies for taking your thread in a somewhat different direction... so I hope that the digression threw up something of interest to you. :)

It's perfectly normal to be "quite confused", as you say - even after buying a telescope or two! As others have said above, there's no single perfect answer as the different mounts and telescope designs all have their pros and cons.

There's a good pair of articles in the stickies at the top of this forum - Article 1 and Article 2, which cover a lot of the aspects. Worth a read.

When I started (a whole 3 months ago!) by far the hardest thing for me was simply finding my way around the sky. When i looked through a telescope what I could see was a whole lot busier and more complex than what i could see with the naked eye, or on basic star charts. So I was glad that my first scope was a basic fairly low powered refractor. I still couldn't see, for instance, the whole of the Southern Cross, only a part of it at one time. But at least everything was "the right way up" so I was able to slowly get the hang of navigating through star hopping.

What scope you buy first depends a lot on your priorities. Mine was to learn more about the layout of the skies first, before diving into deep space object and/or astrophotography. So a basic refractor with a simple alt-az mount was a good choice - easy to carry about, easy to set up (open tripod and start viewing, no real setup to do) and easy to use. It even works with a camera attached. Then, as i got more familiar with navigating I bought a more powerful telescope.... and got lost all over again... :)

But it's a great hobby and whatever you choose will have more plusses than minusses.

Good luck with it.

Cheers.

Chris

[m11]

Hi Alex,

I have been using sharcap with a zwo camera in the focuser to stack images. I use this to take video of the planets and run the video through autostakkert and registax. The deep sky stuff like orion i stack the image and change the exposure and gain levels through sharpcap in realtime. Ita quite fun :rofl:

The guys on the forums have helped me heaps on the eaa stuff.


http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=150472

Jupiter attached using sharcap and a goto dob.

Regards,

Mel

[xelasnave]

Hi Mel
Great work with Jupiter better than anything I ever did.
We are very fortunate that Mike started this site and that so many folk take the time to help folk.

Alex

[Nebulous]

+1 :thumbsup:

I've been on a lot of different forums over the years, for a variety of hobbies and topics, and this one is head and shoulders over the pack. Unlike many forums, even the arguments seem to be conducted in a respectful manner. :)

Does astronomy attract a more thoughtful and type of person than some other hobbies, or what? Perhaps we're all just slightly mad in a similar way, but I can only say that I've been very impressed by the friendly helpful atmosphere here. :)

[m11]

Thanks for that. I am still a newbie and still learning - lots of fun and frustration at the same time :D

Totally agree that this site ia a great resource and a credit to Mike.

Thanks,

Mel

[m11]

Hi Nebulous,

Couldnt agree more :thumbsup:

Mel

[Lognic04]

Alex, all stacking does in a deep sky sense is reduce noise, a common misconception is that it makes the image brighter/more details, but in the end a 60 second shot if always a 60 second shot, even after stacking. It is really hard in my opinion to bring any faint detail out with 60 second subs, maybe impossible.

[sil]

Not impossible but certainly not for novices. You really need to start thinking in terms of signal to noise ratio with astrophotography.

Signal is the information in the field of view you want to keep.

Noise is introduced information by the capture system that you dont want. Its very weak and not often seen but its always there.

For everyday photography the same applies but in that case the Signal just overwhelms the Noise that you rarely ever notice it.

In astrophotography the signal is often as weak as the noise so you have to amplify it a LOT to see it, but that also amplifies the noise too. Noise reduction only does what it says, it REDUCES noise, does not remove it. By stacking the noise gets averaged down deeper but its still there. What it gives you is more room to amplify the signal up to see it without noise becoming too dominant.

It this that gives people the misconception stacking makes brighter images, it absolutely does not unless you used the wrong stacking method. Its not the point of it, it just gives you more room to adjust your image before noise ruins it.

[Luca.C]

Hi Mel,

No, not at all! This is my very first approach to space watching!

[Luca.C]

Hi Mel,

That photo of Jupiter is amazing!

Is that through your 8 inch skywatcher?

[Luca.C]

Hi Logan

Would a wedge resolve the field rotation issue?

Cheers,

[Luca.C]

Thanks Paul,

Attending some ASV sessions and seeking advices from them is a good idea given that I have never looked through a telescope before.

Are you a member?

Luca

[Luca.C]

Hi Chris,

Thanks for your welcome and please no need to apologise for the (further) discussions you guys have been having...actually I've read them all, it's a great occasion to learn more!

As of the scope, I really don't want to rush things and make the wrong decision wasting money.

What is your second telescope?

[Lognic04]

Hi Luca, from what ive heard a wedge is just too finicky to use for astrophotography, and is just a pain to polar align. right now id choose a dob. you wont regret it! :) then you can move up to a proper AP rig later.

[m11]

Hi Luca,

Thanks :) Random trial and error with my 16inch dob. I generally use my 6se for deep sky stuff via stacking.

Mel

[m11]

No problems, I reckon its a fun and interesting period.

If you are interested, happy to do a viewing session when the weather is clear to go through some of the scopes and show some deep sky objects that are the bright objects that look good from surbubia.

Also the view through binoculars as some objects are nice and can be seen in binos easily.

Regards,

Mel

[Nebulous]

Hi Luca,

It's certainly a very good idea to gain as much information and understanding as you can before jumping in, but I don't think that there's such a thing as a perfect single starter choice. :)

You asked about my other telescope...


The second telescope is a 150x750mm SkWatcher Newtonian on an EQ3 mount. (see pic below) In other words it's a 6" diameter "light bucket" that has a big primary mirror at the bottom of the tube and a small secondary mirror which directs the image into an eyepiece. The eyepiece is an interchangeable lens which allows the user to change the effective magnification - within a certain range anyway. (Cost me $699 new). Currently I mostly use it to take pictures. The 'first' telescope - a small refractor - is mounted on top and I can use that (and a smaller finder scope) to work my way around a constellation, taking reference shots through the Newtonian as I go). But that's just one way to use it. For instance, I could put the camera on the top scope and an eyepiece on the Newt. They are both classed as F5 focal ratio (reasonably "quick") and are fine for basic photography. Or I could put the small refractor back on its original mount for light and easy transport and quick viewing.

The EQ3 mount is an "Equatorial" mount which means it has more complex geometry than the basic Alt-Az mount (which just goes up and down and left and right). To work properly it needs to be accurately aligned with the South Celestial pole. They're a splendid bit of kit but a pain to keep setting up for a beginner.

Edit : Snipped some surplus information..

The first telescope is an 80x400 Skywatcher refractor that cost about $300 new.

“Astrophotography” covers a very wide range of possibilities too. All of my telescopes can be used for beginner star photography, but they have different strengths and weaknesses. I enjoy taking wide field views of particular constellations (using just a camera on a tripod) and then aiming at specific areas through a scope. But I (currently anyway) have no interest in trying to get the sort of highly coloured close-up shots of deep space objects that you can find splendid examples of elsewhere on this forum. It’s enough for me to get simple pictures at much lower magnification, and my current equipment is plenty good enough for that.


Good luck with your choice.

Cheers,

Chris

The picture:

The small finder scope (top centre) gets me approximately in the right area. I can then explore and star hop using the refractor on the right. The Newtonian has a camera mounted in that photo, but a range of different powered eyepieces could go there instead. It only takes a few seconds to change them over. When in use, the screen on the back of the camera would be flipped out and there would also be a remote release cable attached. In the picture the EQ3 mount has been adjusted in such a way that it can be used in a similar way to an Alt-Az mount, and I don’t need to align it with the pole. The two scopes together cost about a thousand dollars.