Budget quality terrestrial scope (I know, how boring)

[aphelion]

Hi all,

I know this may be a boring question, but I've been reading about telescopes for about 3 days now and need some human input. I'm wanting a telescope for beach and wildlife views - the house is about 400m away from the ocean with trees in between where koalas, parrots, kookaburras abound :)

I've looked into refractors, reflectors etc and understand the differences.. I take it a refractor is a good terrestrial scope and a bad celestial scope, and the reflector is a good celestial scope and bad terrestrial scope? The thing is, I come across so many bad reviews of the refractors I feel like maybe I shouldn't get one- the last thing I want is a flimsy thing with lots of chromatic distortion etc..

I guess what I'm asking is how stupid is it to consider a reflector for what will be an almost full-time terrestrial scope?

P.S. I may have become hooked on the celestial gazing just by reading all of your posts!!

Best,
Andrew.
:newbie:

[aphelion]

I should add that my budget would hopefully be under $200, unless I'm convinced that is false economy territory... and I'm more than willing to consider second hand equipment also, again unless it is not a good idea. :thumbsup:

[Jeff]

Best option may be to join the ASV (Astronomical Society of Victoria: http://www.asv.org.au/), enroll in the NAG (New Astronomers Group), and borrow one of their loan scopes for 3 months (normally Bintel/GSO 8" Dobsonians with several eyepieces). Outlay is a $60 bond, or which $50 is refunded when scope is returned in good condition. It's a great deal.

If your keen to jump right in a purchase straight away, the cheapest I would recommend is a 6" Dob with basic accessories for around $299 from:
- Bintel...good prices & service/advice (https://www.bintelshop.com.au/welcome.htm)
- or Andrews Comms...good prices (http://www.andrewscom.com.au/site-section-10.htm)

2nd hand is another option, but involves some slight risk and requires you to hunt/wait for the right opportunity to arise.

A better option (depending on your requirements, and if your pockets are deep enough) may be to go for an 8" Donsonian with accessories for around $429 new .... or cheaper if you can hunt/wait for 2nd hand.

Here's a link to a great thread/guide by Brian Nolan (Miaplacidus (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/member.php?u=354)) titled "General Principles for Choosing your first Telescope".
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/index.php?id=63,260,0,0,1,0

Cheers.

[madtuna]

hi and welcome Aphelion!

Seeing as you are thinking of predominantly terrestial... have you concidered a good pair of Binoculars? It's amazing what you can see astronomically with binos aswell.

[erick]

Hi Aphelion. Your budget will be a challenge. Even with binoculars, if you want more than about 8x to 10x magnification, you'll need some way to hold them steady as well - probably a tripod is best, but putting them on a small bean bag on a railing might be a cheap way.

Remember, a reflecting telescope for terrestrial means an upside down image. You can get inverting adapters to bring it back to something like the right way, but that's extra expense and they will probably narrow your field of view.

[MikeyB]

Hi, Andrew -welcome to IIS. There's nothing boring about sea views with native wildlife, Mate - half your luck!

What you want is called a "spotting scope" - most are refractors, but Maksutov-Cassegrain types are available too. The main desirable feature is that they show things with the correct orientation, like binoculars (such niceties don't matter to astronomers!), so birdwatchers use them a lot. Prices range from very cheap (<$200), to very expensive ($2,000+). A tripod is essential for stable viewing of course.

You could try looking down the bottom of the Celestron section of Andrews Communications - they have several in your price range , and they also have other brands of spotters too:

Andrews Communications (http://www.andrewscom.com.au/site-section-10.htm)

Right side up and right way around viewing is possible with suitable astro scopes (refractor and Mak-Cas types), but requires the use of special eyepieces or diagonals, so in your price range, a spotter is the answer if you want more magnification than binoculars.

[Kokatha man]

Excuse me fellas but Andrew is asking about a scope for terrestial use! Now, perhaps he is vaguely interested in astronomy or perhaps he's not; but let's respect his basic intellect and provide him with an answer to his question!

Andrew, the suggestion re binoculars is a good one (and also assuages the emotions of my fellow AA's in this thread, whose subconscious tendencies to convert everyone to our cause gets the better of them!) Quite reasonable binoculars can be purchased for around that price (check out Andrews Communications website for starters) and will, as someone said, double for night sky delights viewing if the appropriate pair are chosen. As well as optics, issues such as weight are relevant in choosing a pair.

Secondly no - your assumption that refractors are bad for astronomy but ........etc....etc is completely wrong: however, because of their optical system (where the viewer points at an object and looks at it via the other end) they are much more "user-friendly" as terrestial scopes. If it is an astronomical job, it will still require a "imaging corrector " device in the optical train (easily acquired) but of course you will be able to find many refractors that are made specifically for terrestial viewing ("spotting scopes" etc.)

"Avoid the supermarket types" is a good maxim, but for around $200 some very reasonable terrestial/spotting scopes can be purchased - most of these will have an objective (main, the front one) lens of 50-70mm diameter and a magnification (power) of between 10x and 30x.
These come with either a short or full-length tripod with a simple alt/azimuth mount and would be quite adequate for just about all your needs. I note that Andrews have a couple in that price range - a Skywatcher 70mm and 80mm achromatics primarily for astronomy (no mention of a correct image prism but they list them for $29 extra) or a Long Perng spotting scope (terrestial) with 60mm objective lens and angled eyepiece (which makes the viewing position more comfortable) that are all under or within your price parameters.

Cheers, Darryl.

[dannat]

I agree with Daryl, lOng perng make William optics telescopes which are of good quality - don't think you would go wrong with the $149 spot scope, you could point it at the stars if need be, probably would not see a great deal.

I had the andrews 70mm mak/Cass scope, which I think was a bit of a bargain at $99, it sat on any photo tripod and gave crisp terrestrial views, with the optional eyepece I could see the rings of saturn, and on a really good night some color detail on jupiter (as well as making out the galilean moons)

You also wouldn't go wrong with a good set of binos - 10x50 is probably the standard choice, I have some 7x50's which are great either terrestrial/astronomical viewing

[aphelion]

Wow I didn't dream of getting such great advice!

Jeff, I know it may not be the best idea, but I'm going to buy a scope blind rather than borrow one (it's a bit difficult to get too and from the holiday house with equipment).

Kokatha man, Erik, MikeyB, madtuna, dannat, thanks so much for the comments..

My priority is definitely terrestrial - but the good or bad news is that it is really dark at night (very little light pollution) so an ideal star-gazing situation. I've been reading Brian Nolan's guide - I figure I can get something that will be barely acceptable for celestial viewing - and work on the conceptual side of the hobby anyway - see if the bug sticks :)

I think the binoculars are a great idea - except personally I can't use them as I have monocular vision - basically my brain can't stitch the two images together correctly so I end up feeling a bit sick..

The spotting scope idea is great, and I've also found a few skywatcher refractors that might be okay (if they are decent quality).

I've had a look at the sites and models recommended and they are great. Here are a few contenders:

Skywatcher SWAT80: https://www.bintelshop.com.au/Product.aspx?ID=7727 - $295 clearance

http://www.andrewscom.com.au/site-section-10.htm
Skywatcher 70 x 500 AZ3 - $199
Skywatcher 70 x 900 EQ1 - $199

or the long perng spotting scope at $149

There is also this astromaster on ebay: http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=300216180325&ssPageName=ADME:X:AAQ:AU:1123

I look forward to hearing your advice!

[Kokatha man]

Andrew, the Skywatcher SWAT80 would be a great scope for you if your budget stretches to $300: though not to say that other scopes are there around that price range that may be more suited to your needs/wishes.

I have a Skywatcher refractor amongst my scope collection and definitely believe they have good optics - my SW 150mm f8 is a gem to me! This SWAT80 has a nice size objective lens for your primary needs; is a correct image job with the more ergonomic 45 degrees eyepiece viewing position, and with a finder and tracking/go to has extra bells and whistles that can just function as a motorized "direction pointer" for you or for its more sophisticated capabilities. Definitely a scope that would satisfy your primary needs and double as a fine little intro scope for night skies! (I acquired a secondhand go to refractor (80mm) for my grandson - I really was amazed at what could be seen in the night sky with it: cloud bands and moons of Jupiter, Saturn's rings, nebulae and star clusters, double stars etc that far exceeded my (prior) presumptious expectations!)

Of course there are a number of other scopes that could equally compete for your needs and dollars, it is best to look around and canvass as much opinion as you can, but this is certainly one scope to consider.

ps all achromat critics: not only am I able to discern chromatic aberration with the best of you, but these units suffer very little from CA, despite some of the arrant nonsense sprouted by people wishing to elevate their own sense of expertise etc!

From your considerations Andrew, CA (chromatic aberration) is caused by differing wavelengths of light bein diffracted (bent to focus) at separate positions, sometimes resulting in colour-fringing on very bright objects (eg moon, Venus, Jupiter etc.) For terrestial useage this problem almost/never has any consequence; but on the scope's mentioned, it is so neglible at night, even on the moon, that it is still of no consequence!

Cheers, Darryl.

[dannat]

I would avoid the ebay scope - you don't know what you are getting & it could be junk.

THe skywatcher & long perng would be good - keep in mind which one will give you an upright & correctly oriented image - the spotting scope should, with some of the telescopes you would need to purchase a different diagonal (or correct image) one.

Also bear in mind the EQ mount takes longer to setup as it is made for star tracking, and is harder to orient than the Alt/Az (which is basic up/down & left/right movement).

One last thing - your location says Melb - but you say it is really dark at night, are you pulling our leg?:poke:

[janoskiss]

Short tube achromats (like the 80mm f/5) are not great for terrestrial IME. A lot of chromatic aberration even at low powers. Not impressive. For under $300 you can land a 4" Mak second hand. I used to have the 102mm skywatcher and that was a great little terrestrial scope. Handles high powers very well - great bird/nature watching scope. Far better than cheap refractors. For mounting it you can get away with a decent camera tripod, but eventually you might want something a bit more refined like a Vixen Porta or similar especially for astro use.

[aphelion]

There seems to be a rather generous discount on this model of spotting scope - perhaps I should get this for my koala spotting while I ponder a reflector or dobsonion?

http://www.yorkoptical.com.au/ProductMenus/SpottingScopes/tabid/64/CategoryID/150/List/1/catpagesize/10/Level/a/ProductID/660/Default.aspx?SortField=UnitCost%2cP roductName

As for my dark location - it is on the great ocean road between lorne and apollo bay - there are a few street lights and other house lights - but a short drive into the rain forest (or a short boat ride into the ocean ;)) and it is scarily dark- the sky is amazing. I would suggest it as a place for a group excursion except I bet you all know the best places in vic...

[aphelion]

Also Kokatha man, thanks for all the advice on the swat80 - do you think I would need the motor? I also noted that the andrewscom special on the Skywatcher 70 x 900 EQ1 comes with a motor- so that could be a good one!

Sorry to be such a newbie, but would the EQ mount be horrible for terrestrial use?

[dannat]

I am not keen on qn EQ mount for terrestrial; the scope can get in to many funky positions.

I have had a quick look thru that skywatcher & was not that impressed, I think you would need another tripod.

The andrews mak/cass scope for $99 is the same one selling at Aust Geogrpahic stores, it has a long focal length - have a look thru it if possible, it is 70mm, very compact & sits on any photo tripod

I would still go with the long perng 60mm, that would be my personal preference (but these things vary from one person to another)

The motor is usually used to keep an object in the field of view- eg a star I think it would be a hinderence for daytime viewing, as it goes the speed the stars track across the sky. Mostly motors are for taking pics of stars,

[aphelion]

thanks daniel, seems the az3 mount is the one for me.. I couldn't find the Andrew's mak scope for $99- but I'll have a look at Aust Geographic on the weekend... getting closer I think. Re the spotting scope I'm not sure it would be all that easy to operate on a tiny table-top tripod - wouldn't a floorstanding tripod be easier for that?

Janoskiss: I like the idea of a 4" mak - but can only find the skywatcher MAK90EQ1 for $399- is it a good buy?

Is this a 4" mak?: http://www.amazon.com/Orion-Apex-90mm-Maksutov-Cassegrain-Telescope/dp/B0000XMRQ2/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1208493428&sr=8-2
it looks nice - could probably have that delivered to Australia for about $300 - plus tripod

Is there a good place to look for second hand scopes of this kind? ebay and the trading post are limited and flooded with cheap new stuff..

again - sorry if this is boring - at the moment I'm constantly feeling like I'm stupid and in over my head.. maybe I should keep researching before posting again.

[janoskiss]

Re the Mak, look for a 102mm (ie 4") skywatcher second hand. They are out there. You could post a wanted ad in Icetrade. They are threaded for standard camera tripod, which is great for terrestrial viewing. Never mind about the EQ mount, just buy the optical tube only and stick it on a camera tripod. It's a very compact scope - backpackable (I've taken it bushwalking). 90mm I guess would be okay too for terrestrial but the 102mm will at least show you a bit more of the heavens. Saturn is particularly cute through that scope with Cassini nicely resolved. ;) You can only just pick up moons casting shadows on Jupiter - that seems to be about the limit of it's resolution.

[janoskiss]

ps. note that Skywatcher maks are also sold under various other brand names eg Orion, Optex

[aphelion]

Thanks, I've changed my wanted ad a bit to reflect that :) Thanks so much, I feel I've avoided a whole lot of cheaper false economy territory. I hope someone sees the ad - seems to be a very popular forum so I'm in the right place. Great forum by the way - makes you even prouder to be Australian.. I guess we have great skies here.

P.S. with the york optical special discount coupon i can get the 90mm with mount for $340.. but only have until sunday to get that deal!

[Screwdriverone]

Hi Andrew,

Check out my opinions of a beginner Terrestrial scope here (http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=29775) for around $300. The one in question I recommend is the Skywatcher 90x900mm AZ3 scope for $329. - Ooops, Andrews have done it again and made it $299. Bargain!

In fact, Bintel (https://www.bintelshop.com.au/Product.aspx?ID=7727) have a SWAT 80 Mak Cas auto tracking scope or $295, this is almost, if not even better value than the refractor.

Alt Azimuth mounted refractors are probably the way to go as they are great for terrestrial and can be used for celestial work too!

If you can stretch a few birthdays and Christmas presents into one and can get around $465, then this Ioptron 80mm refractor WITH a goto mount (http://www.sirius-optics.com.au/ioptron_refractor.htm)is the beez neez for both Terrestrial and Celestial viewing and has the benefit of GOTO to any object in its database for under $500 bucks!


Chris

[aphelion]

Thanks Chris,

The 90x900 sounds nice! That might just be within my price range too. Though I must say, I've been pretty taken by the Maksutov-Cassegrain spotting scope idea. Compact, light, and good value..

Would a 90mm aperture, 1200mm focal length spotting scope like http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-52265-Maksutov-Spotting-Scope/dp/B0002862UM/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1208756877&sr=8-1
be equivalent to the 90mm, 900mm focal length of the skywatcher, but with even more zoom? Sorry for being a bit naive about it all... Also I'm just starting to understand eyepieces; the celestron has a 32mm eyepiece, giving a 37.5x magnification. The skywatcher comes with an S10 and an S25 - giving 90x and 45x magnification, respectively.. If I put a 10mm on the celestron, I would get 120x magnification? But I lose my field of view..?

Also, I assume the 90mm refractor would give me more clarity than the 90mm Maksutov, due to it having fewer mirrors... But then I can't take it with me hiking as easily..

[aphelion]

Did you say that the SWAT80 is a Maksutov Cassegrain?? I thought it was a refractor? That could be almost perfect for me then! But can I detach it to take it outside easily? Thanks soooo much for all the help. Although only 80mm aperture... :(

[Terry B]

This is not necesarily true. The Mak has a mirror and is essentially not subject to chromatic aberation (purple fringeing around bright objects) that cheaper refractors will have but can have slightly less contrast than a similar size refractor due to the central obstruction in the mak design.

[dannat]

Aphelion, yes the swat 80 is a short focal length refractor.I am not a big fan of it's tripod - the scope doesn't detach easily & the side mounting isn't very sturdy, it would not be my choice

Andrews have the celestron 90mm you are looking at for 465 and the smaller 65mm mak/cass for $160 - which is not bad seeing as though it is waterproof. I think the magnification with included ep is 30-70, and it mounts on standard phto tripod, or you can buy one of the cheap mimi tripods.

In theory a premium refractor would give a better look, but the refractor you are looking at wouldn;t be much better in my opinion. I had a small mak/ass and I could not fault it's optics, even though it was less expensive
daniel

[aphelion]

Hi dannat,

Thanks, didn't think the SWAT80 was a maksutov-cassegrain... a 90-102mm mak is my object of desire.. Can't go to $465 so will have to hang out for a second hand one. I've done a search in the IIS trade pages and it seems they come up every once in a while..

[janoskiss]

If you have no luck getting second hand, contact shops/dealers and ask for best price on a 90mm SW Mak (OTA only, no mount) - you should be able to get one for < $300. For terrestrial use besides standard eyepieces, you'll want an erecting eyepiece/diagonal also. Few dealers I've had good experiences with (no affiliation): Telescopes and Astronomy, Myastroshop, Bintel, AOE, Telescope Shed.

[aphelion]

Thanks janoskiss - I've already begun :) but I have to say I don't think the customer service so far has been anywhere near as good as the advice on this forum - and you are all doing it out of the goodness of your hearts!! it's a sad world. I saw the york optical 20% sign which ran until the 20/4/08 so rang friday, the guy said he didn't know the SW MAK90, even though it's listed on his page, said he would ring back and still hasn't. Andrews didn't know if they had it in stock, if they could sell it OTA and how much cheaper it would be, and said to call back later because they're busy... anyway they have great prices and free delivery on skywatcher so I'm definitely calling back. The shops with the lowest margins always have basic customer service and I know I'm small-fry for these shops but if I really get into it one day I might buy a $10k meade or something.. :P

[aphelion]

New update- bintel, who were up for a chat and very helpful - said the mak is not a design they like to sell, and suggested the sw708 for $379 - but andrews have this model massively discounted at $149 delivered... am I mad not to grab it?

By the way, probably still going for the mak for it's massive range and tiny footprint...i figure for land use it will be okay and it may complement any future celestial scope.. would that be fair? sorry for such a long saga..

Also, I have a Canon 20D, and am wondering how much it would cost to buy a T-ring and a T-mount - is the 'T-ring adaptor' at andrews for $29 all I need? thanks again again!

[janoskiss]

70mm f/7 achromat on an AZ3 for $149 is a steal. It will probably do a good job at what you wanted it for. If it does not come with a correct image diagonal for terrestrial viewing you'll want to get one of these too (so things don't appear upside down).

[aphelion]

I know! I think I should get it while it lasts...there's also a 70mm x 700mm on an az2... not sure of the difference, apart from better zoom on the latter.

the news back from andrews is $230 for the 90mm mak OTA... decisions decisions..

the 70mm x 500mm comes with an erecting eyepiece and tripod, the mak would be $230 + $30 for the erecting eyepiece + $xx for the tripod, maybe a solid vintage camera tripod for $50 = $310... just doable, more than I would like, but quite taken with the 1200mm focal length, 90mm aperture, so wider field of view, and ability to connect my Canon 20D maybe later on..

edit: the difference is the focal ratio? the f/stop.. the mak-cass is 13.7, while the 500mm refractor is f7... I only know about camera lenses, but the f7 would be a lot better at night/in low light? what about during the day, would an f7 be too bright? do you get sunglasses for your telescope?

[janoskiss]

First off: just stay away from the AZ2 mounted scope. AZ3 is not a perfect mount but infinitely better than the AZ2 and better than a camera tripod $50 or so will buy you.

Now, you are beginning to over analyse ;) Secondly: you cannot have a <$300 scope that does everything - i.e. terrestrial scope, astronomical scope, camera lens.

If you know about camera lenses, the 90mm Mak on a camera is like a 1200mm f/14 lens, i.e. a big long telephoto lens that is very very slow (f/14) - too slow to be useful in many (most?) practical situations. You are better off getting a real camera lens IMO.

For visual, the Mak will give you higher powers (not suffering from chromatic aberration and having more aperture), while the refractor will give you wider true field of view (with shorter focal length). No f/7 is not too fast for visual. You might want to find out if the Mak is a Skywatcher or Saxon. I know the SW Maks are good scopes but I'm not sure about the Saxons..

Given your budget and initially stated requirements the f/7 70mm achromat on AZ3 best fits the bill IMO.

[aphelion]

Done! I still covet the mak, but I will soon own a 70x500 refractor, which perhaps will end up being (a half acceptable?) finder scope ;) I figure a $150 refractor plus a $300 2nd hand dob would be a decent beginner combo, for both land and sky... I can't wait to get the refractor now, and point it at the moon!

Thanks to all for putting up with my frantic decision-making... I'm going to leave up my wanted ad for a 4" mak just in case, and look out for other 2nd hand equipment..

[janoskiss]

Andrew, have you got your new scope yet? How do you like it?

[philj6970]

I have a Celestron C90 Maksutov.
Very impressed with it when using it as a spotting scope, with the supplied 32mm eyepiece. You wont enjoy this with a cheap tripod though, (I have tried it on my neighbours Manfrotto tripod, sheer luxury but nearly $400 secondhand!) and as soon as I put my Pentax *ist DL2 DSLR on it, there is not enough light gathering ability even in broad daylight on a sunny day. Its ok for looking at the moon and thats about the only object in the sky that I can get a photo of without longer exposures.

I am in the lucky position of being able to afford a new mount and a new scope at the same time, so my C90 will be ganging up with a EQ6 Pro Synscan and a SW 100ED Pro. With a mount like that I *may* be able to get some night time action from the C90.

Phil.