first scope

[philipheaven (Philip)]

Hi barx1963 how do you find the ethos eyepieces. I hear some people say our eyes can't handle the extended FOV and therefore have to keep 'looking around.'

If that's the case doesn't 'looking around' in the eyepiece simply add to the sense of immersion?

I've got some Naglers on lay by. So excited!

[wobbygong (Charlie)]

Hi Aaron

I am hoping to upgrade from my venerable 80mm F15 Amasco refractor. And like you I have about 400 -500$ or so to spend on a new scope.

After reading a fair bit about this on the web it seems to me that the best value for money in terms of aperture comes with the Dob.

For $400 - 500 the best prices I have seen for 8" dobs are $449 at Andrews (Guan Sheng) and $445 at Telescopes and Astronomy (Saxon). As I understand it Bintel sells Guan Sheng but they're rebadged with a Bintel sticker, they also cost more than the Andrews ones.

I dont know whether GS or Saxon are better. I get the impression that there isn't a huge difference. But I have read good reports about the GS stuff. Especially as far as the budget conscious are concerned!

The 10" dobs were $599 at Andrews and $642 at T&A. The extra $150 -200 gets 2" more aperture... its tempting! Again, only going by what I have read - the downsides to a 10" are the hassles moving it around, the need for more frequent collimation and the fact that its F5 makes it 'need' better quality (pricey) eyepieces. Apparently you can get away with cheaper eps on the slower F6 8".

Anyway good luck!

[barx1963 (Malcolm)]

Phillip
I love my Ethos EPs. In a big scope they are the way to go. Yes I have heard about people saying the field is "too wide". Cannot understand that as my eyes produce wider fields and they have worked ok for 50 years!
I used Naglers a lot before going Ethoi and they are very nice.

With the EQ vs Dob issue. I can see what you are stating with the elegance but I still stand by my experience. I have been to lots of observing nights and can still count the number of visual observers using EQs on one hand. The EP position is a factor. On and EQ5 or heavier mount, rotating the tube was an option. With my EQ3 (which is the class of mount the OP is talking about) attempting to do that meant the mount would move. I would find an object, go to rotate and have to relocate it.
Add that to polar aligning, smaller aperture for money etc etc.

Wobbygong
The Saxons are a cheaper version of Skywatcher, both made by Synta. Yes the GSO and Bintel scopes are identical. The main diff as I understand is that Bintel actually check the scopes before hipping out while Andrews simply ship the box as it arrives from Taiwan.
Technically you get better flatter field with the more expensive EP in a faster f5 scope, but the different is minor. In my 12" I observed happily for ages with the Plossls that came with it.

Malcolm

[Tropo-Bob (Bob)]

Aaron,
I would recommend a 6"(150mm) Dob. It has an F8 focus ratio, which makes the image quality accross the field more pleasant to view(although expensive eyepieces can handle faster F ratios well) as well as the telescope being lighter and U having less to worry about with colimination.

I have owned 6 & 8 inch dobs, and I tended to use the 6 much more. When I used the 8, I was always disappointed that there did not seem to be the difference that I was expecting.

U can still take some basic photos of the moon with a dob, whereas I think that little more would be achieved in imaging with the 90mm refractor and its somewhat basic mount.

However, this advice is given on the assumption that you are fit. For people that have back problems or are older, dobs can be more difficult to use because of their lowness to the ground.

[The Mekon (John Briggs)]

The above advice from Tropo Bob is one of the most sensible posts I have seen here. A 6" f8 with its small secondary will produce excellent images - better most of the time than the 8" f6 will. My brother in law has an 8" f6 - it is representative of its type, but with standard eyepieces the performance is poor. This improves with high end oculars, but I reckon a 6" would perform better in most conditions.

[philipheaven (Philip)]

I agree with the 6 inch dob. My first scope was a 10 inch dob and it was too big a scope for a first. Yes aperture is king but there is such thing as getting too big a scope too quick.

I also believe there is no point getting a dob unless you have a basic knowledge of how to get around the sky and locate objects.

[AG Hybrid (Adrian)]

8 Inch dob gets my vote. Wish I started with an 8 inch dob instead of 6 Inch newt on an equatorial. Beginners astronomy would have been a lot more simple and frankly fun. I seriously disagree with starting with a equatorial like an eq5 unless Astrophotography is on the cards in the near future.

An 8 inch dob is not difficult to move around, unless your bound to a wheel chair or crutches or your feeble and arthritic.

[mental4astro (Alexander)]

What an extraordinary statement to make, Phillip. You really believe it is pointless?

For thirty years I've been looking through scopes. The first 20 of which I only used alt az/dob mounts and charts. What this taught me was how to use a scope, how to find any target, and most importantly how to see. None of which a go-to system will do for you. Not one. I've had go-to systems too, and in the end I ditched them as they were only a hinderance, not an advance for me.

You may fool yourself that you are learning with a go-to. But you're missing out on the true training that our mind gets when put upto a task it needs to work out for itself. It is those fine motor skills and observation techniques that a go-to system will never do for you. The end result is you miss out on a whole lot more than you could. To profess otherwise shows what you've missed out on.

The greatest service you can do to someone starting out in astronomy is to guide them into the methods that will teaching them the most at the start. Sure it can be a pain in the neck, but the skills that are pickup up will allow them to make better use of an automated system, and allow them to identify and solve problems. To ask what problems again shows what you've missed out on.

6", 8", 10", 12"... ??? Aaron, you originally mentioned interest in an 8" scope. This shows you've had some consideration on what to get. I think an 8" is a great first scope. Is it too large? No, but then I don't know your situation.

I think you're on the right path scope wise. But before you lay your money down, if you only follow one thing written in your thread, it's to get yourself to a star party or astro club and see a range of different scopes for yourself. Only then will you be best able to gauge what would best suit you. You'll see what a push-pull offers and a go-to system. How large they are, and how complex they are to set up. If you then decide on a 16" Meade SCT with all the bells and whistles and that makes you coffee too, then that is great, as it is an informed decision. If you decide on your original 8" dob, great too as again it is an informed decision. A good retailer is a good place to start too. But just be aware that the scopes there are already set up and all look reeeaaaalllll good in a showroom. An in-the-field experience is even better.

Mental.

[baileys2611 (Simon Bailey)]

I vote for the journey rather than the end.

In other words - what's the reason to get a scope? Is it because you are interested in astronomy or is it for a specific reason up-front.

I like the idea of getting experience and being able to exchange 'war stories' about nudging my first dob every 10 seconds because I was using a 4 degree eyepiece and learning not to do that if I wanted to actually keep an opject in FOV longer than 10 second...

Some frustration involved, yes, but well worth the understanding I got about eyepieces and how they work. I was a complete new starter with my first dob, now I'm using an SCT on a paramount MX and automating everything. Later I might do what Alex is doing & get into sketching using eyepiece viewing.

Different objectives...so to speak.

[philipheaven (Philip)]

Hi Alexander,
I think it is pointless getting a dob (or any other telescope for that matter) without a basic understanding of how to locate objects within the sky. Going from zero understanding of astronomy to an 8 inch dob (or 10,12,16 whatever) is too quick a move. I would recommend learning some of the basic constellations first, major bright stars etc, with the naked eye or binoculars. I don't think that's an outrageous comment to make.

As for 'go-to' telescopes, I would totally not recommend one of those for a beginner. Like you said, it takes away all of those techniques that are so important for amateur astronomy.

[mental4astro (Alexander)]

I now understand where you are coming from, Phillip.

Yet, I still disagree with you (well half do)! I do think a dob is a great way to learn, and by using the very methods you stated. But, yes, binos are fantastic tools. I always pack mine regardless of what scope I'm packing. And I still use a planisphere too, , if only now jus to plan future sketching targets.

But, come to think of it, thirty years ago when I started in astro, I didn't have a scope, only my opera glasses binos and the planisphere I cut out from my old How And Why book on the stars... Hmmm, looks like you may have reopened my eyes with your last post!

[philipheaven (Philip)]

I can see I didn't make my prior point very clearly. Will try and be a clearer in the future. I'm a newbie to this site (and online forums in general).

Opera glass bins? That would be a sight to see.

I've just noticed your sketches. They are brilliant. The details on your lunar drawings are as good as photos. You've got quite a talent there.

I've tried doing some sketches but mine always end up looking terrible. I do like how it challenges your eyes to see more detail, though I give up in the end because it never looks like what I'm trying to sketch.

[philipheaven (Philip)]

*binos

[baileys2611 (Simon Bailey)]

Were they 'pretty' bino's? You could always take them to star parties and wear a phantom mask.

Phantom of the star party.

[mental4astro (Alexander)]

Bugger off, Simon...

[AG Hybrid (Adrian)]

Whats it matter? No one can see them in the dark!

[ManUtdFans (Alan)]

I am not intending to hijack this thread but found these not sure exactly the differences beside focal length (affects FOV) I guess, from Andrews Communications:

1)Guan Sheng GS-680 8"
(200mm x 1200mm)
$429

2)
New GS-600 "fast" imaging OTA!
8" f/4 (200mm x 800mm)
$399

3) New GS-630 imaging OTA.
8" f/5 (200mm x 1000mm)
$399

I assume these 3 dob above have same build and quality?

[mental4astro (Alexander)]

An "imagining optimised" scope just has the primary mirror set a little closer to the focuser than it woukd be set for a "visual" scope. The focal length, in particular the focal ratio, us more significant photographically, where exposure times are shorter in a fast scope.

For visual use, and a very fast Newtonian will show more coma - a phenomenon thst only affects reflectors. Coma is a result of the eyepiece not being able to focus the light at the edge of the field of view, and is seen as the stars having little comet tails radiating out from the center. It isn't a defect, and can be corrected for by using a coma corrector. A coma corrector is essential for photography, but for visual it is upto the individual. I have an f/4 8" Newtonian and I don't use a coma corrector as I just don't find it objectionable. I actually found the one I used killed light transmission -THAT I found more objectionable. Yet other people swear by them...

Either way, an imaging optimised scope can still be used for visual. It just means needing yo use an extension tube to allow the eyepiece to focus.

[barx1963 (Malcolm)]

Originally Posted by ManUtdFans

I am not intending to hijack this thread but found these not sure exactly the differences beside focal length (affects FOV) I guess, from Andrews Communications:

1)Guan Sheng GS-680 8"
(200mm x 1200mm)
$429

2)
New GS-600 "fast" imaging OTA!
8" f/4 (200mm x 800mm)
$399

3) New GS-630 imaging OTA.
8" f/5 (200mm x 1000mm)
$399

I assume these 3 dob above have same build and quality?

Also, this may be obvious, but the 680 is a dob, which is a ready to go visual only scope, while the others are OTAs only, no mounts or eyepieces.
As you are calling them all dobs, you may not have realised this and if you ordered the cheaper one it will not be useable!

As to build quality, GSO make good quality dobs for the price. As for their imaging newts, I haven't heard of any major issues, maybe if someone out there has used one and can give some feedback.

Malcolm

[ManUtdFans (Alan)]

Originally Posted by barx1963

Also, this may be obvious, but the 680 is a dob, which is a ready to go visual only scope, while the others are OTAs only, no mounts or eyepieces.
As you are calling them all dobs, you may not have realised this and if you ordered the cheaper one it will not be useable!

As to build quality, GSO make good quality dobs for the price. As for their imaging newts, I haven't heard of any major issues, maybe if someone out there has used one and can give some feedback.

Malcolm

Malcolm,

You are right, I overlooked the details.
Thanks for that.

$429 for a 8 inch dob is a good buy I guess.