"Testing the water" equipment - some advice?

[barx1963 (Malcolm)]

Rob
I look forward to the discussion!
I guess my main aim in the posts was to try to assist the OP with some information. Hence I tried to outline some of the factors that would weigh on a purchasing decision and how a beginner can use that info to make an informed decision. The OP has a limited budget, that said, if a 76mm Firstscope is all the budget will allow, then go for it, but these scopes have limitations and will not give Hubble like views of the sky.

We can really only assist people with the benefit of experience, and from my personal experience, I still feel that my comments were valid. I owned a little 70mm goto refractor for a while and found using it difficult. Under dark skies it was quite handy, but with any level of light pollution, even the moderate level we have here in Colac, it dropped in usefulness markedly. Even M42 was a difficult object. Given that almost anywhere in the UK is going to have significant light pollution at least to a level similar to my home.

I will admit I haven't had the opportunity to look through one of the Firstscopes, but I have seen one and IMO they are just useable mechanically.

I recommended that the OP consider a pair of binos as an option. Partly because they would fit within a tight budget, but also because they could continue to give value if the observing bug bit and she later decided to get a larger scope. Odds were in that situation, a 76mm scope would sit gathering dust.

All that by the by, as you know Rob, I am in awe of your observing skills, and look forward to having that chat at SV!

Malcolm

[nakisawame]

Hi again - sorry for such a delay in my response, I've been visiting my partners family and had no opportunity to post without him seeing!

jjjnettie - Much appreciated! (I did check the links out not long after you'd posted) the problem being I have no way of collecting telescopes that are self collection only. Unfortunately not many people selling 2nd hand scopes add a shipping option (I don't blame them!).

barx1963 - Amazing information, thank you very much! Really helped me understand a lot of things that were going over my head (though I must admit it'll take some time to properly sink in!). Quick question - about the eye pieces, you say to find the magnification you divide the scopes focal length by the eyepieces focal length: is this relative to the "highest useful magnification" I keep seeing on scope product details? So in other words you can do the math to see whether or the scope is capable of making good use out of whatever new eye piece you're looking at buying? I hope that made sense!

Rob - It's great to hear what you're saying as I know any view that is better than the naked eye is going to be amazing for us, and although I'm trying to educate myself more before buying a scope I certainly don't have high expectations nor crave top of the line gear just yet!

Having said that, I've decided to push the boat out a bit more (maybe it is starting already!) and have narrowed it down to two options but I'm struggling to know which is the better quality scope in terms of what I'll be able to see.

Skywatcher Heritage 130p
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Skywatcher-H...1590875&sr=8-1

vs

Celestron Astromaster 130EQ
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Celestron-31.../ref=de_a_smtd

The obvious difference being the mount, but otherwise what's your opinion on how these match up in terms of specs? I get the feeling they're the same but am a bit too uncertain of my knowledge just yet!

Many thanks,

Hannah

[barx1963 (Malcolm)]

Hannah
I wondered where you had gone! Anyways Rob and I had amused ourselves with a discussion on observing philosophy while you were away!
The term "highest useful magnification" is often seen in ads for scopes and unfortunately is one of the things used to "bait" buyers who may not understand telescopes. For example on the ads you posted links to just now they gave figures of 260x and 307x as highest useful mag. If anyone in history has ever used these scopes usefully at those powers I would be extremely surprised. The larger (eg more aperture) a scope the more power it can handle. In my 12" scope I find it is useable at 150x and really struggles at 250x. I have heard of a rule that the maximum power is 50x per inch of aperture which means that I should be able to get to 600x but that assumes:
- perfect collimation
- perfect optics
- most importantly perfect conditions (eg still with no air movement at all)

As these conditions will almost never occur the "theoretical" limit is nearly impossible.
I had a 130mm scope and found I could use it easily at 36x and with a little more difficult at around 100x. The more power does 2 things it magnifies the object but also magnifies the effects of the atmosphere and with dim objects spreads out the light making them harder to see.

The upshot of all this is please ignore claims about magnification, they are just marketing hype and usually baloney!

With regard to the 2 scopes, if you are going to get one I would tend towards the Skywatcher. I have looked at one and they are not too bad mechanically. The Celestron is on an EQ mount which is not easy to use as a beginner and can be VERY frustrating. You will find the eyepiece ends up in all sorts of odd positions, you need to learn to polar align (admittedly that is easier in the Northern hemisphere with views of Polaris!) and navigation is not intuitive.

Malcolm

[nakisawame]

Hi again Malcolm!

I see, it's good to know what's only said to make things sound fancy instead of having actual relevance - as a first buyer it's far too easy to get sucked into these things.

I actually ended up buying a Skywatcher Explorer 130 EQ2 (http://www.amazon.co.uk/SkyWatcher-E...1949625&sr=8-2). I decided that, as much fun as the dobsonian seemed with it's easy set up, it meant limited places for us to be able to use it (at least without getting a bad back!).
So then looking more into the Celestron Astromaster 130EQ, I found a fair amount of people saying that the Skywatcher Explorer 130 EQ2 was similar but of better quality for around the same cost and went for it. Shame I can't set it up until Christmas, it looks amazing in the box hah!

Hannah

[cmknight (Chris)]

Hannah,
I would agree with most of the people here on a few points:

1) Start with binoculars, but not 10 X 50's. Go with 7 X 50's. The 10's can get weary to hold after a bit, and even if you have them on a tripod, you will find your neck to be getting sore after a while (a very short while). 7's will give you a wider field, and will be more comfortable to hold.

2) If you insist on a telescope, find out where your local astronomy clubs are and go to a meeting. You never know. One of the members just may have a 6" Dobsonian lying around that he never uses anymore. As well, most clubs have loaner scopes, which new members can sign out for a couple of weeks at a time. If they have one of the scopes you were originally looking at buying, borrow it, and see what you think. Try before you buy.

3) If you join one of these clubs, you would be surprised at the number of people willing to help you out. Some members may even be willing to help you build your own scope with a few donated or cheaply purchased parts. Nothing speaks more than something you and your partner have built, together, and observed with, together, for only a few pounds.

I will agree with other posters in that the two scopes you have mentioned as being interested in buying, are "toys". I know people who have owned both, and have been sadly disappointed with them. On the other hand, some people really enjoyed them. The choice, ultimately, is yours, but if I were you, I'd scout out some local astronomy clubs, first, and see what they have to offer.