Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Telescope


nirvana
 Share

Recommended Posts

nirvana

What's a decent telescope to look for second hand? And what do I need to check if it's used?

Thanks Alien spotters! :)

ooh how about this one for 100 notes? looks a bit flash for me lol

 

186535841_1842330165948838_2209403793519026314_n.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are better off buying decent binoculars with a tripod. More portable, and therefore will be used more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nirvana
1 minute ago, MrPin said:

You are better off buying decent binoculars with a tripod. More portable, and therefore will be used more.

maybe but the neighbour might think I'm trying to see her soaping her ample knockers in the shower! xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

nirvana
Posted (edited)

Found another one, Astromaster 70AZ

I think I like that one cos it's long n thin, those others are a bit on the 'fat side'? O.o

Think I'll put some cheeky 50yuro bids in lol

Edited by nirvana
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sugarlips

We’ve got a Celetron, pretty good entry level gear.

Depends what you’re hoping to look at. This guy gets some great shots of the moon.. 

 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When most people buy a telescope it usually isn't clear what they want it for.

There's often a nebulous series of thoughts about 'look at the stars' or 'see the planets', without any real idea of what they'll actually get in the end.

These people tend to end up disappointed, because with a non-expensive telescope all you'll get is more dots (well, maybe a wobbly view of the moon's largest craters).

If you want to look at the stars you'd be best off investing in a thermos flask, a comfy deckchair and enough time set aside to look upwards during the dark hours (20 mins in the dark required to dark adapt properly so that you can see the dimmer stars).

After that, Pin is right about the binoculars.  The point here isn't so much the magnification (you get dots with different separations than before) but light gathering ability -- so you'll be able to see dimmer dots (or perhaps start seeing nebulae and galaxies*, etc).

I'd say that these days the next investment might actually be a good camera with a decent lens.  We're talking about micro 4/3rds or APS-C sensor and a non-zoom lens (about 50mm equivalent will do to start with -- not a long telephoto).  They won't be expensive second hand.  Oh, and a tripod.   IMO it is amazing how easy astrophotography is with a modern digital camera.  Anyway, this will allow you to 'see' the dimmer things like nebulae and the full expanse of the Milky Way, etc.  

After all that feel free to get a telescope, because at that point you'll have more of an idea of what you want from it and thus what type of telescope you'll need.  Dobsonian for dim deep sky, short refractor for bright deep sky, catadiopric for portable higher magnification for planets, etc, etc. 

In terms of recommendation, I rather like the SkyWatcher telescopes (your photo).  Meade and Celestron are good, but they're a bit on the expensive side for what you get, IMO.  'GoTo' telescopes are interesting, but pointing in the right direction isn't the important bit once you've got a bit of experience.

For viewing soaky knockers I'd suggest a lovely brass telescope from the olden days; get one as big/long as you can afford.

[* Nebulae are interesting.  In the books they're sold as a distant thing that you need a huge telescope to see, but they were seen by the ancients (it just means cloudy) and aren't too difficult to see with the naked eye if it is dark enough (that's the modern day problem, though.  Similarly with galaxies.  Both tend to be 'a bit bigger' to 'a bit smaller' than the apparent size of the moon (ie, in degrees of extent in your view), so not too tiny.]  

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd add that you don't really want long and thin telescopes.  For a long-refractor (the 'long thin' ones) you want the 'bit closest to the stars' to be as wide as possible, but that's expensive.  That's why people get Newtonians (for first picture), because they're nice and wide -- this means that they'll collect lots of light, and that's what you want.

I think most people if they knew what they wanted would get a catadioptric system, which these days probably will be a Muksatov-Cassegrain.  They're small and easy enough to use.  The Newtonian is a cheaper, larger equivalent, I suppose.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, dgul said:

I think most people if they knew what they wanted would get a catadioptric system, which these days probably will be a Muksatov-Cassegrain.  They're small and easy enough to use.  The Newtonian is a cheaper, larger equivalent, I suppose.

Yes, a good compromise. they compromise for a non-parabolic reflector with a wobbly lens

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bornagain
13 hours ago, dgul said:

When most people buy a telescope it usually isn't clear what they want it for.

There's often a nebulous series of thoughts about 'look at the stars' or 'see the planets', without any real idea of what they'll actually get in the end.

These people tend to end up disappointed, because with a non-expensive telescope all you'll get is more dots (well, maybe a wobbly view of the moon's largest craters).

If you want to look at the stars you'd be best off investing in a thermos flask, a comfy deckchair and enough time set aside to look upwards during the dark hours (20 mins in the dark required to dark adapt properly so that you can see the dimmer stars).

After that, Pin is right about the binoculars.  The point here isn't so much the magnification (you get dots with different separations than before) but light gathering ability -- so you'll be able to see dimmer dots (or perhaps start seeing nebulae and galaxies*, etc).

I'd say that these days the next investment might actually be a good camera with a decent lens.  We're talking about micro 4/3rds or APS-C sensor and a non-zoom lens (about 50mm equivalent will do to start with -- not a long telephoto).  They won't be expensive second hand.  Oh, and a tripod.   IMO it is amazing how easy astrophotography is with a modern digital camera.  Anyway, this will allow you to 'see' the dimmer things like nebulae and the full expanse of the Milky Way, etc.  

After all that feel free to get a telescope, because at that point you'll have more of an idea of what you want from it and thus what type of telescope you'll need.  Dobsonian for dim deep sky, short refractor for bright deep sky, catadiopric for portable higher magnification for planets, etc, etc. 

In terms of recommendation, I rather like the SkyWatcher telescopes (your photo).  Meade and Celestron are good, but they're a bit on the expensive side for what you get, IMO.  'GoTo' telescopes are interesting, but pointing in the right direction isn't the important bit once you've got a bit of experience.

For viewing soaky knockers I'd suggest a lovely brass telescope from the olden days; get one as big/long as you can afford.

[* Nebulae are interesting.  In the books they're sold as a distant thing that you need a huge telescope to see, but they were seen by the ancients (it just means cloudy) and aren't too difficult to see with the naked eye if it is dark enough (that's the modern day problem, though.  Similarly with galaxies.  Both tend to be 'a bit bigger' to 'a bit smaller' than the apparent size of the moon (ie, in degrees of extent in your view), so not too tiny.]  

We were in our van about 15 miles north east of Fort William last September, there was no light pollution and the sky was cloudless.

I went outside at about 3:00 in the morning and simply could not believe my eyes - the sky was incredible - easily the most beautiful and powerful thing I have ever seen - it really gives you a perspective of your place in the universe - just  thinking about it has given me goosebumps.

This is something that everybody should experience.

Mag-fuckin-nificent.

 

 

 

  • Agree 1
  • Cheers 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The sky was like that at a mates farm in Normandy. No clouds and it felt like you could see to the edge of the universe. Within 5 minutes the sky could go cloudy and you couldn't see a thing. Not even your hand in front of your face. Those clouds could clear 5 minutes later.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bornagain
24 minutes ago, jm51 said:

The sky was like that at a mates farm in Normandy. No clouds and it felt like you could see to the edge of the universe. Within 5 minutes the sky could go cloudy and you couldn't see a thing. Not even your hand in front of your face. Those clouds could clear 5 minutes later.

 

When you see the sky when everything aligns, you can really understand why our ancestors were obsessed with the stars, we understand what they are yet they still leave me practically speechless.

The night sky is about the only thing that truly fits the description "awesome"

 

  • Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Carcassion

Not much to add to dgul's post. Bear in mind there will be a lot of light pollution unless if you're somewhere very remote, it feels like the number of clear skies in the year can be counted on the fingers of one hand and good viewing opportunities are either at stupid o clock in the summer or stupid o clock and freezing cold in the winter. If you live in the Atacama desert or Hawaii, ignore the above.

  • Agree 1
  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

onlyme
On 05/07/2021 at 06:31, nirvana said:

maybe but the neighbour might think I'm trying to see her soaping her ample knockers in the shower! xD

You need one that can accept a camera mount then as well.

There's also some small cameras with stupidly high zoom factors and mobile phones too, they won't have the list collection but some seem to work surprisingly well.

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Bornagain said:

We were in our van about 15 miles north east of Fort William last September, there was no light pollution and the sky was cloudless.

I went outside at about 3:00 in the morning and simply could not believe my eyes - the sky was incredible - easily the most beautiful and powerful thing I have ever seen - it really gives you a perspective of your place in the universe - just  thinking about it has given me goosebumps.

This is something that everybody should experience.

Mag-fuckin-nificent.

Totally agree. Had a similar experience on a little Greek island, so you can imagine hardly any light pollution for miles. The thick stripe of the Milky Way splitting the sky in half was awe-inspiring, had never seen anything like it before (or since). 

  • Cheers 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...