UKC

Anybody own a telescope?

New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
 Graeme G 26 Dec 2020

Thinking about getting a telescope, budget around £300.

Hadn’t realised how many there are available and just wondered if anyone can share their experiences? Would like to view deep space objects as well as more local. Maybe use for astrophotography as well. 

 Tom Last 26 Dec 2020
In reply to Graeme G:

Hi Graeme. 
 

I basically know naff all, but am just starting to get into astro photography, so am thinking about similar questions. 
One thing I was surprised at was the relatively short focal length required to access some wide field (I guess the clue’s in the name) astro photography. I initially set out thinking I’d buy a telescope and have now changed tack completely and am looking to buy a motorised equatorial mount instead. 
I have a lot of high quality dSLR kit, with a fast 200mm lens and a couple of high end bodies (though apparently camera body is of the least importance), so possibly a different starting point to you, but for me, wanting to photograph some stuff like nebulae and galaxies and stuff, it makes sense for to to go with the fast 200mm lens and buy some other important stuff to go with it; ie the mount. 

If you want to photography deep sky objects, you’ll need a tracking equatorial mount, to compensate for the Earth’s rotation. There is another way to do it by using an intervalometer to take hundreds of short exposure (~1 sec) images and then stack them, but better results to be had with a mount.

One thing that’s not clear to me is whether or not you can actually see the fainter stuff like nebulas with a telescope in real time, rather than by photographing them and thus revealing more light. I suspect that an optical scope that’ll allow you to do this in real time is somewhat more expensive than a motorised EQ mount which will allow your camera to do the same thing. Presumably you’d still need a decent mount to go with the telescope anyway? interested to know the answer to this. 
 

Of course, you’ll get better viewing of solar system stuff with a telescope than you will with a dSLR and affordable long lens, so depends what your main focus will be I guess and whether you have any dSLR stuff to start with. 

Looks like half decent motorised equatorial mounts can be had starting at about £300.

Like I say, these are just initial thoughts from someone else trying to get into it. There are definitely some good astro photographers on UKC so hopefully there’ll be along to offer better advice.

Good luck! 
 

 Tom Valentine 26 Dec 2020
In reply to Tom Last:

The first lesson of astronomy seems to me to be that visual astronomers only see a fraction of what astrophotographers create.

But that in itself has its own rewards. 

 Tom Last 26 Dec 2020
In reply to Tom Valentine:

Yeah, the two do feel very different don’t they - ‘see’ and ‘create’ being the operative words.
 

A quick Google of the stuff people can get with a fairly cheap camera/mount setup reveals some pictures that are, quite honesty, incredible. But whilst looking at Jupiter’s moons through a beginner level scope reveals basically no detail, it has amazing spontaneity. Different feel to the two things entirely. 

Post edited at 20:24
 Tom Valentine 26 Dec 2020
In reply to Tom Last:

The awe and wonder of that feeling of spontaneity is magnified many times when looking at a galaxy 12 million light years away ( my current limit). All I'm getting is a grey smudge but it's real,  the photons are falling on my retina and the image isn't being doctored in any way. 

Although I'm not sure a word like spontaneity sits well with an image that has been in transit for such a length of time.....

 Tom Last 26 Dec 2020
In reply to Tom Valentine:

Haha, yeah agreed, such distances probably transcend language - or maybe just my ability with language.

12 million light years! Wow, good effort.
So, are you looking at that through something more akin to a beginner scope, or the sort of thing you need an entire new shed for?  

To the OP. Apologies for hijack. 

 Michael Hood 26 Dec 2020
In reply to Tom Valentine:

> The first lesson of astronomy seems to me to be that visual astronomers only see a fraction of what astrophotographers create.

This has become very apparent in the last few years especially in lots of photos on UKC that show a stunning milky way in the mountains that is just not like that to the eye.

I was pretty chuffed when I could actually see Saturn's rings this year - no ring detail, only distinct enough to see them as handles with space between them and the planet but it was real seeing.

 Tom Valentine 26 Dec 2020
In reply to Tom Last:

M81 and M82. First saw them through my ST 80 last year , a popular beginner scope 80 mm objective width  and 400 mm focal length. This makes it an f5 device which is great for collecting light but fast achromats like it have a bad reputation for chromatic aberration. But it's something I can live with for the price, around the £130 mark.

I don't think it's a popular choice for astrophotography: people seem to choose better quality optics and are less concerned about how fast the scope is because the camera can compensate for incoming light levels .  But for viewing, the faster and brighter, the better

Post edited at 23:46
OP Graeme G 27 Dec 2020
In reply to Tom Last:

Thanks. That definitely helps demistify some of the immense amount of info available on the internet. Particularly about the mount.  Do you use an App based system on your phone?

Only using mirrorless aspc at the moment. So I’m maybe being unrealistic in my ambitions. Was thinking of upgrading my camera as well but was only considering to a newer aspc, or full frame. Not sure I’d get enough value for money out of a DSLR.

Post edited at 09:25
In reply to Graeme G:

Assuming your mirrorless APSC can have its lens removed and a simple adaptor fitted (a spacer/ring) to allow it to be connected to a telescope it will almost certainly be fine.

Astronomical photos don't use any of the fancy camera distinguishing features like autofocus, lens stabilisation, noise reduction, movie mode etc., so the point about the camera not being critical is relevant. Provided it can output RAW images and allow the shutter to be held open for a long time it's good. Liveview is helpful for focussing but not critical as there are alternative methods. All cameras can be remotely controlled these days via a computer or plug in itervalometer.

There is nothing magical about the different camera sensors, they all work fantastically well these days, the only real difference now is the size of the sensor. A DSLR will probably be more hassle for astronomical photography compared with a mirrorless camera because it has the mirror mechanism to jiggle about and the camera is heavier so it places more strain on the telescope focuser.

A full frame sensor will need a very careful set up to make the most of and get sharp images right across the field of the sensor. Even the expensive camera lenses will struggle at the edge of a full frame sensor because it's such a large sensor placed very close to the lens. All a full frame camera can do compared to say an APSC one is see a little bit more sky in one image, other factors are pretty similar.

To get good images of the planets, you need a very long focal length, maybe 2m or more. Such a telescope is difficult to take deep sky images with as it demands very accurate tracking for long exposures (needed because it will be slow) and has a tiny field of view, great for planets though!

For wider angle images, camera lenses are very convenient and a mount like Skwatcher Sky Adventurer or Ioptron SkyGuider are an excellent way of mounting a DSLR and lens and tracking the stars. Even at 200mm they will easily allow 1 minute exposures without stars trailing. No computer needed. If you fit autoguiding then you can go even longer, but then you will run into problems with light pollution and images that slowly saturate the sensor's dynamic range with sky glow. A wide angle lens like a 24mm doesn't even really need a tracker at all.

A great way to estimate the field of view is to use a program like Stellarium and tell it your camera sensor size and lens / telescope focal length and it draws a box showing what's in the field of view which you can then use to frame objects. Many objects are surprisingly large, even bigger than the filed of view of a 200mm lens for example, so a long focal length telescope is hopeless for imaging them. 

There are lots of different options to explore and as Tom has said, visual observing is very different to photography. There is no one size fits all, and a setup good for one thing might be very limiting for another. On the plus side, there is a thriving secondhand market and once you get away from the supermarket toys, the equipment is reliable and holds its value well so you can chop and change.

One truism in astrophotography is that the perfect is the enemy of the good; nobody ever seems satisfied with their setup!

 Tom Valentine 27 Dec 2020
In reply to richard_hopkins:

I think your final sentence highlights another difference: someone getting into visual astronomy might be lucky enough to spend money on an outfit that will prove satisfactory over many years  for the initial outlay of a couple of hundred quid: an astrophotographer will spend years chasing perfect images and this will involve updating equipment at regular and fairly expensive intervals.

OP Graeme G 27 Dec 2020
In reply to richard_hopkins:

Thank you, that’s really helpful. 

In reply to Graeme G:

Hi Graham, am doing the same, still dithering so missed getting one for Christmas. At the mo looking at skyscanner and meade (both around 230mm), can ket you know how I get on!

Eamonn

Post edited at 17:36
OP Graeme G 27 Dec 2020
In reply to JJ Krammerhead III:

Thanks. As a complete beginner I’m thinking I should probably go with a simple set up for viewing and then upgrade later if it peaks my interest. Plus by then I’ll have got my head around a lot of the tech and terminology.

Removed User 28 Dec 2020
In reply to Graeme G:

I have the Telescope 80EQ Refractor Scope. My son used it to observe the moon already and it looked amazing. There is still a lot to learn but it certainly stirred up a lot of interest and curiosity in the family. 

In reply to Graeme G:

Have plumped for a sky watcher 130p reflector scope. Bit more than I'd wanted to spend. Can report back on how I get on as there have been a couple of threads on astronomy recently. 

 smbnji 30 Dec 2020
In reply to Graeme G:

When this question was recently asked: https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/off_belay/telescope-727102

There were several recommendations for the Skywatcher 130P / 150P, based on those I picked up a 150P and have been very pleased with it.

OP Graeme G 30 Dec 2020
In reply to JJ Krammerhead III:

Thanks. I’d appreciate your thoughts/experience. It’s obviously impossible right now to visit shops so committing to buy online is a bit nervy.

OP Graeme G 30 Dec 2020
In reply to smbnji:

Hadn’t seen that thread. Thanks.

 graeme jackson 31 Dec 2020
In reply to JJ Krammerhead III:

> Hi Graham, am doing the same, still dithering so missed getting one for Christmas. At the mo looking at skyscanner and meade (both around 230mm), can ket you know how I get on!

I'd avoid Meade right now. They've filed for bankrupcy in the USA and are now owned by a chinese company who haven't made up their minds what they're going to be selling under the brand. Getting after sales care will most likely be a nightmare.

https://www.bkalerts.com/recent-bankruptcy-cases/california-central-bankrup...

In reply to graeme jackson:

Thanks for the heads up, have avoided. Anticipating my new sky watcher. Hope I'm not too dim to use it 

In reply to Graeme G:

For deep space, a wide aperture shorter focal length, a motorized equatorial mount and a digital camera makes a great combination.

Deep space is a bit uninteresting through the eye piece of a medium sized affordable telescope (gray fuzzy areas in the messier list). However this completely changes when you capture light coming through the telescope using long camera exposures. So you need a good quality mount with a motor, the optical tube you can get fairly cheaply (a sky watcher 200mm  Newtonian for around 100-200 euros here in Spain second hand). 

Never tried a Dobson, they must be good fun

For planetary again a motorised equatorial mount, you don't need so much aperture and hardly any exposure, a video of the image helps to improve resolution as the frames can be stacked.

Alt azimuth mounts are great but are both computerized and motorised to track.

One of the best fun celestial objects to observe through the eyepiece is the moon when it's not full, you have great views of the craters.

 Tom Valentine 01 Jan 2021
In reply to Dago theruinmargalef:

And that's what differentiates us

You think the grey fuzzy bits viewed in real time are " a bit uninteresting" whereas I think that the sensation you get when viewing them  directly is the closest you get to experiencing the wonder and the  awe striking nature of the universe.  

 stella1 01 Jan 2021
In reply to Graeme G:

If you are thinking first scope for purely visual I'd get a dobsonian. Skywatcher 200p is around your budget.

For deep sky astrophotography you really need to spend a bit more. My advice would be to learn the sky for a bit, see if it holds interest then invest in a photography setup.

 Tom Valentine 01 Jan 2021
In reply to stella1:

If I was happy enough to stay in my back garden  the Dobsonian would make sense. But I've got a few campsites in my mind where a short tube refractor would make a more practical choice. Not to say I'm ruling out the Dobsonian in the future, though.

OP Graeme G 01 Jan 2021
In reply to stella1:

Thanks. I’m thinking that looks like a good buy. 

OP Graeme G 01 Jan 2021
In reply to Dago theruinmargalef:

Thanks

In reply to Tom Valentine:

I guess I lost the wonder over time, I started watching fuzzy bits since I was a kid, got my first telescope when I was 12. 

Over time I might have become a bit disenchanted and perhaps a tad more miserable and grumpy.

I only realized their true magic when I started taking pictures of them, clusters look great through the eye piece though.

So I took some of what I thought were great images of the messier lot and made the mistake of posting them on astrophotography forums.😂.

I stopped that now.

 d_b 04 Jan 2021
In reply to Tom Valentine:

From the photons perspective it has traveled for no time at all.  Ain't relativity grand?

 Garston 04 Jan 2021
In reply to Graeme G:

If it’s any use to anyone I have a Meade Polaris 90AZ with upgraded eyepieces that I bought about 6 months ago that I am using far less than I thought which I am happy to sell. It’s all as new and I can have a look at the eyepieces when I get home if anyone’s interested. I can send photos and am in Wrexham if anyone would like to see it.

cheers

chris

In reply to Graeme G:

I wonder if the market has improved. I was dead set on buying one but could not get one for love nor money.

In the end my disposable cash went elsewhere.

OP Graeme G 04 Jan 2021
In reply to TheDrunkenBakers:

Have found the one I want from a supplier in Glasgow. The day before they have to shut due to another lockdown!!! Oh the joys....


New Topic
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...