Page 1 of 1

Telescope choices

PostPosted: Thu Jul 26, 2018 10:10 pm
by Jeans1968
Hi is possible you can recommend a scope that is good both for visual viewing and Astroimaging. There seems to be different scopes that do one or the other but not together or I’m looking at this all wrong. Cheers — looking for recommendations.

Re: Telescope choices

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:03 am
by rwillits
I think that not all viewing telescopes make good imaging telescopes, but most all telescopes that are good for imaging work quite well for viewing. First decide what you may want to image, then get an appropriate telescope. If you want to image solar system, sun, moon, and planets, you need a different telescope (like Mak, SCT, any telescope above f8). if you want to image deep sky objects (DSOs), get a telescope with a low "f" ratio. f8 or lower. The lower the better. An 8" f4 newtonian is affordable for DSO imaging and works well to view. The most expensive part and most important item is the mount. A German Equatorial Mount (GEM) is necessary to do good imaging (like the EQ5, SiriusEQG Series or EQ6, AtlasEQG Series mounts). Not knowing your finances I would recommend for planets a Celestron C8/8SE, or an 8" f4 Newtonian for DSO (you will need a coma corrector). Both with a GEM mount. For viewing get only three or four good eyepieces. (good, used eyepieces work well). I hope this helps.

Re: Telescope choices

PostPosted: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:37 am
by Gfamily
Jeans1968 wrote:Hi is possible you can recommend a scope that is good both for visual viewing and Astroimaging. There seems to be different scopes that do one or the other but not together or I’m looking at this all wrong. Cheers — looking for recommendations.


I can't give any advice on specific models, but TBH, if you want to do both, you're very likely going to have to look at them separately.

In astronomy there are very few large bright objects, a few very small bright objects, a small number of fairly small, fairly bright objects, a medium number of fairly large, fairly dim objects and a lot of very small, quite dim objects.

For visual, you ideally want the largest aperture possible if you want to see anything of the dimmer things; up to 10" or 12" aperture, depending on your sky conditions.

For imaging,the really important issue is the quality of how well it tracks the night sky, which comes down to the mount, as that determines what you can image.
The specifics of how well it needs to "track" depends on the focal length with which you're tracking. A long focal length implies a 'bigger' image, so tracking is more important (and more expensive in terms of mount required) as you're looking at smaller objects

It's getting late, so let me know if you want me to supplement this advice