Slashdot Mirror
Entry-Level Astronomy?
brobak writes "I'm getting ready to move into a new home on a couple of acres of rural property a significant distance from any large source of light pollution. I've always been interested in astronomy in general, and I would like to put my dark skies to use by picking up decent telescope and learning a bit about the skies over my head. The overall budget for this project is going to be around $1,000. I am particularly interested in astrophotography, but I understand that that may carry me outside the scope of the initial budget. I've already signed up for my local astronomy club's next monthly meeting. I have been doing Web research, but I thought that the Slashdot community would be the perfect place to get opinions on entry-level equipment, websites, and books."
The first thing I'd do would be to install Stellarium. That'd enable you to "tune in" on stars, even in cloudy weather.
What's your Blortle number?
Have a look at http://iceinspace.com.au/ while it's run out of Australia, there are members worldwide.
'Where to start' is a common question there.
... Google Sky.
Militant Agnostic: "I don't know, and damn it, neither do you!"
Now, I know that this probably won't be the kind of answer you're looking for, but here I go anyway...
Personally, if I had the kind of space you had, with no light pollution, and if I had the budget you mentioned: I would buy a high quality digital SLR camera. Obviously, if you're looking to photograph things that you need a telescope to see, this wouldn't be a good use of money for you. But, if you're looking to take shots of constellations and the moon and such, then a high-quality digital SLR with a tripod will work beautifully.
Plus, such a setup would allow you to take great photos of various weather phenomenon (e.g., thunderstorms). While it may not be the case for you, most of the people that I know that enjoy photographing the moon and the night sky also love photographing weather as well.
And, obviously, you'd then have a great camera for travelling and such.
Hang out at astronomy clubs and go to their camp-outs and slowly glean more info before blowing a wad of cash. Maybe subscribe to Astronomy Magazine. However, don't be tempted by the ads to buy the Ultra-Mega-Scope. Work your way up slowly. And, purchase a good star map with all the common nebula's and galaxies marked. Also note that the best viewing targets tend to come out in the winter, so prepare yourself for cold weather.
Table-ized A.I.
Yes, $1000 is a rather small budget where astrophotography is concerned. A good mount alone can cost many times that amount. Please don't skimp on the mount. I assure you, few things in life are more frustrating and miserable than attempting quality astrophotography on a cheap, inadequate mount.
You can get a quality telescope for $1000, especially if you build your own. I grind my own mirrors because the mirror I make myself is quite a bit better than all but a very few of the ones commercially available. It's quite a bit of fun too.
Your best course of action would be to hold off on getting a telescope for now. Get good astronomical binoculars ($200 - $400) and learn the sky. Once you've done that, you'll have a much better idea of exactly the aspects of astronomy that interest you and you'll have some additional time to decide upon the right equipment. You'll also have more time to save some additional money for qualityequipment.
When you go to your astronomy club's meeting, see if they have a group that builds telescopes. Building your own telescope is a great way to save a lot of money, plus you'll learn a lot in the process.
If you're lucky enough to be in the SF bay area, the Chabot Observatory Telescope Maker's Workshop is a great place to learn about telescopes, and also how to build them. They can guide you through the process, and its really not as hard as you might think. http://chabotspace.org/vsc/observatory/telescopemakers/
If you want to hold of on astrophotograpy for a while, I recommend picking up a Dobsonian mount telescope. They're a low cost design, and you can find 10 and 12 inch reflectors for $800. Also, they're easy to build, which goes back to the building your own comment earlier.
Dobsonians are not suitable for photography though. But, they are a cheap way to break into backyard astronomy.
The best advice I got (now in retrospective) when starting out was to buy an telescope that was easy to take out and setup, the best scope is the scope you use often.
http://www.intellipool.se/ - Intellipool Network Monitor
$1000 is not much. I've been doing research quite a long time on what should I buy, to get the best possible view both for planets and deep-sky. You know - usually for deeps skies a newton with huge mirrors is good, while they are not applicable for planets, because newtons cannot produce big magnification with enough detail. While for planet viewing the refractors are the best, because they can produce big magnifications without the distortions of newtonians. But refractors have too small aperture to collect enough light for comfortable deep-sky viewing.
The best balance in this big_mirror/refractor conflict is an apochromatic refractor. Because - apochromatic means that the lens are covered with special layers that give about 96+% of light transmission (so it's better than non-apochromatic refractor, where some light is wasted on the lens and you don't see deep-sky objects clearly), and special layer eliminates light dispersion like in an optical prism (otherwise each color would go on a different path and the resulting picture of something looked more like a rainbow instead of beight sharp). And also as a refractor it's good for planets. But... this APO refractor has to have big aperture, or it won't work for deep-sky anyway.
Refractors have some other advantages - for instance you don't have unnecessary air flow between the lens because they are inside a tube. Newtons are much brighter (good for deep-sky) but air turbulence blurries the view on planets.
Oh, and forget about cassegrains, they are compact, that's true (the only advantage). But the view is terrible.
Well if you have just $1000 you gotta decide: (1) want to see distant galaxies (newton), or (2) view to see planets (refractor). But I suggest to spend a bit more cash and get APO refractor. Should be good for both.
You can look at those reviews I had bookmarked long time ago: http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=1260 and http://www.cloudynights.com/item.php?item_id=32&pr=2x6x17
You can consider Takahashi also, althought from my research it looks like TMB make better equipment, but you never know that for sure: http://www.tmboptical.com/itemsGrid.asp?cat_id=4 .
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
When I was young in the early 90, I was madly in love with astronomy. I subscribed to and religously read a astronomy magazine for young kids called "Odyssey" that was published by the same folks who put out "Astronomy" and "Sky & Telescope" (Alas, they sold the title to Cobblestone not long after and it went downhill very quickly) Though I was just a kid with poor parents, I had dreams and invested a lot of thought and energy into fantasizing about how best to budget for my hobby (even though I had no budget). Back then, at a bare minimum, a decent telescope could be had for ~$200. When you add a stand/mount, eyepieces, etc. you're looking at ~$500. For astrophotography, you generally make use of your existing 35mm picture camera and what they call a T-adapter. It would have been wise to invest in a couple of filters also because they add tremendously to the polishedness of your final pictures.
Today, you're probably in the market for a ccd camera (or better). Since I haven't been following the trends for many years, things may have changed significantly. But in any case, I wish you luck, and lots of fun.
Stay sentient. Don't drink bad milk.
Depending on how you want to approach your stargazing there are computer/scope combos where you align the scope, hook it to a laptop, select the feature you want to look at (if it's visible from your location) and it will hone in on it, show it on the screen, let you look through the viewfinder, and take pictures. I haven't seen an advert for it recently so I don't remember its name, but for a starter with some cash it could teach you how to identify constelations, pinpoint planets, etc. Some will think it's a copout to use a digital library and motorized mount to find what you're looking for, but used right it could be a good way to learn fast.
Ok, here is the classic answer. Forget astrophotography until you have a lot more experience. Go to your local club and look through as many telescopes as you can. Third, ask them all the questions you can get away with. Now go buy some decent binoculars, 7x50 or 10x50. Learn your constellations. (Really.) If you still want a telescope, you will probably already have figured out what you want. One thing I'll add, avoid one of those expensive apochromatic refractors as a first scope. Get something with more aperture, a cheap 8-10 inch dobsonian perhaps. Don't forget the eyepieces.
Check out the forums on cloudynights.com for more help.
Just be sure that you aren't so driven by aperture lust that you get something too big and clunky to use. If you can anchor it in a fixed position, like a permanent observatory, go for all the aperture you can get. If you plan to move it in and out of the house, stay at about 10 inches or less. They get big and heavy *very* quickly. I'm happy with a 6 inch (150 mm), because I can take it places without wrecking my back or needing a new truck.
It seems a secondary consideration, but the smaller telescope you actually take out and *use* is far better than the light bucket that gathers dust because it's such a pain to set up and use.
One thing you might want to think about is what you're more interested in photographing... planets or deep space objects like galaxies and nebulae. That will inform the type of telescope your money will be best spent on.
With your dark skies, it would be a shame to get anything other than a nice big dobsonian. For $1000, you could get a 12-inch telescope, or save money on an 8- or 10-inch one and spend the rest on accessories.
If I were you, I'd go for an 8-inch to start, and plan to build my own if I really got into it.
Seriously, get a good (as in buy them from a proper telescope shop) set of binoculars and a decent camera tripod.
Both are useful outside of astronomy and until you know whether you are really keen it's not worth spending lots of money. They are also great to use as spotters while you are using your real telescope as they have a fantastic field of view.
I started with a pair of Gerber 10x50s which is getting to the limit of what I would consider comfortable to hand hold without a tripod. The tripod itself is a standard camera tripod with a binocular mounting bracket.
Then start out with something simple like: http://www.skymaps.com/downloads.html to see what you should be looking at in the sky and getting familiar with the sky.
Once you are happy that astronomy is right for you just have a go at lots of different telescopes that your local astronomy club members use and see what you like. Astronomy is a very expensive hobby, one that you might not like so just be careful
A lot of people will say 'start with a decent pair of binoculars'.
I am not so sure. That's right if you're going to get into the hobby in a big way, but your problem may be that you don't know enough about the hobby to be sure. If that's the case, you really need to try it first. No advice is as good as personal experience.
There are hundreds of advice sites on the web - many very good and put together by experts. I also got the astrophotography bug, and thought I would see what I could do for about $250. I was quite surprised to find that you could do quite a bit, and you really understand what the big boy sites mean after you work on it yourself.
I went for a small, cheap, entry-level reflector, a Meade 4 1/2 inch, which I got from CostCo for $200, and made a lot of accessories myself. It will never be as good as the big boys, but I have learned enough for me to know what to get next if I want to progress with the hobby, and the scope is light, good enough for Moon work, or can be sold if I want. And I've had lots of fun!
So I think I have done well getting a telescope which a real hobbyist would turn their nose up at. I am just putting a web site together to describe it, but if it will help I'll put the (unfinished) site up now for you. It's at http://www.telescopes.hobby-site.org/ and I can recommend the 'Remote Focusser' under 'Making Accessories'!
They are well versed in helping beginners and will be able to give you advice and guidance on this fascinating hobby. They have their own experts who don't necessarily post here.
As a starter, get the book "Turn Left at Orion". Read it. This will set your expectations of what you can really see. If you are still enthusiastic, go ahead and take advice on what equipment to buy. Be aware though that there are as many opposing opinions as there are people willing to offer you advice (including this one). You will still have to choose which ones you want to adopt.
Good luck and clear skies
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
You're not going to have enough budget to pull off any sort of astrophotography that will satisfy you, so I would recommend you start saving up.
:)
For astrophotography you absolutely *must* have an equatorial mount, it is simply impossible to do astrophotography with a stock altitude-azimuth mount, because while it can still track the sky as it moves, the view will rotate as it does so. With an equatorial mount, the view stays properly aligned even while it tracks the sky. German equatorial mount is the preferred mount for astrophotography. Even looking at just the mount you've pretty much blown your budget right there.
Secondly, you're going to want a high quality right-ascension drive motor. It's possible to get by without one, though tedious and limiting, but don't bother with a cheap one. The gearing is insufficient for astrophotography and will cause jerking and backlash resulting in awful pictures.
You'll also need to get a heavy duty mount and tripod, because a normal tripod is only designed for the weight of a telescope, not a telescope with a camera hanging off the end. You also need to make sure you've got a very sturdy, firm mount, because any vibration at all will ruin your pictures. Remember we're talking about huge magnifications and long exposures here, it's extremely easy to blur the pictures. Astrophotography is a challenging enough hobby to begin with. Inferior equipment can make it damn near impossible.
You'll notice I haven't even talked about the actual telescope yet. That's how important the mount and tripod is to astrophotography. So now that I've completely blown your budget, I'll try and be a bit more gentle on the telescope side of things. Probably the most bang for your buck in this case will be a newtonian reflector telescope. They're by far the cheapest type of scope per inch of aperture. Sort of big and unwieldy, and they require very precise and regular maintenance (called collimation). I'd recommend a bare minimum of 5" aperture, but as high as 8" if you can manage it.
Then you have to figure out how to mount your camera to the telescope, which is a black art in and of itself. Duct tape is not recommended. For most SLRs and telescope brands you can find a suitable T-mount adaptor which will allow you to attach your camera in place of the telescope's eyepiece. For non-SLRs, I'm not sure. If you were thinking of getting an actual astronomy CCD camera (such as the popular SBIG brand) well that alone will blow your budget and then a whole lot more. Then you'll want a second one to use it as an autoguider.
Astronomy isn't cheap, but it is rewarding. Good luck and clear skies.
Random and weird software I've written.
There's good news and bad news, as always. The good news is that with the price dropping on technology, you can find fantastic scopes that are quite inexpensive and will find just about anything you'd want to look at with the touch of a couple of buttons. Most will even interface with a laptop right out of the box. The bad news is, if astrophotography is what you're after, your budget is going to have to expand a bit or your going to have to find a good deal on a used setup. The problem with taking pictures is tracking, tracking, tracking. You need a scope mount that's able to track with very little vibration or drift and you also need one that can handle having the weight of a heavy camera body clamped onto it. CCDs have come down quite a bit in price and they are much lighter in weight but, again, they ain't cheap. A good place to get an idea of pricing would be Orion Telescopes http://www.telescope.com/. They sell just about everything and have a "wizard" that you can use to get you in the ball park on prices. If you weren't so interested in photography, I'd suggest one of the Dobsonian style setups; they are inexpensive, portable, easy to set-up and take down and give excellent view/price.
As your parent stated, dobsonians cannot be used for photography. Photos need you to be able to rotate the telescope with the night sky over the several minutes needed for an exposure: for that you need an equatorial mount.
There are Dobsonian setups that can rotate the camera mount to compensate for the rotating earth, but these setups are for experienced persons with high pain thresholds.
Prediction for end of Universe #42: Fencepost error in Quantum_bogosort.cpp
Hi,
/Tage Widsell
$1000 surely won't get you into astrophotography in a big way, but it's a start. I was in the exact same position a few years back and I decided to buy into a system that would let me gradually upgrade as funds became available. I got myself a pair of really nice and cheap 11x70 binos - best purchase yet. Then i took the plunge and got a scope that would let me advance slowly. Getting to know the sky and how to use a telescope will keep you busy for some time before you are ready for astrophotography.
Most importatly - get a decent mount. The Celestron CG-5 or Meade LXD75 seems to be a good choice. Second, go for quality over aperture if you want to do photography. I spent some $1100 on my scope and got a Celestron C6S-GT on a CG-5 mount, a wide field eyepeice and a barlow. The mount can carry much heavier equipment than the OTA I have, so it's future compatible once I decide to upgrade to a larger scope.
Since then I have spent approx $1000 on dew protection, powerpacks (which you will not need if you will use this in your back yard), software and recently $99 on the older Meade DSI CCD camera which will not produce 'stellar' results, but with your expectations set to match the price tag, it's a way to get started. Now if those clouds would only move away.
Hi!
I'm an undergraduate astrophysics major, but I've had some fun with amateur astronomy before. I know this suggestion will fall outside your budget, but it will eventually be the most cost effective strategy. First, buy a decent SLR digital camera. This will allow you to take nice deep images, quickly check your focus, or download them for postprocessing and printing (all in color and without having to purchase filters!). You'll want to mount the SLR on a ~10" reflector (Cass or Newtonian, not a big deal). That should give you enough light for deeper objects. Try finding things used through your local astronomy club. Perhaps you'll find a good deal. But do check the optics before you buy anything. This should be everything you'll need for years of great imaging. Good luck!
Interesting Links:
http://www.ast.cam.ac.uk/~optics/Lucky_Web_Site/LI_Amateur.htm
http://www.astro.shoregalaxy.com/webcam_astro.htm
I was an amateur astronomer for years before I switched to being just a computer geek (no dark skies where I live now). However, even if my Messier-marathon nights are over, I think I can still give some good advice. So, let us start with equipment. Since you really don't know what you are mostly interested in viewing, I would say get a 6" - 8" Newtonian reflector with a decent equatorial mount (you can find deals for much less than $1000), or if you want to stretch your budjet you could get a more compact Schmidt Cassegrain (again 6"-8" aperture). Go for either Celestron or Meade (with the latter probably being better but more expensive). This type of telescope will provide a rich viewing experience, for both planetary and deep space targets. It is also astrophotography ready (computerized or motor equatorial drives are usually standard). ;)
So, at first I recommend "testing the waters" for astrophotography. Find a cheap, old, mechanican Canon, Minolta etc SLR. Start with that, and if you are still interested you can invest to a CCD camera in the future.
I can't recommend books, since been such a long time, except Stars and Planets by Peterson Field Guides which was a nice reference and gets updated once in a while. I was a fan of the Astronomy magazine for years. Sky & Telescope was also decent, you should certainly pick one of those up.
I have also skipped the part about telescope accessories, but I do have to go to sleep now, so you'll have to do with the included eyepieces for now...
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent. Polar Scope Align for iOS
Don't pick up a $100 telescope from Wal-Mart or whatever, "just to see if it's fun". That's a good way to frustrate yourself out of of a potentially interesting hobby. At a minimum, you need a scope with an equatorial mount (and you'll need to learn how to set it up). Trying to track things moving through the sky with an altitude/azimuth control is just way too annoying. For most photographic purposes, a motorized mount is necessary. These days, that probably also means you'll get a remote controller and computer interface.
I agree with the binocular advice.
Since you do not say if you are interested by planetary astrophotography vs. deep sky, let met add that a Webcam turns out to be a perfect device for planetary astrophotography.
Let me quote the following website (http://sctscopes.net/Photo_Basics/Webcams_for_Planets/webcams_for_planets.html)
"It takes a whole bunch of frames (i.e. photos) in a row, and all that's needed is software to accumulate the photos, decide which ones are good, and stack them together to create a good planetary photograph. During the recent historical Mars opposition, many astrophotographers created amazing photographs of Mars using Webcams."
Just a clarification, so you can compare what I'm talking about in my other post. A dobson is a newtonian reflector (has a huge mirror, and good brightness) with a dobsonian mount. Dobsonian mount is the cheapest possible. You cannot adjust it to the ecliptic plane, etc. Also such dobson is quite good for deep-sky (big mirror = big brightness), and terrible for planets (blurry view on high magnifications due to airflow turbulences and cannot track planet moevement on the sky due to cheap dosbon mount). Personally I'd advice against dobson, because after the initial enthusisam wears down, you get tired by the unconfortability of working with dobson mount. It's like using debian 4 years ago (eg. woody release) compared with comfort of using kubuntu today ;) So get a better mount if you can. But that's expensive too. Oh well, if you can't spend more than that $1000 you gotta buy just binoculars.
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
If so, what would a basic setup generally look like? Any pointers to sites?
I would also recommend Celestia, because in addition to simulating the night sky it lets you "travel" to points of interests -- the planets and nearby stars, so you can view them from different angles. Lively modding community around that one, too.
I went through the same thing. I was fresh to amateur astronomy and didn't know what to do. My first warning: Don't spend to little on a telescope. $180 for a StarBlast is the lowest I'd pay for anything decent (and it is, I drool over it as a quick 'plop down and observe' scope from time to time). Second Warning: Astrophotography is insanely expensive. As in 10+ times your budget. Don't do it. If you really want to do astrophotography take a camera, put it on a tripod, point at the sky, set it as wide as you can and expose for 15 seconds for digital, a few hours for film. The results are quite nice.
Here's what my own experiences have taught me: Get a Dobsonian. With $1000 you can get a 10"-12" Dobsonian and still have tons of room for accessories. A dobsonian is very portable compared to a refractor and with near zero setup and takedown using it is much easier than a refractor too. 10" is a lot of aperture and you won't catch the "aperture fever" for something bigger for a while. The scope I eventually got is an Orion XT10 Intelliscope, but you may not want the computerization with your budget.
I found the people at Cloudy Nights very, very helpful. They have reviews of lots of products as well as their forums and they tend to specialize in getting the most out of your money.
As far as books go, I use Nightwatch by Terence Dickinson every night I observe just for the charts. Star Watch by Philip Harrington goes well with Nightwatch as good place to find new objects for the beginner. A lot of people suggest Turn Left at Orion, but I fount it to be a bit slow and the charts lacking in lower magnitude stars for their size.
1000$ aren't enough for astrophotography, but try considering used telescopes. You'll have to look around a bit, but used equipment is less expensive and, if it was kept in good condition (as it is by every serious hobbyist, as telescopes can be very delicate), as good as new equipment.
But really, 1000$ is not enough for photography, even if you don't do digital astrophotography.
I wouldn't recommend digital astrophotography for a start anyway, as these cams either have low resolution and large amounts of noise (webcams) or are horribly, horribly expensive (CCD cameras for astrophotography). Consumer-grade digital SLRs don't offer the long exposure times needed for quality pictures, so I wouldn't buy one sppecifically for astrophotography. If you are interested, try using chemical film with a decent SLR. If you don't already have one, they can be bought incredibly cheap today, as fewer and fewer people are interested in chemical photography. For astrophotography, unless you want to make measurments (in which case a professional CCD camera should be advised), chemical photography generally means less hassle and lower cost with the only premise being the non-instantaneous nature of the images.
assuming you live at all close to one. Sometimes it's listed under Physics.
For a beginning setup, I would recommend a simple Meade telescope such as the ETX series (I have one of these). The telescopes are motor driven so they can accurately target and track objects, and have remote controls that let you program in coordinates to go seek out -- very useful when coupled with either a book of easy to find targets (like those star guides most bookstores carry) or software that lets you find interesting objects to look at. Personally I prefer, when looking around for pleasure, to use software on my computer to get a sense for what is up at any given time in the night, and then work with a book and a red flashlight (gotta have one of these - red flashlight won't hurt your night vision like a normal flashlight, or for that matter, the glow from a laptop screen). Software, although useful, takes some of the fun and challenge out of learning how to find things in the sky on your own. Besides, part of the fun of the hobby is getting to see everything in the sky that you look at while you seek out your target - using the computer to find things means you miss out on all those things in between the named objects.
You actually can get into astrophotography for a relatively low price. The only big requirements are that you get a camera that supports long exposure times and has a mount for a detachable lens (or, can be mounted onto the telescope above an existing eyepiece). You can buy eyepieces for the telescope that can attach to the camera to do photography through the telescope. Now, you won't be making pictures that are very high quality of things like nebulae and galaxies, but you would likely be able to practice and get used to the process on easier, bright and big targets like the moon. Taking a good, crisp picture of craters on the moon is no simple task, and that alone is easier than, say, getting a good picture of the Orion nebula. Once you choose a telescope, you should do some research on google to find a mount that fits the camera you have. You can likely come up with something to make a $300 digital camera work with your telescope if you do a little research. With $1000, a simple setup at home can easily be made to let you learn about the sky and take a few pictures to top it off. You won't be making anything that will be making it into Sky & Telescope, but you can set something up to learn enough about the process so that you can decide if a further investment into a better telescope or camera will be something you'll be willing to commit the time and effort to learning how to use. This is a hobby that takes time and effort, so it's wise to limit yourself to something simple and digestable early on so you can guage if you will have the patience to push it further and make a larger investment in a better setup.
http://www.astroimagen.com/
The photos that this guy manages to take are stunning! He gives full details about the process and equipment. The web is in Spanish, I hope it won't be a problem.
I just got into this, myself. First, I bought a pair of astronomy binoculars. They are 20x with 70mm lenses, quite inexpensive ($150) and certainly good enough to start with. They have a built-in tripod mount, which is not surprising considering the magnification (anything above 10x is likely too much for manual stabilization). I then purchased a piece of metal from the hardware store with some holes in it (a stabilizing bracket, I believe it's called), and some 1/4"-20 threaded bolts and thumbscrews. These are the same threading that a tripod uses, so bring a camera along to spot-check my numbers.
Attaching the metal to the binoculars, my digital camera to the metal, and the metal to an actual tripod, I was able to take -STUNNING- photographs of the moon during the recent eclipse. It didn't hurt that my girlfriend and I were coincidentally visiting Maui at the time so we visited the 10K foot peak at Haleakala. But to be honest, it would've been just as great from sea level as long as we got away from the street lights.
Now, to be clear: Yes, you basically just point the camera down the barrel of the binoculars, and yes it can be quite a challenge to get the alignment right at first... but keep trying. It will amaze you when it works. Make sure to set the camera's manual focus to infinity, and don't set the camera's exposure too long. At full optical zoom on the camera (3.8x) + binoculars (20x) I had to limit myself to the camera's version of ISO80 or the image would blur _from the rotation of the earth_. Another trick: set it to 5+ seconds delay for taking the picture. There'll be a lot of weight on the tripod and it'll be quite widely distributed so you'll need a few seconds as you pull your hand away for the contraption to stop vibrating and settle down. The magnification for the moon image was so high that it was nearly full-frame, and once I had the moon lined up I had about 15 seconds to take the picture before it started to move significantly out of frame.
There you go. Basic astrophotography with a bunch of stuff that you probably already have (digital camera, tripod), that you're going to want to buy anyways (cheap astro binoculars), and $5 worth of parts from the hardware store. Since I'm AC, I'll check back tomorrow if you have any questions relating to this. I highly recommend this trick as a way to whet your appetite for very little capital. You'll get stares and maybe a laugh or two until people see the results.
BG
PS - Check out you camera's manual. I discovered recently that my Canon point-and-shoot has the capability of taking up to a 15 second exposure. This isn't terribly useful at huge magnification because the image will blue so badly, but it makes for really cool pics when you're in a place so dark that you can see the Milky Way. Just set for "ISO400", 5+ sec exposure, give yourself a 10 sec delay to let the tripod vibration settle down, set it on a tripod pointing up, and press the button.
They give adequate magnification and a wide field-of-view.
You'll be astounded by how well suited they are for astronomy.
The best part is that if you don't cath the astronomy bug, you won't have blown all your cash on a telescope you'll probably never use again and the binos will be useful for other things besides astronomy.
Get a pair in the 7x50 - 1-x50 range... very good and inexpensive.
although this will use up your budget on a small telescope (90mm or less apeture) (limiting the deep sky objects you can see) you'll find that you can set the thing up quickly and get it to point to things in the sky that you cannot see by eye. This will allow you to work out where things are.
When you're ready you can get a good motorised 6-8" reflector for less than $1000 with a good mount and this will open up the deep sky objects nicely.
Liquid Mirror Telescope
You can use iTunes to listen to free astromony courses. I highly recommend Astronomy 161 and Astronomy 162 by Dr. Richard Pogge at Ohio State. About 60 free hours of instruction you can listen to on-line or download to an iPod. There are other courses as well. They usually have an associated wed site for course materials.
As the other posts have indicated a good entry level astrophotography rig will run several grand. However, there is a lot of "obsolete" kit hitting ebay and astromart these days that can be made pretty capable. On your budget I would go with an old clock driven fork mounted SCT (ex. Celestron C8 or Meade LX50).
If you choose to get a telescope, as opposed to binoculars, it's vital to get one that points and tracks well. Otherwise, you spend too long finding targets. (This applies all the way up to 8m-class research telescopes.) Nothing kills the experience as much as not being able to find what you want.
If you get a telescope that you set up at the beginning of the night , as opposed to one permanently fixed in its own enclosure, then you need a drive system that is easy and quick to align. If you have to spend 2 hours each night aligning then it's too tedious. (Again, also true of research-level kit :-/) I believe that drives sold with good makes (Meade? Celestron?) self-align quite well and quickly; but beware of cheaper versions.
If you want to do long, timed exposures, then you either need a drive that tracks outrageously well (sub-arcsecond accuracy for best results) by itself, or you need a guiding system. A manual guiding system is an eyepiece with crosshairs (or a camera) coaxial with the main telescope. You continually tweak the drive motion to keep a bright star centred in the guider while the telescope itself observes something fainter. An autoguider (preferred) is a guide camera + computer that does it for you.
Quality of drive is as important as quality of optics for serious work and photography. It's much more important than the apeture of the telescope. A big telescope that doesn't point or track is useless.
Hi,
I did the same thing as you basically... Looked at setting myself up for some decent observing. Many posts before me have already said this but here are the key things I would do in your position:
1.) Don't buy a telescope (yet!). Most amateurs are given this advice but ignore it and go out and get a telescope straight away. If you don't really know what you are in for then you will a.) be disappointed and b.) Not get anywhere near the best out of your scope.
2.) Join an astro club. You already have so that is cool! You will get to use telescopes there and learn how to properly operated and observe using them. They may also have an astrograph for astrophotography as well. You can use this with a simple SLR that has an open shutter or unlimited exposure time setting. You will be amazed at what sort of cool pictures you can get without needing any fancy equipment early on. The astro club guys should also be able to tell you how to get the pictures developed because that is almost as important as the taking of the picture!
3.) Buy a pair binoculars. A pair of 10x50's will do but if you want to spend a bit more there are plenty of other options. I have a pair of 9x60 Celestron bino's which are brilliant. They cost a bit more (not much) but they are excellent for observing. Don't go to crazy with size. To big and you will struggle to hold them steady. 10x50's work really well.
4.) Learn how to navigate round the sky. With Bino's and naked eyes this is MUCH easier than a telescope. Get some software to help you get bearings. I use Starry Night (http://www.starrynight.com/products.html)which I find good, although later versions were a let down. As others have stated, there are plenty of free options, but many of them are not as good as the cheap commercial products for actual observing. There are plenty of websites as well that provide up to date skymaps as well.
5.) Once you have spent time observing with the club and their scopes and your binos, look at getting a telescope. Do some research as there are tonnes of options. Basic rule I found was if you want to look at the solar system and planets get a refractor, if you want to do deep space stuff get a reflector. Remember its not the tube that does the magnifying, its the eye piece so eye piece selection as very important as well. Very very basic rule... There are tonnes of options and types of scope. But you DONT want to get a small toy one like a 90mm job. You need to spend at least $700 on your scope I'd say. Ask your club for advice on this one! If you want to do astrophotography, get a scope that you can mount a camera to and a tripod that can have a drive motor attached.
6.) Buy yourself a drive motor and camera mount for your scope and take your own photo's!
Hope this helps!
James
First things first... decide if you want the focus of the hobby to be the scopes or the stargazing.
If you're serious about the stargazing, forget the pricey glass. Get a decent set of binoculars and a few good books, and one of those plastic "Star Wheel" sky charts.
For the binocs, a basic pair of 10x70's will set you back a hundred and fifty bucks or so online. For the books, try Astronomy for Dummies and Left Turn at Orion. Also, your library will have back issues of Sky and Telescope - read 'em, and then visit their site. They have star maps you can print out that shows what's worth looking at each month. Try not to be too put out by their over-agressive marketeering.
The learning curve will be steeper than a big-bucks robotic "Goto Scope" that aims and focuses for you, but with a nice lawn chair, some decent binoculars and a rough understanding of what you're pointing them at, a night under the stars won't fail to deliver a few thrills.
Once that gets old, then look into the big-money glass. Telescopes, on their own, are a pretty damn rewarding hobby, especially once you get into making and modding them yourself. But unless you really, really know what you're after, dropping a grand on glass isn't a good idea. It likely won't be anywhere near what you want once you understand what that is.
Ignore parent talking about relfectors and refractors. The Newtonian (not "Newton") is perfectly suitable for planets but it's true that a refractor is better because of the absence of the obstruction caused by the secondary mirror. All the stuff about turbulance isn't really relevant. Once the scopes cooled to ambient tempertatures there is no more turbulance in the tube.
/good/ equatorial could cost you a LOT more than a Dobsonian of the same aperture. So you choose: either pay for tripods and steel counter-weights (eq.) or pay for mirror diameter (Dob.). A Dob is /fast/ to set up so you're more likely to use it. It has no computer drives, etc, do you have to learn to find objects yourself (get "Turn Left at Orion"--it's by far the best book for learning how to find things up in the sky). There's a real sense of achievement in learning to track down a galaxy located 50 million light years away. The Meade LX5600XP-BLAH with computer-powered whatsit will find it for you in seconds and you won't appreciate it... And you pay for the electronics...
/that/ much bulkier...
Parent also has no clue about what an apochromatic lens is. Ignore what he says and look on Wikipedia for correct explaination.
You won't get sensible astrophotography for 1,000 so steer clear for now. Go for a Newtonian for the simple reason that you get more aperture for your dollar. That means more light and an ability to see dimmer objects. Your main choice will be Dobsonian (a simple azimuth mount) or an equatorial (complex and heavy but needed to for astriphotography). A
If you buy a Dob you could eventually mount it on a Eq. stand and add a camera so it's an investment. I have a 8.75" and found that very suitable but a 10" or a 12" won't be
Hi
This probably isn't the kind of advice you're looking for, but what the hell, this is an open forum.
I'm a total idiot when it comes to astronomy, but I still love stargazing.
Something that helped my motivation on particularly cold nights was having friends over to my house, where I could talk about some of the things I've managed to identify.
One of my most useful acquisitions was a laser pointer, mostly for helping point out stars and constellations to friends. If you've ever had the experience of somebody who knows what they're doing saying "see that there... no there... no look where I'm pointing" and been frustrated by it, then get a pointer. A reasonably cheap green one has a range of several metres, long enough for the casual observer to work out what it is you're referring to. If you don't believe me that this actually works, then borrow one and try it!
-Drew
A decent pair of wide field binoculars and a good sturdy tripod (20x60's weigh like 6 pounds so a tripod is a must). I recently picked up a pair of 20x75 Russian bins for less than £200 (US$400) and a surveyor's tripod for £30 (US$60). If you have an SLR camera with an M42 mount it wouldn't be a stretch to build a ring adapter for one side of the binocular and spot with the other side, you can get some good closeups of the moon and some of the brighter deepsky objects (LMC/SMC/M33/M42, etc.). Being in the middle of a city I found that film was getting a bit expensive particularly with a lot of shots being spoilt by streetlighting bloom, so I started to experiment with CMOS and CCD. I quickly came to the realisation that a supercooled CCD was far more sensitive than any film, and so went for broke and bought a cheap secondhand palmcorder. A freon cooling system later and I'm taking shots of the Pleiades cluster in the middle of a major metropolis!
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
Either a Meade ETX or a small Newtonian on a equatorial mount for the scope. Either one will give you a motor-driven imaging platform that you need for any kind of astrophotography. For a camera suggestion, if you have a notebook computer, an inexpensive webcam ($115 or so), and a free program called Registax will get you into lunar and planetary photography without breaking the bank.
I heartily recommend listening to all the other episodes too.
(1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
...I used an Olympus OM10 film SLR and Bausch/Lomb 650mm* Schmidt lens. Awesome shots of Mars, Jupiter and Saturn, I could even make out cloud bands in early dawn Venus.
/need/ a solid tripod and a shutter cable.
*for SLR don't consider anything less than 500mm unless you're doing wide-field; if you can, get a Schmidt. Whatever you do, steer well clear of zoom telephoto, the lens systems in these things are just too lossy to be any use at all. Either way you absolutely
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
Hi, Go to a few star parties (take your camping gear-the most interesting amateurs don't pack up and head home at 10am...) Most people will be glad to let you look at what they are viewing (ask first) and will happily talk your ear off about what they like and don't like and would do differently in their next telescope. Arrive at the star party well before sunset so you dont ruin everyone's night vision and astrophotographs with your vehicle's lights (all of them- interior and exterior-no white light-cover it with red), make sure you read the star party rules well before the date. Most astronomy clubs have star parties at least once a month-all weekend. Spend a few months learning about the different telescopes hands on in the field using them. Don't be in a hurry for your own telescope-if you can't stand it then get a pair of binoculars-you'd be surprised what you can see. If you have never lived or camped in truely dark skies-you have never seen the sky before :) You won't believe what you can see with your naked eyes. Don't worry if you can't see a lot or what you expect thru a telescope at first-your eyes have to learn to see. What looks like faint fuzzy nothing will eventually become amazing and diverse nebulas and galaxies. It is more than getting your eyes accustomed to the darkness.
Your club may have loaner telescopes and equipt-try this before buying one. Also people often also build their own telescopes and there are seperate clubs for this. There are also 2 large astronomy festivals devoted to telescope building. The Riverside Telescope Makers Conference Astronomy Expo (Ive been to this one-awesome) 3rd week of May in 2008 in southern California, and Stellafane on the east coast in Vermont. People compete for prizes for their telescope designs and give workshops on all aspects of amateur astronomy. Its a BLAST-a nerd heaven. Nothing beats camping out with other astronomy nuts :)
gentle mornin'
Great online tutorials - professional photographer - works for The Philadelphia Inquirer during the day as a sports photographer - Jerry Lodriguss
I've been down this road as well. My advice is to forget the astrophotography for now and go as big as you can afford. Skip all the electronics and other dodads. Get a dobsonian, and get ready to spend almost as much on eyepieces as you did on the telescope.
Dobsonians do have some downsides. I bought the Meade 16" with a particle board base (7 years ago). The base is not really strong enough and the scope will vibrate every time you move it across the sky. It takes a few seconds to settle down, but you get used to it. Its bulky as well, but manageable if you have room in your garage. Also, its completely manual, so you are going to have to learn to find things in the sky yourself.
The upside is that you have put as much money as you can into your scope diameter. When you look at Orion's nebula, you'll actually see it! Not some fuzzy blob that is supposed to be Orion's nebula. When you look at Jupiter and Saturn, you'll see details you'll never see in a smaller refractor. I also have a Meade ETX, and almost never use it because the images are a joke compared to the 16" dob. I only use it to look at the moon, now.
You'll also need to get the best eyepieces you can as they will make the biggest difference in your scopes performance. I started with the Meade eyepieces, which are okay, but after doing some research, I purchased a Televue Nagler, 27mm, I think. Once I saw the view of the sky through it, I began to replace all my Meades with Naglers and haven't touched the Meades since. I would say plan on a minimum of 2. Which two are going to depend on the focal length of your scope, but if you get a big dob, say 10+", then I would recommend a low power one, such as the 27mm for really nice wide field views, and a moderate power one, such as a 10mm for looking at the planets. You can go slightly higher in power (or lower in eyepiece focal length), but then you'll run into the problem of a small field of view, which makes using a dobsonian very frustrating.
Unfortunately, you won't be able to do any astrophotography through the dob. Its just too unstable. But I have never regretted the purchase as I can look at the sky with my eyes and see things close to the way they are shown in pictures.
Got my first one in Februray, just got my second one. I whole heartedly agree that the mount is king. You must have a good one. The best thing I've seen so far in your posting is that you have joined your local club. You'll learn more in one night with a club member then you'l learn in a thousand /. posts.
I live in a city so light pollution is terrible. But, I get a lot of enjoyment with my binoculars. I've found dozens of Messier objects in the city. Sure, they are faint smudges but the joy has been in being able to find them.
When I'm at my dark site, I use a GoTo mount. Some sneer and be aware that this will happen, even from members of your club. In my opinion they are worth it when starting out. On the other hand, all that complexity can bring frustration (hence I'm on my second scope...) and frankly, it isn't that hard to point a scope at the sky yourself.
Your club my have loaner scopes and it may even own a darksite with some quality scopes in the observatory. (Mine does!)
And finally, you should really consider buying used. Both my scope were used and I spent far less than I would have new, far, far less. Astromart.com is the site to visit, not ebay, when buying scopes. But ask around your club, odds are somebody is selling one. You'll get expert advice, not worry about shipping, and you'll make a new friend in the club.
Paul
If you had $400 or $40,000 it doesn't matter, my advice is the same. Get an 8" Dobsonian (roughly $350 new, but lots available used, just get someone that knows 'sopes to check it out before you buy used). It is amazing what you can see with one of these simple telescopes, and it will teach you the sky because they lack motorized mounts. Next addition is some good eyepieces, they make a huge difference and stay with you as you upgrade the scope, good eyepieces last forever.
Fancy computerized mounts are great, but they are too much of a crutch for the beginning astronomer. I've met people that have been viewing the sky for years but still don't know anything more than the obvious constellations. It is like trying to learn to sail in an America's cup boat, you learn far easier in a simpler boat.
Two things I'd strongly recommend. First, never buy department store telescopes, or any others that advertise their magnifying power, you will not enjoy these and leave the hobby in a few weeks. Second, forget photography until you are much more accomplished, and can afford to spend a lot more than $1000. We have all been spoiled by Hubble photos, and you will be incredibly frustrated trying to come up with a photograph that looks anything like what you can find for free on the web, especially if you aren't spending $5,000 or more for the equipment.
http://www.atmlist.net/
;)
You get way more scope for the buck. Many commercial scopes aren't that high in quality. Even poorly made first mirrors can out perform commercial mirrors. Sad, but I can tell you that from personal experience.
As many people have said here $1,000 for Astrophotography is not really going to get you a great deal. I speak with experience as I tried to do
exactly this. I expect you to ignore this as everybody thinks they can get something for nothing.
Lessons I learnt:
1) The mount is more important than the scope. For Astrophotography you need the sturdiest mount you can afford.
2) The mount is more important than the scope. Repeated just in case you forgot it the first time.
3) Don't buy a scope off eBay unless you really, really, really know what you are doing. Ignore the cheap scopes that advertise themselves based on the magnification. Any scope (and I mean *ANY*) scope that advertises itself based on 675x or 300x is junk, no exceptions. Most cheap Chinese Newtonian reflectors on eBay use spherical primary mirrors. These are useless, junk and a waste of money.
4) Most mounts on eBay are rubbish and junk. See points 1) and 2). Exceptions are Losmandy, Televue, Williams Optics and a very few others. Most people do not sell their second hand gear on eBay. They use Astromart or Cloudy Nights.
5) Join a local astronomy club and check out what everybody else uses. Ask them nicely and they may let you use their kit.
6) The best scope you have is the scope you use the most. You can get excellent results from small refractors (66mm or so). Check out the William Optics range. They will attach to cameras using a T-Adaptor.
7) If you want to do astrophotography then a reasonable German Equatorial Mount is the easiest (though not the only) way to do it. You will need a decent mount (see points 1 and 2) and a decent motor drive. The Vixen EQ5 range of mounts are pretty good, though there are others. You do not need GOTO on a mount to do photography, though it's sometimes a nice-to-have.
8) You can do pretty good photography with an ordinary camera and an ordinary camera lenses of just about any size. Clearly a 50mm lense is not going to give you a nice closeup of Saturns rings or Jupiter or any deep sky object, but check out what you can do with them on www.cloudynights.com. You will need something that tracks though to do long exposures (> 10 seconds). You can try and track manually. this is in the difficult to do category or you can use a decent GEM mount (see points 1 and 2) or use something like Astrotrac (http://www.astrotrac.com/prj104/html/104_3.htm). Astrotrac, a small 66mm or 77mm scope (e.g. Borg), a decent photo tripod will cost around $1,000 or so. This is pretty much the entry level. Of course now you need eye pieces, possible a finder, though with a 66mm or 77mm this is not really needed.
9) Astrophotography is hard. To do it properly you need to polar align your scope (make sure it's nice and level), you need to align and find your object. Mmm... I wonder which point in the sky that really is? You need to get your camera attached to the scope and then check that everything is focussed set up. Whoops, nudged the scope, lets start again. Ah! Digital cameras have noise and hot pixels, mmm...need to remove that, oh and I need darks and flats. It's not as easy as point your scope upwards and pressing the button.
10) Webcams are an easy (and cheap) way to get started. A cheap webcam (Phillips Toucam II is recognised as probably the best), a 1.25in adaptor and you're away. Connect it to a laptop and save that AVI file. Use Registax to take each frame and stack a couple of hundred. Check out Damian Peach for what he's done with webcams.
11) Allow a couple of years to become proficient. I class myself as a rank, useless amateur and I've spent a lot of time and money.
12) Once you get a decent picture you'll be hooked. Assume you will then spend all your disposable income on the latest Takahashi Mewlon or a high end TMB, Astro Phyics or Tec refractor.
13) Oh and just in case you've forgotten, the mount is more important than the scope!
Rob.
Seriously - H A Rey wrote one a good time ago. It's a nice intro, and is somewhat memory-friendly, if geared towards the younger set. I believe his treatment is a bit unorthodox, but its still is nice book.
google link to the book
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
For $1000 you are much better off buying a good laptop and visiting http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ everyday.
You can also check out porn sites that are much more interesting to look at.
I have had 3 good quality hobby level telescopes - a 6" Newton, and 2 8" cassys, one manual, one computer (goto). In looking back at my experiences, the first one was the only one that really gave me any pleasure, as I bought it for and observed Haley's comet. Everything else was disappointing. Astrophotography is out of the reach of hobbyist. Sure you can take some pictures, but the only thing you get out of them is the fact that you took them. They are nothing to look at compared to what is abundantly available elsewhere. The costs for equipment to get a decent picture is easily over $8k.
There is a certain enjoyment from doing it yourself and learning about the technology, but you can get that from many other hobbies as well. If you decide to proceed and spend your hard saved $1000, just be sure your expectations are set appropriately.
slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
The full spectrum of "astro", in increasing order of complexity and expense:
1. Binoculars & a book - learn the sky, see great wide-field objects too big for scopes. Hard to do photos. Cost: $50 and up.
2. Mount camera on still mount - make pictures of star trails, meteors, eclipses, etc. Incremental cost to step 1: $200 and up for camera, $300 and up for mount.
3. Mount camera on motorized "clock" mount that moves approximately at speed of earth rotation. Good enough for 30-60 second exposure times with a wide lens. Photograph bright star clusters (M13, etc.). Incremental cost: $150 and up for clock drive rig.
4. Buy portable scope & static mount - learn more sky, see planets, moons, etc. Incremental cost: $300 and up for scope. $800+ starts to get you something you may keep a long time.
5. Put scope on motorized clock mount from step 3, connect camera to scope. Good for 1-5 minute exposure times, depending on quality of mount. Photograph fainter clusters, stack exposures in software to image bright galaxies. Incremental cost: $100 for adapters to connect camera to scope.
6. Introduce closed-loop tracking control to your mount system. Typically requires a second, co-mounted scope & low-quality camera for tracking guide starts. Requires PC and software, all-freeware solutions readily available. Can image almost anything - limited by sky conditions and quality of equipment, primarily scope optics and quality of mount mechanics/drives. Incremental cost: $150 for cheap tracking scope, $50 for webcam to use as tracking camera, $100+ for clamps etc. to piggyback tracking scope on main imaging scope.
7. Make upgrades to mount, drives, primary imaging scope, camera. Invest in filters, etc. Incremental cost: Start thinking in units of $1000.
8. ???
9. Profit! (just kidding)
I have run the whole gamut and find myself spending most time now doing 1. and 3. because it's fast, fun, and easy to teach/involve kids, friends, etc.
My next upgrade will probably be a really nice set of binoculars.
I can heartily recommend the Astronomy Hacks book (Amazon Link (no referrer ID)), which is part of O'Reilly's "Hacks" series. Average 5* reviews from 48 reviews.
Note to ACs: I won't mod you up, even if you are being funny or insightful. So take a chance! It's not real life!
Invest the 1000$ and wait until you have ~200 000$ to spend on equipment. It is probably faster way to good astrophotos than to try to make things work with mediocre and self combined equipment. You may choose to make things ATM way, but learning and selfmade system will take longer than making the money. You probably miss some of the ATM phun...
If someone disagrees, then as valid argument I take your selfmade near perfect RC 24", your selfmade EM-CCD camera and your selfmade mount with raw PEC below 2 arc sec, able to tolerate loads over 300 kg, all made in about 10 years.
http://www.starhouseobservatory.com/
Starhouse Observatory is an amateur research observatory operated by Michael Koppelman near Minneapolis, Minnesota.
The site will give you a run down of the equipment, the building (complete with blue prints and where to get the fiber glass dome), some of the research done at the observatory (which you can participate in too), and a nice little blog.
Definitely worth a visit.
In general, if you want a scope of your own, you go right ahead and get one, don't over-research exactly which one to get. Good advice that I echo - get something SIMPLE to set-up and start looking through, in practice for beginners this mostly means being able to lift and carry it outside -easily- with both hands (and preferably just one), and be able to plonk it down and have it ready to look through in no more than 5 minutes.
Despite all the talk of an equatorial mounted set-up, IMO this pretty much cuts the options down to a pair of decent binoculars, an 8" or maybe 10" f6 Dobsonian (a newtonian scope on a cradle-and-turntable mount, sure you already knew that tho, set up time = not much longer than takes to carry it outside and take the covers off) with a couple of good eyepieces and a Barlow/Powermate, and for imaging, a "Toucam Pro" webcam (this has a removeable lens so you can use the CCD straight on the end of the scope) and a copy of Registax on your computer.
You've said you're interested in astrophotography, however as well as picking up the kit there's a whole **LOT** of craft skill to pick up too, especially for long-exposure deep-sky work. For starting out imaging, ie meeting the challenge of GETTING a good picture at all before you start going after the challenging targets too, I'd say that your budget is definitely at the very bottom end for a driven equatorial set-up, and might easily land you with something fiddly enough to get good results out of that it will put you off.
In comparison, a manually-driven Dobsonian + webcam + Registax software gives you more than enough bright easy targets to get started with, and if you find you DO want to do long exposures, an equatorial platform (a driven stand that you just stick the manually-aimed Dobsonian on top of) will give you about 20-30 minutes of tracking. Before you do any of that tho, ask one of the astro-club members if you can join them for an imaging session one night so you can see what's involved.
And to echo Starwanderer, for astrophotography a solid mount is UTTERLY essential, if you don't have that you might as well not bother at all, and yes, one of those can very easily cost several times your total budget, the top of the range amateur-class mounts are more than ten times it.
You might want to consider including in your budget a bino-viewer for visual work with the telescope, using two eyes is WAY better than one, you can see much better detail with both eyes working, and your new dark-sky site will give you SO SO SO *SOOOO* many things to work them on 8-)
It does of course also mean needing 2 of each eyepiece, some of the cheaper eyepieces on the market are REALLY good, check the reviews on the astronomy websites like Cloudy Nights and Astromart.
Oh, and second-hand kit is usually the best way for getting started, LOTS of amateur astronomers out there selling lots of well looked after old kit to finance buying new toys, sorry, equipment.
A good way to get started is an entry level Dobsonian mounted Newtonian reflector of about the 4' to 8" range depending on what's on sale and your level of light pollution. They sometimes will come with some starter lenses. If not that route, a good set of QUALITY binoculars. Check www.telescope.com, this is the home page for Orion who sells tons of astronomy stuff and has several getting started guides. Later, get good glass; i.e. lenses (glass is everything). This is true for the SLR area as well. The camera body is nothing, the glass is everything. Any old 35mm body will work, actually better than digital because of the overheating issues with CCDs. Thing is, $1000 would get you either a really good scope, OR a good mount and coming from having a really crappy mount, the mount is more important as you can change the scope body with a larger aperture very easily. Crappy mounts shake and are hard to control, imagine finally finding Saturn, then you go to focus and it moves the scope and you loose it, ugh. Happy viewing.
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
First thing I would do is to subscribe to Sky and Telescope and start reading it cover to cover.
Second, you need to ask yourself, do you want to do Science, or have fun, or something more like Art ? If you want to do science, you should look into
- asteroid occultations (these always need more data) or
- variable star observing (look into the AAVSO or
- searching for or confirming new comets
Astronomy as a science requires patience and is generally unglamorous.
If you want to do Art (i.e., pretty astronomical pictures) you may want to get a an equatorial mount. With your budget, you will likely find a Dobsonian telescope mount a better choice if you just want to look at objects with your eyes. In any case spend more time and effort selecting your mount than your telescope. This is the biggest mistake most beginners make.
Astronomical telescopes must be very steady, which means a sturdy mount, ideally mounted directly into the ground. Most department store telescopes are OK, but their mounts are hopeless. If your mount wobbles, because it is cheaply made, vibrates in the wind, etc., your telescope is not likely to see much use.
I read in an astronomy magazine that a budding astronomer should first buy a high powered pair of binoculars (10mm x 50mm) and star charts, plus a red LED flashlight.
That way, you get used to pointing out where things are in constellations. You also find out if you can handle the long nights, getting your eyes used to darkness and waiting, waiting, waiting.
It takes about an hour to get used to the darkness. Red LED flashlights also keep your eyes dilated, having little effect on night vision.
If you get good at doing things the "old-fashioned way", then buy from somebody on EBay, who spent the big bucks and found out they weren't as interested as they originally thought.
Worst case, you got a good pair of binoculars and saved about a grand.
Best case, you learned a lot more about astronomy and will be able to find anything by constellation.
Of course, download and use Stellarium. They have a red night vision mode you can take with you on a laptop. (I'd still recommend dimming the display as much as possible and enabling a 1 minute monitor shutdown, to keep your eyes).
Also, go to http://heavens-above.com/ for more information about tracking objects in the sky. (Be sure to synchronize your clock to the atomic clock, since satellites and other objects wait for nobody). Watching satellites pass is a good way to keep yourself interested in astronomy, while you wait, wait, wait.
Heavens-above.com and Stellarium are excellent planning tools, as are your handy star charts.
. . . about a local astronomy club?
It could be called "Waiting for NGC 1068" or "This is Thermal Distortion" or "A Mighty Catadioptric."
What?
There was a Science friday topic on this late last year that answered a lot of the same questions for me. You can try to dig up the podcast if you like ("Winter Sky" 12/01/2006). It didn't have specific brand advice but the two things I remember being most helpful were: 1) a good mount is as important, if not moreso, than the telescope. And 2) he had a good recommendation for a key optical ratio, which I've of course forgotten. The podcast is ony 20 minutes, though, so might be worth your time.
Do not buy anything, except binoculars and a star finder, before you go it a starry night party and try a few instruments. Good binoculars will cost 20$ to 100$, something like 7x50 to 10x50 will be perfect. You don't need Celestron or Bushnell binoculars; any no-name brand will do as long as you have a 50mm apertume.
I live on a small rural plot too. Here are the suggestions that the local astronomy porn shop made to me, which I followed, and couldn't have been happier with.
1. Buy a good guide book on the sky 2. Buy a good (I mean good) pair of binoculars 3. Go outside and learn your way around the sky without computer assistance
Once you have visually mastered touring the sky, and only once you've done that, are you ready to go buy a telescope. But before you run out and drop a 1000 bucks (or more) go to your local astronomy club and attend some of their meetings so you have a chance to look through various types of instruments. You will be amazed at the amount of money that some of these people have dropped on their scopes.
Personally, I have a Stellarvuew Nighthawk and a Meade LXD75 6" refractor. Both are great scopes but cost more than a comparably sized reflector. I prefer planetary observation, and some of the Messier objects. All in all, I've probably dropped about $3000 on astronomy stuff.
One more thing, a smaller scope that you actually use is worth more than the larger one you don't use often. One thing we in the country have in our favor is that we can often mount a large scope permanently outside. I have not done this but I personally know people who have and it is convenient.
Good luck.
Democrats and Republicans are like AIDS and Cancer, I want neither!
get yourself a nice telescope, and spend all your money on the optics. you might even purchase the optics from edmund scientific or other such low cost option, and opt to make your own lens/mirror mounts and adjusters(old micrometers) as well as the tubes(concrete forming sonotubes perhaps).
reflective vs refractive? personally i'd choose a reflective(parabolic mirror, single fold; fewer surfaces for distortion/abbaration) over refractive, but that's a matter of what you can purchase at the time. at the end of the day it's all about bending as much light as possible... the bigger the optics, the brighter the image. if you do choose to go the refractive route, make sure you are purchasing achromatic optics, to minimize chromatic abbarations. if you choose the reflective route, consider a mirror with 1/4 or 1/2 wave flatness versus 1/10 wave for cost reasons. colter and mead are two possible brands for mirrors.
grind your own? i was actually looking into this myself a few years ago. in chicago, the adler planetarium held classes(more like a club) for mirror grinding: material ordering, grinding stand, flatness checking, vacuum deposition contractor. for a nominal fee, you could take a class, learn to grind a mirror, and get professional astronomy advise for building your own telescope... sounds like your moving to the boonies, but maybe your close enough to a metro city to have access to periodic visits to an academic center that might have offers of this sort.
three can keep a secret, if two are dead - benjamin franklin
I completely overbought when I got into astronomy. I got a 210mm reflector from Takahashi. It's a great scope, but it's just too much hassle to bring out on ordinary nights. I wish I had gone with a refractor (I'm probably going to sell my rig to get a good refractor with enough left over for a plasma TV). Telescopes with mirrors have to cool down before you can make out any details. A good apochromatic refractor has superb image quality more or less immediately. Get a refractor with a shorter focal length (maybe f5, no more than f8) -- the shorter the focal length the wider the field of view, which helps astrophotography. You might look over on www.astromart.com, which looks like it has a great classified section for new/used top-notch stuff. See if someone is letting go of a Takahashi Sky 90 or a similar scope from Televue, TMB, or Williams Optics.
The S&T website is also a good resource for information: http://www.skytonight.com/
== First cross river, then insult alligator.
Set aside astrophotography at this point. You don't have the money to get worthwhile results; even a decent mount would blow your entire budget.
Get good binoculars (veeery good is within your budget) and a good starter book. A good starter project would be to observe as many of the Messier catalog objects as you can with a pair of good binoculars. If you are interested enough to complete this project, you will know whether you want to invest in the astrophotography gear; otherwise you end up with a nice pair of binoculars you can use for birding or casual astronomy.
Alternatively, reasonably good binoculars (even cheap binoculars are surprisingly good for what you pay), a modest telescope, and a good book.
In any case, binoculars. Avoid the massive astronomical binoculars (10x70, 30x80 etc) -- they are specialized instruments and really need a tripod. You want something light and convenient, with a wide field of view. The best way to get started observing is to observe, and you'll observe most often with the most convenient instrument. 7x50s or 8x40s are good choices. You don't want higher magnification because you won't be able to hold them steady enough. 7x50s have the maximum light gathering power that can be handheld and used by most people when they are dark adapted. 8x40s can also be handheld because they are lighter. You are more likely to use them for other purposes.
Things to look for in binoculars: full multicoating, bak-4 prisms, wide field of view. If you wear glasses, you will also want to find out the eye relief -- how far you have to hold them from your face. Binoculars with short eye relief have to be mashed up against your face. Avoid zoom binoculars -- they're good for sporting events, but they don't have good optics. Porro prism binoculars (the standard z-body shape) are less expensive for the same quality than roof prism binoculars (eye pieces in line with the objetives); there are very fine examples of each though.
You might want to go to a local dealer and try out the binoculars. There is nothing like looking through a pair of really good binoculars. You'll also get a sense for what a difference light weight makes. Some of the more expensive Swift binoculars that are meant for birding are very good, but are very light. Compare this to the binoculars many people consider to be the optical gold standard: Fujinon's 7x50 FMT-SX marine binoculars. These are built like a tank and weigh like one too.
You need to spend about $100 to get a pair of decent binoculars. Like everything else, returns are logarithmic in investment: Going from $100 to $300 you get about as much as you get by going from $300 to $1000.
If you plan to get a telescope, spend $100 to $200 on your binoculars. Buy three books: (1) Turn Left at Orion [guide for small telescope users], (2) Touring the Universe through Binoculars: A Complete Astronomer's Guidebook; (3) National Audubon Society Pocket Guide to Constellations of the Northern Skies. Later when you are serious you can get a good star atlas. If you don't plan to buy a telescope, you might consider image stabilizing binoculars like Canon's 18x50s. A good pair will blow your entire budget, but is a worthwhile investment.
As for the telescope itself, I will be heretical here and say you don't need a really good telescope to start. You could even go with something like a 70 or 90mm spotting scope. You can get a very nice spotting scope and mount it on a strudy tripod or alt-azimuth mount well within your budget. The key is to get a quality instrument and a decent mount. When you start astrophotography (which I know little about), you will want to have an auxillary instrument in any case. Also, for manual observations, remmeber that eyepieces are half the optical system; they make a huge difference, so you might consider getting a more modest telescope and better eyepieces.
On the other hand, if you have a dark location, you can really go to town with light gathering power.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
On your budget, I'd suggest you consider a Philips SPC900NC webcam (the successor to the popular Toucam). It's $100. It comes with software. You can use various free stacking software. There are loads of sites that coach you on the easy mods you can make to the camera itself. You can't do extremely long exposures, but you can get a lot of good experience and great pictures. Maybe you want to do quantitative photography rather than just pretty pictures? Think about doing amateur spectroscopy. You can pick up a Rainbow Optics grating for $250. All the software you need is free. It and the Philips, and an inexpensive scope and a cheap mount is all you need to detect the composition of stars that are many light years away! Light pollution and "aperture envy" are minimal. Or, (and I doubt this is what you had in mind either) consider solar observing. (You don't have to sacrifice your sleep for it!) I the past few years, Coronado's PST (for $600) has made good solar observing possible on a budget. You can use the Philips camera on it too. Yes, these are all somewhat different answers than what you were looking for. But, it's where I'm focusing my time now. Good vendors: astrovid.com, OPT, Company7.
http://www.philharrington.net/sw2.htm
Before you buy anything, check out this book. It will give you a very good overview of what's out there and what it costs.
You've had a lot of replies pointing out that binoculars are the way to start. Good advice, of course.
Well, if you had no budget at all, you could still get in to the skies. All you need is your eyes. Whilst bins and scopes massively open up what is visible to you, your eyes still do the seeing and they can see a lot more than you may realise at first:
- You need to adapt to night vision - takes up to 30 minutes
- You need to be able to use your peripheral vision (rods) to see more at night
- You need to bring your muscles and mind under control to gain a stable view
- These apply just as much with scopes as with naked eye, so this is valuable training wherever the hobby takes you
All the constellations and 5 planets are viewable with the naked eye. Andromeda, M44 etc are also spottable. The major moons of Jupiter and Saturn. Training your eyes to see at night and training your mind to know what you are seeing is great physical and mental exercise and requires no equipment whatsoever, just access to star charts and ephemeral information.
Just your eyes and a sense of wonder...
I'd suggest you check the forums at http://www.dpreview.com/ for any questions in astrophotography, or photography in general.
Don't spend so much money if you are just staring out with astronomy. See what astronomy is all about by taking a class at a local university or astronomy club, subscribe to a few magazines, and buy a few books -- especially ones with a star chart or two. A number of people have mentioned software as well...
If you really want to buy something expensive right now, you might want to invest in a pair of nice binoculars first. With a set of binoculars you can explore the sky a bit and get a sense of the items that you are interested in -- planetary, deep sky or both. Although my first scope was a wonderful Meade ETX 90 with an Autostar controller, I would have been happier if I had spent the same amount of money on a non-computerized Dobsonian telescope with a 10" (or greater) aperture, rather than the ETX's 3.5" aperture. I am interested in deep sky stuff, especially nebula -- as such my initial purchase of an ETX was perhaps not the wisest choice -- I could have spent the money on a larger aperture, non computerized, telescope...
Good luck, and have fun!
My advice - learn the sky first. There's tons to see, and you'll need practice finding it. If you've been interested in astronomy, maybe you already have used binoculars (which is a good start) to scan the sky. If you're in a hurry and want to get your first telescope, I'll give the advice that was given to me -- get a Dobsonian reflector. Dobs are very easy to set up, don't require alignment, and are generally lighter (important if you're planning on carrying your scope). The downside is that you have to manually track what you're looking at, and simply can't do astrophotography. As many people have said, you'll have a hard time getting a good telescope with a good mount with a drive system for under $1000. What you can do is spend ~$500 on something like the Orion SkyQuest XT8 Intelliscope (that's what I have and I love it), use it for a while (maybe a couple years depending on how frequently you take it out) and get to know the night sky, then when you've saved up that $1000 again in your astronomy budget, get a nice equatorial mount for it with a drive system, put some rings on the tube and attach it to the mount instead of the Dobs base. Oh, and order a Barlow lens along with the scope. Also, I really enjoy having a solar filter - why limit your telescope to night use??
The time you spend learning the sky with your Dobs will also help you decide if you want to spend the extra money for the fancy mount, camera, etc.
One thing I'll point out that may be blindingly obvious to some, but comes as a surprise to others... for the most part, images in your telescope appear in black-and-white to the naked eye. There simply isn't enough light for your eye to detect color. Once you get a spiffy camera and that fancy mount, the longer exposure pictures will get you all the color you want.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1auTp6qJcM/
I'd say this is great advice. I built a telescope years ago, only to discover that I enjoyed building it a lot more than actually looking through it. More accurately, than lugging it somewhere, setting it up, and then finally getting to see something small and bright. The one I built has an 8" mirror, so it's really too bright to look at the moon through, it hurts your eyes. I'm sure there are tons of telescopes out there that never get used.
To get into full blown astrophotography you can break down the cost as: 1/3 for the mount 1/3 for the scope and 1/3 for the camera. I tried to go cheap my first round, and it was an exercise in frustration. Currently my set up is around $10,000, and I'm still learning.
But for what it sounds like, go simple. If you are really committed to it, avoid the GOTO scopes - you will thank yourself later. Get as much aperture as you can afford, get a simple mount (a dobsonion setup is a good start once you are determined to spend some money). Get familiar with the skis (this is the key reason for not using a GOTO scope). Find out what you like to view. Is it planets?, Deep Sky Objects (DSO's); galaxies, nebula's, star clusters? Once you've determined that and if you are still interested in doing astrophotography then you can tune the type of telescope to the type of objects you want to image.
If/when you decide to get into astrophotograph, if you have a dark enough sky and the property, build a little observatory (a rolloff is fairly simple). Get a good equatorial mount and build up from there.
IC405 I took this image from the Pawnee Grasslands about 100 miles north of Denver, CO. I used a Takahashi TOA 130 telescope (a 5" refractor) with focal reducer (FL 860mm f/5.73), on a Losmandy G11 mount, ST-4 autoguider, and a Canon 20Da digital SLR. It is two 10 minute exposures at ISO 400, aligned, stacked, and processed using GIMP.
Let us take this one step at a time ok? Buy Cambridge Star Atlas by Wil Tirion and do some naked eye observing. Just look up at the sky and see if you can identify major constellations. If the sky is really dark and your eyes have sufficiently acclamatised to the darkness, even with the naked eye you can see the andromeda galaxy (M31), double cluster in casseopia, orion (M42), pleides (M45) etc. They wont be swirling galaxies of stars like in computer simulations but it will motivate you to think 'what is in that fuzz'. This indeed would have driven ancient astronomers to build telescopes. Dont deny yourself that. Then buy a pair of 10x50 binoculars. These are higher powered than birding binoculars, medium heavy but comfortable to hold for long periods of time. 12x60 maybe suitable too if you are strong. But it will be heavier than the 10x50. Binoculars are amazing - they give a spectroscopic view, a wide field of view and combined with a dark sky is just spectacular. Your enthusiasm will dampen a bit when you view the same sky with 1 eye thru a telescope with mirror 3 times the power of a 10x50. Yes, you will see more detail but its not so spectacular. Still with binoculars, M31 will be a fuzz, but M42 and M45 are nicely represented. M35, M34 are fine too. See in a few months if you are still interested in astronomy. If you are then consider buying a 4.5 inch (mirror radius) reflector telescope with a dobsonian mount. Now most folks in astronomy clubs will say 4.5" is good only for planets and just a few big galaxies like M31. They will say start with a 6" or 8" or even 10" telescopes. Beware of these people. They have 18" telescopes and are still not happy. The 6, 8 and 10" are heavy scopes. You can lift a 4.5" with one hand. When the sky is cloudy and it has just cleared, you will be more motivated to take out that 4.5" than a 6" (if you have an 8 or 10" well forget it). And whats wrong with planets? Its a beauty to see the rings of Saturn with your own eyes and 4.5" will do a great job. And unless you are doing astrophotography, get a Dobsonian mount *not* equatorial mount. Dobsonian is a pleasure to use and with a spotting scope mounted on top you can find anything. I bought an Orion Starblast 4.5" dobsonian http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=4644&itemType=PRODUCT&RS=1&keyword=starblast and very happy with it. Remember the most powerful telescope is the one that gets used. Usually interest in astronomy damps in a year or gets feverish enough that the spouse is alarmed. If it is the latter, you can always give away the Starblast and buy yourself a bigger scope and all trinkets.
I was in the same spot a few years ago: I wanted to get into astronomy, but I didn't want to spend a lot of money. I saved my pennies for a while, and bought an Orion XT 6 Newtonian reflector on a Dobsonian mount for about $300. It includes the telescope, a finderscope, and two plossl eyepieces (25mm and 9mm).
I've been very happy with the purchase.
After a while, I also got a Barlow lens (doubles the magnification of your eyepiece), and a small plastic case for storing/carrying my lenses safely.
For the first year and a half I had the scope, I took it outside and looked at the starts once per month (making sure I always had a nice clear night). After that, my wife gave birth to twins, so my viewing stopped for a few years until they slept through the night. Now that the kids are older, I'm back to my monthly look at the sky. Some may criticize that monthly is not often enough to get the value out of my investment, but it works very well for me. I've learned quite a bit about stars, planets, and other objects. Also, I'm going at such a slow pace that I don't foresee a time when I'll "grow out of" my telescope.
I second the other folks who have recommended Celestia; it's a great piece of software.
Also, check out Amazon for a book called "Turn Left At Orion," by Guy Consolmagno, Dan M. Davis, Karen Kotash Sepp, and Anne Drogin. This is a great guide to finding objects in the night sky at all times of the year. The authors describe objects that are likely to look good when viewed through binoculars or a small-aperture telescope.
Another resource that I like is to pick up the occasional Sky & Telescope or Astronomy magazine, mainly for their monthly star charts and guides to the heavens.
Have fun!
I'd suggest finding someone to hook up with that already has the equipment in your area. Usually they already know the skies well, and have ideas on equipment that you can put your hands and eyes on. If you get out a shovel, you can clear out an area to put a concrete pad to do all this observance. Like others have stated, the mount itself will burst your budget, so start by enhancing the area that you will be using and get some friends to come over and use theirs. Grilling food usually does the trick. Do plenty of research and keep asking around, money is pretty much the answer.
While others have posted on the impossibility of setting up a quality astrophotography rig for $1000, it might be worth focusing instead on what this guy CAN do with $1000.
I would like to hear suggestions from others, but here are some example of what I'm thinking about: Time-lapse photos of meteor showers. Timing of occultation events (e.g. when the moon just grazes a star, giving information about the contours of the lunar surface). Searching for new comets. Observation (indirect, of course!) of sunspots and solar flares. Quirky efforts like year-long time lapse photos to illustrate the analemma, e.g.: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020709.html
Man-made objects can be a lot of fun, too. Photos of the silhouette of the ISS, if one is lucky enough to be in the correct position as it passes in front of the sun or moon. Heck, just watching satellites fly overhead, especially Iridium satellites as they flare, and the ISS when the shuttle's docked (with the combination being about as bright as Venus these days), and the heavens-above.com website is a big help with all that.
I recommend browsing through previous Astronomy Pictures of the Day ( http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ ) to get some ideas. A lot of it is professional astrophotography but some of it is the work of dedicated amateurs, some of whom didn't have >$1000 rigs.
Kstars has the advantage of Open Source, Runs on Linux, and communicates with a large variety of motorized telescope mounts. This allows picking a feature on screen, driving your scope to it, and tracking it for a long exposure for those dim objects requiring long exposure times.
Did I mention it was Free..
The truth shall set you free!
A commercially made Dobsonian telescope can be found for only a few hundred dollars. Add a couple of eyepieces of GOOD quality, a Telrad or other laser/HUD-style pointer, a couple of different star charts, and you are ready to get started. This is NOT an astrophotography setup. It's a way to discover the skies, see amazing things and enjoy astronomy. I have found over the years that I was president of my local Astronomy club that the majority of those that went out and purchased what they needed for photography right away rarely did it, while those that spent the time with a simpler telescope and the pure joy of astronomy eventually moved into photography. In addition, careful buying will set you up under your budget. Set aside the rest to be ready to become an addict!
-- I really need to bleed off some of this
I'm an amateur astronomer myself and Mike's advice is perfect. Astrophotography is addicitive, but needs planning and patience. As I assume you don't own an telescope yet, my advice is to buy a good binocular. If you still want to buy an telescope, buy a cheap ( not cheapo ) one, around US$ 250, with EQUATORIAL mount, that's VERY important. Get used to it, learn what you like the most to observe ( deep-sky objects, planets, moon, variable stars, nebula ), learn how to align your telescope so it can track the sky movement's. Then borrow from someone an old SLR camera, with film. Yes, that's right, not a digital one. Couple in your telescope ( you'll need an adapter ) and read some FAQs, ask help from your astronomy club and play with the settings, see how they change the result. You can use a webcam for that too, and some software like Registrax to stack the pictures, the result is amazing! After you get to know the dirty details, you'll know what's the best equipment to buy, the best DSLR camera. One tip: it's not about the camera or the telescope. I've seen AMAZING pictures taken with an old SLR with a home-made refractor telescope, mounted on a US$ 500 mount. It's about the MOUNT, spare no expense here. Spend 1000 on a mount and 200 on a telescope, you'll get GREAT pictures. Dark skies for you!
That's all very good advice.
I've take to using my binoculars more than my telescope. While I don't get the aperture with the binoculars, I do get the ease of instant set-up time and a wide field of view so I can see not only the various objects in the sky, but also the star field around them.
The wide field of view helps you learn the sky too. You get the big picture when learning what is what up in the sky, which makes finding things easier down the road with a telescope.
Another little tidbit--don't be so quick to use the "Go To" function all the time. Star-hopping from point to point will help you learn the sky's landmarks, how to use and control your telescope, and you might come across something that you have never seen before (think driving across country and discovering sights that you would miss in an airplane).
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
Grab a good pair of binnoculars and a current astronomy magazine.
A good pair of binnoculars should be better than the telescope that Galileo had, and he was able to observe everything from the mountains on the moon to the rings on Saturn. You will also have access to some of the most beautiful objects in our galaxy, like the Pleiades and the Orion Nebula, as well as the nearby galaxy Andromeda. Best of all, they will look better because you will have a wider field of view. Pointing those binnoculars at the Milky Way itself can also lead to mind-boggling revelations. The magazine is just there as a guide. Any decent magazine will include a sky chart that will enlighten you rather than confuse you. It will also contain a list of things to look at during the month (i.e. goals).
Using binnoculars will help you get used to finding stuff in the night sky, which is important when you step up to a bigger telescope with a narrower field of view. It will also help you figure out what you like about astronomy. Knowing what you want will guide you when you do go out to buy your first telescope. After all, different telescopes are useful for different things. Some people will go for portability because they need to travel to dark sky locations. Some will go for a massive dob because they want light gathering power at a sane price. I have also seen some stellar refractors in my time.
As for software, I something like KStars or XEphem will be much more useful to an observer since they will show you when something is visible in the sky. Celestia and Stellarium are beautiful, but not very useful at this point of time.
One of my earliest astronomical memories (aside from the shows at the local planetarium) was standing on a friend's driveway just after dusk. He says to me, pointing at a bright point of light against the rapidly darkening sky, "hey, I bet that's Saturn". He ducks into the garage, and drags out a 8-ish inch reflector telescope his dad had made. He lines it up, adjusts the focus, looks, and then invites me to have a look. Boom, there it is. Just like in all the picture books, only live, in front of my eyes.
So look at the planets through your scope. It should be bright enough to resolve any of the naked-eye visible planets as discs. You should be able to see the phases of Venus.
On my desk I have a picture of Comet Hale-Bopp. I took it with a 35mm film camera, with a 100-200 mm zoom lens set all the way out. Tripod, Kodacolor Gold color film (although there isn't any color in the print.) I thought I would want to take more astro-photographs, but haven't gotten around to it yet.
Kstars does look interesting; However from the description it says that it only has 130,00 starts in the catalog. If you compare that to Stellarium with default of 600,000 and available of more that 116,923,084 objects. Or if you willing to spend $40 on http://www.ilangainc.com/astroplanner AstroPlanner you will get about 609,558,311 objects in multiple catalogs. Unlike Stellarium Astroplanner also you turn catalogs on and off when you need to. You can plan your observation during a day, then print charts or connect the laptop to the scope and drive it. Record you notes.
And for "eye candy" write a script to show what you have seen to your wife on the Projector/HDTV/Computer through Stellarium.
I like Stellarium but it is not a very useful tool of astronomy.
I agree about the go-to functions. The low end versions of them seem to be more trouble than they're worth.
For $100 here is how I'd do it:
Meade ETX-80. 3.5" refraction. Under $300.
Go buy a couple nice eyepieces with good eye relief and wide viewing angle. For $140 I got a nice 5mm eyepiece that brings out the bands in Jupiter. The eye relief makes it possible for me to view with glasses (which is necessary if I'm sharing the telescope with someone else and don't want to make them refocus). The eyepieces will be reusable on whatever other telescope you might get.
Star charts and a comfy chair or stool that is easy to lean over and use the telescope with.
The ETX-80 has a couple good things going for it. It is great for the planets and excellent for the moon (get a filter for the moon ~$15-20). Even though I don't use the go-to functions, I still use the motor to move the telescope around...great for more minor adjustments. If you decide to upgrade to something else, it has only cost you $300 or so and you're left with a pretty good spotting scope for daytime use.
Just don't go out and buy something big and fancy if you don't know for sure you'll use it.
t
Your investments, in order are, first, join an astronomy club. Many clubs have the equipment you want.
At that point, you might be done. But, i'd still subscribe to one of the astronomy magazines. Astronomy,
or Sky & Telescope. Both, if you have time to read them. Many libraries carry one or the other. Club membership will offer you a discount on either or both magazines.
Last year, i bought a scope with a $1000 maximum budget. I decided that astrophotography will come second.
I purchased a good visual astronomy scope. This is a ten inch (254 mm) Newtonian reflector on an Alt-Az mount.
The mount does not track the sky, but it comes with a computer, which helps locate objects in the sky.
The Orion xt10i is about $800. This leaves money for a laser collimator ($65), an Oxygen 3 filter ($90), a 2x barlow ($40), and possibly a variable moon filter ($30) (also good for Venus). I've been very happy with it. The computer has taught me what is possible to see very quickly. Set observing goals - double stars, the messier list, etc. Get monthly sky charts from
http://skymaps.com/downloads.html
To get into photography, i'd go with a much smaller instrument, perhaps an 80 mm APO refractor. The idea is
that a smaller instrument requires a smaller (cheaper) mount. To get the best results of anyone in my club, it appears that about $9,000 is needed. Or, just use the club equipment. You'll probably want help using the equipment, so you should join a club.
Did i mention that you should join a club?
-- Stephen.
The other two mentioned are also open source and run on linux. It actually begs the question: Are commercial programs such as these even available?
I'd also like to know if any professionals use these (Celestia, Kstars and Stellarium) or if they have their own fancy-pants versions.
Is whatever scope you get, get a Telrad for it. A Telrad is a zero reflex finder. It lets you point the scope with your eyes open looking through a non-magnified view with a projected set of concentric circles on your target. Even with a Goto mount, the Telrad is what I would call a necessity.
My experience went from a few seasons of frustration, to actually being able to easily find deep space objects and planets in the scope, the moment I got a Telrad.
Also, concerning software, Cartes du Ciel is a freeware astronomy program that is very robust and probably the most common outside of Stary Night.
My advice for a purchase it perhaps an Orion ED 80 on a Sirus goto mount. You'll crack just over a grand, but it's a quality set up the price. It's not a Tak sitting on a Losmandy, but it'll work.
Another option, especially for the photography part, would be to try and find a Meade SN-8 OTA used. You can't get the OTA alone brand new. And still get the Sirus mount.
The Atlas EQ-G mount is perhaps the best bang for the buck in astronomy, but that's about $1,500 by itself. The Sirus is it's little brother.
For best results you're also going to need to guide your scope taking the pictures. So you'll need to mount a second guide scope, or use what they call an off-axis guider. The first option is preferred. And it gives you the option of manual guiding, or getting a second imager, and autoguding.
My last little bit of advice. Typically, dedicated CCD imagers work better then dSLRs for astrophotography. I use a a couple of different Canon dSLR's and you can get the job done with them. Though you're not going to be able to get some targets well unless you get them modified to remove the IR filters they come with. The Meade DSI Pro can be found right now for about $100. And at that price is a super bargian.
Be warned, it's an expensive hobby. As I've said before, astronomy is a hobby where free software abounds, yet a simple 2" long piece piece of 2" machined tubing will cost you $100. The tech side of it is free. Everything from planetarium software, to focusing software, to control software can be found free. But the
I was in the same boat as you, once upon a time. If you're interested in a telescope, just go to telescope.com and look at the $1000 telescopes. Generally, you want the most aperture for your money, so you'll end up with a 10-12 inch dobsonian.
The downside of a 10-12" dobsonian is size, weight, and that it's not good for astrophotography at all.
If you want to do astrophotography, then you really don't care about the telescope. The only thing you should initially be worried about for astrphotography is the mount. Once you have the mount, you can just connect your camera right to it for wider angle shots, or through a telescope. Orion's Sirius mount costs anywhere from 850 to 1150 dollars, depending on whether you want the GoTo controller. It's decent enough for some astrophotography.
If you try to get the telescope AND the mount for 1000 bucks, you'll end up with a mediocre telescope and a lousy mount. Hmm, and if you were planning on getting the camera, adapters, and potentially a coma corrector or focal reducers as well... Well, you can take pictures of the moon, but the faint fuzzy objects require too much nice equipment.
I took this picture of the North American nebula using a Canon Digital Rebel XTi, Canon's sub-$100 50mm prime lens, and an Orion Sirius mount.
I pretty much started out with exactly the same goals as yourself, I wanted half decent aperture and the possibility of astrophotography. the $1000 budget isn't so ridiculous if you already own a ddigital SLR, hen instead of paying $$$ for a ccd you can just mount your SLR at prime focus.
If it wasn't for the 'interested in photography' part then I'd just recommend an 8" (or larger) dobsonian, a large newtonian reflector on a simple mount, for under $1000 you can get up to 12" of aperture which is more than enough to let you see galaxies and nebula under dark skies
Anttlers Optics has a great in house brand, but you can also look at Celestron and Orion
BUt, for photography you need a steady, equatorial mount with a drive on the RA axis, which means you need to shrink the size of the scope to make it stable enough. I'd recommend Orion's 80mm Refractor on their Skyview Pro Mount, that'll sneak you in under your $1000 mark. The 80ED is an apochromatic scope which means they use special glass to eliminate Chromatic aberration, and because it's a refractor it produces nice high contrast images. The focal length is 600mm which is about as high magnification you can go before the limitations of the mount start to show up. For the mount you need to get singe axis drive ($50) to make it track, and preferably a polar alignment scope so you can get the thing aligned enough to take images of greater than 30 seconds (which is the longest exposure time on many digital SLRs).
The great thing about the mount is that you can upgrade it with computerised object location or even GOTO capabilities later when you want. It's also sturdy enough to hold larger scopes if you don't need to take photos. You can drop an 8" reflector on there, or a 9.5" Cassegrain.
Now, this setup will not let you photograph planets, they're too small, if you want to image planets you need to spend some more money on a barlow lens, and a camera which is smaller and faster than the SLR - I use a converted phillips webcam, but you can save time and just buy a $100 camera that'll just work.
I should stress that this is an antry level photography system, the optics are pretty damn good, but the tracking is barely adequate, but it'll give you enough experiece to let you have fun. People will tell you it's a waste of time to even think about astrophotography on that budget, but I'm having loads of fun - even from my ridiculously light polluted back yard in Oakland.
Here's some of my images with my setup - same mount, same focal length, but it's a 100mm non-ED refractor which means more Chromatic aberration.
Orion Nebula
Andromeda
M51
The Moon
Jupiter
M13
I grew up with astronomy, and have been watching the skies with binoculars for a few years now, which is leading to my first scope. Something you have to understand from the start is that
First of all, get a good Planisphere. That'll set you back about fifteen bucks, and you'll learn a TON about the night sky. Also get a red flashlight. I really like the Rigel Systems ones which have a variable-brightness red LED for viewing, and a variable brightness white one for set-up and tear down.
Get a copy of Nightwatch, by Terry Dickenson. It'll serve you from day one until the paper disintegrates (which will be a long time--it's well made).
Now guess what? Armed with nothing more than a pair of eyes and a chart, you're an amateur astronomer! Wasn't that easy?
The next step is usually binoculars. A good pair of 10x50 (Nikon and Pentax are good in the low end, ~$150) and a tripod mount will let you see more than you realised was out there. 10x50 is a nice size, because you can use them handheld, whereas getting much bigger (11x70 and up) will be too heavy to hold steady enough without a tripod. The first time you see the Pleiades through mounted binoculars in a dark sky will be breathtaking.
Now comes the scope. You can easily spend two years happily researching scopes while you use the binoculars and charts (and your naked eyes--don't ever forget just looking up!), by which point you'll know what suits you best. A few pointers, though:
1) Aperture rules. More aperture means more light coming in, which means fainter objects. Deep sky stuff (galaxies and nebulae) NEED aperture. Unfortunately, more aperture means more money, more size, and more weight.
2) Bigger is harder to move. A gorgeous 24" light-bucket is useless if you can't actually get it outside without three willing friends (unless they're eager and living with you). An 8" scope may only be adequate for deep sky objects, but if you get it out every clear night then it's a far better scope for you.
3) The mount is key. Most mid-range telescopes available are built by one of two companies, and have surprisingly good optics--better by far than you could get at (almost) any price 25 years ago. Unfortunately, good optics are ruined if the scope won't stay steady.
4) No telescope can do everything.
As I said above, most telescopes are made by one of two Chinese companies. Synta makes Sky-Watcher and Celestron, Guan Sheng makes several Meades, Antares and some others. Orion scopes are sourced from both companies, depending on the year and the type. There's not a lot of difference between them--both have good optics and good design. There are some cheapies, but once you hit the $300 point, the scopes and mounts are all pretty reliable. (and again--MUCH better than you could get a while back.)
If your heart is set on astrophotography, be prepared to spend a LOT of time and quite a chunk of money in the hobby. You'll need an equatorially mounted scope with a motor drive, and stability will become much more important than for simple viewing. You'll need some sort of camera capable of long (30 minute!) exposures, you'll need books, you'll need planning, and you'll need patience. Lots of patience. Don't get me wrong--astrophotography can be great fun--I used to take pictures on my dad's 8" SCTs and do the developing and printing in our darkroom--but it's a whole range of 'more work' and pretty serious stuff, even with digital.
Which mount you want is a major deciding factor. For the same amount of portability and similar prices (about $400 CDN), you can get an 8" Dobsonian or a 6" Newtonian on an adequate mount. For another hundred bucks, you can get the same 6" on a really beefy mou
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
For your budget I would suggest some good, solid basics. Never mind anybody talking about motorized, computerized contraptions, polor aligned mounts, etc. Any of these things under 1k will be frustrating to use, as anything solid enough to hold a scope worthy of a dark sky will be quite above that. It takes quite a lot more mount to hold a good sized scope than you might expect due to side loads (torque capacity) placed on it by something as long as a scope.
:). A 10-12" dobsonian mount newtonian reflector scope will become your best friend. Add to that some 7x50 (or 8x42 if you can find them at a good price.. brighter images) binoculars, do not look at any 10x50 or greater magnification unless you plan to put them on a mount. Binoculars are absolutely a great thing to look at the sky with, just make sure you test them out first to check that they "fit" you. You would be surprised how different they can feel to look through. For your astrophotography I would suggest researching barn door mounts. These are easily buildable, long exposure, manually driven tracking mounts. They are cheap and work unbelievably well. To round off your starter package.. books, books and more books. Take a stroll down the science isle of your local bookstore and see what is there. Yeah, I know, books. It's dark outside right? Ok, you also need a red led flashlight. :) That is an eyesaver.
:D. You will see the deepest objects with the greatest aperture. More photons = good. If you are really interested in the sky, you will just LOVE learning exactly where everything is, and starhopping your way around with it. Key things to remember, keep a cover over the open end when you're not using it to protect the mirror and put it outside a couple of hours before you plan to do your viewing so it can aclimate to the outside temps. You also need to keep it aligned (collimated), and to do this optimally requires some special, but inexpensive tools. Consider them just part of the package as they are *not* optional, at least if you want a usable scope. There are even people who have built tracking mounts for dobs if that is an interest (good for prime focus astrophotography).
That said, the basics are where you will get your just reward
Now the breakdown...
I suggested a dob, because well, when it comes down to it there is nothing better under a dark sky than a light bucket
Binoculars are just a wonderful thing to have outside. If you have never considered pointing them up at night, please do. You will be pleasantly surprised. For anything including and above 10x50 mag binocs I would strongly suggest a mount. This is because at those magnifications the view can be very shaky. These in general are not cheap. You can get an adapter to put them on a photo tripod, but in general this is not very good as you pretty much break your neck trying to look through them like that. Real astro binoc mounts are not cheap. They will consist of extending pivoting platforms where you bascially get to lay out on your lounge chair and they extend out over you. Something you might consider later on, but just stick to 7x50 or 8x42 to start with. Handheld is definitely the way to start.
Then comes the barn door mount. Google it, you will find several plans to build one. It's basically nothing more than a couple of pieces of wood, hinged together with a camera mount, and a hand driven mechanism that consists of bolts and nuts, where every, say, 15 seconds (this is entirely dependent on the plans you build.. it will have instructions for use as well) you give the drive a quarter turn and it will properly track the sky while your camera takes long exposure shots. Granted this also requires you have proper camera equipment with manual shutter exposure controls.
And books, you will need books that contain skymaps and constellation charts, etc. There have been links to many good astronomy sites posted here, most of them will give you book recommendations. Compile a list and take it to your loc
We have enough youth, how about a fountain of SMART?
Don't try to build your own telescope before you even own one. That is like saying you should build your own car before you drive. You have listed a budget ($1,000) and a scope of work (astrophotography).
At that budget you will really only be able to take photographs of planets and the moon. Those nice photos of nebula take a lot more money. I'd say that a budget of $3,000 might start to get you there. There is a very steep price to quality curve for good star photos. If you want the cheapest way to really see nebula, get a very large set of binoculars. You will be stunned. Otherwise, here is what worked for me:
Equipment:
Meade Astro ETX-90AT (325 x 96mm) Telescope $600
Tripod: $100
Good Used Compact Digital Camera with a screw filter attachment: $150
Eyepiece Converter for camera: $70
Extra eyepiece for planetary observation: $80.
This adds up to $1,000. Few posting on this page will like it because every part listed here has significant drawbacks, but it will indeed get you photographs of planets.
Go to http://www.weasner.com/etx/menu.html to see how to put it all together.
Take a look at modified webcams for long exposure, plus software that averages multiple images to clean up noise. They are well within your budget (under $500) and you can take excelent, clean pictures from what Ive seen on the web. For example look at http://astronomiser.co.uk/cams.htm for a website that sells the mod-ed webcams, or you can do it yourself (http://sweiller.free.fr/VP-SC.html). Looks like a guy named Stephen Chambers discovered this, his website has a lot of information about it: http://www.pmdo.com/
If you're absolutely new to Astronomy, or even if you aren't, you should really start with the right software on your computer before you branch off into something more complicated. Probably the hardest part of Astronomy is knowing where to point your telescope, and that's where having the software comes in. With the right software, you can learn the night sky and from that, know where to point your telescope even without a motorized mount. Just being able to recognize the constellations and asterisms is a skill that some would-be astronomers could benefit hugely from. I'm a big fan of a piece of software called Starry Night, by Imaginova. You can order it online: http://www.starrynightstore.com/stniso.html
For the most part, you can get away with the "Enthusiast" level of the software. (it's what I have) But the Pro and Pro Plus (which cost significantly more) have features that the Enthusiast doesn't have, like the ability to control a motorized mount. *VERY* useful feature, that one... find what you want to look at in the software, tell the software to point your telescope at it, and then go look at it. Starry Night comes with free updates to its stellar database and information, which is one of the main reasons I like it.
As for getting a proper telescope... there's a lot of factors to take into account. If you're in the city or the suburbs, I personally wouldn't spend more than $300-500 on a telescope. For one, increased magnification isn't going to do you any good at all. Heat pockets in the atmosphere will distort the image, and cause anything you see on a telescope to dance around. The more magnification you have, the worse the image dance is. And you'll actually get to a point where it's very difficult to see anything clearly without taking a video of it and then using software to drop the blurry frames. For two, light pollution. It's too bright in the city to do a lot of astronomy. In the suburbs, you can start, but it's still pretty bright. You have to get way out of the city to make having a larger telescope (that's still within your budget) worth it. If you had a budget of, say, $25,000 then you could make a case for wanting a bigger scope to use in the city, but even then, you're going to suffer from light pollution.
I'd go for the good software, a decent telescope, and if you have the money a properly motorized mount that the software can use. If not, save your pennies and upgrade in the future.
If you believe everything you read, you'd better not read. - Japanese proverb
First off, hold off on the astro-photography part. Get a very simple Dobsonian scope. Maybe 10" 12" in diameter. Get a few low power eye pieces and a good star atlas and some books.
Later you can attach a webcam to the scope and take photos of the moon and some of the other "easy". Without a tracking mount a webcam is perfect because it takes a series of short exposures that are later sorted and combined.
Some interresting projects you can do with just the web cam. One is try to make a composite photo of the full lunar disk but all taken at the same light angle. It would take 14 nights to colect all the data then a long time to combine them.
Later, in a few years maybe you save up some money and buy something 6X more expensive but if you bought a quality "Dob." you will continue to use it
My only advise on this is to use the club you've joined to help you decide. Go to star parties and see what you like. Most folks in the clubs I've been in over the years are only too happy to instruct and let you try for yourself. Once you see the options and have some hands-on experience, the decisions will become clearer.
And those people have everything from toy telescopes to the "SUVs" of scopes driven by supercomputers.
There are many resources available both online and your local library. I live in tucson and there is a astro society http://www.tucsonastronomy.org/ hope it helps
Most others have covered the important points, but let me add a few refinements:
- I'd keep the astrophotography on the back burner for now as you ramp up.
- I second (third/fourth/...) the idea of getting binoculars to learn the sky. IMO, image stabilization is well worth the money you pay for it in large binoculars. If you get a computer-controlled telescope you could avoid the learning curve, but part of the fun in astronomy is learning where things are in the sky.
- As one post already said, the best telescope to buy is the one you'll use. I use my little Meade Maksutov-Cassegrain *way* more than I ever used my big Dobsonian.
- After you learn the sky, get a decent finder on your telescope. For a small scope, I like red-dot finders but am also eager to try green laser-pointer finders.
Have fun!
Get a planisphere. It is a round star chart with a cutout representing the horizon. You dial in the date/time and it shows you what the sky looks like overhead. This is what you use to learn the constellations and bright stars. Use the binoculars you have or get a pair, they are useful even if you decide astronomy is too boring. Don't fool around with a laptop and software unless it is cloudy. Don't get a big book of star charts yet.
Before you spend any money on a telescope, GO TO A STAR PARTY AND LOOK THROUGH OTHER PEOPLES SCOPES. Check the local astronomy clubs, they surely have a website where they list the monthly star parties and locations. Bring your binos and planisphere and look through a bunch of scopes. A star party will have a bunch of big expensive scopes to look through, like 8-10" SCTs and 10-18" Newtonians. If your site really is dark, consider allowing the local club to use your site on new moon weekends. Every club could use another dark site with no stray lights or drunken campers.
Plenty of people get the astronomy bug, go out and drop money on an expesive telescope, then find out that they are bored and cold standing around in the dark looking at barely visible fuzzies. Nothing looks as good as it does in the pictures, except globular clusters. If you think the views in a big scope with a 24" mirror that requires a ladder to look through is going to compare to the deep images you've seen on your computer, you're going to be sorely disappointed.
Astrophotography is way, way harder than it looks and is insanely expensive to get top results. The amateurs who are good at it (crisp, gendler, croman, crawford, etc...) spend $5-$10K on a mount, as much on a telescope, and as much on a camera. Then they have lots of software, tons of patience, and tons of talent. Some of them have remote observatories in the middle of nowhere with robotic telescopes.
On a $1000 budget you can easily pick up something like a Meade 2114DS. It comes with trackign computer, object finder and some sweet automatic controls. With that you can get several different lenses, an SLR camera and a camera attachment for the lens fittings. You could even get (check eBay) a serial cable to control your scope too. I have a very similar setup (I made most of the connectors because my budget was significantly smaller) and I watch Saturn regularly live on my TV from the comfort of my living room controlling my telescope via my laptop and Starry Night.
That setup will cost around $400 - $800 depending if you get new or used equipment.
The one I built has an 8" mirror, so it's really too bright to look at the moon through, it hurts your eyes
:P
;)
That's what filters, short focal length eyepieces, and barlows are for.
An 8" scope should be able to manage 400x magnification before hitting the diffraction limit (not that seeing would cooperate in most places), and I can assure you, it won't be too bright then
By a scallop's forelocks!
browse a copy of astronomy hacks. I got my copy from amazon.com
The moon reflects light and not emits it. Jesus was wrong!!
Never say never. Ah!! I did it again!
NOT binoculars. Have you actually tried to hold them above your head for more than 5 minutes to look at the sky? Awful.
Pick up an inexpensive telescope from Orion. A Dobsonian. You can get a sweet 8 or 10 inch scope for less than half the $1000 budget.
www.telescope.com
Remember, no 's' on the telescope in the URL.
No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men.-Ronald Reagan
You're kidding, right? The person wants to spend $1000 , and you're recommending they get a scope with only 3.5" aperture? That's crazy. $140 for a 5mm eyepiece? What was that, a Televue? :P You don't need to spend that kind of money on an eyepiece to see bands in Jupiter (which, really, is more about atmospheric seeing conditions than anything else).
If I had 1k$ to spend starting out, I'd go with something like an LX50 -- an 8" Schmidt-Cassegrain. LX mounts are better than the ETX mounts; the ETX mounts are similar to the DS mount that I've got. The LX50 is only 23 lbs and is small enough to fit through a door or put in the backseat of a car, so it's still portable.
By a scallop's forelocks!
I like Stellarium but it is not a very useful tool of astronomy.
One feature that you need for photography is the ability to find your star and drive the scope to it, then track it real time for the photo. In the list of features, it mentions telescope control just like Kstars. With a larger library of stars and objects, it may be worthwhile as a repository of data for your telescope drive. I have not used it, so I don't know how hard it is to use. The Kstars interface is not difficult to learn and has all the naked eye viable objects without a large confusing library making it very useful to a beginning astronomer. Picking a popular target such as Mars is a simple point and click interface to locate the object and drive your scope to it.
I don't know if Stellarium with it's added bells and whistles has ease of use buried in a maze of menus. I also don't know if it just drives to a star or does tracking.
The truth shall set you free!
If you have help or will keep the scope set up, a Meade LX200 10" will cost you a bit over a grand on ebay. An LX200 8" is manageable by one person and about $400 cheaper on ebay but you will give up significant light gathering ability. I've had both. Check the software on the LX200. You want a later version, 3.34 if memory serves me right. There was a problem with earlier scopes burning out the RA motor drive.
With time, you can aquire some excellent eyepieces as well. I would recommend saving for the Meade 24.5. It was my favorite lense.
The Orion Optic 10 x 50 binoculars are made by the same company that makes the Carton Aderblicks. I have the Aderblicks and think they are phenomenal.
Get the book on Backyard Astronomy. Browse the book store. There are others that are interesting as well.
M
If you have seen pictures on APOD, spaceweather etc most of those great pics come from people in that forum. I'm sure they could give you great suggestions. The forum is laid back and friendly so you won't get treated like a noob or anything some other places tend to do. Anyways good luck hope it helps.
Just to point out. A full frame sensor vs. a smaller sensor 'zoomed' is a false argument. You CAN get that same zoom factor by cropping down the larger sensor. Larger sensors tend to have larger pixel elements and also more pixels (depending on the sensor). Larger pixel elements collect more light and have less noise over longer exposures. This is why photos from a DSLR with a larger sensor (full fram or not) look better than the small super dense CCDs in point and shoot cameras, particularly when looking at uniform backgrounds like a sky where noise becomes readily apparent.
Although I've never done, it seems to me that for astrophotograpy, digital is particularly useful because you can composite many shots together much more easily. Both for gathering more light in a single frame and creating mosaic's of many different frames.
Just some thoughts from an amateur photographer.
- Asmodae
Up here in redneck Michigan, we have these fancy doohickeys we like to call "tripods". They're made for your camera, but lots of binocs will attach to them too. You can even get them at the local K-Mart! It's worth the trip - come and visit!
"I've been killing time, and it's been reciprocating." - David Turrill
I looked for a telescope in the mid-90's. To have fun, it started at 3000$. To really see great stuff (what I really wanted) was more around 6000$. At that point I thought I would keep looking at the Hubble pictures on-line and look at the skies with my own eyes.
An amateur astronomer told me: twice the power means you are half the distance looking into your telescope. Half of 20 million light years is still 10 million lights years and does not make a big difference looking at stellar objects. To be really be worth it over binoculars, you need to invest a lot.
What's great with today's telescope is the included GPS and tracking devices, that automatically points you at the exact position and follow as the earth turns.
If you wish to takes pictures too, then stability is a huge issue, as you will want exposure times of several minutes to several hours (forget the train passing by).
I know a guy who built his own, many many poeple do that, you should look ito it.
True, but that's not the typical advice given. The advice typically given is binoculars, with no mention of a tripod and binocular mount.
Plus, a nice 10 inch dob gives bright images, it's a quality instrument, you can get fancy electronic setting circles, and they don't cost much at all.
Besides, when a kid says he wants a telescope, he wants a telescope! Not binoculars, but something that looks like a telescope.
At the end of the day, M-43 in binoculars is NOTHING compared to M-43 in a 10 inch Dobsonian scope with a quality eyepiece. Images and experiences like that are what make astronomers out of wide-eyed kids. Binoculars are for the birds (watchers).
No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men.-Ronald Reagan
I am getting in on this discussion a bit late, I hope my comments help.
1. Go and grab a few entry level books on naked eye astronomy and astronomy with backyard telescopes. Grab or subscribe to Astronomy Magazine and Sky and Telescope. Spend time LEARNING the night sky, learn the major constellations and features of the night sky. So many people do not take the time to learn the night sky before jumping in and buying a scope, they get frustrated soon after because they cannot find any object and quit the hobby. Believe me, this more than anything will ease your pains when moving up to binoculars and a telescope.
2. Buy some decent 7X50 - 15X80 binoculars. I would not recommend anything above 15-20 X 80 and would rather see someone stick to a decent pair of 7-10 X 50 binos. Start learning to find bright deepsky objects with the binos. An amazing number of objects are viewable with simple 7X50 binos. I used my binos far more than my 10" Eq. Newt when starting out. They are light, easy to take with you and easy to use. This will also help you learn the night sky.
3. Buy a dobsonian style scope that YOU WILL USE. In other words don't go too big on aperture. A big scope is great and can give amazing views but only if you use it. My first big scope was a 10" German equatorial mounted Newtonian. It was big and VERY heavy. However, I was young and only had to drag it out to the backyard. Setting it up wasn't too much of a problem - but breaking it down at 3am after a long night of observing was a pain. Sixteen years later I still have the scope but it doesn't get much use. I now live in Dallas and have to drive long distances to find dark skies. I just bought a smaller scope to replace it.
You can get GREAT dob style scopes from places like Orion Telescopes for well under your budget. You can even get models that have a computer that aid you in pointing the scope and will greatly reduce your frustration level in finding "faint nothings" in the sky.
You can even do some photography with a good dob. You will need to grab a webcam that is easily modified. The Phillips Toucam and SPC900 are the most popular as they use CCD chips instead of CMOS imagers. Get an adapter to slide into your focuser (http://webcaddy.com.au/astro/adapter.htm) and you are ready to start imaging the moon, planets and sun (with appropriate filter). You will not be able to guide but you can take short movies of the objects and use Registax to split the movie into frames and stack and average your frames. It does a GREAT job. I use it to take images of the moon and planets with an untracked and unguided scope.
Astrophotography of deep sky objects is out of your budget range for now. However, you may want to buy a scope that can be easily converted to astrophotography at a later date as you add equipment. I cannot recommend the Meade LXD75 SN-6 or LXD75 SN-8 enough. The SN-6 is within your current budget and the SN-8 is just outside of it. They are good visual scopes and are great astrophoto scopes. They are on decent enough mounts and have goto capability. Do NOT get the SN-10, its weight is just a bit much for the LXD75 mount to handle for astrophotography.
Right now, if you look you can find closeouts of the Meade DSI CCD camera for around $100.00. Great entry level camera, it is a bit outdated now but you cannot beat the price.
A great website is http://www.cloudynights.com/ - Tremendous user support forums, if you have a question, someone on there can answer it.
Id like to continue my post but I am out of time - Hope this helps.
I was asking the same questions about a year ago myself. I'll throw in my two cents. First, second, and last - RESEARCH everything. Talk to people. Test drive equipment.
Your budgeted amount is fine. Astronomy, and even astrophotography, contrary to some opinions here, doesn't have to be a rich man's hobby. You can get a solid EQ mount and scope for the amount mentioned. You can use an existing camera or one of the lower end astronomy specific digital cameras for photography.
Here's what I would do on the research side:
I would find the local astronomy club. Go to a few meetings and ask questions. I belong to the Denver Astronomical Society, and I went to meetings and had opportunities to talk to very helpful people, look at different types of scopes, mounts, eyepieces, and filters.
Find a local astronomy store (I'm sure the people from the local astronomy club will have opinions on where to go). The internet isn't a good way to shop for your first telescope. Go to a local store. Talk to the staff. Discuss budget, and what you want to accomplish.
After you do all of your research, then start thinking about mount + scope + eyepiece + filter + camera combinations that'll fit your budget. If your local club sells used scopes, that might be a good place to start. Sometimes a member might be looking to dump their "starter" scope. Also Craig's List or eBay might be good places to shop - ONLY IF YOU CAN EXAMINE THE SCOPE BEFORE PURCHASE. Sorry about the caps - never buy a scope "blind". See if your local store will examine used scopes for a fee (this isn't something you want to try to do on your own until you've owned one or two). If you can't find a used one that you feel safe buying, get it from the local store. Having a human being you've met be available for the setup, usage, and care of a scope is invaluable.
Hopefully, by the end of this process, but before purchase, you'll have a good feel for whether or not this hobby interests you, and what equipment you'd like to have.
Seems like you've run into a bunch of purists here. In reality, you can easily get started with astronomy as a hobby for under $1000.
The most important advice is to a telescope that is easy for you to use. If it takes 30 minutes to drag it out, assemble it, and set it up (and another half-hour to tear it down), regular use is less likely.
Another good starting point is reading. A subscription to Sky & Telescope is a great way to be exposed to many different facets of the hobby.
Telescopes are important, but good eyepieces even more so. Invest in some high-quality wide-field eyepieces--they'll be a significant improvement over what typically comes with the scope, and they'll follow you through any number of scopes you may get in the future.
Magnification isn't the most important thing: often, the view through a 42mm eyepiece (50x for a typical 8-inch compact scope) can be more visually appealing than the more detailed view through a 7mm. That's especially true when seeing is poor, and the high-resolution view at high power is just bigger and fuzzier, not more interesting.
Astrophotography can be explored at many levels. For example, you can do some very cool planetary photography by using an inexpensive webcam adapted to an eyepiece tube, then using software to select the best images and "stack" them to improve resolution. You can do this without an equatorial mount, by the way, although you do need a clock drive--the exposure times are short enough that image rotation isn't an issue, and the individual images can be de-rotated on the computer.
Making observatory-quality color photos with long exposure times and millions of pixels is certainly possible for an amateur, but it requires a lot of skill and equipment and practice. Explore options and find out what interests you.
Building a telescope is very educational and satisfying, and it can save you money (if you don't count value for your time), but you won't learn much about astronomy from doing it--optics, engineering, even electronics, yes, but not astronomy. Telescopes are simply not very expensive today, and I'd recommend that you gain some experience before you start thinking about building one. The great thing about building a scope is that it's an opportunity to escape the limited range commercially available stuff and explore novel designs, mounts, and optical paths. Personally, I hope someday to build a long-focus offset reflector, but it's a big project, and I have a family and a day job.
What do you want to do with your scope? Is this a hobby you expect to be sharing with friends and family? If so, I'd strongly advise getting a computer-driven "go-to" mount, because that largely eliminates the boring intervals when you're trying to find something by star-hopping. Even if it's strictly a solitary pursuit for you, a "go-to" mount can substantially increase the likelihood of actually using the scope. Although I firmly believe that I've learned a lot about the sky by groping around with setting circles and a sky atlas, I find I get more enjoyment from my computerized 5-inch Meade than from my traditional 8-inch Celestron simply because it's so easy to set up and point at something.
Without knowing more about you and your interests, I'd recommend getting a Sky & Telescope subscrption, a 5-inch Celestron or Meade with a computerized mount, a 40-mm wide-field eyepiece, and a video eyepiece or adapted webcam. You can see and do a lot of cool stuff with that rig, and learn where you want to extend your capabilities. You can get some excellent deals (e.g., on eBay) on used equipment, too, although it tends to be older and less computerized.
After you've spent some time with it, think about what needs improvement. Do you really want better views of dim distant galaxies? Then maybe you want a big Dobsonian "light bucket". Do you want to make incredible nebula photos? That might mean a permanent in-ground pier with a serious equatorial mount (and a bigge
Ok, down to some stuff that I've learned over time about scopes that I'm hoping you might find useful. This is very general, and from my point of view (the horses mouth). Confirm everything with the real experts - local clubs and stores.
Also, don't get overwhelmed by all of the terminology. This hobby takes practice like anything else, and before long you'll have it all figured out.
A telescope is really several parts - scope, mount, diagonal - eyepiece, filters, and accessories. When you buy a telescope, you need to think about all of them when making a purchase.
Scope:
All optical telescopes basically have the same function. To collect and focus as many photons as possible. Think of your scope as a light bucket. Basically the bigger the bucket, the more photons it can capture, and the more things it can "see" (or see more clearly). An 8" scope can't see as deeply and clearly into the night sky (with the naked eye) as a 10" or a 12" scope.
The size of the scope is really all about it's opening at the front, or aperture size. When people talk about a 8" or 12" scope, they are talking about its aperture size. The bigger the aperture size, the bigger the light bucket, and the more you see. Aperture size has NOTHING to do with magnification. Magnification happens at eyepieces.
There is a tradeoff in aperture size versus weight. The bigger the scope, the heavier the scope gets, and thus requires a stronger mount, which in turn gets heavier. An 8" scope with EQ mount might weight in at 50 points, but a 12" with EQ mount might weigh in at 125 pounds. Imagine lugging that in and out of the garage.
As someone else pointed out already - the best telescope is the one that is being used, and not gathering dust in the garage. Avoid "aperture fever" (i.e., bigger is better) when buying your first scope. Make weight one of your primary considerations.
There are two major types of consumer optical scopes - refractors and reflectors.
Reflectors:
Reflectors use mirrors to take the light and concentrate it to one spot. Reflectors are generally considered solid all purpose scopes. There are several reflector models available - Dobsonians, Scmidt-Cassegrain, Maksutov-Cassegrain, etc. If you go the reflector route, you'll need to do some research to find the right combination of size + weight + portability for you.
Reflector pro's:
[1] Using big mirrors is a lot cheaper then big lenses. You can collect more light for less $.
Reflector cons:
[1] The mirrors have to be refocused on occasion through a process called collimation. Easy to do once you know how, and have the right tools, but the first couple of times you're going to want to watch a pro do it.
[2] Usually much heavier then their refractor counterparts.
Refractors:
Refractors use lens to move the light from the front of the tube straight to the back. Generally considered to be superior planetary scopes, and good but not great deep space telescopes (primarily because of the price difference for the equivalent aperture reflector).
Refractor pro's:
[1] Usually much lighter. Makes them more useful for terrestrial viewing (birds, etc).
[2] Internal optics almost never need to be adjusted.
Refractor con's:
[1] Price versus aperture size will force you into a smaller scope then a refractor, thus, a smaller light bucket, and you'll need darker skies to see deep sky objects.
For all telescopes, if you're going to do deep sky photography, the focal length of the telescope comes into play. This can be a complicated subject, so you'll need to do some research here.
Also, mirror coatings are something you should look into. This can increase the amount of light reflected from the mirrors, which increases the number of photons that reach your eye. Not mandatory, but very nice to have.
Mount:
There are three general types of consumer mounts - altaz (altitude-azimuth), Dobsonian, and Equatorial.
Altaz
Altaz mounts have
As others have wisely mentioned, you SHOULD start with a pair of decent binoculars; be careful though, while its tempting to get super-powered deep drinking aperature binoculars, they are difficult to use without a stable mount (shakiness=sucks.) You can do very well with a pair of Bushnell 4x50's when you start off-- >$50, decent optics and sturdy.
Once you've resolved to purchase a telescope, again, start small. While you want to marvel at everything in the heavens, you need to learn how to find these objects, and train your eye(s) on how to study them-- as you graduate to more powerful telescopes, the reward is much greater. My personal recommendation is to look at one of Orion's 100-130mm Dobs-- the 4.5" short tube is probably my favorite. Its affordable, not very heavy, doesn't take up much room, has commendable resolving power given its size, easy to maintain, and most importantly because you're interested in astrophotography, it comes with a very straightforward equatorial mount. An equatorial mount that can be easily fitted with drive motors is a crucial requirement to successful astrophotography study.
Once you feel comfortable with your telescope, it'll be time to move into astrophotography. There are a million and one solutions, most of which are capable of making your wallet weep. I'd recommend scouring the internet for a camera project that seems to be within your technical and financial means. You'll be able to find a good many freeware software suites that will help assemble your exposures for some pretty stunning imagery.
I've had the most success with a modified Logitech web cam. I won't bore you with the lengthy mod, but it did give me an excuse to use a peltier wafer to cool the CCD for 20-second-plus exposures. As it cost less than $200 to build, I'm especially happy.
Best of luck!
-SS
Assuming your local astronomy club IS in fact local, bag your budget for a while. Get a subscription to a hobiest magazine. Most important, attend club meetings regularly and try EVERY scope you can. Help set them up. Halp take them down. Carry them to the car, see what type of cases they use. As mentioned by others, pick the scope that is the MOST CONVENIENT for you. (I.E. I have to carry this bad boy up a hill, or take it out without waking the kids.) If you want to spend money, get some binoculars to participate at the meetings. But after a few months, you will have much more knowledge about what you really want. Your first purchase should be enough to grow your interest, but leave you wanting more.
I agree. 15 years ago, I was doing astronomy with binoculars. With a good map and semi-dark suburban skies, you can find Neptune in a pair of 10x50s.
Now I have a Meade ETX-125 (can't remember the price, probably about $900 to $1K). Skies aren't as dark because the city I live in has grown a lot, and Neptune would elude my binoculars in these conditions (though I haven't tried in a long time). But with the more powerful scope, I can see objects down around magnitude 9 or 10, like the Ring Nebula, even under these skies. And of course, with the electronic guidance, finding those objects is even easier (feels like cheating, actually).
But, I wanted socialized health insurance!
$1000 is quite a significant sum for someone starting out!.
:)
When i first got into the hobby (many many years ago) my parents bought me a telescope for Christmas and they'd done a bit of homework and managed to get me one quite cheaply that kept me going for a number of years (I had that thing for about 4 or so i think). It had a mediocre mount and the spotting scope kinda sucked, but all in all it was a respectable start - i bought 2 more after that one. I have since moved to a big city thats surrounded by 2 other smaller (yet not-insignificant-astronomically-speaking) cities and so getting somewhere the night sky is repectably viewable is a 3-4 hour journey each way. These days, when i do feel the itch i tend to point a browser at the various robotic sites and hope i get a job in the queue
I've seen good start-out scope in the 300$ range new, with a very sturdy base + motorized mount. And to be honest, the motorized mount is probably overkill for the beginner (your going to want to learn how to find the object your looking for and alot of motorized mounts make that task trivial = i learn nothing, some just do earth/moon rotation correction - that is good enough). Im not going to quote brands at you though.
Now consider you may grow out of it in 2 years, 300$ over 2 years is a pretty decent return considering the enjoyment you'll get out of it plus by then you'll have a much more significant understanding of astronomy, the equipment and what would be best for you. You'll have $700 left over, you'll be inspired to save a bit more and you can earn interest on the cash. So by the time you think you're ready for an upgrade you'll probably be able to afford the beast that'll cost you significantly more.
My advice though (as has been stated) find a club and turn up to anything they'll let you turn up to - alot hold open field nights/information nights and these are boundlessly informative. You'll be able to look through scope's and get info from people about why they like there scope and why its important to them (thats an important thing). I would personally avoid going into any details on a first (or even second) visit about wanting to buy something because clubs can be a little self-serving when it comes to furnishing new amateurs with gear. Thats not to say you'll end up with a dud, just that you might find they'll be pushing type x and brand y, when you find later on you'd of rather bought type z. OF course, not all clubs are like that. But like any purchase, do your research. You obviously have net access, and there are any number of reviews out there on the various scopes you might consider worthy of purchase. All in all, don't be too pushed into absolutely buying a scope by a given date (nothing new there really).
Points I would consider worth checking though
- upgrade-ability (what mounts does it support, can it take a camera adaptor, can it view sun/moon, etc)
- sturdiness (nothing worse that a scope that moves when you look thru the thing)
- portability (as an amateur, you'll want to lug that thing around - get something luggable, get a less lugable later on)
- durability (if your lugging it around you dont want it to take one bump and need a service)
- Resistance to weather (you don't want to be using your scope in the middle of winter when theres condensing moisture in the air and find out later on the scope wasn't built to take that kind of atmospheric condition and has been damaged, this point is more important than it seems because alot of scopes are made nowhere near you and make some assumptions about the environment around you are operating in)
- Serviceability/Warranty (make sure it comes with both a warranty and the ability for you to fulfill that warranty should you need to without much fuss)
Thats my 0.02 anyways. I've since wanted to build a home radio telescope, which has been quite a non-trivial task to the point where i've never really gotten anywhere with it. Thats a good thing though because the thing on the list after that is to build a "laser" on the moon in order to conquer the earth.
My advice with that kind of money is to forget photography right now and forget a computer controlled scope. Learn the sky first manually with a nice 12"+ Dobsonian scope ($1000 with a some nice eye pieces for it would be easy to find). After you do that for a while then move into photography and computer controlled scopes.
As someone who is in a similar situation (5 rural acres), the advice on scope setup/takedown is critical. However, there is a cheaper and far more useful solution:
Build an observatory.
Ok, now that yer done dreaming of curving steel walls and motorized floors, what you really need is a shed w/ a hinged roof. You want someplace you can leave the scope set up and aligned all the time. It doesn't have to be weather-tight, or pretty. Just someplace you can wander out to when the house is quiet, kids are asleep, you wake up at night to pee, etc.
The most critical factors:
*Earth floor or slab (wood floors vibrate)
*Shoulder height walls, and some sort of removable roof.
*Weather tight storage (ammo boxes, etc) for lenses, maps, etc.
*Room to walk all the way around the Scope when the roof is down.
*Good caps for the scope, and a small tarp to drape over it when not in use (to keep off dust)
If yer living rural, you know that you can scrounge the lumber, etc from old buildings, pallets, job sites, etc. Ask yer neighbors for help, and you'll find all the materials will show up for free. And, as a side perk, you'll have standing parties at yer observatory when something interesting is going on.
Yes, the David H. Levy of the Shoemaker-Levy comet fame.
I picked up _Skywatching_ in the bargain bin for a few bucks. It's a bit dated (it has pictures of "microcomputers") but is an excellent introduction. The star charts are perfect for the beginner, he provides a few highlights in each constellation.
As far as software goes, I really like Celestia (which actually lets you travel to the planets and stars in the star catalog in 3D), NASA WorldWind, and more recently Google Earth 4.2 now does good zoomable star browsing.
Finally, people can do some pretty decent astrophotography on budget equipment using software compositing, check out these works done with halfway-decent webcams duct-taped to a telescope: http://www.my-spot.com/planets.htm http://homepage.mac.com/nmonks/astronomy/astro_photo.html
I have not used Kstars.
But when i was just starting in astronomy a few years back i was using an application that only had a few catalogs (Messier, NGC). Without having prefect alignment you would look through the scope and see more then one star of the same magnitude and not know witch is the one that i wanted to observe. so i would have to guess. It is not too big of the deal, but when you truing to see a separation on the double star and you not looking at correct one - could be very frustrating.
I use Astroplanner for all of my observing and planning. It will draw the stars as they appear in the eyepieces of you telescope, so you can compare and make sure you are looking at what you think you are looking.
I use Stellarium to get/keep my son interested in astronomy.
When i first got my telescope, i called my wife out of the house to show her the Saturn - her response was "Wow, that is nice... couldn't you just look at the pictures on the internet?" It is hard to compete with Hubble and it is hard to get kids to be interested in it. That is why i use stellarium. It is nice eye candy. You can go though stars/planets before you go out. Keeps my son interested in comparing what computer will generate and what you can see with your eyes.
I've been an amateur astronomer since I was a little kid. I'll spare you with how long ago that was. :) You've done the Smart First Thing: you've not bought a telescope and you've located (and joined) a local group of people with similar interests. Now's the time to get the return on that initial investment: go to every group outing (star party) you can and spend as much time as possible actually looking through other people's telescopes. Tell them what you're doing (trying to figure out which of the 478 varieties is the one for you,) and help them load and unload their scopes, set them up, align them, etc. Listen to what they say but your own experience is going to be so much more valuable.
Look at it this way: would you buy a car, based solely on the manufacturer's literature and the opinions of strangers on the web, without even going to the dealer to look at it, never mind driving it? No, not if you're normal you wouldn't. Telescope is the same thing, very individual choice. Good luck and welcome to the obsession!
Rb
You're doing the right thing by joining a local club. Get to know a couple people there - someone will be glad to take you out a couple evenings so you can get familiar with the sky, and perhaps there will be a proficient astrophotographer who can show you their setup and do some imaging before you take the plunge on serious equipment. Many clubs have some "loaner" scopes, and some even have a club observatory with a really nice scope. You'll find the best initial investment is a nice pair of binoculars with a planisphere (basic start chart that changes with date/time) to help you get familiar with the sky. Particularly out in a dark rural area, the sky can become overwhelming and you need to know how to navigate the constellations or you'll quickly become disenchanted because you can't find what you're looking for. But I wouldn't even buy something like binoculars before going to a few meetings and having a couple outings with your club. You'll get much better, more reliable advice than off any internet chat.
You don't need expensive equipment to do some wonderful astrophotography. The FOSS community has developed a marvelous toolbox. Take a look at what my daughter did with a home made 6 " Dobsonian coupled with a 10 quickcam, and free AstroStack software: http://www.heffernans.org/gallery/view_album.php?set_albumName=AstroPhotos
You should join the Yahoo Group: Quick Cam and Unconventional Imaging Astronomy Group ti see incredible efforts and technical support: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/QCUIAG/
Also, for a great free planetary program try the excellent Cartes Du Ciel (Star Charts). It has much that you would get in a several hundred dollar commercial program. Save your bucks until you find out whether this is truly your thing. It is at:http://www.stargazing.net/astropc/
I just downloaded the PDF user manual. It isn't clear on one point.
I use Astroplanner for all of my observing and planning. It will draw the stars as they appear in the eyepieces of you telescope, so you can compare and make sure you are looking at what you think you are looking.
It mentions pointing and clicking an item in the manual and then clicking Go to drive your mount to the object. This drive to an object, is it then tracking the object, or is it a one shot to there while waiting the next Go as the star drifts out of view?
Can you answer this? Are you using it with a motorized mount?
The truth shall set you free!
The best way to get a taste for imaging is to take an imaging vacation, go to a place like www.nmskies.com and for a very reasonable price you get to use a $50,000 imaging setup with help from people that do this for a living. You can take your own telescope as well or rent one of theirs for viewing in amazing dark skies. One night of imaging here I got more/better images than in the entire previous year on my own. It makes you lust after nice equipment, but you learn a lot. They also have an option where you can rent time and control a scope remotely if you don't have time for a vacation.
When you click Go it will slew to object and keep tracking it on my EXT125.
Astroplanner works with many different mounts so you would have check with yours.
I think there is a trial that is free. http://www.ilangainc.com/astroplanner/download.shtml
Avoiding the inevitable argument over the meaning of "begs the question" there are many commercial astronomy packages out there. The Sky, Starry Night, and Equinox all come to mind and there are many others for various platforms.
Clear, Dark Skies
I also don't know if it just drives to a star or does tracking.
Being the author of Stellarium's Celestron interface, I can assure you that it does not. It assumes that the scope has it's own tracking software.
Moreover, astrophotographers are going to want to use high-precision tracking mechanisms that use a guide star rather than just mathematics and an internal database.
Clear, Dark Skies
This is *great* advice. You can see a surprising amount in a pair of binoculars, and even more if you buy a good mount for the binoculars. A $100 pair of binoculars and a $200 mount will let you see the rings of Saturn, and it's without a doubt the most portable of all astronomical setups.
If you get tired of the stars, you can watch the wildlife and the local birds. Hard to do that with a 10 inch Dobson.
Build yourself a mylar mirror scope, add a high speed, high pixel, low light digital camera. Add electronic time marks every nano second or so. Find a few other people to go out and do the same thing. Next we need someone to write a program to take the images from the distributed scopes and sync them to generate long baseline and 3D images. Finally hook it all to the internet. WOW.
You're in exactly the same position I was in four months ago, though with more budget. Although I'll give you the same advice I took:
Start with binoculars. I spent a grand total of $140 on a pair of 30x80 binoculars, and put them on top of a $30 camera tripod I already had. Very inexpensive start. Binoculars make it easier to find objects because they have a wider field of vision, so they're great for beginners. Also, if it turns out that astronomy isn't your thing, it's a much softer blow on your pocket. With much less than your budget you could get a much nicer pair of binoculars and a better mount. Starting with binoculars will also let you decide if you're more interested in observing lunar vs. planetary vs. DSOs (deep sky objects), which is a decision that can impact your choice of scope later. Binoculars are also great even if you have a scope, especially if you're doing photography. They let you keep looking at the sky while your camera is taking the picture!
For a $1000 budget I wouldn't try for astrophotography yet. Concentrate on getting a nice telescope first. If you start with a cheap scope you're more likely to get discouraged or disappointed after a while. Seeing as how you will want to one day move into astrophotography, though, make sure you get one on a german equatorial mount. You can't take long exposures if you don't have an equatorial mount -- with other mounts, even if the scope tracks the sky, the view will rotate within the eyepiece.
With your budget, a standard newtonian will get the most bang for your buck. You might start by taking a look at Celestron's Advanced Series. You can get a 6" for $800 or so, and an 8" for just over $1,000, complete with GOTO mount and tripod. Although if you know you're more interested in viewing planets, I see that Zhumell has a 6" refractor for about $800. Refractors are generally regarded as better for planetary viewing.
Also check out www.astromart.com for used equipment. There are lots of amateur astronomers selling their scopes to help afford upgrades!
A real must is a red flashlight -- red light doesn't ruin your night-vision, which can take up to 30 minutes to fully get. Go out with a white light, and you ruin 30 minutes of night vision every time you look at your star charts.
Also get a planisphere to help learn the constellations, and a sky atlas for help locating objects.
For software, the new Google sky is great, as is stellarium. I've also located a free package called Cartes du Ciel that is great for printing out sky maps.
Also, check out www.cloudynights.com -- it's a great source of articles and reviews, as well as friendly forums. Another good resource I've recently found is http://obs.nineplanets.org/lm/rjm.html -- if you're logging your observations or just want to talk about them on CloudyNights later, that page has a method to help determine how good your seeing is. Also, look for a Clear Sky Clock http://cleardarksky.com/csk/ in your area to help you be prepared for good/bad nights.
Clear skys!
Punctanym: alternate spelling of words using punctuation or numerals in place of some or all of its letters; see 'leet'
It's hard to beat a "Sky Window". Your neck will thank you. I have a pair of 20x80 binoculars mounted on a sky window with a laser pen as a finder. Also, with practically zero set-up and tear-down time, you will find yourself observing more frequently. In addition, I use the sky window with binoculars to help point my telescope. I center the object I want to see in the binoculars and put the green laser right on the object. Then I just move my telescope's laser beam to touch the end of the beam from the bino's and the object is nicely centered in my eyepiece. This method works particularly well when the object is high in the sky and traditional finder scopes are hard to use.
I've jumped into astronomy/astrophotography this summer. This goes some way towards explaining the unusually wet weather here in Texas.
I spent $1k on a Celestron 6SE scope. It's big enough for me to get a reasonably good view of deep space objects as well as the planets, but small enough so it's not a major pain to lug around and set up. It has an electronic mount that provides fairly easy auto-alignment and a substantial database to help me find and identify objects in the sky, which I think is great for a beginner.
I spent maybe around $100 on connecting rings and cables to attach my Canon 20D DSLR camera. Obviously, adding the cost of the camera itself blows the $1k total budget.
Here's some of the things I found:
Set up can take a while. I usually run a power cable down the back yard so I'm not at the mercy of 8xAA batteries in the scope in the dark. The automatic alignment (point it at three bright stars and it figures out the rest) works best when the scope is perfectly horizontal, so lots of adjusting the tripod legs and checking the spirit level. Also, the mount time/date setting recalls what the time/date was last set to, not what it currently is, which is annoying.
The alt-az mount is not brilliant for photography, as it has to track the stars in two axes of rotation. I'll add an equatorial wedge to fix this at some point, but that's an additional $200. Still, it doesn't make it impossible, just difficult to maintain a steady enough tracking of the sky to make decent long exposures. Over time, I find the tracking can deteriorate, maybe requiring re-alignment after about 45 mins.
Swapping between the eyepiece and the camera is fiddly, especially in the dark. One has to be unscrewed before the other the is attached, trying not to nudge the focus too much, not cross-thread the attachment and not knock the scope out of alignment too much. Finding an object via the camera rather than swapping back to the eyepiece, is almost impossible.
Focusing the telescope with the DSLR mounted is difficult. Looking through the camera view finder is both physically difficult, due to it's location on the bottom of a scope pointed skyward, and very difficult to see clearly enough to reach a decent focus level. I have the camera connected to my laptop, running the DSLR Focus software, which takes sequences of photos as you tweak the focus dial, looking for the sharpest star image on screen.
Once everything is set up, the software can be set up to take multiple images at various ISO speeds and exposures. You can sit back and relax, look at the sky, and hope that your 25 x 30 second exposures come out ok, and fingers-crossed that the focus didn't get knocked off on the third shot. If the focus behaves, I find about half to two-thirds of the shots may be unusable to to bad tracking or shakes.
Ultimately, the results can be really cool. Captured my first nebula action last week - I was really chuffed, but I know there's still a lot of room for improvement. The process can be very frustrating at times, so you need a lot of patience. I guess I've spent just over $2k for my set up so far, with a wishlist of another several hundred dollars (wedge, filters, reducer, eyepieces). As with computers, I guess it doesn't matter what your initial budget is, you're always going to find extra bits you want to add later!
Use google sky. (Included in latest version of Google earth) Spend the money on a big monitor or even a projector.
I have a projector onto the (high) ceiling in my house, and I lay down on the floor with my kids. We look up and can look through the eyes of the best scopes in the solar system.
This is not said lightly. I spent a lot of nights on observatories on mountaintop in desolate areas, and took a lot of pictures of planets and moons using 14" refractors and 40" reflectors. The result is very poor compared to hubble and keck.
I even built my own scope. Just the mount was $2000 in parts, and months of work. It is beautiful, and could probably support a loaded cement truck. Of course, with a 20" mirror, even the rings of Saturn are unclear and fuzzy compared to Cassini's.
don't cut it off www.mgmbill.org
$1,000 is a fine budget for intro astronomy!
First, don't worry about pictures, just enjoy learning the night sky.
Pick up Sky & Telescope and Astronomy magazines. Get a pair of 7x50 binoculars, and an 8-inch Dobsonian. You'll still have budget for eyepieces, but you'll only need a couple and maybe a barlow. 100x is my most versatile magnification.
Get a copy of Turn Left at Orion by Consolmagno and Davis.
The first year in astronomy is magical. Learn the sky and constellations as they go by, then be amazed when they reappear in the east later in that year.
Take small bites and enjoy every one.
Mojo -- Old Town Sidewalk AstronomersAnd whatever telescope you get, add a Telrad or other "reflex" finder. It makes using your telescope a real pleasure. Mojo
first, go to the astronomy club meeting before you buy anything. talk to people, and look at their gear. they will be more than willing to tell you why they got what they got, and answer questions better than slashdot.
read this book: http://www.amazon.com/Astronomy-Hacks-Tools-Observing-Night/dp/0596100604
next, get yourself a dobsonian telescope. best bang for the buck (i.e., biggest aperture for the bucks), nice and portable. google it, and shop around. with other scopes, over half the money you spend is for the stand. with a dobsonian, most of what you pay for is the big-ass mirror.
forget about astrophotography for now. if you want to play around anyway, just hold your digital camera up to the eyepiece. you can get some nice moon and jupiter pics that way. anything else you would want to photograph, you're going to need a lot more than $1000 anyway.
Buy the largest light bucket that you can afford and a set of good eyepieces to begin with. After you have sat in the cold looking at the universe for a while and have felt comfortable with it then put some cash into the rest of the goodies. Most wind up storing their equipment in a closet and wonder why they spent that much on those, "toys", but it you get bit then you will get used to the cold nights under the stars.
Stellarvue offers high quality telescopes at reasonable prices.
To get into astrophotography, you will want a high quality equatorial mount with an accurate drive mechanism. Your telescope will have to accurately track stars and celestial objects in order to photograph them. Any irregularities will be magnified (pun intended). The best astrophotography for amateurs is with CCD cameras right now.
Orion has some mid-range equatorial mounts and CCD equipment. However a budget of under $1000 is extremely limiting.
To keep on budget, I would avoid looking for computer controlled telescopes. This would add nothing to your ability to photograph objects and also keep you from learning how to navigate the night sky on your own. I would recommend the book "The Stars" by H.A. Rey as a pleasant introduction to the night sky and how it apparently moves above us. After that get "Turn Left at Orion" by Guy Consolmagno.
A SkyView Pro mount with motor drive, but without computer goto technology and a Stellarvue Nighthawk 80mm refractor will go for under $1000. Add a relatively nice CCD imager for under $200 and you have a really nice quality starter scope.
None of this is really high end. The mount and the camera are reasonable and the scope is good quality (stellarvues are actually a bargain for their price!).
Many people will spend more than $1000 on the camera alone. don't be surprised to meet people with $7000 scopes and $2500 mounts! This is a hobby that can cost you your marriage.
I really recommend small scopes like the Stellarvues because you are more likely to take it out and set it up. If you were not on a budget, I would recommend a televue telescope. Stellarvue are American made and the owner stands behind his products.
If you were not interested in photography, I would suggest a really nice pair of binoculars. You can get really good optics for less money than with telescopes because the market for binoculars is greater, and the laws of economic mass production work in your favor. Binoculars are nice because if you find you don't like astronomy as much as you used to, you can still use the binos for sporting events, hunting, camping, or whatever.
I'm not joking about the binoculars. Until you've seen the moon through a nice par of binoculars, don't mock them!
Go online and find a local astronomy group. Go to a few star parties and check out scopes other people have set up. You may also have better luck finding quality used equipment if you develop a network of friends in the community in this way. Astronomy is a fun and challenging hobby, I wish you luck!
Well, for optical, I'd probably go with a Celestron 8" or better Schmidt-Cassegrain design. If you have a farm with alot of acreage, you might experiment with a virtual telescope made of multiple telescopes spread out in an array. I've always dreamed of creating an interferometer.
You could always just build a giant Newtonian and lean it up against the barn...
Codifex Maximus ~ In search of... a shorter sig.
Here is my setup:
Canon 350D XT, Celestron 6" Newtonian on a Celestron Advanced GT mount. Outdated 1.3Ghz laptop
I started with a 6" Meade, but the electronics on the mount wouldn't drive the equatorial axis in the correct direction. I returned the telescope and mount to the vendor and got the slightly more expensive Celestron. I have been pretty happy with it so far.
The mount has to work well enough to follow objects in the sky, when looking at objects in a telescope of this size you realize just how fast the sky moves overhead. A star will show up as a streak on a 15 second exposure unless the telescope is driven around the equatorial axis by a motor. Even with a motorized mount, you will still have to recenter the target periodically and you will get what is called field rotation. The field rotation is compensated for later with software when you stack multiple exposures to make an image.
Focusing is a big problem with a camera on a telescope. You can't see enough light through the camera view port to focus sharply on celestial objects - unfortunately the little lcd screens on the camera don't help much; this is where the laptop comes into play. You can shoot an image with the camera connected to the laptop via usb, download the image to see if it's in focus, adjust and repeat until you get good focus.
There are other options for focusing, such as optical splitters and lcd screens that can be attached to the telescope, but I haven't tried these.
Since the 350D XT can be remotely controlled from the laptop you can adjust shutter speed, 'film speed', etc. without touching the camera and bumping the telescope off target or screwing up your focus. Cabling between the camera and laptop can be a bit of a problem, especially in the dark. The usb cable needs to be atleast 10 feet long depending on how you position your telescope and laptop.
For the motorized mount to follow the sky correctly, it must be aligned with polar north. My mount has an auto-alignment capability. I never have gotten it to work well enough for astrophotography, so I just align the mount manually by sighting it on the north star.
When you take a picture with a DSLR, the mirror that redirects light to the view port has to be moved out of position before the shutter is opened. This is barely noticeable when you are doing regular photography, but for astrophotography the movement of the mirror will cause the telescope to bounce for a few seconds and completely ruin an image. So you will need a shutter release cable to flip the mirror up, let the telescope stabilize and then open the shutter. You will also need a T-Ring to attach the camera to the telescope.
Then you have to be able to supply power to all this stuff. With my power pack this all weighs about 80lbs.
This is very much an entry level astrophotography setup. It is suitable for shooting SOME deep sky objects, but you will need to be very familiar with the camera, telescope and mount and you will have to be persistent. It might be possible to get a comparable setup for $1700, but $2100 is probably more realistic. I haven't even gotten into the issue of post-processing the images, which is a whole 'nother realm of costs. I am still a beginner so there is a lot more that I don't know yet.
I am not trying to discourage you from the hobby, but I am trying to give you enough of a data dump so you have some ideal of the complexities and expense involved; I have left lots of little detail off that you will have to pick up along the way. Just take it slow and be sure its something you really want to do before you put $1000 into it. The learning curve is steep and it's an expensive undertaking.
The good news is that it's possible for amateurs to make incredibly good images, but I agree with the other
I'm amazed that only one person before me has mentioned Orion Telescopes.
What you want is a dobsonian mounted refractor. They all these "light buckets" and or the money, they are without a doubt the best thing to do entry-level viewing with. Yes, they are hard to keep aligned to a specific spot at times(though modern drive systems exist to compensate), but the view is stunning.
Go to their site. Telescopes --> Dobsonian --> Orion® SkyQuest(TM) XT10 IntelliScope®
It finds objects for you, tracks them for you, and at 10 inches, is a big enough lens to keep you occupied for at least a decade or more. At 56 lbs, it's heavy, but not unreasonably so(the tube is about 40lbs). $790 and 14,000 objects in the computer to look at. even including shipping, you'll be well under $1000.
This is an amazing deal for the entry-level astronomer.
The 12 incher would fit in your budget as well, but it's nearly 70lbs and isn't very portable. If you are planning on keeping it at your house and NOT taking it on the road, the 12 incher at $1,120 is an even better deal. Though slightly outside your budget, it's well worth it for a home only user. But for most first time astronomers, I'd recommend with the lighter and more portable 10.
I'd really recommend the computerized versions as well, since us old-schoolers can do it by ourselves, but having the computer do it for you is a great thing. It really makes beginning much more fun.
Also:
If you go to their main page and click on the clearance tab up near the top, you get this as the first item:
*2nd* SkyQuest XT 6i w/CI RA F - $323. An amazing deal that blows the department store models away. Perfect for looking at the moon, major planets, the ISS, and so on for dirt cheap. 34lbs and 45 inches long makes it a snap to fit in most any car if need be as well.
Oh - you normally want at least 8 inches, as much smaller won't allow you to see very well given the light pollution in most of the U.S. and Europe.
P.S.
Under Reflectors:
StarBlast(TM) 4.5 Imaging Reflector $140. This is essentially a massive telephoto lens made for taking pictures. You would need some mounts and so on, but it's a 450mm F4.0 lens.
http://www.sfsidewalkastronomers.org/telescopes/building
Best site I know of. I've met him in person and he's a great guy - willing to answer almost any question. Very helpful group.
If anyone's interested in CCD astrophotography, my dad is somewhat of an expert on the subject: http://www.ghg.net/akelly
Moderator hint: a comment is neither "Flamebait" nor "Troll" if it is true.
I often wondered, when people talked about using binoculars for astronomy, what mag. they were talking about and whether I could odo anything with what I had to hand. Your comment has given me a new impetus to try my dad's (very expensive) Steiner 16*80s on the night sky again, this time using a map! The last time I tried (a few years ago when I was probably 16) could never find any object that apppeared larger than a single point of light. Now I'm 25 and 2x as nerdy, and can get my hands on some software to help. Thanks!
When the posters fear their moderators, there is tyranny; when the moderators fears the posters, there is liberty.
Now, are you still interested in Amateur Astronomy? It can certainly be a lot of fun, but unless you go the strictly Binoculars and Star Charts route, cheap it is not.
If you're still interested, what do you want to see? There are really three distinct classes of objects, with different requirements: Stars (looking at doubles and multi-star systems), Planets, and Deep-Sky (Faint Fuzzies, the Nebulae, galaxies, and globular clusters.) For Stars and planets, you want the best quality refractor you can buy, largely becase these are pursuits that push high magnifications. For the Faint Fuzzies, you need as much aperture as you can get, and the cheapest way to do that is a Newtonian Reflector.
Now, there is a third way, not mentioned by many of the other posts I see, the Catadiotropics, these are telescopes that contain compound Mirror/Lens combinations. They provide a way to the get much of the optical performance of Refractors, with the light gathering ability of Reflectors. Orion imports a number of Chinese made models that are rather well regarded of this type.
Resources for more information - You really need to learn as much before making a purchase. I recommend: Ed Ting's http://www.scopereviews.com/, which hasn't been updated much lately but has a lot of good information nonetheless. Also, as mentioned by others: http://www.cloudynights.com/ is an excellent resource with a great, and active forum community.
Now, just to give you more of the Kind of answer you wanted, for $1000, what do I like? In a Refractor, I like the William Optics http://www.williamoptics.com/ Zenithstar 80 ED Refractor, a nice budget OTA (optical tube assembly) with well regarded performance, and a very nice focuser. That will leave you enough money left over to buy a decent Mount and Tripod (a hugely complex subject in and of itself), and a decent eyepiece or two (I like the University Optics http://www.universityoptics.com/ HD Abbe Orthoscopics, which give a lot of Bang for the Buck Performance). Now, in a Reflector, the Orion http://www.telescope.com/ Skyquest XT12 Classic is a good buy and comes with everything you need to get started. And the Third way? The Orion 150mm Skyview Pro Maksutov Cassegrain is probably a good start. Note that the Skyquest XT12 will definitely show you the most things (Aperture wins!) BUT, it does not have an equatorial mount and it will NOT track the sky.
In closing, I strongly suggest thinking about what it is you want to see, and spending a good bit of time reading the Cloudy Nights Forum before making a purchase.
Try Dark Sky. Click on Dark Sky Finder version 3 and input your coordinates. It will show you the dark sky sites closest to you.
Thanks, I may check it out later.
FalconShould there be a Law?
There are many great ways to enjoy astronomy. The easiest and cheapest is to get binoculars (50mm or more) and a star chart. In dark skies, you can see some really cool things with just those, and trying to find the constellations and nebula/globular clusters is fun and gives you a feeling of accomplishment. Check out Stellarium (free and open-source) or Starry Night to get a view of the sky and find some things to look at. You can also explore the sky now in Google Earth.
For just viewing, I'd recommend a Dobsonian telescope. They are the cheapest and lightest. The Orion Skyquests I linked to are great. It took me maybe 45-60 minutes to get it put together for the first time, and it's really easy to take around if you get the bag. You can carry the bag in one hand and the base in the other with the handle. The IntelliScope computer worked great, it only takes a couple minutes to get it going and have it point you to the right place in the sky. Basically you find a few bright objects that you know, point the telescope to center on them, and push a button on the controller. Then you type the identifier for something you want to see onto the controller and it gives you a reading of how far to move (around and up/down). You just move the telescope until both numbers reach 0 and the object is centered for you. Grab a wide-field lens to see faint objects like nebula, galaxies and globular clusters. narrow-field lenses make an object seem larger, but they actually make nebula and galaxies look dimmer.
However, Dobsonians are not good for astrophotography. They rely on you to move them, so there's no tracking. You'd be surprised how fast the sky moves across your field of view. At high magnification you can actually see Saturn moving across your field of view for instance. To get good photographs, you need to have longer exposures, which means your telescope needs to be able to move itself. For a good Schmidt-Cassegrain that can track itself you are looking at more like $2,000... Those are usually heavier as well, my 10" weighs about 80 lbs.
Whatever you do, realize that light-gathering ability goes up by the square of the mirror dimensions (roughly). So if you get a telescope with an 8" mirror, that is about 50 square inches of light-gathering ability. If you move up to a 10" mirror you get an area of 78.5 square inches. You could use a 19 second exposure instead of a 30 second exposure if you're doing astrophotography.
They're all disassembling their darkrooms and have gone completely digital. Film is dead there, they use Epson printers with the Ultra Chrome inks. While the ink isn't cheap it is better and more durable than current photographic methods.
Pro photographers debate whether digital or film is better, but as they both have strengths and weaknesses, many use both. I only have a film camera now but when I can I'll get a dslr. First I want to setup a darkroom as well as get a medium format camera with a film back. Later I can get a digital back for it, I'll then be able to shoot both film and digital with the same camera.
While hp and canon make nice stuff too it seems to be the Epson that everybody I know has gone for.
Epson is pretty much recognized by pros as having the best printers. There may be some debate, like there is between those who prefer Canon and those who prefer Nikon. But most comparisons I've seen say Epsons are better.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Don't go straight into astrophotograpy. I bought one of these: https://www.bintelshop.com.au/Product.aspx?ID=6993. Start off simple and see if you'll enjoy it. Then spend the money.
No point in buying a fullframe DSLR for astrophotography. Reduced frame gives you a blow-up factor, meaning you can get better shots with shorter lenses. Seriously, how often do you need ultra wide angle field of view when photographing the night sky?
Ah, but I don't and wlon't just shoot the sky. As it is now I shoot mostly nature and outdoors recreation. One place I love to shoot at is a lake not far from me, 10 to 15 minutes bike ride. I love shooting the sailboats during the summer and ice sails in the winter. I also shoot closeups like pestles and stamen of flowers, and want to get into macrophotography shooting with wide angle, fisheye, and macro lenses. Only a fullframe sensor allows this. With the same lenses I can get pretty much the same image with my film camera and a fullframe dslr.
And how often do you wish you had a lens just _that_ bit longer?
Ah, for shooting the night sky, the telescope is the lens. Besides I'd rather get a longer lens, I'd love to get an 800mm lens, and I don't like cropping small sensors do. Fullframe sensors have one more advantage, the signal to noise ratio is much better on fullframe sensors, which is important for night sky, astrophotography.
FalconShould there be a Law?
Over time it can preserve or improve the the view you have now, and save you money from having to buy larger optics just to keep the same image quality.
It can even save you from being forced to move because your sky is washed out from the neighboring town.
Check out this great article at the New Yorker http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/08/20/070820fa_fact_owen
Then check out;
International Dark-Sky Association http://www.darksky.org/
3225 North First Avenue, Tucson, Arizona 85719-2103 Telephone: 520-293-3198
Digital has a HUGE advantage over film in almost all areas of astrophotography. It's well worth getting a DSLR. You don't need full frame (for telescopic use full frame is fairly useless because the edges of the field in most telescopes are quite degraded). You can get an older model DSLR for less than what you'd spend the first year in film and processing.
As I've said previously I don'y do just astrophotography, I also do wide angle and want to do macro and would like to get a fisheye lens. If you're lucky a sensor that's not fullframe will turn a fisheye into a wide angle lens. One more adavantage, that's important in astrophotography, fullframe sensors have is they also have a better signla to noise ratio.
The one exception I've found is star trails. I've still got my film SLR and it's unbeatable for that kind of shot. Long exposures you can't stack are still much easier with film.
Ah, I also like long exposures. One of the things I want to do is take delayed release photos to get the star trails you mention. I already do some, but want to do more, shooting of delayed exposures, for instance there's a waterfall near here where I'd like to make the water falling look like mist early in the morning. I've got a cable release just for shots like this.
FalconShould there be a Law?
I went through this entire decision myself just over a year ago. Here's what I did, and what I like and don't like about my setup.
:)
/.), you'll be a hero with the go-to and a goat without it.
1. Tube: I bought a Celestron 8" Schmidt-Cassegrain. I love this tube. It's relatively easy to carry around, has good light-gathering power, and gives me satisfactory images of both planets and deep-sky objects (nebulae). No complaints with the tube at all, although I would love to trade it on an 11" tube now that I know what I'm doing.
2. Mount: Celestron's "german" equatorial mount, with go-to. This is where I went wrong. I convinced myself that I just had to have the ability to do astrophotography, which means an EQ mount. OK, so a year later and dozens of viewing sessions and I have never even purchased the gear to mount my camera...and the mount is a pain in the ass to set up. I'm a die-hard gadget freak so I have finally figured out how to do it quickly and reasonably well, but all in all a "fork" mount would probably have been a better choice for me. Forks (also known as "alt-az" or "altitude-azimuth" mounts) take a whole lot less time to set up, are cheaper, and have only one major drawback compared to EQs (photography, and even then you can do good photos on a fork)
That said, the "GO TO" feature rocks. Ignore all those people who say that go-to's let you avoid learning exactly where everything in the sky is. They're right, but you know what? When you want to set up for an hour of viewing, the go-to lets you see 10 different things in your hour, whereas if you had to learn how to point the scope and star-hop, you'd see maybe one or two. A year later, I pretty much know where everything is in the sky, but I learned by letting the 'scope teach me instead of the other way around. And really, when your sweetie wants to see the ring nebula the first night you set up the scope (because she read something about it on
Another advantage of the go-to is that there are lots of faint objects that even you pointed at them manually you'd convince yourself that you didn't point it properly and give up before you see them. With the go-to, you'll become convinced pretty quickly that the object just has to be in the field of view, and probably close to dead center, and you'll keep staring until the great "a-ha" moment arrives. You'd be amazed at how many times the thing you wanted to see was there the whole time...
3. Eyepieces: get a decent wide-angle eyepiece, something in the 30-35mm range. You'll want this for larger objects like the Great Nebula in Orion. Even with that, you won't see the whole thing in one shot. Also get a good eyepiece in the 10-15mm range, something like the Orion Stratus lineup. They're priced right, and "almost" as good as the high-price jobs...at least, a year later I can't tell much difference between my Orion and my buddy's Nagler. I'm sure there's a reason people pay for the Nagler, but I'm not good enough to see it yet. And get a good Barlow. No excuse for not having one.
4. Other accessories:
a. Red LED flashlight (a must)
b. green laser pointer (a crowd pleaser, especially when you want to show people what the scope is pointed at)
c. software: stellarium rocks. Google Sky sucks massively (gasp!) and is unfit for use by even the most casual astronomer (gasp! gasp!)
d. car battery jump-start kit ($30 at Wal-mart) -- you can use these to power the motor on the go-to mount. They're cheap, portable, and typically power a scope for 2-3 good long observing sessions (about 16 hours total)
All told, I have spent less than $2k on everything above, probably closer to $1500. You can shave another $500 if you drop down to a 6" tube, but I'd fork over the extra $ for the 8" 'scope if I had it.
Oh, and whoever said "apochromatic refractor" must be a troll. That's the worst possible advice you could get.
Cheers,
D
First:
Price a scope of at least 11" - this is the minimum aperture. Trust me.
Next:
With this investment as a barrier in mind, instead, spend about $100 on a quality pair of binoculars. After you move. Go sit outside a few nights there. Make sure you have decent weather.
Then:
Make sure that you actually LIKE to sit outside, quietly, patiently, for hours and hours and hours, alone, in the dark, looking up at the stars. If the weather is foggy, or dusty, or if you find that you don't have the stomach for hanging out with the coyotes, then maybe spending the $5000+++ on a decent telescope isn't such a great idea.
Luckily, I was just mouthing off to my wife about liking astronomy, and she thought it would be neat to buy me one of those low-end automount celestrons, which are nice and all, (120mm), but not really useful for seeing anything really cool (like comets or asteroids, or ANY galaxies other than Andromeda). So, the good thing about this was, I also had moved to a rural location - but there was STILL some pretty significant light pollution (neighborhood streetlights). And, frequent marine-layer fog. But most of all, I found that on any given night, at 2am, I didn't really feel like being outside watching the stars. I preferred being in my nice warm bed, gazing at the insides of my eyelids.
These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
You're by no means alone in this, but there's nothing to be ashamed about in it. Build the scopes that you want and sell them at cost or give them away to educational institutions. Or hook up with a local astronomy club and set to on upgrading their communal pool of equipment.
The GP's advice concerning binoculars is absolutely standard (well, it is here in the UK, where sky conditions are much less than predictably good) ; the only modification I'd make is to suggest looking at a similar-sized monocular (because they're lighter) and spending the difference on a decent camera tripod and a swinging-arm type of mount. This page has instructions for making one, if a supplier can't be found locally.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
I've given advice to new amateur astronomers for over 30 years, 10 of them as a planetarium professional. I agree with much of what has been said here. Here's a summary of the key points I agree with.
1. Aperture is the most important measure of telescope performance
2. A stable mounting is very important. Hopefully one that's easy to set up.
3. Experience has more to do with what you see through a telescope than anything else.
The third point is one I haven't seen here yet. Your eye has to be educated to see more. The more you look, the more you'll see. That's true in a single night and it's true over a lifetime.
My first telescope was a 2.4-in refractor from Sears 37 years ago. I was able to see Jupiter as a smooth, ivory ball. Then I went to the local astronomy club and saw Jupiter through a 10-in telescope. After that, I could always make out the North and South Equatorial Belts through *my* telescope and the Great Red Spot (which was darker in the 70s than it is now).
Years later, as an adult, I took that 2.4 out with only Norton's atlas and the finder was gone. With it I was able to find and view M1 the Crab Nebula, M51 the Whirlpool Galaxy, M81 and M82, The Ring Nebula M57, and more. Experience is way more important than the telescope.
Go to the astronomy club meetings and look through telescopes. Notice how easy or hard they are to set up. Watch the image to see how much it vibrates when you move the telescope or it's bumped. Observe people as they set up and take down their telescope, noting how easy or hard it is.
From the club meetings and reading, learn about what kind of astronomy you like. There are lots of variations in the hobby, e.g., deep sky observing, planetary, moon, variable stars, occultations, astrophotography, telescope making, double stars, etc. If you become deeply interested in any of those you'll probably may want a particular telescope for that hobby.
I've used 8-in Schmidt-Cassegrains (S-C) in the past, a pier-mounted 14-in S-C, and many other telescopes. My telescope now is a 10-in f/5.4 Dobsonian that I made with purchased mirrors in 1984. I love that telescope because I mainly like deep sky observing. Someone here said Dobsonians weren't great for planets. For planets and stars, I made a thin cardboard aperture stop (cardboard with a hole in it) that makes my Dobsonian a 3.5-in f/15 telescope that works splendidly! (The hole is off-axis so there is no obstruction).
The 10-in Dobsonian takes about 5 seconds to set up. It's two pieces that are easy to transport. It's very durable and kid-friendly. Kids can practically climb on it.
As many have pointed out here, for commercial telescopes, I really like Orion at telescope.com. There is a lot of tutorial material there at their web site, too.
I also love my 7x50 binoculars and frequently grab them as my only take-along astronomical instrument. Mounting binoculars on a camera tripod, if you have time, makes a world of difference in how much you see!
Those who posted here that you should get something that is convenient and easy to set up also hit a very key point.
Sadly, most people I've known who buy a telescope, almost regardless of their initial enthusiasm, use them a couple of times then never again. I'm always surprised by this in a way. The corollary is that there are a *lot* of barely-used telescopes out there which you could probably get a good deal on if you can find them.
So go to club meetings, look through telescopes, enjoy the sky, read about astronomy, don't spend too much money up front, and have fun!
Others have said it, but I'll say it again. Don't buy anything at a department store or your friendly neighborhood Brookstone store. Just don't. Unfortunately, astrophotography is one area that hasn't really gotten any cheaper. Easier maybe, but not cheaper.
:)
I found the following book very helpful from the tech side:
The Backyard Astronomer's Guide
# ISBN-10: 155209507X
# ISBN-13: 978-1552095072
There's very little here in terms of skycharts, etc., but a wealth of solid, helpful information on the goodies you'll be drooling over after your meeting.
Have fun
Have you guys ever tried using a Laser Pointer to point out stars and constellations? Even an inexpensive 5mw Laser is powerful enough to show you a beam that can point out stars. Check them out!! www.novalasers.com
f you can reduce the noise to practically zero what you're left with is whatever signal you managed to capture. Since film captures much less signal, you still won't see dim objects no matter how many exposures you stack (not to mention that it's a pain with film). On the other hand, the digital sensor captures that signal, though it's covered in noise. Average enough exposures and the noise goes down to a level where you can see the signal again.
Here's an old post on photo.net asking Digital long exposures worse then film?. Photo.net has more discusions on astrophotography and long exposure tymes.
Multiple shot star trails with a cable release are pretty frustrating because you have to get each exposure exactly the right length (otherwise your trails will pulse brighter and darker) and can't have much shutter closed time between exposures (otherwise you'll get gaps).
I saw some photos the person taking them spent hours to capture, on film. He'd set the camera up and open the shutter then go back a few hours later to close it. He also did some fantastic light painting, in valleys with almost vertical rock walls, and caverns. After setting up the camera for long exposures, he'd then take a flashlight and with it on point it at the rock walls a slowly move it around so as to paint different spots. He had some terrific shots, and it didn't take any special processing or multiple exposures, which I'm guessing is your stacking. With experience most anyone should be able to do, just keep a log of all shots taken. Which pros do anyway, what film was used, the aperture and exposure tyme, what lens was used, and so on. I write all this down when I go out shooting. Now some digital cameras can record this but so can some film cameras. Later the photos are evaluated and you can see what worked and what didn't. Go out a second tyme and use settings similar to what worked before but also try changing one or two settings. The more you practice doing this the better you'll get.
Should there be a Law?
Here's an article from a great amateur astrophotographer (who uses both film and digital) on deep sky imaging with digital sensors: http://www.astropix.com/HTML/I_ASTROP/SIGNAL.HTM
Interesting, I like how the rollover effect was done. With the multiple exposures I'm wondering if you can't get the same results with film. Though my 35mm is a cheap one I can still take multiple exposures on the same frame. I suppose what I could do is test it, take a 5 minute exposure on one frame then take 5 one minutes exposures on the next. I don't know anyplace around here that doesn't have light pollution, however there's a waterfall not far where I want to get some tyme lapse photos of early in the morning. I'll need to get at least one ND filter first though.
Oh, I also don't want to leave the impression I don't like or have something against DSLRs, I don't and I'd like to get one myself. Perhaps the Canon 5D. The film camera I have is a Canon EOS Rebel so I'll be able to use the same lenses on both. However before I get a DSLR I want to get a a medium format camera first, perhap one of Mamiya's 645s with a film back. Eventually when the prices come down and I can afford one I can get a digital back for it. My dream camera would allow me to shoot both digital and film at the same tyme. Technically though I don't know if one can be made yet have good image quality, either the light would have to be split with one going to the film plane and the other to the sensor, or possibly have the film right in front of the sensor. The first one though means splitting light in half requiring twice as long an exposure, and the second means the film will interfere with the sensor.
FalconShould there be a Law?
It's most advisable to spend your money after gathering enough information. Joining the local astroclub is a good first move. You will get the chance to experience different types of scopes. There is a lot of good information on the Internet. Join http://cloudynights.com/ and read what other first buyers went trough. After you get a feeling about what do you really want as an astro-amateur and what equipment is more rewarding, it's time to start thinking about buying something.
Astrophotography on a $1000 budget will not get you too far. You might be able to get a Canon DSLR (used maybe) with a reasonable lens and a motorized equatorial mount(EQ5). A small achromatic refractor can be used for visual. It's up to you to decide if you are happy with this. I went for a 10" dobsonian and a few good eyepieces myself. There is always time for more investment later. Good luck and clear skies.
A inadvertently ironic post you have there ... I live just off of M-43, a state hwy between Kalamazoo and Lansing. My first thought was "Hey, how the hell does he know where live?"
Furthermore, I made my own 10" dob!
I'll spare you from my thoughts about buying kids what they want...
"I've been killing time, and it's been reciprocating." - David Turrill
You ought to just refer to Orion's left and right belt stars as Kalamazoo and Lansing. M-43 is kind of in the middle.
No weapon in the arsenals of the world is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men.-Ronald Reagan
Congratulations on your country house. All the below is old hat and obvious. My apologies.
1. Find an astronomy club where you live. Go to their out of town observing site and get advice on equipment.
2. Look a lot at other equipment in use (not the showroom) before you buy anything. Used equipment is OK.
3. Going directly for CCD pictures might be a bit over your 1K investment plan. But lots of people try this and give up and dump their equipment.
4. A laptop attached to the scope works wonders for broad views. You can also see the image move as you step on the cement telescope slab.
5. Start out with a lawn chair and binoculars and a star chart to get an idea where the constellations live.
6. Anticipate a mobile home with a guard light moving in next to your site. So be prepared and polite and helpful getting them shaded lights.
Best wishes,
Jim