Slashdot Mirror
Amateur Astronomer Bruce Berger Talks About Telescopes, Part II (Video)
Bruce Berger is an IT
guy, but he's also an amateur astronomer who takes telescope selection and scope building extra-seriously. We ran a video interview with him yesterday. Today that interview continues, with more emphasis on telescope selection and purchasing. He mentions Orion, a telescope vendor he seems to respect, along with other sources for both new and used equipment. Which should you buy (or build): A reflector or a refractor telescope? Bruce talks about how you should make your selection based on what you want to view, your skill level, and how much time and/or money you have available.
Bold move, Slashdot, going forward with a topic that pulled in only 34 comments yesterday. And a video too - exactly what we're looking for.
Naked and petrified.
Reflector or refractor?
That depends. Do they keep the lights on?
>Which should you buy (or build): A reflector or a refractor telescope?
Reflectors are always cheaper per inch of aperature and need less correction. However the central obstruction can be a problem. But even that can be dealt with by making an off-axis diagonal - the difficulty in this is grinding the off-center parabola on the primary.
>Bruce talks about how you should make your selection based on what you want to view,
Rule of thumb: Planets=refractor. Deep sky=reflector.
> your skill level
If you are mechanically declined, buy. If not, build.
>and how much time and/or money you have available.
If you have boatloads of cash, buy. If you want to learn something, build.
--
BMO
Also what is your personal refractory period?
If you live in the northeast check out: Amateur Telescope Makers of Boston
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
social engineering, get into her bedroom
Long time ago, before the age of CCD photography and GPS setup for telescopes, I used to have a 20" reflector. The tube was longer than the width of my truck :) It was a lot of fun, even though it was very difficult to setup. I even tried some photography....wait for it....with hyperexposed film. I loved the reflectors but ended up trading it for a 5" motorized SCT for the simplicity of operation. Maybe some day when I have time to stay up all night again, I will go back to reflector.
I've always said English was my second language. Had Romeo and Juliet been written in C, I might have understood it.
when you want to see nebulae and light-scarce objects (galaxies and the like) go for a reflector;
when you want to observe planets, go for a refractor.
Even more generally than that, reflectors where the way to go. Which type of was another
decision, Newton, Maksutov, etc. (I forget, it's been some 40 years).
For mobility, of course a good quality refractor of the binocular type is unchallenged. The
last one I bought is a 25x100; just on the verge of mobile, I admit, but what a tremendous
sight.
Their Xbox 1
Refractor? I barely knew her! (ba-dum ching!)
I've owned a few refractors and currently have an 8" dob (newt mounted on a simple alt/az base). With a small refractor (say under 102mm) it's easy to just pop out of the house and start observing. Fast refractors (like Orion's 80mm shorty) are great for scanning the deep sky and drinking in wide views of the milky way from a dark site. They set up fast and don't take up much room when stored or while in the car. My 8" newt is a completely different setup. It's heavy and bulky and takes up a ton of room in the car while transporting. In the winter it can take a couple of hours for the mirror to cool down to ambient temperature and provide stable views (on top of the 15 minutes it takes to get setup). That said, other than the narrower field of view, it shows much better on planets and most deep-sky objects than any sub $2,000 refractor is capable. In an ideal world, one would have both a small grab-and-go refractor (or possibly some 15x70 or 20x80 binoculars) for quick/casual viewing and a medium or large reflector for serious viewing.
A post with news for nerds and stuff that matters. Too bad its a video without transcript and that means it might as well not exist.
I can't stress enough that the best telescope is one you're going to use. I've seen a few people spend a lump of cash on a shed-ornament.
Coming home after a long day at work and expecting to spend an hour setting up a german equatorial mount or wheeling out a heavy dobsonian will quickly kill your enthusiam.
Determining which scope is best for you involves checking out other people's gear at star parties or at a local astro club. Ask questions like "how often do you use this?" and "how long does it take to set up?" as well as "what can you see?". Remember that location is pretty important but it is not the be-all and end-all of astronomy. Dobson would routinely show people planets and deep sky objects from the middle of the light-polluted city with his constructed telescopes but you can buy a little grab and go scope of much smaller aperture and see much much more from a site with low light pollution.
Another mistake I see lots of people making (even telescope manufacturers!) is to pair a scope with a mount that cannot support it. You'll get a far better view through a small scope on a solid mount than with a large scope on an insufficiently robust mount.
Please don't drop a few hundred dollars on a shiny telescope hoping that you'll see wonders straight away. It's tempting to a lot of people and is a likely way to kill all your enthusiasm for a highly rewarding passtime when you realise you're spending more time fighting with the instrument than you are using it.
Most importantly, do not give one of those crappy National Geographic style scopes to a kid. Presenting astronomy as a frustrating experience will ruin it for them for a long time.
Find what works for you - a little research goes a long, long way.
Clear skies.