[removed]
Comments
ghost4278 OP t1_ixih4ob wrote
That's all good advice, thank you! I will say that while it is normally a very expensive "first telescope" it is on sale for ~$320
[deleted] t1_ixi3hof wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_ixi6biz wrote
[removed]
Strange-Ad1209 t1_ixib2k7 wrote
Take a look through Sky and Telescope magazine www.SkyandTelescope.com Or Astronomy magazine www.astronomy.com
ghost4278 OP t1_ixih8lg wrote
The problem isn't so much where to find a good one, it's that neither of us have a good knowledge base on WHAT IS a good one :(
Strange-Ad1209 t1_ixijfcu wrote
The articles in the magazines should help anyone seeking advice on what kind of telescope is best for what purposes. One suggestion though is check the PC version of World Wide Telescope for which telescope drives (about 30 models) are easily interfaced by the totally free software that has several million deep sky objects catalogued and can use the software to control the telescope drive and even connect to an LCD camera on the scope to display on the PC screen while staying nice and warm indoors while telescope is outside in the icy cold but crystal clear winter nights. The URL takes you to the web page version but also has links for downloading the PC version. I haven't looked to see if the Apple and Linux versions have been produced yet. The PC version is necessary to control the telescope drive.
ghost4278 OP t1_ixijm3x wrote
Ohhh ok. I'll run that by my friend too, thank you!
Strange-Ad1209 t1_ixj0bs5 wrote
I really think you'll enjoy the huge astronomical databases of images in every spectrum available. You can also view Earth and the other Planets highest resolution images. Just know the PC version gives you much higher resolution than the web application. You should also be patient and only click in 3 or 4 magnifications then wait until it updates completely before shifting to a desired target like Lunar lava tubes or Apollo landing sites then click another 3-4 magnifications and wait for the image to update. Very high resolutions are available for Moon and Mars. Also Earth you get really good images of Area 51, Nevada, Dugway Proving Ground and Skin Walker Ranch, Utah that haven't been blurred out like in Google Earth. Lots of images all over the Earth from the ISS super high resolution cameras. www.worldwidetelescope.org
space-ModTeam t1_ixjg8e3 wrote
Hello u/ghost4278, your submission "Advice on a telescope for an amateur star-gazer" has been removed from r/space because:
It looks like you are looking for recommandations on buying a telescope. Check out the beginner guide on r/telescopes for advice depending on your budget.
Please read the rules in the sidebar and check r/space for duplicate submissions before posting. If you have any questions about this removal please message the r/space moderators. Thank you.
WictImov t1_ixjiift wrote
I am not familiar with that telescope, but from the picture, I see it has a very flimsy-looking tripod. As someone else mentioned, you are probably better sticking with a Dobsonian mount which is used on reflecting telescopes. While there are excellent refractors out there as well, they are well over $1000 entry cost and need an equally expensive tripod or other mount. With a flimsy tripod, you will not get a stable image. The higher magnification you use the worse it will get. That is why many people are turned off of astronomy, they got the wrong equipment to begin with.
Low-end refractors are fairly good in many respects but suffer from chromatic aberration (can't bring different colours into focus). That can be corrected with better optics, and that is why people pay much more. A good refractor makes an excellent telescope, but will not be cheap compared to an equivalent reflector (light gathering).
Reflector telescopes don't have the above problem (a mirror reflects the entire spectrum equally). The other advantage of reflector telescopes is that for the same objective size they are far cheaper, or for the same money you can get a much larger objective size and collect a lot more light. A 6" reflector will collect almost 4.5 times the light as the 72mm refractor.
Dobsonian mounts are more stable for the dollar than a tripod. Dobsonian mounts require a reflector telescope. A Dobsonian telescope is a reflector telescope on a Dobsonian mount.
ghost4278 OP t1_ixjl6aq wrote
Wow this is an information goldmine. Thank you so much
manicdee33 t1_ixi7lnj wrote
You'll want to check the sticky post in /r/telescopes
Their basic recommendation is that with any limited budget you stick to Dobsonian telescopes until you understand how to operate a telescope, and have a better idea of exactly what you're interested in doing (what you want to do will drastically alter the choice of telescope).
At the price of that Galileo telescope you may be better off looking at a pair of good binoculars and a tripod or monopod or even a deck chair/lawn chair (something that can fold back to recline on) and a good astronomy beginner's book.
For choosing binoculars, check out this Sky and Telescope article on choosing binoculars for astronomy.
I've not read it myself but I've seen a few recommendations for "Stargazing with Binoculars" from Firefly Pocket Books.
Hope this helps. Just keep in mind that a pair of 7x35 binoculars, a lawn chair and a good astronomy book would be a better package than a tiny telescope on a wobbly tripod, even if they don't seem as special up front. Besides, binoculars are portable and can be used for daytime activities such as birdwatching should interests drift.