5 ms·

The most important thing to look for is the diameter of the aperture. Your resolution is proportional to the diameter of the telescope (absent atmospheric condi

The most important thing to look for is the diameter of the aperture. Your resolution is proportional to the diameter of the telescope (absent atmospheric conditions). I would recommend a minimum of 6" in diameter. 8-12" is preferred. With this in mind, the best telescope you can get for the price is a Dobsonian. Dobsonians are extremely mechanically and optically simple. This makes them long, and bulky. It also makes them cheap. It also makes them rather easy to point. They have a lot of mass and inertia, and a large moment of inertia. This makes them easy to move and point slowly and carefully. Dobsonians are ideal beginner telescopes. Easy to point, cheap, good resolution. This is the model I have (8" aperture, $450): https://www.amazon.com/Orion-8945-SkyQuest-Dobsonian-Telescope/dp/B001DDW9V6 https://www.amazon.com/Orion-8945-SkyQuest-Dobsonian-Telesco... They're also rather easy to construct, if you are of a DIY mind. Here's a 90 minute youtube video on how to build one, with John Dobson himself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snz7JJlSZvw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snz7JJlSZvw

pkaye 6y ago
Would these be of any use in the bay area or places with high population and hence light pollution? I have clear view of my sky from my backyard except for the ambient light pollution in the sky.
- danesparza 6y ago
  I'm stunned how much I can see even with a bit of cloud cover in my front yard (and we have streetlights close by). But of course, you should probably get a case and go camping with one of these (in a secluded area) for best results)
- dplavery92 6y ago
  This is the sort of thing where darker is always better, but John Dobson started a movement around "Sidewalk Astronomy" in the 60s and 70s in San Francisco with this very telescope design. I'm sure the light pollution has gotten worse since then, but the moon, the planets, and perhaps a few brighter Messier objects will still be within reach. It's a big sky and there's a lot to see.
  - JKCalhoun 6y ago
    > I'm sure the light pollution has gotten worse since then Perhaps. In the South Bay they still have many of the sodium street lights because of Lick Observatory in the hills. I'm always amazed at how well you can see the stars from my driveway. I don't recall it being as clear in the midwest when I lived there.
- gcheong 6y ago
  There was a guy who regularly brought out his Dob (11" I think) in the Sunset district of San Francisco near Parkside Square as part of Sidewalk Astronomers public outreach. Good views of the moon, saturn, jupiter some nebulae, etc. and the San Francisco Amateur Astronomers often held star parties near at Land's End and Crissy Field pre-pandemic though their main viewing spot is usually Mt. Tam I think. Quite a few of Dobs show up I think.
craigching 6y ago
Agree on the Dobsonian on being a great entry level option unless you need to be mobile. You can still be mobile with a smaller dobsonian, but the bigger you get, the harder mobility becomes.
- dplavery92 6y ago
  I think 6" is still pretty manageable for most people--you can probably fit it in the trunk of a sporty two-seater car. It's really only when you get to 10" and beyond--telescopes that are probably not a good "first scope" purchase for a variety of reasons--that the Dobsonian becomes a beast.
  - craigching 6y ago
    Yes, you absolutely hit what I was thinking! I was thinking the 6" Dobs would be portable, the 8" still ok, but past that ... probably not so much!
dplavery92 6y ago
I'll glom on this only to add that while building your own reflecting telescope is valuable as a fun project or an educational exercise, you are unlikely to save much (if any) money doing it. A lot of John Dobson's "Sidewalk Astronomer" guidance comes from a time in Southern California where it was easy to find discarded porthole glass for free to grind into a mirror blank and when hardware shops would hand out teflon samples for free. Even finding the correct cardboard "sonotubes" can be a little tricky these days, and you're likely to blow out the price of an Orion or Apertura procuring a mirror (or sourcing the glass and getting it silvered.) I hope that doesn't deter the "makers" among you from building a Dobsonian for the experience of it all, but if you want to get from zero to observing as cheaply as possible these days, you're probably better off just buying a Dobsonian similar to the one the parent comment linked.
Tepix 6y ago
Great advice! Start with good binoculars for $100-200. I would get a used telescope. Many of them are as good as new and here in Germany you get them for 50-70% of the regular price. I bought an 8" SC myself used for 550€ including a mount with tracking.
- mikesabbagh 6y ago
  binoculars cant go too far, the diameter is too small to allow enough light to be concentrated into your eye. With binoculars, u can look at the moon. boring. with a telescope, well u can see the planets live and take amazing photos
  - wang_li 6y ago
    Orion has considered this problem... :) https://www.amazon.com/Orion-2x54-Ultra-Angle-Binoculars/dp/B084R99W8Q https://www.amazon.com/Orion-2x54-Ultra-Angle-Binoculars/dp/...
    - davidcuddeback 6y ago
      That's a wider FoV, not a larger diameter objective. I was thinking more along the lines of... http://www.jerryoltion.com/binoscope.htm http://www.jerryoltion.com/binoscope.htm Or on a more serious note, binoculars do come with pretty large objectives, but they get to be expensive when you get past 100mm. Here's one with 150mm objectives. And since binoculars have two objectives, that has the light-gathering capability of an 8-inch telescope. https://www.apm-telescopes.de/en/telescopes/bino-telescopes/apm-150-mm-45--ed-apo-bino-2-eyepieceset-uf30mm-case.html https://www.apm-telescopes.de/en/telescopes/bino-telescopes/...
  - necheffa 6y ago
    With a nice pair of coated binocs you can see some of the closer star clusters. Of course Andromeda is always a good view. And the occasional bright comet too. The nice thing about binocs is they are easier to bring out than the scope. Plus they give the wife something to look at while I find cool stuff with the scope.
gbrown 6y ago
Unless you want to image things, either for EAA or full blown astrophotography, in which case the question is more about the mount than the telescope.
- dplavery92 6y ago
  If you want to get into astrophotography, the phrase "entry-level" should probably not be in your vocabulary any more, though.
  - jjav 6y ago
    This is pretty universal advice, yes, in most (all?) skywatching tutorials. The astrophotography rabbit hole is deep, infinitely expensive and the learning curve is steep. It's a lot more sensible to start with visual observation. (That said, I ignored the advice because really wanted to do photography more than anything else.)
    - gbrown 6y ago
      Your parenthetical is why I commented - astrophotography isn’t just more advanced visual astronomy, it’s really a separate hobby.
  - gbrown 6y ago
    That might be true in general, but this is a forum full of highly technical people. At the end of the day, doing basic Astro is not rocket science, and if OP is into photography they might be more interested in buying a small tracking mount for their DSLR than a telescope. The hobbies are more parallel than sequential.
- JKCalhoun 6y ago
  Did some Googling — apparently you can use Dobsonian for astrophotography. Seems to me the field is wide open for someone to come in and solve it using off-the-shelf hardware. Maybe tapping the CCD and detecting the minuscule changes ... servo to rotate the CCD, servos to adjust pitch, yaw ... a feedback loop that blips the servos and decides if the image error is increased or diminished....
mikesabbagh 6y ago
just make sure the diameter is as large as you can afford. Watching Saturn with its ring and moons is something i still remember 20 years later. Definitely a good investment
- perilunar 6y ago
  Saturn is quite bright — you don't need much diameter (aperture) to see the rings. A smallish refractor with the right eyepiece (50x magnification) is enough.
jerome-jh 6y ago
I have a 4.5" Dobson. It is quite cheap even with an additional set of eyepiece that is almost mandatory. Our use case is occasional observation while on holidays and weekends, when space in the car is counted. You can leave kids touch it and on good nights reach magnification levels where pursuit starts being painful. Around 11-12PM kids are asleep, cold, bored and you have observed every visible planets. You can stay later searching for deep sky objects: it is difficult and not very impressive but you'll be quite happy when you find one for sure (often you'll doubt). I would say: perfect instrument for the setting I describe. Maybe binoculars would be great too, have not tried.

pkaye 6y ago

Would these be of any use in the bay area or places with high population and hence light pollution? I have clear view of my sky from my backyard except for the ambient light pollution in the sky.

danesparza 6y ago
I'm stunned how much I can see even with a bit of cloud cover in my front yard (and we have streetlights close by). But of course, you should probably get a case and go camping with one of these (in a secluded area) for best results)
dplavery92 6y ago
This is the sort of thing where darker is always better, but John Dobson started a movement around "Sidewalk Astronomy" in the 60s and 70s in San Francisco with this very telescope design. I'm sure the light pollution has gotten worse since then, but the moon, the planets, and perhaps a few brighter Messier objects will still be within reach. It's a big sky and there's a lot to see.
- JKCalhoun 6y ago
  > I'm sure the light pollution has gotten worse since then Perhaps. In the South Bay they still have many of the sodium street lights because of Lick Observatory in the hills. I'm always amazed at how well you can see the stars from my driveway. I don't recall it being as clear in the midwest when I lived there.
gcheong 6y ago
There was a guy who regularly brought out his Dob (11" I think) in the Sunset district of San Francisco near Parkside Square as part of Sidewalk Astronomers public outreach. Good views of the moon, saturn, jupiter some nebulae, etc. and the San Francisco Amateur Astronomers often held star parties near at Land's End and Crissy Field pre-pandemic though their main viewing spot is usually Mt. Tam I think. Quite a few of Dobs show up I think.

craigching 6y ago

Agree on the Dobsonian on being a great entry level option unless you need to be mobile. You can still be mobile with a smaller dobsonian, but the bigger you get, the harder mobility becomes.

dplavery92 6y ago
I think 6" is still pretty manageable for most people--you can probably fit it in the trunk of a sporty two-seater car. It's really only when you get to 10" and beyond--telescopes that are probably not a good "first scope" purchase for a variety of reasons--that the Dobsonian becomes a beast.
- craigching 6y ago
  Yes, you absolutely hit what I was thinking! I was thinking the 6" Dobs would be portable, the 8" still ok, but past that ... probably not so much!

dplavery92 6y ago

I'll glom on this only to add that while building your own reflecting telescope is valuable as a fun project or an educational exercise, you are unlikely to save much (if any) money doing it. A lot of John Dobson's "Sidewalk Astronomer" guidance comes from a time in Southern California where it was easy to find discarded porthole glass for free to grind into a mirror blank and when hardware shops would hand out teflon samples for free. Even finding the correct cardboard "sonotubes" can be a little tricky these days, and you're likely to blow out the price of an Orion or Apertura procuring a mirror (or sourcing the glass and getting it silvered.) I hope that doesn't deter the "makers" among you from building a Dobsonian for the experience of it all, but if you want to get from zero to observing as cheaply as possible these days, you're probably better off just buying a Dobsonian similar to the one the parent comment linked.

Tepix 6y ago

Great advice! Start with good binoculars for $100-200. I would get a used telescope. Many of them are as good as new and here in Germany you get them for 50-70% of the regular price. I bought an 8" SC myself used for 550€ including a mount with tracking.

mikesabbagh 6y ago
binoculars cant go too far, the diameter is too small to allow enough light to be concentrated into your eye. With binoculars, u can look at the moon. boring. with a telescope, well u can see the planets live and take amazing photos
- wang_li 6y ago
  Orion has considered this problem... :) https://www.amazon.com/Orion-2x54-Ultra-Angle-Binoculars/dp/B084R99W8Q https://www.amazon.com/Orion-2x54-Ultra-Angle-Binoculars/dp/...
  - davidcuddeback 6y ago
    That's a wider FoV, not a larger diameter objective. I was thinking more along the lines of... http://www.jerryoltion.com/binoscope.htm http://www.jerryoltion.com/binoscope.htm Or on a more serious note, binoculars do come with pretty large objectives, but they get to be expensive when you get past 100mm. Here's one with 150mm objectives. And since binoculars have two objectives, that has the light-gathering capability of an 8-inch telescope. https://www.apm-telescopes.de/en/telescopes/bino-telescopes/apm-150-mm-45--ed-apo-bino-2-eyepieceset-uf30mm-case.html https://www.apm-telescopes.de/en/telescopes/bino-telescopes/...
- necheffa 6y ago
  With a nice pair of coated binocs you can see some of the closer star clusters. Of course Andromeda is always a good view. And the occasional bright comet too. The nice thing about binocs is they are easier to bring out than the scope. Plus they give the wife something to look at while I find cool stuff with the scope.

gbrown 6y ago

Unless you want to image things, either for EAA or full blown astrophotography, in which case the question is more about the mount than the telescope.

dplavery92 6y ago
If you want to get into astrophotography, the phrase "entry-level" should probably not be in your vocabulary any more, though.
- jjav 6y ago
  This is pretty universal advice, yes, in most (all?) skywatching tutorials. The astrophotography rabbit hole is deep, infinitely expensive and the learning curve is steep. It's a lot more sensible to start with visual observation. (That said, I ignored the advice because really wanted to do photography more than anything else.)
  - gbrown 6y ago
    Your parenthetical is why I commented - astrophotography isn’t just more advanced visual astronomy, it’s really a separate hobby.
- gbrown 6y ago
  That might be true in general, but this is a forum full of highly technical people. At the end of the day, doing basic Astro is not rocket science, and if OP is into photography they might be more interested in buying a small tracking mount for their DSLR than a telescope. The hobbies are more parallel than sequential.
JKCalhoun 6y ago
Did some Googling — apparently you can use Dobsonian for astrophotography. Seems to me the field is wide open for someone to come in and solve it using off-the-shelf hardware. Maybe tapping the CCD and detecting the minuscule changes ... servo to rotate the CCD, servos to adjust pitch, yaw ... a feedback loop that blips the servos and decides if the image error is increased or diminished....

mikesabbagh 6y ago

just make sure the diameter is as large as you can afford. Watching Saturn with its ring and moons is something i still remember 20 years later. Definitely a good investment

perilunar 6y ago
Saturn is quite bright — you don't need much diameter (aperture) to see the rings. A smallish refractor with the right eyepiece (50x magnification) is enough.

jerome-jh 6y ago

I have a 4.5" Dobson. It is quite cheap even with an additional set of eyepiece that is almost mandatory. Our use case is occasional observation while on holidays and weekends, when space in the car is counted. You can leave kids touch it and on good nights reach magnification levels where pursuit starts being painful. Around 11-12PM kids are asleep, cold, bored and you have observed every visible planets. You can stay later searching for deep sky objects: it is difficult and not very impressive but you'll be quite happy when you find one for sure (often you'll doubt). I would say: perfect instrument for the setting I describe. Maybe binoculars would be great too, have not tried.