TT Policy Statement
(Revised September 14, 2004)

As a reminder of this group's desire to encourage all of its members to
participate in a friendly and informed manner, please review our list policies.

1. Talking Telescopes Mission

The Talking Telescopes discussion group was established in August 1999 for the
express purpose of discussing astronomical equipment, including, but not limited
to, telescopes, eyepieces, binoculars, and accessories.  If it can be used for
astronomical purposes, it's good fodder for discussion here.

Please note that we are NOT the place to post your observations, except in the
context of the equipment being used.  If you are looking for a forum to discuss
*what* you have observed, consider joining our offshoot list "Starrynights." 
Information can be found at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/starrynights .


2. All Telescopes Welcome Here!

As the moderators of this group, we want to make it absolutely clear that we
welcome discussion about ALL types of telescopes, whether they are refractors,
reflectors, Schmidt-Cassegrains, Maksutovs, or an exotic design. While we will
always encourage comments, pro and con, on any scope, we will discourage blanket
generalizations and will not stand for rude comments (note rude does not mean
negative -- one can have a negative opinion about a particular telescope and
state them politely).

Remember, all telescopic equipment is only as good as the person using it. This
hobby is not about who has the best equipment. It is about what you do with the
equipment you have. Our goal here should be to enable *everyone* to maximize the
enjoyment and use of their equipment and this hobby, whether you have a megabuck
apochromatic refractor, huge Newtonian reflector, sophisticated catadioptric
instrument, a pair of binoculars, or a small telescope purchased at
Wal-Mart.

All opinions expressed by group participants are theirs alone. The Talking
Telescopes Yahoogroup or its moderators take no responsibility for these
opinions and do not endorse them. Please read the rules, then use this group at
your own risk. The following is what you agree to by participating in this
group: No pornographic or obscene material, abuse, or harassing of other uses,
crime of any kind or defamation, slander, libel, religious or anti religious
comments, racism, violence, fraud, continued use of other languages other than
English, or a deliberate posting to the wrong section, or using others' names
already in use by others (impostors).  Violators of these requirements will be
removed from the group quickly and permanently.

One point should be given reiteration. This note is not intended to say that
people cannot speak their minds. On the contrary, everyone saying that
everything is wonderful does none of us any good. If you get a lemon, we want to
know about it. If you get bad service, we want to know.  And we encourage frank
and honest advice to newcomers looking for advice on their first purchase. We
just ask that you do so in a manner worthy of those just trying to help others
-- not in a way that is confrontational or inconsiderate.


3. Postings

Since we are speaking to all members here, we would also like to encourage all
of you "listeners" to speak up. Please share your thoughts on the equipment you
have or are thinking of getting. No matter what it is that you have, there are
certainly others thinking of getting the same. The more diverse the equipment
discussion becomes the better for all of us. So please, do not be shy!

Members can also post one-time announcements for items that they have for
private, noncommercial sale.  Note, however, that you CANNOT post announcements
on the list for items that you have for sale through other services, such as
AstroMart, eBay, etc.

In addition to the message board (which can generate more than 100 posts a day,
especially around Full Moon for some reason <g>), you are invited to look over
the "Photos", "Files", and "Polls" sections.  Under "Photos," you will find all
sorts of things, ranging from photos of our equipment and ourselves

The "Files" include reviews, links, and other miscellaneous items.  If you've
written a review on a piece of equipment and want to share that review with
others, upload it here and then post a note to the group about your new
addition.

We also run polls and surveys every now and then to test the waters on various
issues.  We ask that all poll questions be filtered through one of the list
moderators (Chris Adamson, John Bambury, Kevin Dixon, Geoff Gaherty, or Phil
Harrington) before posting.

4. Keep Messages Focused

A thought or two to frequent contributors. Try to avoid filling everyone's
mailbox with "banter" type replies. While saying "thanks", "sounds great", "me
too", etc. is nice, it also adds to the large number of e-mails that get
generated that really do not serve the group. By all means, speak when you have
something to say to the group. But do not speak just to speak or to have a one
on one conversation with a fellow group member. You can always reply personally.
Also, *please* don't quote the entire message to which you are replying. The
only thing worse than a "me too" post is a "me too" post accompanied by a quote
of the entire 25 paragraph message! *Do* change the subject line if the topic
has narrowed or changed completely from the original
message.


5.  Commercial announcements

Talking Telescopes is *strictly* noncommercial, a policy that is guarded
jealously.  While company representatives and vendors are certainly encouraged
to read and post to the group, we ask that it be done in the spirit of
non-commercialism.  Blatant commercial announcements for products are strictly
forbidden.  Violation of this policy may result in the poster forfeiting his or
her right to posting future messages.  That said, if you feel that you can
answer someone's question about one of your products, by all means, feel free to
post a reply.


6. Spam

Every now and then, an unsolicited solicitation (a.k.a. "spam") gets onto the
list.  Rest assured that one of the moderators will spot it quickly and deal
with it and the perpetrator accordingly.  We always delete the message and ban
the sender from the list, no questions asked.  Having said that, if you choose
to subscribe to the list by e-mail (as opposed to reading it on the Web only),
then you will automatically get every message that is posted, including the
spam.  We ask, however, that you do not post a reply on the list.  That only
perpetuates a bad thing.  If you want to write to the moderators about the
problem, that's fine.  A note to telescopes-owner@yahoogroups.com will get it to
all five of us simultaneously.


7. Common Courtesy

When you subscribe to any e-mail list, be it TT or otherwise, you have
responsibility to *every other* member of that list. Among others, that includes
making sure that your e-mail program or account does not cause an undue burden
on that list. Many e-mail programs nowadays have an option of setting up an
autoreply message that alerts anyone who contacts you that you will be away from
the computer for a length of time. That's fine, but before you turn that option
on, first unsubscribe to all e-mail lists that you may be on. In the case of TT,
you have the option of changing your subscription to "no e-mail," which means
you can access the messages via the Internet, but they will not be delivered to
your e-mail. Then when you return, change your subscription back to e-mail
delivery, if desired.

Having said that, if anyone fails to follow those simple steps and we all get
dozens of autoreplies (as has happened in the past), we will have no choice but
to unsubscribe and ban the offending address. There will be no exceptions.
Sounds extreme, but not as extreme as sending out dozens of unwanted messages to
more than 3,000 subscribers.

We also see a proliferation of telescope-specific lists. That's fine, and might
be very useful if you are an owner of a specific model. But if you have formed
such a list, we ask that you do NOT promote it here on TT, especially if you are
not a frequent contributor here. Sorry, that just rubs us moderators the wrong
way. Add a link to our list of "Links" if you wish, but please do not post
messages begging people to join.


8.  Plagiarism

What if you come across a message written by someone on another list, newsgroup,
or possibly on a web site that you think everyone on this list would benefit and
appreciate?  Should you copy and paste it into a message and post it to the
group?  In a word: DON'T.  That's what we call copyright infringement.  If you
read something somewhere that you think might be of use to the list members,
then by all means post a link or reference to that item.  But do NOT cut and
paste the text into a list message.  The problem is even more offensive if the
material being plagiarized was either from a private conversation or was
privileged in some manner.  That latter includes written words that were
subsequently retracted by the author.


9.  Keep these addresses handy

Here are some addresses that you might want to keep around for future reference:
           Post message: telescopes@yahoogroups.com
           Subscribe: telescopes-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
           Unsubscribe: telescopes-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
           URL to this page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/telescopes

If you need to contact the list owner and moderators directly, please send an
e-mail to: telescopes-owner@yahoogroups.com.

Thanks to all of you for making TT as large and useful as it is. Let's work
together to make it even better. Please feel free to email any of the moderators
with any suggestions or thoughts you may have to improve TT.

Thanks,

TT Moderators

Hi,
I found this YouTube series tonight and it goes over the target and events in
the night sky for each week. This week happens to be the first week of the
series. Check it out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bS9QlOz04fs

Unless you and your husband are knowledgeable and are pretty sure what you want,
you don't have enough time before Christmas to select a telescope with
confidence. Instead, I would suggest the following:

(1) Join the local astronomy club. You can benefit from the members' collective
experience. Clubs hold "star parties" at which you can look through telescopes
of different types and sizes.

(2) Learn the constellations so that you know where things are in the sky. A
star atlas is part of every astronomer's library.

(3) If you already have binoculars, they are probably adequate. If not, be
careful not to buy a pair that are too heavy to hold up or have too high a
magnification to hold steady.

(4) Before trying to select a telescope for purchase, learn about the various
kinds of scopes, mounts and eyepieces and the strengths and weaknesses of each.

(5) When you have narrowed your search to a few candidates, run them past this
forum before purchase.

Kendahl

HK,

Might as well add my 2 cents.

I got into the hobby when I retired about 2 years ago with a Celestron XLT
4.7" (120 mm) refractor on
a CG4 equatorial mount. This cost about $500. The learning curve was pretty
steep, and over
the next two years I found myself spending another $1000 on  accessories.
This scope gives nice views but is large (about 4 ft long with the light
shield on the front) and takes me a good half hour to set up, balance  and
align on the north star.  Also, until I got an extension pier to raise the
scope 16", I found myself sitting on the ground to be able to see high in
the sky.

My main interest so far has been the moon and planets. The moon was the only
satisfying view I got for a long while because it's big enough to find
easily, and without tracking stays in the viewfinder for a good 20 seconds
or so.  From the viewpoint of the eyepiece on a telescope, the sky is in
continual motion. Without tracking I would spend a half hour or so focusing
in on a planet like Saturn or Mars or Jupiter, only to have it glide past
the eyepiece in a second or two. I have never used a dobsonian mount, so I
don't know how well a person could track a planet by hand with that mount.
Remember the sky is very large and the telescope is like looking at it
through a pinhole, so navigation to a specific spot sith a manual non
computerized scope like mine takes a lot of patience and some time to learn.

My final comment is that except for the moon, the planets were quite small
when I first saw them (about the size of a small pea at 100 power).  The
paradox is to see the planets larger at a higher magnification, you must be
more precise in navigating, and without tracking they go by too quickly to
enjoy.

Hope this helps.  This hobby is a challenge for a newbie, and was lot more
physical and technical than I imagined it would be.  But those rare nights
(in our overcast NJ climate) of seeing Jupiter and 4 of it's moons line up
in the eyepiece like jewels are as dazzling and memorable as anything I have
seen.

Clear skies,

Bob

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:52 PM, kendahlcs <kcshane@...> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> Unless you and your husband are knowledgeable and are pretty sure what you
> want, you don't have enough time before Christmas to select a telescope with
> confidence. Instead, I would suggest the following:
>
> (1) Join the local astronomy club. You can benefit from the members'
> collective experience. Clubs hold "star parties" at which you can look
> through telescopes of different types and sizes.
>
> (2) Learn the constellations so that you know where things are in the sky.
> A star atlas is part of every astronomer's library.
>
> (3) If you already have binoculars, they are probably adequate. If not, be
> careful not to buy a pair that are too heavy to hold up or have too high a
> magnification to hold steady.
>
> (4) Before trying to select a telescope for purchase, learn about the
> various kinds of scopes, mounts and eyepieces and the strengths and
> weaknesses of each.
>
> (5) When you have narrowed your search to a few candidates, run them past
> this forum before purchase.
>
> Kendahl
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

HK and Bob;

The beauty of the "Dobsonian" mount is that you can easily track objects at
reasonably high power. I have 2 Dobs and regularly do this manually (no
tracking) simply by tugging the scope in the direction against the earth's
rotation. I can generally set up a planet or other object at 150 - 200x at
the edge of the field of view (fov) and have it stay in the fov long enough
for one or two onlookers to view it at a star party (20 - 30 seconds).

I can have my scope set up and cooling down in a matter if minutes. The Dobs
are simple, and easy to use which is why I recommend them to a beginner.
More complex scopes tend to frustrate people and could cause the to loose
interest.

I do also recommend wide field eyepieces which helps considerably. These can
be a bit pricy, but Possls are not too expensive and some have a decent
viewing angle. You may upgrade your telescope from time to time, but we
usually keep our eyepieces for life.

I hope this helps.

Julian
-----Original Message-----
From: telescopes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:telescopes@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Bob Speziale
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 11:49 AM
To: telescopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Telescopes] Re: Buying a Telescope

HK,

Might as well add my 2 cents.

I got into the hobby when I retired about 2 years ago with a Celestron XLT
4.7" (120 mm) refractor on
a CG4 equatorial mount. This cost about $500. The learning curve was pretty
steep, and over
the next two years I found myself spending another $1000 on  accessories.
This scope gives nice views but is large (about 4 ft long with the light
shield on the front) and takes me a good half hour to set up, balance  and
align on the north star.  Also, until I got an extension pier to raise the
scope 16", I found myself sitting on the ground to be able to see high in
the sky.

My main interest so far has been the moon and planets. The moon was the only
satisfying view I got for a long while because it's big enough to find
easily, and without tracking stays in the viewfinder for a good 20 seconds
or so.  From the viewpoint of the eyepiece on a telescope, the sky is in
continual motion. Without tracking I would spend a half hour or so focusing
in on a planet like Saturn or Mars or Jupiter, only to have it glide past
the eyepiece in a second or two. I have never used a dobsonian mount, so I
don't know how well a person could track a planet by hand with that mount.
Remember the sky is very large and the telescope is like looking at it
through a pinhole, so navigation to a specific spot sith a manual non
computerized scope like mine takes a lot of patience and some time to learn.

My final comment is that except for the moon, the planets were quite small
when I first saw them (about the size of a small pea at 100 power).  The
paradox is to see the planets larger at a higher magnification, you must be
more precise in navigating, and without tracking they go by too quickly to
enjoy.

Hope this helps.  This hobby is a challenge for a newbie, and was lot more
physical and technical than I imagined it would be.  But those rare nights
(in our overcast NJ climate) of seeing Jupiter and 4 of it's moons line up
in the eyepiece like jewels are as dazzling and memorable as anything I have
seen.

Clear skies,

Bob

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:52 PM, kendahlcs <kcshane@...> wrote:

>
>
>
>
> Unless you and your husband are knowledgeable and are pretty sure what you
> want, you don't have enough time before Christmas to select a telescope
with
> confidence. Instead, I would suggest the following:
>
> (1) Join the local astronomy club. You can benefit from the members'
> collective experience. Clubs hold "star parties" at which you can look
> through telescopes of different types and sizes.
>
> (2) Learn the constellations so that you know where things are in the sky.
> A star atlas is part of every astronomer's library.
>
> (3) If you already have binoculars, they are probably adequate. If not, be
> careful not to buy a pair that are too heavy to hold up or have too high a
> magnification to hold steady.
>
> (4) Before trying to select a telescope for purchase, learn about the
> various kinds of scopes, mounts and eyepieces and the strengths and
> weaknesses of each.
>
> (5) When you have narrowed your search to a few candidates, run them past
> this forum before purchase.
>
> Kendahl
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

You are subscribed to the "Talking Telescopes" e-mail discussion group.  To
unsubscribe from this group, send an e-mail to:
telescopes-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links

--- In telescopes@yahoogroups.com, "kendahlcs" <kcshane@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> Unless you and your husband are knowledgeable and are pretty sure what you
want, you don't have enough time before Christmas to select a telescope with
confidence. Instead, I would suggest the following:
>
> (1) Join the local astronomy club. You can benefit from the members'
collective experience. Clubs hold "star parties" at which you can look through
telescopes of different types and sizes.
>
> (2) Learn the constellations so that you know where things are in the sky. A
star atlas is part of every astronomer's library.
>
> (3) If you already have binoculars, they are probably adequate. If not, be
careful not to buy a pair that are too heavy to hold up or have too high a
magnification to hold steady.
>
> (4) Before trying to select a telescope for purchase, learn about the various
kinds of scopes, mounts and eyepieces and the strengths and weaknesses of each.
>
> (5) When you have narrowed your search to a few candidates, run them past this
forum before purchase.
>
> Kendahl
>


Hi:

I have to agree with Kendahl.  Since there are no perfect starting scopes and
you do not have much time, it would be best to wait until you explore all areas.

If that is not feasible, than I would suggest a 6 or 8" DOB.  the cost is approx
$300 to $400.

Lenny

Hi Kendahl,

You offer some very good advice.  I do not necessarily agree that there isn't
enough time to select a telescope before Christmas, however.  If she were to
select one of the Orion dobs that is in her price range, she can't go wrong.  It
will provide many years of enjoyable viewing.

Your advice about an astronomy club, learning the constellations, and binoculars
is spot on!

Clear skies,
Kevin Dixon
www.magnificentheavens.com


   From: kendahlcs
   To: telescopes@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 11:52 PM
   Subject: [Telescopes] Re: Buying a Telescope





   Unless you and your husband are knowledgeable and are pretty sure what you
want, you don't have enough time before Christmas to select a telescope with
confidence. Instead, I would suggest the following:

   (1) Join the local astronomy club. You can benefit from the members'
collective experience. Clubs hold "star parties" at which you can look through
telescopes of different types and sizes.

   (2) Learn the constellations so that you know where things are in the sky. A
star atlas is part of every astronomer's library.

   (3) If you already have binoculars, they are probably adequate. If not, be
careful not to buy a pair that are too heavy to hold up or have too high a
magnification to hold steady.

   (4) Before trying to select a telescope for purchase, learn about the various
kinds of scopes, mounts and eyepieces and the strengths and weaknesses of each.

   (5) When you have narrowed your search to a few candidates, run them past this
forum before purchase.

   Kendahl




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Julian and HK,

If I would have known I could easily track a planet for 20 seconds by
hand with a DOB, I would have bought the SkyQuest XT10 Classic
Dobsonian Telescope for $499 instead of the Celestron 4.7
inch refractor.
I have heard  that the 10" DOB was the best all around telescope for
the money by far.

Clear skies,

Bob

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Julian Shull <julian_shull@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> HK and Bob;
>
> The beauty of the "Dobsonian" mount is that you can easily track objects at
> reasonably high power. I have 2 Dobs and regularly do this manually (no
> tracking) simply by tugging the scope in the direction against the earth's
> rotation. I can generally set up a planet or other object at 150 - 200x at
> the edge of the field of view (fov) and have it stay in the fov long enough
> for one or two onlookers to view it at a star party (20 - 30 seconds).
>
> I can have my scope set up and cooling down in a matter if minutes. The Dobs
> are simple, and easy to use which is why I recommend them to a beginner.
> More complex scopes tend to frustrate people and could cause the to loose
> interest.
>
> I do also recommend wide field eyepieces which helps considerably. These can
> be a bit pricy, but Possls are not too expensive and some have a decent
> viewing angle. You may upgrade your telescope from time to time, but we
> usually keep our eyepieces for life.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Julian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: telescopes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:telescopes@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Bob Speziale
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 11:49 AM
> To: telescopes@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Telescopes] Re: Buying a Telescope
>
> HK,
>
> Might as well add my 2 cents.
>
> I got into the hobby when I retired about 2 years ago with a Celestron XLT
> 4.7" (120 mm) refractor on
> a CG4 equatorial mount. This cost about $500. The learning curve was pretty
> steep, and over
> the next two years I found myself spending another $1000 on accessories.
> This scope gives nice views but is large (about 4 ft long with the light
> shield on the front) and takes me a good half hour to set up, balance and
> align on the north star. Also, until I got an extension pier to raise the
> scope 16", I found myself sitting on the ground to be able to see high in
> the sky.
>
> My main interest so far has been the moon and planets. The moon was the only
> satisfying view I got for a long while because it's big enough to find
> easily, and without tracking stays in the viewfinder for a good 20 seconds
> or so. From the viewpoint of the eyepiece on a telescope, the sky is in
> continual motion. Without tracking I would spend a half hour or so focusing
> in on a planet like Saturn or Mars or Jupiter, only to have it glide past
> the eyepiece in a second or two. I have never used a dobsonian mount, so I
> don't know how well a person could track a planet by hand with that mount.
> Remember the sky is very large and the telescope is like looking at it
> through a pinhole, so navigation to a specific spot sith a manual non
> computerized scope like mine takes a lot of patience and some time to learn.
>
> My final comment is that except for the moon, the planets were quite small
> when I first saw them (about the size of a small pea at 100 power). The
> paradox is to see the planets larger at a higher magnification, you must be
> more precise in navigating, and without tracking they go by too quickly to
> enjoy.
>
> Hope this helps. This hobby is a challenge for a newbie, and was lot more
> physical and technical than I imagined it would be. But those rare nights
> (in our overcast NJ climate) of seeing Jupiter and 4 of it's moons line up
> in the eyepiece like jewels are as dazzling and memorable as anything I have
> seen.
>
> Clear skies,
>
> Bob
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:52 PM, kendahlcs <kcshane@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Unless you and your husband are knowledgeable and are pretty sure what you
> > want, you don't have enough time before Christmas to select a telescope
> with
> > confidence. Instead, I would suggest the following:
> >
> > (1) Join the local astronomy club. You can benefit from the members'
> > collective experience. Clubs hold "star parties" at which you can look
> > through telescopes of different types and sizes.
> >
> > (2) Learn the constellations so that you know where things are in the sky.
> > A star atlas is part of every astronomer's library.
> >
> > (3) If you already have binoculars, they are probably adequate. If not, be
> > careful not to buy a pair that are too heavy to hold up or have too high a
> > magnification to hold steady.
> >
> > (4) Before trying to select a telescope for purchase, learn about the
> > various kinds of scopes, mounts and eyepieces and the strengths and
> > weaknesses of each.
> >
> > (5) When you have narrowed your search to a few candidates, run them past
> > this forum before purchase.
> >
> > Kendahl
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> You are subscribed to the "Talking Telescopes" e-mail discussion group. To
> unsubscribe from this group, send an e-mail to:
> telescopes-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links
>
>

On 02/12/10 1:18 AM, Bob Speziale wrote:
> If I would have known I could easily track a planet for 20 seconds by
> hand with a DOB, I would have bought the SkyQuest XT10 Classic
> Dobsonian Telescope for $499 instead of the Celestron 4.7
> inch refractor.

No matter how many times I tell people how easy it is to track planets
with a Dob, some still won't believe me.  For several years my primary
planetary telescope was a Meade 10" f/4.5 Dob.  I liked it so much, I
remounted my 8" f/7 Cave Astrola Newtonian from a Losmandy G11 to a
Discovery Dob mount.

> I have heard  that the 10" DOB was the best all around telescope for
> the money by far.

That's usually my number 1 recommendation, even for a beginner:

http://www.gaherty.ca/tme/TME0702_Buying_a_Telescope.pdf

Geoff

--
Geoff Gaherty
Foxmead Observatory
Coldwater, Ontario, Canada
http://www.gaherty.ca

Bob;

I've owned 2 10" Dobs and loved them both. My first was a Coulter Odyssey
10: f/4.5. I enjoyed it until I made my first mirror and then discovered how
bad the Coulter was. It was basically uncorrected, but still gave stunning
views a low power. I have since built a 10' f/5.2 grinding my own optics
which performs well and is my favorite "grab and go" scope.

The first scope I made is an 8" f/7.5, which gives great views on the moon,
planets and brighter object (in fact the optics are a little better than the
10"), but the 10" is still my favorite. At f/5, comma is not a particular
problem and you still get good wide field views on objects like the Vail,
the Helix or M42, and the 10" aperture begins to show color in some of the
brighter stars.

The medium size refractors are nice too. A couple of our club members have
made their own 6" and 4.5" refractors which give remarkably clear and sharp
views. Loosing the central obstruction definitely has an advantage in
improved contrast, but the limited aperture is a definite disadvantage,
especially in light polluted skies.

Julian

-----Original Message-----
From: telescopes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:telescopes@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Bob Speziale
Sent: Thursday, December 02, 2010 1:18 AM
To: telescopes@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Telescopes] Re: Buying a Telescope

Julian and HK,

If I would have known I could easily track a planet for 20 seconds by
hand with a DOB, I would have bought the SkyQuest XT10 Classic
Dobsonian Telescope for $499 instead of the Celestron 4.7
inch refractor.
I have heard  that the 10" DOB was the best all around telescope for
the money by far.

Clear skies,

Bob

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 1:36 PM, Julian Shull <julian_shull@...>
wrote:
>
>
>
> HK and Bob;
>
> The beauty of the "Dobsonian" mount is that you can easily track objects
at
> reasonably high power. I have 2 Dobs and regularly do this manually (no
> tracking) simply by tugging the scope in the direction against the earth's
> rotation. I can generally set up a planet or other object at 150 - 200x at
> the edge of the field of view (fov) and have it stay in the fov long
enough
> for one or two onlookers to view it at a star party (20 - 30 seconds).
>
> I can have my scope set up and cooling down in a matter if minutes. The
Dobs
> are simple, and easy to use which is why I recommend them to a beginner.
> More complex scopes tend to frustrate people and could cause the to loose
> interest.
>
> I do also recommend wide field eyepieces which helps considerably. These
can
> be a bit pricy, but Possls are not too expensive and some have a decent
> viewing angle. You may upgrade your telescope from time to time, but we
> usually keep our eyepieces for life.
>
> I hope this helps.
>
> Julian
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: telescopes@yahoogroups.com [mailto:telescopes@yahoogroups.com] On
> Behalf Of Bob Speziale
> Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 2010 11:49 AM
> To: telescopes@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: [Telescopes] Re: Buying a Telescope
>
> HK,
>
> Might as well add my 2 cents.
>
> I got into the hobby when I retired about 2 years ago with a Celestron XLT
> 4.7" (120 mm) refractor on
> a CG4 equatorial mount. This cost about $500. The learning curve was
pretty
> steep, and over
> the next two years I found myself spending another $1000 on accessories.
> This scope gives nice views but is large (about 4 ft long with the light
> shield on the front) and takes me a good half hour to set up, balance and
> align on the north star. Also, until I got an extension pier to raise the
> scope 16", I found myself sitting on the ground to be able to see high in
> the sky.
>
> My main interest so far has been the moon and planets. The moon was the
only
> satisfying view I got for a long while because it's big enough to find
> easily, and without tracking stays in the viewfinder for a good 20 seconds
> or so. From the viewpoint of the eyepiece on a telescope, the sky is in
> continual motion. Without tracking I would spend a half hour or so
focusing
> in on a planet like Saturn or Mars or Jupiter, only to have it glide past
> the eyepiece in a second or two. I have never used a dobsonian mount, so I
> don't know how well a person could track a planet by hand with that mount.
> Remember the sky is very large and the telescope is like looking at it
> through a pinhole, so navigation to a specific spot sith a manual non
> computerized scope like mine takes a lot of patience and some time to
learn.
>
> My final comment is that except for the moon, the planets were quite small
> when I first saw them (about the size of a small pea at 100 power). The
> paradox is to see the planets larger at a higher magnification, you must
be
> more precise in navigating, and without tracking they go by too quickly to
> enjoy.
>
> Hope this helps. This hobby is a challenge for a newbie, and was lot more
> physical and technical than I imagined it would be. But those rare nights
> (in our overcast NJ climate) of seeing Jupiter and 4 of it's moons line up
> in the eyepiece like jewels are as dazzling and memorable as anything I
have
> seen.
>
> Clear skies,
>
> Bob
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 11:52 PM, kendahlcs <kcshane@...> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Unless you and your husband are knowledgeable and are pretty sure what
you
> > want, you don't have enough time before Christmas to select a telescope
> with
> > confidence. Instead, I would suggest the following:
> >
> > (1) Join the local astronomy club. You can benefit from the members'
> > collective experience. Clubs hold "star parties" at which you can look
> > through telescopes of different types and sizes.
> >
> > (2) Learn the constellations so that you know where things are in the
sky.
> > A star atlas is part of every astronomer's library.
> >
> > (3) If you already have binoculars, they are probably adequate. If not,
be
> > careful not to buy a pair that are too heavy to hold up or have too high
a
> > magnification to hold steady.
> >
> > (4) Before trying to select a telescope for purchase, learn about the
> > various kinds of scopes, mounts and eyepieces and the strengths and
> > weaknesses of each.
> >
> > (5) When you have narrowed your search to a few candidates, run them
past
> > this forum before purchase.
> >
> > Kendahl
> >
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> You are subscribed to the "Talking Telescopes" e-mail discussion group. To
> unsubscribe from this group, send an e-mail to:
> telescopes-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links
>
>


------------------------------------

You are subscribed to the "Talking Telescopes" e-mail discussion group.  To
unsubscribe from this group, send an e-mail to:
telescopes-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links

Having built a half dozen or so Dobs, I am no expert but here's my 2 bits worth
anyway: how well you can track by hand depends largely on how good and how large
your bearings are. I have also tracked pretty well at 200x but only if the
required push in altitude is very similar to the push needed in azimuth.

Bob Crews
Louisville Ky



________________________________
From: Geoff Gaherty <geoff@...>
To: telescopes@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, December 2, 2010 7:48:39 AM
Subject: Re: [Telescopes] Re: Buying a Telescope

On 02/12/10 1:18 AM, Bob Speziale wrote:
> If I would have known I could easily track a planet for 20 seconds by
> hand with a DOB, I would have bought the SkyQuest XT10 Classic
> Dobsonian Telescope for $499 instead of the Celestron 4.7
> inch refractor.

No matter how many times I tell people how easy it is to track planets
with a Dob, some still won't believe me.  For several years my primary
planetary telescope was a Meade 10" f/4.5 Dob.  I liked it so much, I
remounted my 8" f/7 Cave Astrola Newtonian from a Losmandy G11 to a
Discovery Dob mount.

> I have heard  that the 10" DOB was the best all around telescope for
> the money by far.

That's usually my number 1 recommendation, even for a beginner:

http://www.gaherty.ca/tme/TME0702_Buying_a_Telescope.pdf

Geoff

--
Geoff Gaherty
Foxmead Observatory
Coldwater, Ontario, Canada
http://www.gaherty.ca


------------------------------------

You are subscribed to the "Talking Telescopes" e-mail discussion group.  To
unsubscribe from this group, send an e-mail to:
telescopes-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Tracking with an 10 inch Orion dob is easy at 170X with a 7mm Nagler.  I just
nudge the object to appear on the edge of the field of view and just watch it
glide across.  Using a 5mm Nagler yields 240X which is fine, although I need to
nudge it frequently.  Unless I'm looking at the moon or a planet, I don't bother
using less than a 7mm fl.  My Maryland skies generally limit me to 5mm as a
minimum focal length anyway.

Sean Brown

One of the best accessories for focusing is the Orion AccuFocus for Dual-Speed
Crayford Focuser. It cuts way down on vibration and allows precise focusing.

http://www.telescope.com/control/accessories/telescope-focusers/orion-accufocus-\
for-dual-speed-crayford-focuser


Bob



________________________________
From: Sean <sean.brown@...>
To: telescopes@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Fri, December 3, 2010 8:06:06 AM
Subject: [Telescopes] Re: Buying a Telescope


Tracking with an 10 inch Orion dob is easy at 170X with a 7mm Nagler.  I just
nudge the object to appear on the edge of the field of view and just watch it
glide across.  Using a 5mm Nagler yields 240X which is fine, although I need to
nudge it frequently.  Unless I'm looking at the moon or a planet, I don't bother
using less than a 7mm fl.  My Maryland skies generally limit me to 5mm as a
minimum focal length anyway.

Sean Brown







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Several years ago I purchased an Antares pedestal for my 8" f/6 Discovery
reflector. I did order the shortest length pedestal offered by Antares which is
30 inches. It is to high and more often than not I have to use a step stool to
reach the eyepiece. One eveing I took it to one of our club's outreach programs
and the scope was way, way to high.

So I again began considering cutting the pedestal down about 8 inches. A friend
is a plumber and has a large pipe cutter but he has been very busy (a very good
thing) so I went to a machine shop. I considered using a hack saw but worried
about how square a hack saw cut would be.

I located a machine shop where the machinist decided to "part off" the tube
using a lathe. He has a band saw but told me that using a band saw may not be
true enough. The holes for the mount adapter fitting and the hole for the
flexible mount retaining cable were drilled. An off the shelf grommet was
inserted in the hole for the flexible cable mechanism. The machinist did a very
good job.

I had to clean some grease off the pedestal tube and as there were a few
scratches in the paint two quick coats of semigloss protective black enamel
paint made it look like new.

Vic Palmieri

On 05/12/10 10:33 PM, vjpalmieri wrote:
>
> Several years ago I purchased an Antares pedestal for my 8" f/6
> Discovery reflector. I did order the shortest length pedestal offered
> by Antares which is 30 inches. It is to high and more often than not
> I have to use a step stool to reach the eyepiece. One eveing I took
> it to one of our club's outreach programs and the scope was way, way
> to high.
>
> So I again began considering cutting the pedestal down about 8
> inches.

Many years ago, after Orion reduced the outrageously high price on it
twice, I bought a Vixen pedestal.  At 45", it's more suiatable for a
refractor or Cassegrain, so I went to a metal supermarket and boaght a
24" length of aluminum tubing exactly the same diameter and thickness as
the Vixen pedestal.  This proved to be a little high for my Intes
Mak-Newt, so I cut it down to 18" with a hacksaw.  The cut isn't as
critical with the Vixen pedestal, as it's just a simple 4" O.D. tube
with three holes to bolt on the mount base.  This makes for a very
compact setup, perfect for "sit-down" observing anywhere in the sky.
For years I've used a Vixen GP-DX atop the pedestal, but lately I've
been using an Orion Sirius GoTo mount.  This doesn't quite fit the Vixen
pier-top, but it will do.

I've always preferred pedestal mounts to tripods: they're less bulky and
allow better access to the zenith.

Geoff

--
Geoff Gaherty
Foxmead Observatory
Coldwater, Ontario, Canada
http://www.gaherty.ca

--- In telescopes@yahoogroups.com, Geoff Gaherty <geoff@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> I've always preferred pedestal mounts to tripods: they're less bulky and
> allow better access to the zenith.
>
> Geoff
>
> --
> Geoff Gaherty
> Foxmead Observatory
> Coldwater, Ontario, Canada
> http://www.gaherty.ca
>
Hi Geoff:

I agree with you regarding pedestals.

I decided to reduce the pedestal to 22" as a length that should be adequate for
the 8" f/6 reflector while standing as well as having a good height for using my
MCT while sitting down.

Vic Palmieri

It's that time of year when most telescopes are sold. Most are sold to
be given to children or young people. I would be interested in what
members think is the most apropriate scope for a younger user.

I tend to recommend an 80-102mm widefield F/5-7 achromatic refractor on
a alt/az mount with a some descent 1.25" eyepeices. What do others
think?

Thanks, George





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Really good explanation here:
http://www.astro-tom.com/telescopes/setting_circles.htm
HTH, George

--- In telescopes@yahoogroups.com, "starryskyn" <starryskyn@...> wrote:
>
> There are two kinds of RA indicators:
> Moving dial;
> Moving pointer.
> In the moving dial type, a pointer is fastened to the housing, and the dial is
a slip-fit with a friction clutch or setscrew to the RA shaft.  This is
procedure:
> Find a known star and point the scope at it.
> Look up the RA of the star and turn the dial until that reading is on the
pointer, then tighten the dial to the shaft.
> Look up the RA reading of the object to view.
> Now move the scope while watching the pointer and the dial.  When the RA
reading of the desired object comes up, you have found it (assuming you have
done the same with the DEC dial and axis).  Since the dial is attached to the RA
shaft, if there is a motor drive on the RA shaft to follow the stars, the dial
stays coordinated with the sky.  If there is no motor, hand drive (PushTo) of
the RA will keep it coordinated.  If no drive, the above steps must be repeated.
> When using a moving pointer indicator, the same technique is used, except, the
pointer moves with the RA shaft, and the dial is slip-fit with a clutch or set
screw to the stationary part of the mount, the housing of the RA shaft.  These
steps must be redone for new views because the dial falls behind the real sky as
the Earth turns.
> A variation of this is the seperately motorized RA dial.  Once the correct
setting for the object is done, a motor drives the dial at the sidereal rate
(the solar rate is good enough for most uses during one night).  That way, the
dial always will indicate the starfield orientation and does not need to be
reset again that night as long as the motor drives it.  This drive is
independent of the RA drive for tracking and slewing the telelscope, but may be
mounted on the same RA shaft.  I built a GEM with that feature.
> Gregg.
>
> --- In telescopes@yahoogroups.com, "david" <daivi248@> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all, I hope the this is a legitimate question for this group.
> >
> > I have a SkyWatcher EQ5Pro mount.
> > trying to follow the orientating steps in the manual.
> >
> > I do not understaqnd the operation of the setscrew. my guess is that the
purpose of the setscrew is to fix the circle to the RA axix. However, the
setscrew is mounted on the housing and if I lock it, it is actualy locking the
circle to the housing and not to the axis. It seems like there is no point in
locking the setscrew and it should be left loose.
> >
> > Is my analysis wrong?
> >
> > David
> > BK2001EQ5
> >
>

celestron 102 slt




________________________________
From: pinyachta <pinyachta@...>
To: telescopes@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Mon, 6 December, 2010 19:08:56
Subject: [Telescopes] Scopes for young people

 

It's that time of year when most telescopes are sold. Most are sold to
be given to children or young people. I would be interested in what
members think is the most apropriate scope for a younger user.

I tend to recommend an 80-102mm widefield F/5-7 achromatic refractor on
a alt/az mount with a some descent 1.25" eyepeices. What do others
think?

Thanks, George

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On 06/12/10 2:08 PM, pinyachta wrote:
>
> It's that time of year when most telescopes are sold. Most are sold to
> be given to children or young people. I would be interested in what
> members think is the most apropriate scope for a younger user.

My number one recommendation, especially for younger kids, is 7x35 or
8x40 binoculars, as these are sturdy and versatile, not limited to
astronomy.  Orion used to sell a nice kit for 50 bucks with a 7x35
binocular, planisphere, Moon map, and book, but it seems to have
vanished from their catalog.  An 8x40 would be a good substitute.  I
_loved_ my father's 6x30 binoculars as a kid, and used them for all
sorts of activities.  Light weight and easy to hold steady.

If the kid is serious about astronomy, a 4.5" or 6" Dob would be a great
choice.  If that's too expensive, there are now some very good small
scopes, such as:

Orion FunScope 76mm reflector @ $50:
http://www.telescope.com/control/product/~product_id=09766/~pcategory=telescopes\
/~category_id=countdown

Orion GoScope 80mm refractor @ $100:
http://www.telescope.com/control/telescopes/refractor-telescopes/orion-goscope-8\
0mm-tabletop-refractor-telescope

Orion SkyScanner 100mm reflector @ $100:
http://www.telescope.com/control/telescopes/dobsonian-telescopes/orion-skyscanne\
r-100mm-tabletop-reflector-telescope

I must admit I was dubious about these at first, but after testing the
first two, I am quite enthusiastic about them.  In fact I kept the
"review copies" and use both of them quite often as "grab and go"
scopes, sitting atop a camera tripod.  With the 80mm refractor, I can
see Jupiter's main belt, but mostly use it with a Kendrick solar filter
to check out the Sun in white light.  The 76mm reflector is a bit iffy
optically because of its f/4 spherical mirror; I expect the 100mm
reflector, which has a parabolic mirror, would be much better.  All
three use a nice little one-arm Dob mount, very smooth and solid.

SkyWatcher also makes a neat 130mm f/5 Dob, but for some reason they
don't seem to sell it in the USA:

http://www.skywatchertelescope.net/swtinc/product.php?id=146&class1=1&class2=106

It's available in Canada and Europe, and Terry Dickinson gave it a great
review in SkyNews, along with the SkyWatcher version of the 76mm
reflector.  I prefer the Orion version to the latter because it has a
red dot finder rather than the 5x24 optical finder on the SkyWatcher.
The Celestron version has no finder at all; you must buy an accessory
package to get a finder.

Geoff

--
Geoff Gaherty
Foxmead Observatory
Coldwater, Ontario, Canada
http://www.gaherty.ca

I think a 4"-6" Newtonian would be a good choice.  It's easier and cheaper to
build a mirrored telescope than a decent refractor.  I always tell people to
avoid the cheap 60 mm refractors the department stores carry.  True, they might
have to learn a little about collimation, but that's what your friendly
neighborhood astronomy club is for.

Jay

--- In telescopes@yahoogroups.com, "pinyachta" <pinyachta@...> wrote:
>
>
> It's that time of year when most telescopes are sold. Most are sold to
> be given to children or young people. I would be interested in what
> members think is the most apropriate scope for a younger user.
>
> I tend to recommend an 80-102mm widefield F/5-7 achromatic refractor on
> a alt/az mount with a some descent 1.25" eyepeices. What do others
> think?
>
> Thanks, George
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

If he has been good this year why not this:
http://www.astromart.com/auctions/details.asp?auction_id=6111
tony

   ----- Original Message -----
   From: Jay
   To: telescopes@yahoogroups.com
   Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 9:50 PM
   Subject: [Telescopes] Re: Scopes for young people




   I think a 4"-6" Newtonian would be a good choice. It's easier and cheaper to
build a mirrored telescope than a decent refractor. I always tell people to
avoid the cheap 60 mm refractors the department stores carry. True, they might
have to learn a little about collimation, but that's what your friendly
neighborhood astronomy club is for.

   Jay

   --- In telescopes@yahoogroups.com, "pinyachta" <pinyachta@...> wrote:
   >
   >
   > It's that time of year when most telescopes are sold. Most are sold to
   > be given to children or young people. I would be interested in what
   > members think is the most apropriate scope for a younger user.
   >
   > I tend to recommend an 80-102mm widefield F/5-7 achromatic refractor on
   > a alt/az mount with a some descent 1.25" eyepeices. What do others
   > think?
   >
   > Thanks, George
   >
   >
   >
   >
   >
   > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
   >





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

On 07/12/10 2:33 AM, Harley Davidson wrote:
> If he has been good this year why not this:
> http://www.astromart.com/auctions/details.asp?auction_id=6111

That's what I call a "Christen present"!  I saw its twin at Starfest a
few years ago, belonging to Peter Ceravolo.  He had built a truss tube
for it, about the only time I've ever seen a refractor with a truss tube.

Geoff

--
Geoff Gaherty
Foxmead Observatory
Coldwater, Ontario, Canada
http://www.gaherty.ca

My thought is that good binoculars are a good starter for most, but if
a kid is expecting a telescope for Xmas, he/she will be disappointed
in getting binos.  Depending on the budget and age/size of the kid,
Orion XT4.5, 6, 8 would be the ones I would look at first.  Simple to
move and set up, gets them viewing quickly whenever they want.

Chris

Thanks for your great suggestions Geoff!  Can you point us to that review by
Terry Dickinson of the Skywatcher P130 in SkyNews?

--- In telescopes@yahoogroups.com, Geoff Gaherty <geoff@...> wrote:
>
> On 06/12/10 2:08 PM, pinyachta wrote:
> >
> > It's that time of year when most telescopes are sold. Most are sold to
> > be given to children or young people. I would be interested in what
> > members think is the most apropriate scope for a younger user.
>
> My number one recommendation, especially for younger kids, is 7x35 or
> 8x40 binoculars, as these are sturdy and versatile, not limited to
> astronomy.  Orion used to sell a nice kit for 50 bucks with a 7x35
> binocular, planisphere, Moon map, and book, but it seems to have
> vanished from their catalog.  An 8x40 would be a good substitute.  I
> _loved_ my father's 6x30 binoculars as a kid, and used them for all
> sorts of activities.  Light weight and easy to hold steady.
>
> If the kid is serious about astronomy, a 4.5" or 6" Dob would be a great
> choice.  If that's too expensive, there are now some very good small
> scopes, such as:
>
> Orion FunScope 76mm reflector @ $50:
>
http://www.telescope.com/control/product/~product_id=09766/~pcategory=telescopes\
/~category_id=countdown
>
> Orion GoScope 80mm refractor @ $100:
>
http://www.telescope.com/control/telescopes/refractor-telescopes/orion-goscope-8\
0mm-tabletop-refractor-telescope
>
> Orion SkyScanner 100mm reflector @ $100:
>
http://www.telescope.com/control/telescopes/dobsonian-telescopes/orion-skyscanne\
r-100mm-tabletop-reflector-telescope
>
> I must admit I was dubious about these at first, but after testing the
> first two, I am quite enthusiastic about them.  In fact I kept the
> "review copies" and use both of them quite often as "grab and go"
> scopes, sitting atop a camera tripod.  With the 80mm refractor, I can
> see Jupiter's main belt, but mostly use it with a Kendrick solar filter
> to check out the Sun in white light.  The 76mm reflector is a bit iffy
> optically because of its f/4 spherical mirror; I expect the 100mm
> reflector, which has a parabolic mirror, would be much better.  All
> three use a nice little one-arm Dob mount, very smooth and solid.
>
> SkyWatcher also makes a neat 130mm f/5 Dob, but for some reason they
> don't seem to sell it in the USA:
>
>
http://www.skywatchertelescope.net/swtinc/product.php?id=146&class1=1&class2=106
>
> It's available in Canada and Europe, and Terry Dickinson gave it a great
> review in SkyNews, along with the SkyWatcher version of the 76mm
> reflector.  I prefer the Orion version to the latter because it has a
> red dot finder rather than the 5x24 optical finder on the SkyWatcher.
> The Celestron version has no finder at all; you must buy an accessory
> package to get a finder.
>
> Geoff
>
> --
> Geoff Gaherty
> Foxmead Observatory
> Coldwater, Ontario, Canada
> http://www.gaherty.ca
>

> Join an astronomy club if there is one near you. The members will
> be a good source of advice. Clubs usually have evening "star
> parties" where the public gets to look through club members'
> scopes. Clubs often have loaner telescopes which members can borrow.

Thanks- I know my question sounded like one from a typical beginner with a cheap
scope, but I'm actually a fairly advanced telescopist.

I bought it for 2 reasons
(1) just to see how good images a $14 telescope ($5 actually since I sold its
shaky tripod for $9) could produce if fixed up with nice accessories, and
(2) to have a super lightweight telescope for sidewalk astronomy.

I put it on a nice high end photo tripod that is sort of a hand-me-down from my
family, got a .965 / 1.25 hybrid diagonal, and then just use my decent 1.25"
eyepiece collection.  The results thus far have been quite good.  I can easily
see the stripe on Jupiter and it can split even surprisingly close double stars.
In fact it seems to give better images at high magnification than even my 114mm
rich-field reflector.  From my home in downtown San Francisco (SQM ~17.8), with
a 17mm 65 deg. FOV eyepiece, I can see stars down to about mag. 8.8 at 45 deg.
altitude -- and my eyesight isn't especially good.

Anyway, Since I got it a couple months ago I've had a lot of fun with it out on
the sidewalk showing mostly the moon and Jupiter, but also a few brighter star
clusters, to passerbys.

Still, it's irritating that I can't visualize Jovian shadow transits
with it -- for that and other more detailed planetary observing I'm thinking of
making a 4" f/13 reflector at the
next telescope making class.

To answer my own question - I tried a 32mm Plossl and got vignetting.  So I
guess that indeed the .965 focuser does constrict the actual image plane.

From: "Dave Goggin" <dg2222@...>
> I put it on a nice high end photo tripod that is sort of a hand-me-down
> from my family, got a .965 / 1.25 hybrid diagonal, and then just use my
> decent 1.25" eyepiece collection.  The results thus far have been quite
> good.

This reminds me that a couple of years ago a family friend asked me to take
a look at the cheap telescope he had bought on the Home Shopping Network to
determine why he couldn't see anything with it. It was a Galileo brand 4"
f/9 Newtonian. I found it didn't need much beyond tweaking the collimation
and aligning the finder. One good thing (unusual in such a scope) is that it
used 1.25" format eyepieces. The stock eyepieces worked, but they were
pretty poor. I also tested the scope with an eyepiece of my own - a 12mm
Orthoscopic - and the improvement was dramatic. There was no more distortion
away from the center of the field, the field was larger, and the images were
much sharper, brighter, and "whiter" in color. Obviously, one of the
greatest improvements anyone could make in a "department store" telescope is
to use better eyepieces.

Jack Kramer
Lily Lake, Illinois

> but if
> a kid is expecting a telescope for Xmas, he/she will be disappointed
> in getting binos.

I certainly was at age 14 just getting interesting in astronomy.

-DG

Thanks for all the input another friend swent me this link as well.
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/home/12511616.html
Geo.

--- In telescopes@yahoogroups.com, "pinyachta" <pinyachta@...> wrote:
>
>
> It's that time of year when most telescopes are sold. Most are sold to
> be given to children or young people. I would be interested in what
> members think is the most apropriate scope for a younger user.
>
> I tend to recommend an 80-102mm widefield F/5-7 achromatic refractor on
> a alt/az mount with a some descent 1.25" eyepeices. What do others
> think?
>
> Thanks, George
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

I suggested both! (and Turn Left aqt Orion, so dad can be a hero.)

--- In telescopes@yahoogroups.com, "Dave" <dg2222@...> wrote:
>
> > but if
> > a kid is expecting a telescope for Xmas, he/she will be disappointed
> > in getting binos.
>
> I certainly was at age 14 just getting interesting in astronomy.
>
> -DG
>