Bit of telescope help please (Cassegrain)

[Happy82]

I currently have a Konusky 45 reflector (about 20years old!), however it's a bit battered and I've found that planet observation is a bit blurry at best.

I've read a few of the Stargazer forums and the Skywatcher 200p Dobsonian seems to come highly recommended and is one I'm considering, however I have seen some smaller Cassegrain types and wondered how these compared to reflector / refractor types? I was mainly tempted down to the much smaller size which allows ease of transport, but are they any good? I have a budget of up to £300 if that's any help!

I used the Konusky for observing the Moon and groups of stars, however I was hoping that the next scope I buy would be capable of perhaps seeing the stripes on Jupiter, polar caps of Mars or rings of Saturn..... is that possible in my budget?

Thanks!

[grenpayne]

Happy

I used to have a Skywatcher 200p and they're really great scopes for the money. Putting that up against a Schmidt-Cassegrain that can be got for £300 is a little unfair as the SC will be much smaller (not checked what you can get for £300, 5" at most?).

Also the field of view in the SC will be a lot smaller as they're normally F10 or F12 and the 200P is F6 I think. Not necessarily an issue with the planets but an 8" scope is capable of showing quite a lot of other things.

Plus you'll need to factor in a tripod for the SC, really makes me think that if portability isn't an issue then go for the 200P.

[scubadude]

Consider a second hand scope, astronomers tend to look after thier stuff so it's not like buying a second hand PS3 off some spotty twonk on fleabay :-)

A big dobsonian is good for instant gratification (hence why its reccomended) and requires less "setup" for each usage as a different mount might but of course needs some care with handling.

You could try visiting your local astronomy society/club and have a play with a few different scopes to see what you like.

[Happy82]

Cheers for the responses, I think I'm edging towards a Cassegrain (Bedazzled, the one you suggested is one I had stumbled across actually!) mainly down to the portability, we have a huge field over the back of the house and often go camping in the back and beyond so something with the smaller dimensions this design offers would probably be more suitable to be honest, think we'd go for the Dobsonian if it was purely for the back garden but reading this thread and having a serious think, I believe the telescope would be more useful if we could take it anywhere (as much as I had my heart set on the Dobsonian to start with!

Eventually I'd quite fancy a go at astrophotography, I'm guessing the Cassegrain would be ok with this ? Again I've read mixed reports about some saying they're not suitable, some that they're fine, but I guess that depends on the requirements of the user.

Also I read that an Equatorial mount is the best if I fancy photography in the future, does this have any disadvantages over alternative designs for general astronomy? Or is it advised purely for photography?

Sorry for all the questions, I've only recently got back into astronomy and so I've forgot most of what I knew

Oh and also, who are good reputable dealers for telescope / equipment ? I used to use a photography specialist in Birmingham but they closed down many years ago, as such I haven't a clue of who I'd order through!

Thanks again for the help

[don4l]

Happy82 said:

Cheers for the responses, I think I'm edging towards a Cassegrain (Bedazzled, the one you suggested is one I had stumbled across actually!)
<snip>
Eventually I'd quite fancy a go at astrophotography, I'm guessing the Cassegrain would be ok with this ? Again I've read mixed reports about some saying they're not suitable, some that they're fine, but I guess that depends on the requirements of the user.

Don't buy that scope if you want to do astrophotography. It has an Alt-Az mount. This means that the image would rotate. The human eye copes very well with slow rotation, but you wouldn't be able to take long exposures, and stacking short exposures would be hard work.

For astrophotography you need an equatorial mount.


Don
--

[Nuclearsquash]

Depends what kind of Astrophotography though, he could do some very nice Planetary imaging using a webcam, head over to Stargazers lounge to see what's do-able with a 127 cassegrain, so very impressive imaging. Infact I think the 127 is almost the default entry point for planetary imaging.

[Happy82]

Thanks, although my plans may be changing slightly (sorry!)

We've had some clear nights down here recently and so I nipped outside with the binoculars I use for Chinook spotting, was quite incredible looking at the stars and although not highly detailed, I found myself enjoying that more than planetary observation, especially when what seemed to be a single star turned out to be a couple and I could make out a few clusters

I'll have a rethink and do some more research before coming back with further questions, as I might be edging towards deep space viewing rather than planetary

[nellyleelephant]

Aha, you'll be wanting one of these then!

http://www.widescreen-centre.co.uk/Products/Orion_...

[Happy82]

nellyleelephant said:

Aha, you'll be wanting one of these then!

http://www.widescreen-centre.co.uk/Products/Orion_...

Pah!

I'm sure I can fit this in my garden

[nellyleelephant]

On a more serious note, if it's deep sky you want then get the largest aperture reflector you can.

I went down the dobsonian route with a 12" Orion Optics and I doubt I'll ever need anything more (doesn't mean I won't buy bigger though, it's addictive!)