New telescope more like a rifle-scope

Eh,

Because of another thread I am involved in, I was inspired to go buy a telescope.

It is a Meade Polaris 60AZ-A 60mm, F-700mm
w/
MA25mm and MH9mm eyes
2x Barlow
5x24 Viewfinder.

Now, if I am using it terrestrially, it is great, I mean the viewinder alone is half the power of my Tasco binolulars.

But as for solar, hmm, what am I not getting?
I checked out Space.com for current views, and it related Saturn as "provides a spectacular view even in small telescopes.". Is this just TOO small? As, with all three lens, I just really didn't see a difference in viewing. Yes, was objected on the right point in space, corellating visible stars/constellations with movement in my zone with that on Starry Nights (PC space viewing).

I do understand about city light interference, but that seems would degrade just the clarity, not the magnification.

Have I got a bunk or cheap tele? Is there something I am missing? (have went over the whopping 3 page pamphlete, just nothing else there to miss).

Am wondering if I should take this back, and try Meades NG-60. Same ratios and all, just newer model series.

This is, however, the most abount of money I can put out towards a tele.

Thanx for any input.

Misfit

Well, how does Saturn look through it?

Even with a 300x reflector telescope you can just make out 4 satellites around Jupiter and the red eye. I mean, it's tiny, but still pretty cool.

Puh, explainging is the worst for me to attempt, heh. Get my tang toungled alot.

Say, if:
============
Saturn is a car 1000 miles away from me.

My naked eye see's it as 1000 miles.
This tele see's it as 900 miles.

At 1000 miles to start, that's not much of a difference.
=============
On that scenario, that car thru this tele should look how close?
Or is that how it shold look?

Man I hope I said that right, heh.

Thanx for your help.

Misfit

I don't think you could see a Saturn car at 900 miles.

www.astroviewer.com...

Go here and you can find celestial bodies for your area. Right now at 02:26 for me, Saturn is visible by the naked eye. Through a 300x telescope the rings are distinct. See if you can see anything.

Originally posted by Misfit
Eh,

Because of another thread I am involved in, I was inspired to go buy a telescope.

It is a Meade Polaris 60AZ-A 60mm, F-700mm
w/
MA25mm and MH9mm eyes
2x Barlow
5x24 Viewfinder.

Now, if I am using it terrestrially, it is great, I mean the viewinder alone is half the power of my Tasco binolulars.

But as for solar, hmm, what am I not getting?

I do understand about city light interference, but that seems would degrade just the clarity, not the magnification.

Misfit

I am assuming that you mean astronomical, because Solar is a NO NO. Do some serious reading about that one before getting involved in it. The scope you have IS NOT designed for it.

As for your scope...well.... without sounding like some boob with a big tube, I have to say that you are going to get some less than spectacular views through it. Part of the problem is the .965 eyepieces they sent with the scope, it just can't gather enough light to give you the views you are looking for. As for the magnification, the barlow should double it. If a car only looks marginally closer when looking through the scope, it could be the scope itself.
The first scope I bought was a Wal-Mart (fall-apart) cheapie and it almost turned me off to the hobby. Contact a astronomy club in your area and find out when they will be having their next "star party". Go there, see what they recommend, THEN decide what you want in a scope. A lot of times club members have old scopes they are willing to sell for a good price to someone getting started.

Peace,
BG

Yeah I have a piece of crap scope that I use to look at planets and stuff... I'm not sure exactly what to do except I can see things, and even though they're pretty small I still find it amazing. I can see caps on Mars, rings of Saturn, and 4 moons and eye around Jupiter, and Venus just a big bright ball. Moon looks incredible though.

@ taibunsuu:

Not a Saturn car, Saturn "is" a car - analogy for perspective.

You saying your "300x telescope", I am assuming mine then is a 700x telescope?
If that is the case, and you see Saturns rings? Oh man something is way wrong with this thing, heh.
Saturn, the dot in my naked eye, thru the tele looks like a dot in the tele.

@beergoggles

Ya, terms terms, never was good with those, heh.
Solar - Sun - Tele - Who sang 'Blinded By The Light"? heh.

The eyepieces are 1.25.

=============

I think I wil be taking this one back. Try that NG tele
www.meade.com...
NG-60
I just don't have the extra $ for the NGC.

Misfit

I dunno man, if you're using it right and it looks the same to the naked eye as it does in the tele you have probs. I'd go through the manual and make sure everything's 100% correct I mean sometimes you get those and just want to go to town but you have a piece backwards or something.

1.25 eh? hmmm

heck, why not build one? it is a LOT easier and cheaper than you think.

just a thought.

Peace,
BG

Saturn's rings are visible even with small magnification. (32x)
With 169x magn. I can see details from rings.



You can calculate magnification by dividing telescope's focal length with focal length of eyepiece. (but size of telescope's mirror/lens limits maximum usefull magn.)

I recommend reading this thread: Astronomy: Telescopes

It looks to be toy... not a telescope.
www.epinions.com...

Originally posted by taibunsuu
Even with a 300x reflector telescope you can just make out 4 satellites around Jupiter and the red eye. I mean, it's tiny, but still pretty cool.

Magnification doesn't have anything to do with this. It's because other moons are too dim.

Originally posted by beergoggles
Part of the problem is the .965 eyepieces they sent with the scope, it just can't gather enough light to give you the views you are looking for. As for the magnification, the barlow should double it.

Size of eyepiece doesn't have anything to do with telesope's light gathering power.
And planets are bright enough that you don't need lot of that, in fact with well adapted eyes planets like Jupiter or Saturn dazzle you when you look them with 11cm telescope.

And doubling magnification just makes image look worse if optics are p.o.s.

One this is certain when it comes to telescopes - the more light gathering capability the better the scope. Especially when it comes to amature star gazing. Do NOT buy a telepscope based on power. Apature is king!

"But the box says 450x so it must rock!!" Nope, a 6 inch dob with a 16x lens (you usually get 2 to 4 lenses with a new scope) will give you better images that will make you go "woah" compared to any 4 or 4.5 inch refractor with any lens. (Except for the moon...)

If you are going to spend $500 on a telescope - get a Dobsonian! You can get 8 inches of light gathering (or more) that will yeild far far better results than any other $500 scope. It's all about light gathering - magnification is worthless if you can't see what it is you are trying to look at to begin with. Plus, with a dob you can go grab whatever lens kits you like and try all sorts of different magnification for different views of the same objects.

If you plan to try to take photos, get an equitorial mount for that dob (which means you'll be buying a $400 reflector and a $300 tripod). If you aren't worried about photos - get a dob.

Very good advice here.

I really like the looks of Orion scopes - www.telescope.com - the price is right, the tubes aren't junk, there's no cheap plastic parts, they use very good optics for the price too. (I've been researching what new scope to get myself for 2 months.)

Seems there is quite a few poeple around here that know a little bit about telescopes. I, like Misfit, am new at this, but I found a Telescope for $84 that you can veiw Nebula and galixies with. Here is the link to it: www.telescopes.com...

Do you guys think this might be worth the investment for a newbie?

Well, it will be ok for some stuff, but you'd be happier with the Orion 60mm refractor (which is the same price) because it uses better quality Kellner eye peices. (Bushnell scopes are almost as bottom end as Tasco).

But... if you're going to spend $89, why not spend $99 and get a small 3 inch reflector? More light gathering will mean better images of the planets. (Neither scope will give you good images of galaxies, clusters or Messier objects.)

Telescopes only start getting good/nice/functional when you get in the $250 range (such as a 6 inch dob). Anything priced lower than that you're almost always better off buying some quality binoculars. If you really want to get into astronomy - save your money for a few months and buy something that you'll actually get some use out of, and enjoy.

A good read can be found on Orion's website about choosing a scope to suit your needs/desires. (No, I don't work for Orion, lol). It's good advice that can be applied to whomever you buy your scope from.

did i miss something here? what are we talking about?

Originally posted by Misfit
Have I got a bunk or cheap tele? Is there something I am missing? (have went over the whopping 3 page pamphlete, just nothing else there to miss).

Talking about that.

Misfit

Just point it at the girl's dorm to study the heavenly bodies.

Caution:
probably illegal in most locales.



[edit on 26-10-2006 by TheAvenger]

[edit on 26-10-2006 by TheAvenger]