Budget Scopes

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

tfwthom

Guest
Question that is sometimes asked "How little can I spend" I don't always agree with S&T on their reviews but these work. I've tried some of them.<br /><br />From S&T's Skywatch 06 <br /><br />5 Scopes for under $200<br /><br /><br />1) Orion SpaceProbe 3 Altazimuth Reflector: $99<br /><br />The lowest-priced telescope to make the grade. A good performer for stargazers on a very tight budget.<br /><br />Upside: Complete instrument for less then $100.<br /><br />Downside: Mount less sturdy then ideal.<br /><br /><br />2) Orion Observer 70: $129<br /><br />Provides right-side-up images, which makes it the best choice for those looking for an instrument to do double duty as a daytime telescope.<br /><br />Upside: Crisp images in a low-maintenance optical system.<br /><br />Downside: Some chromatic aberration (false color) visible at high magnification.<br /><br /><br />3) Orion StarBlast: $169<br /><br />A rugged, easy-to-use instrument that is a near-perfect all-around performer. (I have used this scope (on a table) at the CGSP, with eyepiece that cost more then the scope, it was impressive)<br /><br />Upside: Nicely built scope with a stable, smooth-moving mount.<br /><br />Downside: Low mount means it must be used on a sturdy table.<br /><br /><br />4) Scientifics Astroscan: $199<br /><br />A kid-friendly low-maintenance reflector that produces bright wide-field views. (I like it, it's a fun scope, easy to use. We call them "imp in a bottle scopes" after the old magic trick. It can be mounted on a sturdy photo tripod)<br /><br />Upside: Optics are factory aligned.<br /><br />Downside: Difficult to focus and keep aimed at high magnifications.<br /><br /><br />5) Orion SkyQuest XT4.5 Dobsonion: $199<br /><br />The best high-magnification telescope of the bunch. An excellent choice for those especially interested in viewing the Moon and planets. (I've used the bigger 8" and 10" Orions and don't usually tell anyone to get a smaller dob then 8" but this does work)<br /><br />Upside: Good optics, sturdy mount. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font size="1" color="#3366ff">www.siriuslookers.org</font> </div>
 
B

billslugg

Guest
I have had a 2.5' Swift refractor, a 4.5" Newtonian, (both gone) and currently depend on a pair of Celestron 20x80's.<br />I will go with the binoculars any day. Nothing like 'em. You need a good tripod or some image stabilization. When ever I need high magnification, I have a Meade 60 mm refractor I got from Goodwill for $20. The only good thing about it is the air spaced achromat. The pivots are sticky and the tripod flexible, so at anything above about 20 power there is no way to center the image. I put teflon washers in both pivots, and screwed stiffeners between and betwixt the legs. No more can I collapse the tripod, but with all legs frozen in place (The bottom segments go up and down still) and a sandbag hanging from the center, I can nudge it any way, any tiny bit I want. I use no diagonal mirror, and I tossed the cheap eyepieces. This is how I meet my rare need for high power. My ideal progression for anyone getting into the hobby would be 7x30's, 60mm cheapo (highly modified), 20x80's, then a light bucket. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>
 
B

billslugg

Guest
I use my 60mm x 600mm fl refractor with a 6mm Huygens at 100x. I don't care to use a Barlow because it puts another element in there. I'm also unguided. All my stuff is old and dirty and I prefer to minimize the number of elements. 100x will get me rings of Saturn, a belt on Jupiter, a few smudges on Mars (depending on distance). Good lunar detail. Great for terrestrial viewing. Unfortunately f/10 is just too dark to see the central condensation on comet Holmes. I was barely able to see the central dot with averted vision using my 20x80's. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p> </p> </div>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts