Several years ago I had a computerised reflector telescope. Once calibration was complete, you just keyed items in or selected from a menu and the scope would move into position. Partly due to the faffing about when setting up, it sat gathering dust so I sold it.

It gave some brilliant views of Saturn and the moon of course so now I'm looking at the scopes again. I would go for a normal one as opposed to a computerised one (primarily due to price) but does anyone have any recommendations?

What is better: Reflector or refractor?

Cheers LL.B (Hons) - University of Derby
LOT (Lord of Time) - University of Gallifrey

Usual advice is refractor for planetary imaging, reflector for everything else. The argument is that apart from size the spider in a newtonian or the centre lens in a cassegranian causes some image degradation. However you can't get really big lenses without spending a fortune so that generally you should go for the biggest reflector you can accommodate. I have been thinking of getting an 8" if my wife will let me. (I can see the comments coming in already) 3 x FL1 2 manual + 1 auto
5 x FL2 4 manual + 1 auto
Now Discovery Sport P250 MHEV SE

Would to hook my camera up to a decent telescope, I manged this shot, of the Milky Way, last week from France, Canon 6D with a standard EF17-40 L Lens

Click image to enlarge

my dad has a small fat stubby telescope, with GPS so you can tell it what you want to look at and it goes to it, and i think tracks it, not sure necver worked when i tried

But keep thinking about nabbing it and getting a lenses converter Former Mod/Member, with the most post & Chicken George Arch nemesis

taztastic wrote:

Would to hook my camera up to a decent telescope, I manged this shot, of the Milky Way, last week from France, Canon 6D with a standard EF17-40 L Lens

Click image to enlarge

That's a good photo Taz I keep meaning to try my bridge camera if we get a clear night. It will not produce a photo anything like that but I did once capture a rather stunning photo of the moon if I do say so myself!

This kind of scope appeals to me due to the simplicity and low cost: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Orion-StarBlast-A...+telescope LL.B (Hons) - University of Derby
LOT (Lord of Time) - University of Gallifrey

I joined an astronomy group and found that virtually every night we went out it was cloudy. Evidently the reason that the UK took an early lead in radio astronomy (eg Jodrell Bank) is down to the bloody awful UK weather and generally poor viewing conditions in the visible spectrum: moving to radio was the only way to make progress. Even now most professional astronomers are using telescopes on top of mountains in, Hawaii, Chile etc 3 x FL1 2 manual + 1 auto
5 x FL2 4 manual + 1 auto
Now Discovery Sport P250 MHEV SE

The Doctor wrote:

I keep meaning to try my bridge camera if we get a clear night. It will not produce a photo anything like that but I did once capture a rather stunning photo of the moon if I do say so myself!

I took this with a Nikon P610 Bridge Camera, hand held f/6.5, 1/250 sec, ISO 110 35mm focal length 1440




I'm not an astronomer but I was the publisher of a computer astronomy program and attended a lot of 'Star Parties' where the 'scope of choice seemed to be Meade LX series.

My Nikon D7100 with Nikon 80.0-400.0 mm f/4.5-5.6 using the 1.3x digital zoom the camera has in its options

Click image to enlarge

I wonder how a FL2 would get on with the moon surface? Probably in sand mode all the time, not much use for mud and ruts. 3 x FL1 2 manual + 1 auto
5 x FL2 4 manual + 1 auto
Now Discovery Sport P250 MHEV SE

could ask Nasa to borrow the fake moon landing set  Former Mod/Member, with the most post & Chicken George Arch nemesis

For your consideration:


 LL.B (Hons) - University of Derby
LOT (Lord of Time) - University of Gallifrey

dorsetfreelander wrote:

I wonder how a FL2 would get on with the moon surface? Probably in sand mode all the time, not much use for mud and ruts.

I think terrain response would be pretty good in the conditions but the engine might be an issue and the lubricating oil would either evaporate fairly quickly or freeze solid. You'd have to remove the bonnet to keep the engine in the sun otherwise it would freeze too. Just a few tips anyway for your trip
 2008 Freelander 2 i6 Alaska White - current
2002 Freelander 1 V6 BRG - gone but I still have the nightmares
1999 Discovery II Coniston Green - almost gone

didn't think nasa had that range of control in the hanger  Former Mod/Member, with the most post & Chicken George Arch nemesis

http://www.iflscience.com/space/brian-cox-...theorists/

 LL.B (Hons) - University of Derby
LOT (Lord of Time) - University of Gallifrey