Telescope Electronic I'm going to buy a telescope, should I go fully electronic or manual?
So Australian Geographic sell a variety of telescopes and such ranging from around $500 - $1500.
I'm looking specifically at two;
The first is one of the most expensive in the pack. It is completely computerised (40 000 objects or something), you can connect it to your PC and take photo's through the the lens.
The other is a very good, manual telescope. It is not nearly as expensive and it has some pretty handy features (it automatically flips the image to look the right way up for instance).
This is just purely for an interest in astronomy and I have always wanted a good telescope. But I have never owned one before, so I don't know which I should go for...What do you think, electronic or manual?
If this is your first telescope, I would advise patience. You may eventually find that neither of these is ideal. I say that for the following reasons:
1. The computer may well have 40,000 objects stored in its database. That does not mean you can see them all. In fact, depending on the configuration of the scope itself, you may not be able to see more than 10 or so. There are times when a computer is helpful. If the weather is marginal, with objects hiding behind spotty clouds - or if the light pollution is awful, then a computer makes sense. But in those conditions, you can't see things very well anyway. Under reasonably good sky conditions, I have personally found it much more rewarding to learn the night sky and find the objects myself. I cannot tell you how many times I have set up my scope and observed three or more objects while the guy next to me is swearing and rebooting his darn computer. He finally gets it functioning, only to watch as it hums and clicks and eventually points his scope at M42, or some other target that I can see just by looking up. Learning the sky is half the fun. It can be frustrating, but you miss out on a lot if you skip that step.
2. Flipping the image is not meaningful in an astronomical scope. It is useful for terrestrial viewing during daylight hours, but stars and planets and galaxies look pretty much the same regardless of their orientation in the eyepiece. More important, the extra components required to flip the image add extra glass to the light path before it reaches your eye. This results in added distortion and aberration, which is really a problem for astronomers. An erecting prism on a telescope is usually a sign of a scope that is either not meant for astronomy or is not a very good scope. It is not worth any extra investment at all.
It sounds like you are not that familiar with what is really important in looking for a telescope. That's why it is critical that you not rush into this purchase. You need to understand things like:
1. Aperture - essentially the diameter of the scope. This determines what you can and cannot see, since it determines how many photons you collect. Most astronomical objects are not too small to see, they are too dim to see. Aperture is very important.
2. Mount design - a solid mount is essential, a computer is not.
3. Transportability and ease of setup - Most beginners think they will do most of their observing alone - in the back yard. Most experienced amateurs observe with others. it can get cold and lonely out there. If you buy a scope that is difficult to move, you will quickly stop using it.
4. Cost - You get what you pay for - as long as you know what to look for. Your budget sounds realistic to acquire a good scope. Now you need to understand what that means.
If possible, I would look up the nearest local amateur astronomy club on line. Go to a few open observing sessions (star parties). You will receive a warm welcome and get an opportunity to try before you buy. This is critical, so that you can establish your expectations before you spend that money. Look through several scopes and see what works for you. Ask questions. See what is expensive, and what isn't. I suspect that you will eventually find that - for this amount of money - your best option may be a Dobsonian reflector with an 8 to 10 inch aperture, like this:
This an excellent choice for beginners, and you can use the leftover cash for some accessories, which you will eventually need. Good Luck and Clear Skies!
stands for : Hardy, Telescoping, Picturetaker, + number of manhours spent making it. ?
Each company has a different methodology for how they assign models.
USually they have a couple letters describing the type of device, a number indicating version or revision, and sub letters for certain options, or international versions.
Telescopes Optics What problem are adaptive optics used to correct?
a the opacity of the Earth's atmosphere
b defects in the optics of the telescope
c slight errors in the telescope's mount to compensate for the Earth's rotation
d effects of atmospheric turbulence
e reduce the amount of background noise in a CCD
Adaptive Optics refers to optical systems which adapt to compensate for optical effects introduced by the medium between the object and its image.
d) the turbulence in the air (optical effects introduced by the medium)
I had the predecessor to that tripod and it was nice and stable (I had an Orion Short Tube 80 and a Coronado PST on it). The only problem that I had with the tripod was its quick release head. The spring that held plate mechanism together broke and dropped the PST onto a sidewalk, breaking the scope. Ouch.
Now, if you are getting the parallelogram mount as shown also, you should be o.k. The mount threads into the tripod. I also use a similar parallelogram mount and for what your doing, it should be o.k. Depending on your height, I would not extend the tripod legs out any further than necessary. And even then, try to avoid using the smallest diameter legs. This helps to keep the vibrations down to a minimum and provides a little more overall stability.
If your going to be using this out at a public event or where there are folks milling around near you, think about putting a small red led warning light on the end of the counter weight arm and maybe the tripod legs.
Aerial Photography poles for sale - www.aeromao.com/telescopic_masts
is this good enough to look at planets in high detail with a telescope?
Aperture: 114mm(4.5")
Focal Length: 900mm,f/8
Finderscope: 6X30
Metal Tripod with Slow Motion Control Rod for Easy Vertical Micro Adjustment
Maximum Height: 125cm
Standard 1.25" Accessories Include:
Eyepiece: SR4mm,H12.5mm,H20mm
3 x Barlow Lens, 1.5 Erector
and it has a magnification of 675x (the highest)
Avoid. From the description this is a junk/toy telescope. Nor can it handle the 675x that it was provided with. A telescope this size would not handle more than 200x without the image getting dim and blurry. The eyepieces "SR" and "H" (for Huygens) are subpar for any scope -- even a "K" (for Kellner) would be a big improvement. Nor does an astronomical telescope require a 1.5x erector.
I would suggest Orion Telescopes as a source for a first telescope, though it would behoove you to do as much homework on the subject of telescopes for amateur astronomy as possible before spending your money.
Please don't do as some askers have done by going ahead and purchasing whatever telescope caught your attention and then asking us if this was a good telescope to buy. Better to inquire beforehand.
At the moment i have a 10 gallon tank,15 gallon tank filter and all the other necessary supplies. I understand 10 gal is not enough for full grown goldfish and i will upgrade when the time comes. Anyway i would like to purchase two fancy goldfish and i would like to know what breed you like best! Im thinking a Butterfly moor, ryukin, fantail or telescope cause i love the long split tails and round body.
Also im curious if i could keep a butterfly moor with a ryukin.... Would they be ok living together?
So tell me your favourite type of goldfish and any other stuff you think i would find usefull
ANDREW: thanks. but you still didnt answer my question...
My favorite is Oranda, they have beautiful head growths and their tails and fins are all very flowy. But out of the ones you suggested I like ryukin and then the telescope eyed ones.
I'm getting a couple of Oranda for my ten gallon so don't let anyone push you into getting a larger aquarium if you aren't ready for it. People have been keeping goldfish in tiny fish bowls for years, a ten gallon will be fine.
Oh and I think you can keep the two you mentioned together. The only ones who need to be with their own kind are Oranda and lionhead because of their headgrowths and, in the lionhead's case, lack of fins. So they are slower swimmers and won't be able to compete for food.
Ooh! Just looked up butterfly moors they are stunning. A very hard decision!
One last tip, if you get the smallest ones you'll have the longest time with them in the tank. If you want to see something that will make you want Oranda goldfish, YouTube "punch the goldfish"
Im thinking a Butterfly moor, ryukin, fantail or telescope cause i love the long split tails and round body.