On YouTube, it seems like the consensus on the best telescopes for visual astronomy under $200 are small newtonians with parabolic mirrors. And even more, tabletop dobsonians. People recommend the Zhumel Z100, Orion Skyscanner, Heritage 100p, ... which are more or less all the same telescope. But on Astrobiscuit's website, on that price range, he recommends an 80/400 refractor. Why is that? I'm planning on buying a small telescope that I can carry on camping and/or vacation. And maybe do some photography but nothing serious. I was pretty convinced on buying a tabletop dobsonian. But Astrobiscuit's recommendation is making me doubt that decision. Any thoughts?
#Why Astrobiscuit doesn't recommend small (4 inch) newtonians?
opal wasp
terse yacht
Yea astrobiscuit advice isn't very good
Get a tabletop. Rory fails to mention those refractor scopes are on bad tripods which is incredibly important since you need a stable tripods to good views
Basically: don't get your advice from astrobiscuit. It serves more as a channel for entertainment, not for buying advice
For buying advice, go to Ed Ting. He knows his stuff well
waxen hearth
opal wasp
Basically: don't get your advice from astrobiscuit. It serves more as a channel ...
Thanks!
wide abyss
Honestly his advice isn’t bad if you’re going for planetary. An 80mm achro is probably going to be as good as a 5” or even 6” for planets, just because you’ll also need to Barlow the hell up with those scopes.
The entry point of £100 is still absolutely vital. Can’t get a decent newt for that. That said, I think Rory does need to do an update.
wide abyss
I remembered he actually has done a review of the mini dobs and still recommends the refractors over them. https://youtube.com/watch?v=S9AjNOCv-4I
opal wasp
Honestly his advice isn’t bad if you’re going for planetary. An 80mm achro is pr...
For now I'm interested in the Moon and the Sun. I would also like to see some DSOs. With the planets, I am content in seeing their silhouette (crescent, rings, ...) but I don't care if I can't see fine details.
opal wasp
The entry point of £100 is still absolutely vital. Can’t get a decent newt for t...
My budget is $200
wide abyss
For now I'm interested in the Moon and the Sun. I would also like to see some DS...
If you can get a 130mm dob that would be your best bet. Otherwise I’d go with an 80mm refractor. You’ll certainly have trouble fitting a camera to one of those mini dobs.
opal wasp
If you can get a 130mm dob that would be your best bet. Otherwise I’d go with an...
You mean a 80/400 telescope, or a longer one?
wide abyss
This is the ST80’s view of Saturn with the standard Skywatcher 10mm eyepiece and a 2x Barlow (a lens you insert which doubles the focal length). It includes a Barlow but IIRC it’s really bad, but you can upgrade later. The standard skywatcher eyepieces are basic but optically ok.
Saturn is pretty small but you can see the rings. You’ll need stronger eyepieces to see the rings on Jupiter clearly.
You can mess with the settings here. You probably can’t go above 100-120x magnification with this scope. https://astronomy.tools/calculators/field_of_view/?fov[]=152|68|||2||&solar_system=jupiter
So you want to compare the view in that scope to the others you’re thinking about. A longer focal length will give you a better view of the planets but will make it harder to view DSOs (and by DSOs we’re talking Andromeda galaxy, Orion Nebula and star clusters - and they’re not going to appear how they look in photos)
If you can get a 130mm dobsonian for your budget, like the Heritage 130, that will be a big step up from these smaller scopes.