For that kind of money, an Orion Starblast, hands down. This is one of very few telescopes under $200 that anyone should ever consider (pretty much everything else under $200 is junk, with the exception of the Edmund Astroscan). Remember you'll want to budget some more money for accessories...
Scopetronix makes an excellent line of adapters for many digital cameras. They couple directly to eyepieces (either their own eyepieces or most Plossls such as the Meade Series 4000 ones) and should help reduce or even eliminate vignetting compared to holding the camera up to the eyepiece...
Heck you're looking at north of $3000 for the OTA alone. Add in a mount, diagonal, and other miscellaneous accessories and you'd be in the $5000 range. Want to do imaging? Add at least another $1000 for a DSLR, or waaaaay more than that if you want to do long exposure work. Expensive hobby...
First of all, Hubble isn't doomed because the Shuttle isn't gonna fly any more (it is), it's doomed because if a Shuttle were to fly to Hubble, there would be no way for it to fly to the ISS since the orbits are too different. The requirement that the ISS be reachable is to allow astronauts to...
Like WinstonSmith said, terrestrial telescopes have a number of challenges that space-borne scopes don't have. Imaging the other half of the sky is one. Another one is exposure length...the longest possible exposure is the length of a single night. Then you have weather, which even at the best...
I'd have to agree 100%. CCD imagers from SBIG and others use CCD chips that have specifically been designed for ultra-low noise and very high quantum efficiency (read: sensitivity). Those factors are critical in long exposure astrophotography. A digital camera, no matter how good, will never...
Here's my pic of the moon, though an 8" Dobsonian at 47x, with a Kodak DX3900 3.1MP digital camera. :)
http://members.rogers.com/wong.chris/images/moon_47x.jpg
Unfortunately the full moon is the worst for photography (IMO) because the lack of a terminator and the shadows prevents you from...
Oh yeah, and if he does live in a light polluted location, having a 6" Dob will be far more useful on those nights where he's able to get to a dark sky observing site.
That's nonsense. A 6" Dob will perform better on the planets and the moon than a cheap refractor because of:
1) greater resolution and light grasp
2) lack of chromatic aberration
3) a mount that isn't jiggly (and if you're spending $300 for a scope and a mount, it will be jiggly to some extent)...
I would agree that Dobs are not the be all and end all of astronomy. However, they're a great starting point, particularly when you only have $300 to spend. At that price point, Schmidt-Cassegrain and Maksutov-Cassegrain scopes are out of reach. So are refractors any bigger than about 100mm. The...
Sounds reasonable, but unfortunately that isn't true. It is correct that Hubble cannot track the moon fast enough to get a shot. However, it doesn't need to! The moon is bright...so much so that it takes a very short exposure to capture the moon. Hubble's controllers merely point the telescope...
In the $300 range, your best bet by far is a 6" Dobsonian, sold by many reputable companies. Here's a brief list:
http://hardinoptical.com/dsh6.html
http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=365&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=4&iSubCat=9&iProductID=365...
Considering you have both boards, why not try them both out? ;)
I've been wondering the same thing...I'm switching to Intel and I need to choose a board, and both the Asus P4P800 Deluxe and Abit AI7 are at the top of my list.
I'll agree with arcas here in saying that 70mm aperture is too small to see a good selection of celestial objects. I'll also agree that the Orion Dobsonians are a very good choice for the beginner, since they are affordable and feature very good optics (something you can't tell just by looking...
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.