Telescope or binoculars ?

[G.C.]

For a bit of star gazing.

I have recently added a bit onto my house and included a nice wee balcony. I find myself sitting there sort of reflecting / chilling out with a small glass of something at the end of the day. I have no idea about astronomy, but I know that I can see the “plough” and would like to learn a wee bit more about what I can see. At first I thought I would get a small telescope but with 4 children in the house would binoculars be more practical ?

Thoughts / advice appreciated.
Cheers

G C

 

[Taff]

The problem you will find with binoculars, is holding the little buggers steady enough to see anything. As a kid I spent hours looking at shooting stars, comets, satelites etc. Even looking at the moon through binoculars will keep you entertained for a good while. If you can, get a set of binoculars that accept a screw mount (like you get with cameras) and just use a standard photographic tripod. I'm sure Jessops will have just the sort of thing you need.

 

[trotsky]

What that man there said about holding them steady is true, but a reasonably cheap tripod will solve that problem.

If you just want to find your way around the sky at first then get the combination of "Stargazing" and a Planisphere on offer here. That will let you see what you are looking at. Don't worry that the Planisphere here says 51.5 degrees north and you're up around 57 degrees north, you won't notice the difference.

The problem with taking a step up to binoculars or telescope is that you have to make quite a jump to get something that shows you much more than details on the moon and lots more stars. This site, Telescope House will give you a feel for prices. Basically a pair of good 10x50 binoculars (or 12x70 if you can stretch to that) will be useful for looking at the sky and for other work too. If you want to get a bit more specialist then any one of these "starter" telescopes will do, but generally with telescopes you get what you pay for.

You can however pay for one of two things - bigger mirrors/lenses gather more light and let you magnify things more (more interesting things to see), computer controlled telescopes let you find things by entering the coordinates of what you want to see and it slews the scope round to that point. Generally starter telescopes have 60mm lenses or 120mm mirrors which give you very bright images at low magnifications and no computer control.

If you just want to nose about go for the binoculars until you decide if you want to do something more complicated like take pictures through them.

Be dubious about buying second hand bins and telescopes except from a dealer - they can go out of alignment and are then almost useless and expensive to fix.

 

[Warthog]

For a bit of star gazing.

I have recently added a bit onto my house and included a nice wee balcony. I find myself sitting there sort of reflecting / chilling out with a small glass of something at the end of the day. I have no idea about astronomy, but I know that I can see the “plough” and would like to learn a wee bit more about what I can see. At first I thought I would get a small telescope but with 4 children in the house would binoculars be more practical ?

Thoughts / advice appreciated.
Cheers

G C

I found myself in the same situation (no the balcony and four kids) and I decided to buy a telescope. Binoculars are good for basic detail, but as stated earlier, they are hard to keep speady, unless you use a tripod attachment, in which case why not consider a telescope. I was lucky to work withan Astro-physics graduate so advice on star gazing was easily available.

There are plenty of telescope manufacturers, but two are said to be Shoei and Arai of the scope amateurs world: Meade and Celestron. I bought a Meade ETX70A: an entry level scope that came with two different strength lenses, and a lens 2x magnifier as well as a tripod and a handheld computer that stores 10,000 celestial targets and once plugged into the scope, will run the scope motors to turn to the desired object and then track it as it crosses the night sky, and a virtual sky CD-rom, that means you can link your scope to the PC: all for £320! So far I've seen Jupiter and its moons, saturns rings, Mars and the Andromeda galaxy: All that from light polluted Maidenhead! I think Celestron have similar specs and look very stylish, but I don't know about prices.

Enjoy...

 

[Stumpy]

Can you see the stars though rain ?

 

[Iain Hogg]

Can you see the stars though rain ?

Of course, after a wee glass of something....

<iframe src="http://visit-fortwilliam.co.uk/webcam/cam1_bennevis_00001.jpg" width=400 height=300></iframe>

Iain

 

[Tim Cullis]

I used to live in a light-free area and had an 8-inch (wide) Meade on an equatorial mount. If I was doing it again I would probably go for binoculars--which is what most of the comet watchers use--on a mount. It would get used more.

Tim

 

[G.C.]

Good advice, many thanks.
I think Binoculars on a tripod, which I can use with my camera also, is the way for me to go. Had a quick look and the choice seems to be vast, so I have set a budget of £300 all in and shall get the best I can for that
Trotsky, the stargazing and planisphere will be the first thing that I buy.
I think that Tim hit it on the head about the binoculars “they would get used more”
Thanks for all the practical advice/tips guys.

Stumpy it doesn’t rain all the time in Fort William, it just feels like it.
Iain, Aye it’s a tad overcast today, so the Ben Nevis in the foreground will be tackled and not the one in the background.

Cheers.
Gordon

 

[B Murr]

make sure you get the equatorial mount and that it is automated to follow objects. I have a bog standard telescope, great to find something but a pain in the neck trying to follow the object I am viewing-that's why it never gets used.

 

[Geordie Steve]

Binoculars would get my vote...

Have to agree with Zmeagol - setting up a telescope with an equatorial mount takes a bit of time, and if you don't align it properly then it won't track the object properly. The tracking issue only becomes a real problem at higher magnifications though, and judging by your location and viewing position I think you'd be better off with lower magnifications.

Two reasons for this: firstly, if your viewing position is above part of the house (such as a first floor balcony) you tend to get a bit of air disturbance from rising heat. This makes the image dance around in a telescope - not a problem at low power, but a real nuisance when you stick a high-power eyepiece in.

Secondly, you'll have some fantastic dark skies up there in Fort William so if you go for something with big lenses but relatively low power (like 20x80 or 25x100) you'll get a better view of faint, extended objects such as nebulae, comets, star clusters, galaxies etc..

There's probably loads of other reasons why binoculars might suit you better - like the fact that using both eyes is much less of a strain than using just one, or the fact that the image is inverted in astronomical telescopes... but I won't waffle on about it. Just make sure you get a good solid mount/tripod and the best binoculars you can afford, and I'm sure you won't regret it!

 

[trotsky]

I'd also recommend the new "Sky at Night" magazine, covers whats in the sky this month, what to look for and some software to play with. Good articles and pretty pictures too.

http://www.skyatnightmagazine.com/

 

[roddy]

I was thinking along the same lines recently but since most of my cameras are digital, I think I'll go for a telescope as mounting this will be easier.

this site will also be of some use when you can navigate your way about the sky.

http://www.heavens-above.com/

cheers