What Can I See?

[skippybangkok]

always kinda interested......... but if just see a white dot (star) as a larger white dot.... for get it.

if can see i.e. saturn and its rings, maybe red spot on Jupiter, and a galaxy.......... might be interesting........

anyone has any experience?

[flying]

It will depend on your location & light pollution.

Meaning how dark it gets in your area. If there is a lot of light of course you will see less.

But if your in an area with a lot of stars, milky way etc above & visible with the naked eye

then you will be treated to quite a show.

If lots of light exists the main stars,planets will probably still be visible

Two main types of scope refractors & reflectors

Refractors are the popular beginner scope. The long smaller tube classic look through the end types

Reflectors being the larger diameter look through the side can types which gather more light with a wider field of view.

( these scope descriptions just the most basic description to save space & you can look into it in detail on the web )

In most places ( not knowing yours ) I would guess you can easily see the rings of Saturn, Jupiter moons & red spot etc quite easily. Not to mention the moons craters ( best viewed on a non full moon )

[skippybangkok]

It will depend on your location & light pollution.

Meaning how dark it gets in your area. If there is a lot of light of course you will see less.

But if your in an area with a lot of stars, milky way etc above & visible with the naked eye

then you will be treated to quite a show.

If lots of light exists the main stars,planets will probably still be visible

Two main types of scope refractors & reflectors

Refractors are the popular beginner scope. The long smaller tube classic look through the end types

Reflectors being the larger diameter look through the side can types which gather more light with a wider field of view.

( these scope descriptions just the most basic description to save space & you can look into it in detail on the web )

In most places ( not knowing yours ) I would guess you can easily see the rings of Saturn, Jupiter moons & red spot etc quite easily. Not to mention the moons craters ( best viewed on a non full moon )

Thanks......... if gonna do something, do it well or not at all.. Cant see me spending time and effort to look at an enlarged white dot, and as such am looking at the refractor type. As for light pollution, i live in BKK (say no more), but could travel week-ends to Khao yai or other less polluted places.

[flying]

Thanks......... if gonna do something, do it well or not at all.. Cant see me spending time and effort to look at an enlarged white dot, and as such am looking at the refractor type. As for light pollution, i live in BKK (say no more), but could travel week-ends to Khao yai or other less polluted places.

Great I bet you will enjoy it. It is very interesting to have a look around. At first the planets will amaze you. The rings of Saturn so crisp

But later take a look into the milky way truly amazing. Clouds of stars & clusters

Since you live in BKK a refractor may be cool in the daytime too.

But for many if they really want to see more a reflector with its greater aperture will of course see more.

Refractors give a sharper image for planets & landscapes A reflector is better for stars

Here are better explanations

http://hubpages.com/hub/Refractor-Vs-Reflector-Telescopes

http://www.telescopes.com/articles.cfm

[Tywais]

Since you live in BKK a refractor may be cool in the daytime too.

You mean pointing at Nana Plaza?

I used to have a 60mm refractor and it was a lot of fun. If you are into photography, than a camera mount makes for an even more entertaining experience. However, using a camera normally would require a motorized equatorial mount to compensate for the rotation of the earth. Probably ok without it if shooting the moon and the brighter planets.

[flying]

Since you live in BKK a refractor may be cool in the daytime too.

You mean pointing at Nana Plaza?

I used to have a 60mm refractor and it was a lot of fun. If you are into photography, than a camera mount makes for an even more entertaining experience. However, using a camera normally would require a motorized equatorial mount to compensate for the rotation of the earth. Probably ok without it if shooting the moon and the brighter planets.

:lol: You read my mind

[daveh]

flying has it right. I do want to point one thing out, though. Except for the star we call the Sun, all stars in the sky are single points. They are so far away that no amateur telescope can possibly make out the disk. If they look like disks, that is because the telescope is not focused correctly.

I have a large reflector scope in California. Here is a picture I took through the eyepiece with my camera at maximum zoom. This is about how it looks when viewing with your eye.

Right now Saturn is not great to look at because the rings are mostly edge on, but it is getting better every year.

[Richb2004v2]

I have a 6 inch reflector that I bought from the Uk. Sadly by the time I got it here the star finder feature had packed in. I looked into getting it fixed but without success. Without it I can only look at the moon and the planets. However I never get tired of looking at the moon with it and even looking at the moons of Jupiter is interesting.

[skippybangkok]

I have a 6 inch reflector that I bought from the Uk. Sadly by the time I got it here the star finder feature had packed in. I looked into getting it fixed but without success. Without it I can only look at the moon and the planets. However I never get tired of looking at the moon with it and even looking at the moons of Jupiter is interesting.

Getting an appetite....... not even sure whats good...but the Celestron 1400 HD is about 530,000 baht......... dont think can swing that one by the wife ! any recommendations

[flying]

Getting an appetite....... not even sure whats good...but the Celestron 1400 HD is about 530,000 baht......... dont think can swing that one by the wife ! any recommendations

That is a pretty high end scope

If your going in the Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope direction....Celestron also makes the NexStar line of scopes

http://www.celestron.com/c3/category.php?CatID=13

They seem to go on sale at a lot of places like Amazon

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000GUKTDM/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=1852336315&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0PJYP13A5QWKRMZEC5VG

[rayongtoffee]

I bought a celestron in u.k for about £80,brought it to Thailand and spend hours in the garden at night amazed at how good it is.

[flying]

I bought a celestron in u.k for about £80,brought it to Thailand and spend hours in the garden at night amazed at how good it is.

That is the truth of it.

For most a 5 or 6 inch reflector scope will keep them amazed for life.

These days you can get them for about the same as what you paid.

It is cool that so many have computerized star finders but we all started with manual

6" reflector scopes. Looked at a star map & searched for what we were looking for. Finding all kinds of

other things along the way. Like you I was amazed by what I saw & how good it was.

[skippybangkok]

Getting an appetite....... not even sure whats good...but the Celestron 1400 HD is about 530,000 baht......... dont think can swing that one by the wife ! any recommendations

That is a pretty high end scope

If your going in the Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope direction....Celestron also makes the NexStar line of scopes

http://www.celestron.com/c3/category.php?CatID=13

They seem to go on sale at a lot of places like Amazon

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000GUKTDM/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=1852336315&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0PJYP13A5QWKRMZEC5VG

Bingo....that looks about right. Not sure how to get a optical precision instrument shipped to Thailand without being banged around.

[skippybangkok]

Getting an appetite....... not even sure whats good...but the Celestron 1400 HD is about 530,000 baht......... dont think can swing that one by the wife ! any recommendations

That is a pretty high end scope

If your going in the Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope direction....Celestron also makes the NexStar line of scopes

http://www.celestron.com/c3/category.php?CatID=13

They seem to go on sale at a lot of places like Amazon

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000GUKTDM/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=1852336315&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0PJYP13A5QWKRMZEC5VG

Bingo....that looks about right. Not sure how to get a optical precision instrument shipped to Thailand without being banged around.

For the same size...... Meade look way cheaper?

[flying]

Bingo....that looks about right. Not sure how to get a optical precision instrument shipped to Thailand without being banged around.

For the same size...... Meade look way cheaper?

Cant help you there with shipping but I do know Amazon has a good rep for shipping & I believe they figure duty etc when shipping internationally.

Which Meade were you looking at?

Both Meade & Celestron make excellent products

[flying]

As a side note..........

I just noticed there are a few places in Bangkok that sell Telescopes

Might be worth a call? Looks like TMK sells Celestron

http://www.tmktrading.co.th/

T.M.K. Trading Company Limited

45/2 Soi Sunthornpimon Jarungmuang Road Pathumwan

Bangkok, Thailand 10330

Contact : 662-2140976 662-2155849

Fax : 662-2155851

These guys sell Orion another good brand from what I have heard

http://www.classicoworld.com/

But it is all in Thai

This one sell Meade, Celestron & Orion

http://www.darasartcenter.com/telescope.htm

[skippybangkok]

Thanks ... Will take a look. Looking at the Internet , the nice pics of galaxies and nebula at 10" upwards. ???

On another note , are they directly visabl through the scope or only long exposures via camera. If via long exposure looking via computer, you might aswell jsu down load Hubble pics

I used to do underwater photography using velvia slide film, and there is no comparison to putting that little slide in an archaic monocle slide viewer and holding it up to the light. Although digital macro has it's advantages , the velvia was unique

[skippybangkok]

What would be the difference between these two?

Both 12" , weights very different.

Meade LX 90

Meade LX 200

[flying]

Thanks ... Will take a look. Looking at the Internet , the nice pics of galaxies and nebula at 10" upwards. ???

On another note , are they directly visible through the scope or only long exposures via camera. If via long exposure looking via computer, you might as well just down load Hubble pics

No you can see those things with a much smaller scope.....but

Yes those pictures of colored nebula are due to long exposures.

What would be the difference between these two?

Both 12" , weights very different.

Just glanced at them but.....I believe it is all electronics that are added to the heavier one.

http://www.astronomyforum.net/meade-telescope-forums/89031-lx90-vs-lx200.html

Also the LX200 series is geared more to the astro photography group

A big thing to remember is you will use a scope you can handle/move about.

If the whole process to go outside is too big it will just gather dust because it is too

much hassle to move it outside.

Lastly check out those shops if they are near you because you may get to try a few before you buy.

Most of those kind of stores are hooked up with folks who have star parties & go somewhere dark to set up many types

of scopes.

These kind of parties are great for folks shopping because everyone there wants you to look thru their scope &

see what they are seeing. So you get to try many types & see what you like bast before buying.

[daveh]

Thanks ... Will take a look. Looking at the Internet , the nice pics of galaxies and nebula at 10" upwards. ???

On another note , are they directly visabl through the scope or only long exposures via camera. If via long exposure looking via computer, you might aswell jsu down load Hubble pics

I used to do underwater photography using velvia slide film, and there is no comparison to putting that little slide in an archaic monocle slide viewer and holding it up to the light. Although digital macro has it's advantages , the velvia was unique

The truth is the Hubble telescope and the internet ruined it for amateur astronomers. The first time one looks through the scope, they expect grand color images. In fact, what they get are grey fuzzy blobs. With a 10" scope, it is possible to make out the disks of some spiral galaxies as well as to faintly make out the dust lanes. However, this must be done in only the remotest and darkest areas. Even the disk of some galaxies are not visible unless you get far away from light pollution.

If you are in Bangkok, forget about seeing any deep sky objects. It is impossible to see objects that are fainter than the light pollution even with a big scope (there are some light pollution filters that do help, but are still not perfect for city viewing). You will have to travel for hours to get to some place dark enough.

However, globular clusters are fun to look at. They are bright enough to see in light pollution, but you really don't need a large scope for that.

[flying]

The truth is the Hubble telescope and the internet ruined it for amateur astronomers. The first time one looks through the scope, they expect grand color images.

However, globular clusters are fun to look at. They are bright enough to see in light pollution, but you really don't need a large scope for that.

Ain't that the truth Dave

But I agree with you that there are still many cool things to see.

I am lucky to live in a very dark place at night & yes clusters, binaries etc....all cool to see.

[Richb2004v2]

I have a Celestron Nexstar that I bought second hand. The light pollution is very bad though where I live even though I'm not in a big city. Light from industry does not help though. I'm looking forward to getting back to the Uk though where it will be easier to get out into the countryside with a scope (although colder).

[skippybangkok]

Yeh, will try to find something good 2nd hand.... Wifey will be tasked for this important role

[skippybangkok]

Update......

met the guy from darasat who was quite upfront, and recond the Lx type from Meade ( or others ) is good for looking at stars and planets, but not galaxy's / nebula ( "too dark" ).

he used the long pipe types ( the original type )..... but even then he said the above are not bright enough. He recond he looked through a 16" one, and still did not see properly with own eye ( i.e dual star with one pulling in dust from the other, he said you can see the stars, but not the dust trails as per a long exposure. ).

He seemed to be into photography........ point it at a dark spot - and long exposure. If i am gonna see a digital pic on a PC, then might as well down load hubble or other professional image?

pls let me know if the above is wrong.

thx.

[flying]

Update......

met the guy from darasat who was quite upfront, and recond the Lx type from Meade ( or others ) is good for looking at stars and planets, but not galaxy's / nebula ( "too dark" ).

he used the long pipe types ( the original type )..... but even then he said the above are not bright enough. He recond he looked through a 16" one, and still did not see properly with own eye ( i.e dual star with one pulling in dust from the other, he said you can see the stars, but not the dust trails as per a long exposure. ).

He seemed to be into photography........ point it at a dark spot - and long exposure. If i am gonna see a digital pic on a PC, then might as well down load hubble or other professional image?

pls let me know if the above is wrong.

thx.

Interesting.....

You know it all depends on where you are & again the light pollution as well as regular pollution ...which is why astronomers say a steady sky

When you say long pipe I am guessing you mean a refractor telescope? As opposed to the CAT types like the Meade your looking at.

I am just in the process of ordering a refractor myself. They give a very nice view of planetary, lunar & binary/star clusters

As for deep sky objects like Galaxy/Nebula again it depends on your location but.......

Folks like Steven O'Meara and his books on the Messier Objects, Caldwell Objects, Hershell Objects, Hidden Treasures

Did all of his observations & sketches through a small 4" Refractor type scope.

Same for Walter Scott Houston's Deep Sky Wonders...all with a small 4" refractor

So again a lot of it comes down to your area.

As for Astrophotography yeah those guys are extremely anal....dont pay attention to it. They choose a 10,000 dollar scope in place of a $500 dollar scope just so they dont see a slight blue halo around distant objects.

It is really for the extreme folks to worry about such things...

Here is a classic example

Walter Scott Houston's Deep Sky Wonders

If you want to get out there & just take a look.....start with something basic & go from there.

[skippybangkok]

Update......

met the guy from darasat who was quite upfront, and recond the Lx type from Meade ( or others ) is good for looking at stars and planets, but not galaxy's / nebula ( "too dark" ).

he used the long pipe types ( the original type )..... but even then he said the above are not bright enough. He recond he looked through a 16" one, and still did not see properly with own eye ( i.e dual star with one pulling in dust from the other, he said you can see the stars, but not the dust trails as per a long exposure. ).

He seemed to be into photography........ point it at a dark spot - and long exposure. If i am gonna see a digital pic on a PC, then might as well down load hubble or other professional image?

pls let me know if the above is wrong.

thx.

Interesting.....

You know it all depends on where you are & again the light pollution as well as regular pollution ...which is why astronomers say a steady sky

When you say long pipe I am guessing you mean a refractor telescope? As opposed to the CAT types like the Meade your looking at.

I am just in the process of ordering a refractor myself. They give a very nice view of planetary, lunar & binary/star clusters

As for deep sky objects like Galaxy/Nebula again it depends on your location but.......

Folks like Steven O'Meara and his books on the Messier Objects, Caldwell Objects, Hershell Objects, Hidden Treasures

Did all of his observations & sketches through a small 4" Refractor type scope.

Same for Walter Scott Houston's Deep Sky Wonders...all with a small 4" refractor

So again a lot of it comes down to your area.

As for Astrophotography yeah those guys are extremely anal....dont pay attention to it. They choose a 10,000 dollar scope in place of a $500 dollar scope just so they dont see a slight blue halo around distant objects.

It is really for the extreme folks to worry about such things...

Here is a classic example

Walter Scott Houston's Deep Sky Wonders

If you want to get out there & just take a look.....start with something basic & go from there.

Thanks,

he mentioned he went upcountry, camped out ( cause resorts have too much light too ) , and went during new moon. I will pick up the book. If i can see a Galaxy decently, i would not mind, but for long exposure pics..... might as well use google pics search.

Any idea where i can test one ?

p.s. - yes, refractor. Dont looks as sexy as the other type, but are they better?

[skippybangkok]

p.s.

if i cud see this with my own eyes, would buy for sure

[flying]

As for Astrophotography yeah those guys are extremely anal....dont pay attention to it. They choose a 10,000 dollar scope in place of a $500 dollar scope just so they dont see a slight blue halo around distant objects.

It is really for the extreme folks to worry about such things...

Here is a classic example

Walter Scott Houston's Deep Sky Wonders

If you want to get out there & just take a look.....start with something basic & go from there.

Thanks,

he mentioned he went upcountry, camped out ( cause resorts have too much light too ) , and went during new moon. I will pick up the book. If i can see a Galaxy decently, i would not mind, but for long exposure pics..... might as well use google pics search.

Any idea where i can test one ?

p.s. - yes, refractor. Dont looks as sexy as the other type, but are they better?

Ooops I see I made a mistake in my last post when I said...Here is a classic example I meant this link...not to repeat the book

http://computerphysicslab.wordpress.com/2010/10/14/apochromatic-vs-achromatic-refractor/

There is no better really in scopes.... Folks just like different things....

Some folks really love one type over the other for various reasons.

Here is a basic description

http://www.astronomics.com/main/category.asp/catalog_name/Astronomics/category_name/Why%20buy%20a%20refractor?/Page/1

If you look at the top of the page you can also see a short description for refelectors & cats too.

[flying]

p.s.

if i cud see this with my own eyes, would buy for sure