Orion 90 MM Eq. refractor vs. Orion Skyquest Classic Dobsonian I have a problem since I live in an area with no astronomy clubs or stores. I want to buy a telescope, and have narrowed it down to either the 90 mm refractor or 6" (or 8") dobsonian. Orion is a given due to the great reviews they get. I had a telescope years ago and gave it away due to all of the vibration while viewing as well as having a lot of trouble keeping an object within view. Mostly I will be looking at the moon and planets, but am sure that I will branch out as I gain experience. Which telescope would be best? I have never even seen a dobsonian, except a picture on Amazon. Are the easy to track objects? Portability isn't an issue either. Thanks for any help. Orion 90 MM Eq. refractor vs. Orion Skyquest Classic Dobsonian I have a problem since I live in an area with no astronomy clubs or stores. I want to buy a telescope, and have narrowed it down to... » Read More Orion 90 MM Eq. refractor vs. Orion Skyquest Classic Dobsonian I have a problem since I live in an area with no astronomy clubs or stores. I want to buy a telescope, and have narrowed it down to either the 90 mm refractor or 6" (or 8") dobsonian. Orion is a given due to the great reviews they get. I had a telescope years ago and gave it away due to all of the vibration while viewing as well as having a lot of trouble keeping an object within view. Mostly I will be looking at the moon and planets, but am sure that I will branch out as I gain experience. Which telescope would be best? I have never even seen a dobsonian, except a picture on Amazon. Are the easy to track objects? Portability isn't an issue either. Thanks for any help. « Show Less
1058012
Well it really depends on what type of area you live in and what you are looking at. If you are in a light polluted city or are trying to see fainter objects then a dobsonian would help. If you want to look at fairly bright objects like planets, moon and terrestrial things then a refractor will be great for that.
1058013
The Dob will definitely give you more deep space objects than the refractor. I got my son one of those last Christmas. It is rather large in comparison to the refractor, but rotates well on its base. His is not computerized and he has gotten very adept at finding nebulae and Messier objects. I think the refractor is more for planets and moons in our close by system. Visual tracking is okay, remember that the image is reversed in the Dob.
1058014
I'm looking at the same two as well. Any input would be appreciated.Thanks!
1554881
Yes this is a refractor, and no there is usually no need for collimation for refractor scopes. Now with that being said you should have little problem using this sope for photo's. Although it does come with a mount on the top of the scope for small cameras to be used as a "piggyback". The correct photo adaptor can be found on most sites that sell telescopes. I don't know what camera you have but a dslr is what you need to be able to pick up faint nebula in your photos. From what i know converting this mount to gps would be more trouble than it is worth. Celestron sales go-to mounts that could be used on this scope but you looking at more money. This scope is a great buy though and there is enough info in the contained manual to teach you how to use the eq mount that comes standard. I have no problems at all learning how to use the mount and this is my first scope that i have bought. Now i did have a 50mm refractor when i was a kid i must say this scope is a good bang for your buck. Best thing to do i guess would be to call celestron and see what you would need to use your camera with this. I personally see no need for a go-to because you need to learn your way around the sky yourself without automated computers. The motor drive would track for you to make long exposure photo's if you decide to buy this. Best of luck and clear skies.
1323126
Hi Ryan,As you know that this is a fast dobsonian, you have to use quality eyepieces to get the most out of it.With my Celestron eyepieces I got reasonable level of contrast of Saturn including Casini division, few saturnian moon with little cloudy bands of the planet in 300x .My cloudy nights friends who are using Pentax XW or TV Delos have got lot of viewing pleasure and some of friends who are using Orthoscopic eyepieces also satisfied well with this telescope.I think that you cannot go wrong with this telescope. Clear Skies...Best regardsDr. R.A.N.S Rajapakshe.
1821518
Total weight is the key: Orion 8996 10 inch weight is 25.5 lbs. A set of rings and mounting plate will weigh ~ 5 lbs. Eypiece (1 1/4) ~ 1LB. So you are already at 30lb for a minimal visual (No Red dot finder, dew heater tapes or 2 inch eyepieces). Weight capacity listed for CG4 is 20lb. Typically that is the max for visual only with max photographic load being 60% of that. Both under no wind/breeze and good balance. My experience: I had mine initially on an Atlas EQ-G as well which is rated at ~ 40 lb max. Plan, plan plan if you try astrophotography. Depending on how heavy your guide scope/camera or off axis guider/camera, main camera, dew heater tapes any mis-balance can easily make things unguidable/unstable and/or make the Go-to off. Optics of my tube were good based on Ronchi eyepiece , collimation was stable (but bit touchy to set). If you get the EQ-G be sure to get the upgraded (larger) counterweight bar if you plan to take pictures. Much more stable, the original one my EQ-G came with could be wobbled. Also upgrade the azm/altitude knobs. (Google EQ-G knob enhancements.) The bolts that came with mine were hard to adjust and made of inferior steel. (You will also have to get a complete new SET of counterweights if you upgrade. The holes are bigger.)
72106
I just ordered the Celestron Nexstar SLT 130, as recommended by a friend who has been into astronomy for years..as a beginner myself I would definitely recommend this telescope...I've used it every night since I've gotten it...the computer makes it really easy to set up and find planets and stars right away!
1535197
It should have came with a manual. Google the Orion user manual online. If you can't find it, I would recommend contacting the seller. Yes, there are two lens. One has a higher magnification than the other. It's great for detailed viewing after you have located the object with the lesser magnification.
1159085
The site http://www.garyseronik.com/?q=node/25 has a very nice comparison of all of Canon's IS binoculars for stargazing. In summary, these are not the authors favorites (he prefers the 10x42 Ls or 15x50) but they will certainly work. I am considering these due to their combination of high magnification, decent (not great) optics, and light weight.By going to a telescope (and I mean a decent sized reflector, not a tiny $50 refractor from a department store) you are not necessarily getting a large increase in magnification; it depends on the eyepiece being used. But you are getting a lot more light gathering power to see faint objects. Many people into stargazing will have both binoculars and a larger telescope. The site http://www.garyseronik.com/?q=node/25 has a very nice comparison of all of Canon's IS binoculars for stargazing. In summary, these are not the authors favorites (he prefers the 10x42 Ls or 15x50) but they will certainly work. I am considering these due to their combination of high magnification, decent (not great) optics, and light weight.By going to a telescope (and I mean a decent sized reflector, not a tiny $50 refractor from a department store) you are not necessarily getting a large increase in magnification; it depends on the eyepiece being used. But you are... » Read More The site http://www.garyseronik.com/?q=node/25 has a very nice comparison of all of Canon's IS binoculars for stargazing. In summary, these are not the authors favorites (he prefers the 10x42 Ls or 15x50) but they will certainly work. I am considering these due to their combination of high magnification, decent (not great) optics, and light weight.By going to a telescope (and I mean a decent sized reflector, not a tiny $50 refractor from a department store) you are not necessarily getting a large increase in magnification; it depends on the eyepiece being used. But you are getting a lot more light gathering power to see faint objects. Many people into stargazing will have both binoculars and a larger telescope. « Show Less
613057
First, which Meade 10 are you talking about. This is a Dobsonian style without a computer. It is a very good, inexpensive telescope. You need to direct it yourself, which means you have to know the sky, or be willing to learn it. If you are looking for quick an easy way to look at celestial objects without having to learn how to find them, a Schmidt-Cassagrain with a computerized guiding mount, while more expensive, is the way to go. Orion, Meade, Celestron are 3 of the biggest names in amateur astronomy (there are others.) All market both Dobsonians and Schmidt-Cassagrains and all make quality products, so brand preference is a personal thing. First, which Meade 10 are you talking about. This is a Dobsonian style without a computer. It is a very good, inexpensive telescope. You need to direct it yourself, which means you have to know the sky, or be willing to learn it. If you are looking for quick an easy way to look at celestial objects without having to learn how to find them, a Schmidt-Cassagrain with a computerized guiding mount, while more expensive, is the way to go. Orion, Meade, Celestron are 3 of the biggest names in amateur astronomy (there are others.) All market both Dobsonians and Schmidt-Cassagrains and all make... » Read More First, which Meade 10 are you talking about. This is a Dobsonian style without a computer. It is a very good, inexpensive telescope. You need to direct it yourself, which means you have to know the sky, or be willing to learn it. If you are looking for quick an easy way to look at celestial objects without having to learn how to find them, a Schmidt-Cassagrain with a computerized guiding mount, while more expensive, is the way to go. Orion, Meade, Celestron are 3 of the biggest names in amateur astronomy (there are others.) All market both Dobsonians and Schmidt-Cassagrains and all make quality products, so brand preference is a personal thing. « Show Less
896661
Its a really fast wide field achromat refractor with lots of false color on bright objects like jupiter. Great for wide field deep space views. If you have scope and want to try astrophotography go ccd black and white on camera and LRGB filters. and a good processing and stacking software. that would be your best chance to get a decent image.
1356166
I am not sure what your telescope looks like, I couldnt find it. But if you go to telescope.com and look up orion astroview 120st equatorial refractor telescope,that is what I have and it fits even with the tripod. Mine is a very big telescope, and very heavy,over 50lbs. It does have padding and it is sturdy material, it has a divider for the tripod. But I wish I had gone with a metal case with fitted incerts. I also had to take the telescope all apart to put it in there. I paid over $600.00 for my telescope, I wish I had invested a little more in the case. Hope this helps.
613056
First, which Meade 10 are you talking about. This is a Dobsonian style without a computer. It is a very good, inexpensive telescope. You need to direct it yourself, which means you have to know the sky, or be willing to learn it. If you are looking for quick an easy way to look at celestial objects without having to learn how to find them, a Schmidt-Cassagrain with a computerized guiding mount, while more expensive, is the way to go. Orion, Meade, Celestron are 3 of the biggest names in amateur astronomy (there are others.) All market both Dobsonians and Schmidt-Cassagrains and all make quality products, so brand preference is a personal thing.
45847
oh, one more thing. I saw the other reviews after I posted mine, not before.I think the build quality is fine, I am not sure if the other posters actually own this or not. by grabbing it by the pistol grip, its not heavy at all. I don't understand some of these reviews. also build quality is great. to move the head around you squeeze the pistol grip, and let go, it stays, even at angles. Like I stated before, I can support a 40lb telescope, and my big full frame Nikon with monster zoom. Its good enough to take stills of the moon, its that good. guess we are all different, but this one satisfies me, just fine. weight is not an issue. oh, one more thing. I saw the other reviews after I posted mine, not before.I think the build quality is fine, I am not sure if the other posters actually own this or not. by grabbing it by the pistol grip, its not heavy at all. I don't understand some of these reviews. also build quality is great. to move the head around you squeeze the pistol grip, and let go, it stays, even at angles. Like I stated before, I can support a 40lb telescope, and my big full frame Nikon with monster zoom. Its good enough to take stills of the moon, its that good. guess we are all different, but this one... » Read More oh, one more thing. I saw the other reviews after I posted mine, not before.I think the build quality is fine, I am not sure if the other posters actually own this or not. by grabbing it by the pistol grip, its not heavy at all. I don't understand some of these reviews. also build quality is great. to move the head around you squeeze the pistol grip, and let go, it stays, even at angles. Like I stated before, I can support a 40lb telescope, and my big full frame Nikon with monster zoom. Its good enough to take stills of the moon, its that good. guess we are all different, but this one satisfies me, just fine. weight is not an issue. « Show Less
1310868
Saturn's rings are always a treat! Glad you saw them. A 2x barlow and 4mm eyepiece will give you 200x on this scope, which is about the theoretical maximum usable magnification for a 100mm aperture scope like this one (about 50x/25mm). But in my experience with these smaller scopes, the image is rather poor at maximum magnification; you can see something, but very dim and very grainy, for instance. For my eyes, the max usable magnification is closer to 40x/25mm..... I think it's fun to use the max magnification (esp. on the Moon!) But I usually get the most satisfactory viewing at a lower power. Enjoy your telescope! Saturn's rings are always a treat! Glad you saw them. A 2x barlow and 4mm eyepiece will give you 200x on this scope, which is about the theoretical maximum usable magnification for a 100mm aperture scope like this one (about 50x/25mm). But in my experience with these smaller scopes, the image is rather poor at maximum magnification; you can see something, but very dim and very grainy, for instance. For my eyes, the max usable magnification is closer to 40x/25mm..... I think it's fun to use the max magnification (esp. on the Moon!) But I usually get the most satisfactory viewing at a lower... » Read More Saturn's rings are always a treat! Glad you saw them. A 2x barlow and 4mm eyepiece will give you 200x on this scope, which is about the theoretical maximum usable magnification for a 100mm aperture scope like this one (about 50x/25mm). But in my experience with these smaller scopes, the image is rather poor at maximum magnification; you can see something, but very dim and very grainy, for instance. For my eyes, the max usable magnification is closer to 40x/25mm..... I think it's fun to use the max magnification (esp. on the Moon!) But I usually get the most satisfactory viewing at a lower power. Enjoy your telescope! « Show Less
932723
As I said, if the body and focus bar are metal and not plastic ...and the mount is solid...you should be able to see the planets you listed fine without extra accesories. However, how the scope in general is designed is important. You want a metal or aluminum tube and focusing bar.....not plasctic. And the joints or bars attaching the focusing knobs should preferably be metal so they do not come loose. I would just spend the extra $40 or $50 and look at Orion telescopes because I did and they are simply better made. Same optics...same factory....but better quality parts where it counts the most. As I said, if the body and focus bar are metal and not plastic ...and the mount is solid...you should be able to see the planets you listed fine without extra accesories. However, how the scope in general is designed is important. You want a metal or aluminum tube and focusing bar.....not plasctic. And the joints or bars attaching the focusing knobs should preferably be metal so they do not come loose. I would just spend the extra $40 or $50 and look at Orion telescopes because I did and they are simply better made. Same optics...same factory....but better quality parts where it counts the... » Read More As I said, if the body and focus bar are metal and not plastic ...and the mount is solid...you should be able to see the planets you listed fine without extra accesories. However, how the scope in general is designed is important. You want a metal or aluminum tube and focusing bar.....not plasctic. And the joints or bars attaching the focusing knobs should preferably be metal so they do not come loose. I would just spend the extra $40 or $50 and look at Orion telescopes because I did and they are simply better made. Same optics...same factory....but better quality parts where it counts the most. « Show Less
1066004
I think either one would do fine, IF you have a good tripod mount. You need to get one specifically designed for binoculars and for stargazing, not terrestrial viewing. The weight of the binoculars will get tiring fast. :-( Personally, if I were a beginner stargazer I would get a telescope. Better magnification and, due to the size of the optics, more light.
2121603
Being the same size scope, the mount is driving the price and the 5se appears sturdier then the slt (I own the 5se that I got on Amazon). The 5se can also be set up as Equatorial using the built-in wedge (which is useful for astrophotography). If you don't need or want the wedge feature, bump up to the 6se if it fits within your budget. Also, Celestron lists the slt series as beginner telescopes and the se series as intermediate. I quick search on youtube will find several before-you-buy videos. Hope that helps.
1333285
Depends what kind of mount you want, and what you're using it for,, a C 90 is a fairly small scope so these mounts would be interchangeable, but I don't know if you can buy just the mount. Here is a great shop to buy all things telescope, it's where I get all my astronomy products. http://www.skiesunlimited.com/Mounts/German-Equatorial-Mounts/ The German EQ mounts are the best especially if you want to take deep sky photos. You could also get a Alt Azimuth mount, they don't track as perfect as the EQ mounts, but they work fine. You can spend a couple hundred or several thousand. http://www.skiesunlimited.com/Mounts/Altazimuth-Mounts/