Glad you enjoyed it!

ISRO

TriffidGrower - when we (myself and partner) were looking for our first telescope around 4 years ago we watched all of David's telescope basics videos as well as a lot of Astronomy and Nature's vids. They not only helped us to understand the basics (well me), but helped us to make a choice. We went for an 8 inch Celestron Schmidt Cassegrain with go-to and an alt azimuth mount and we love it. We had a gift of several hundred pounds towards the scope or we would've gone for a Dobsonian, as the Celestron 8SE is a bit pricey for a first scope IMO. I still return to these videos when I need a little refresher and always learn something new - I now understand AFOV and TFOV after today's re-watch. What we didn't take into enough consideration when buying was that too much magnification (without enough light gathering/aperture) can actually be a disadvantage when trying to find and view some deep sky objects - especially those that cover large areas but aren't bright: a focal reducer/field flattener can help with this and will be our next purchase. A good pair of binoculars and a tripod or p mount is a good alternative to a scope that many overlook - I actually prefer looking at the Pleides and Andromeda with my 20 X 80 binoculars - but then again - the Celestron gives views of the planets, or the trapezium in Orion, that are truly outstanding. Good luck with your first scope if you buy one - you won't regret it. Also check out Thunderfoot's vids on choosing a telescope.

@@honeychurchgipsy6 Thankyou. I'm still dithering of course. My first scope will probably be my last, as I'm now retired and have time to 'tinker' that i didn't have before. Truth be known, I'm very happy just looking up, but if I have a device I expect to learn much about the heavens, just in order to aim it. Any enhancement will be a huge thrill. Thanks for your advice.

@@triffidgrower - You sound like a true sky watcher who loves just sweeping the sky and trying to identify objects. I'm the same, and on a recent trip to Dartmoor (around 160 miles from home), where the skies are really dark, I had my best astronomy experiences with the naked eye. Standing out on the moor in the early hours of the morning - new moon - so really dark sky, when suddenly the sky cleared and everything jumped out at me. There was a three dimensional quality to the sky, and thousands of stars began to shine and twinkle, and the Milky Way was clearly visible: I felt quite overwhelmed. A good book or two on the sky might help you learn where things are - the late Sir Patrick Moore wrote a few, and also created the Moore Winter Marathon - a list of objects to find with the naked eye and binoculars (he lived at Selsey just up the road from me) Why not go for a good pair of binoculars as you still get the experience of sweeping the sky, that is lost with a powerful scope? You'll need a minimum of 10 X 50's to see the moons of Jupiter (and a steady hand or a tripod), and anything much larger than 10 X 50's will really requires a tripod or p mount. Good luck and sorry for the long post !!

Did you do well?

And no, dear readers, I did not pay Mr. Archer to say any of that, nor do I know him personally either. So thank you, kind sir, for the very kind and generous compliments. I need to get going on that collimation video here soon... (I did one "try" at it, but wasn't satisfied with how it looked, so I'll try again here soon, hopefully!)

pipe-organ thank you!

Eyes on the Sky good good stuff

Hi David, I live in a city, with a terrific open roof. I bought and returned a 6SE which i was unhappy with for lack of contrast, difficulty getting sharp focus, and it would merger stars that I know are binary. I have decided to go in the refractor direction. I would like to start off with planetary astrophotography and also go for deeper objects when I can travel. I have been looking a 4 inch APOs. How much difference do you see APOs made in the US vs over seas? How big a difference is there between an 80mm and a 105mm in terms of performance? Do you have any thoughts on this scope which I am “eyeing”. Thank you! www.stellarvue.com/stellarvue-svq100-3ft-astrograph/

Thank you Gary!

@@Eyesonthesky My pleasure, great intro series, i'll be sure to point beginners to it. I'm in the process of getting one of those P8079HP night vision tubes working with a scope, they amplify light by 100,000 times! I've tested it in the garden and it all works so the next step is to hook it up to the scope somehow. Obiously it makes faint stars very bright, although everything is green and has a bit of a shimmer to it, apparently that can be fixed with filters.

You're very welcome!

Michael Ryzner I beg your pardon?

Yay! Thanks so much! Just out of curiosity, where?

Eyes on the Sky I teach high school astronomy in Southern CA.

Great to know - thanks again!

Yes.

Most definitely the 150mm reflector.

+Mohamed Elhamy The central obstruction does not blur the view. It simply can reduce contrast, but this is only noticeable if the obstruction is 20% or greater than the diameter of the aperture, and really isn't much of an issue until it is 30% of the aperture. So really, any telescope can provide detailed views, but there are many other issues that can cause a telescope to be blurry - thermals in the telescope, thermals in front of the telescope, unsteady atmosphere, body heat radiating into the line of sight, etc.

Eyes on the Sky thank you a lot for your help i thought the telescope i ordered (orion sky quest xt8) would have a blurred view as it has a central obstruction because its a reflector but that would only affect the contrast if in high precentage as you said. appreciate it :)

If you want to get the Powerseeker, I would highly recommend to upgrade the eyepieces and not to use the 3x Barlow or get another higher quality Barlow. The eyepieces that come with the powerseeker ain't that good and I would recommend to upgrade them to a plossl or any other eyepiece. I have the powerseeker and I upgraded the eyepieces to plossls and they really did enhance to power of it.

The mount for that telescope is very small which will make it hard to track smoothly. Also the tripod looks very lightweight that will cause vibrations and wobble. A small tabletop style Dobsonian like this might be better for you: www.telescope.com/FunScope-76mm-TableTop-Reflector-Telescope/p/103112.uts

+Vedant Pratap Singh Jadon Yes, you will need a T-ring and a T-adapter. Try calling companies like Celestron or Orion and ask what they would recommend. Generally, a refractor is better for viewing moons/planets, and reflectors are best for galaxies and nebulaes. Reflectors are also better for photography I believe.

Check out videos on digiscoping, you won't regret it, use the SLR for terrestrial photos.

Most likely, I haven't used it so I can't be sure,but Celestron doesn't make shitty products

DeathNote 7 everything in these Telescopes Basics videos is going to give you a good base of knowledge for such a scope.

Orion Telescopes Funscope and add a 3x barlow.

@@Eyesonthesky Thank you Sir

I'd say the Orion XT4.5 is a solid choice. Easy to use, not too hard to collimate and is forgiving if slightly off, plus has decent wide field views and long enough focal length for good magnification up to 225x.

Eyes on the Sky I’m really trying to shoot for a nebula of some sort, good pictures of the moons craters, and stars. Is that out of its range?

You can see almost everything I highlight in my videos with a telescope that size. Search through them to get an idea of what you can see. Remember darker skies help, but almost everything should be visible in some way. Photos... hmmm. The Moon, and perhaps Jupiter and Saturn, using your cell phone. For stars and nebula, you really need to invest well north of $1,000 for a bare bones astrophotography set up.

Eyes on the Sky thank you once again. Man I love this channel

Pigeon Productions Maksutovs have a different type of corrector (front lens) and secondary mirror than a Schmidt Cassegrain. The difference lies in the optical design, and now they each bend/bounce the light so it focuses properly. Its easier for manufacturers to make smaller Maksutovs and larger Cassegrains.

+InterJon1 Easy to make in larger sizes, so the light grasp is still good in that no one makes 2" or 3" catadioptrics.. However, because of the light loss through the lenses and mirrors, a larger aperture may be needed to get the same light throughput as other telescope types. Aperture is more than just about total light, it is also related to resolution.

Please let me know if you have any questions. The series isn't intended to answer every possible question, just a lot of the most commonly-asked ones.

Hi Roger. I really have no idea what to suggest about the telescope you listed specs for - often the optical design of 1000mm reflectors is of the poor Bird-Jones design, and they can be put on wobbly mounts and inadequate tripods. But I don't know without seeing the scope (link?). In any case, what I would suggest is taking a look at the post I wrote in the r/telescopes sub-reddit of the website reddit.com - it will give you a good idea of the best options out there to consider in a variety of price ranges. You can find the post here: www.reddit.com/r/telescopes/comments/2f0goy/for_anyone_posting_what_telescope_should_i_get/

Here is a link so you can give it look. If think this one would be good enough to view some stars and such, please let me know. Thanks. I will use your link as well. I find all this very interesting.... www.amazon.com/Rokinon-114mm-Reflector-Telescope-Tripod/dp/B002ILOI0C

Roger Sayers Hi, unfortunately, that is a "Bird Jones" design. It uses an inexpensively produced, very-fast mirror and a cheap lens to "extend" the focal length. It is also undermounted, and the tripod is VERY thin and wobbly. These look like good ideas, but are often not made well, and done cheaply. I've looked through several designs like this, and I've never seen acceptable views through them (and I am far from the most discriminating observer). I think you would be disappointed with this type of telescope. If you do want a short telescope on an equatorial mount, I'd suggest a Celestron Astromaster 130EQ instead. I know it's more expensive than the Rokinon, but there's a reason for that (it's better). If your budget won't allow, look at the other options I posted on reddit. Hope that help!

Hello again, and thank you so very much for helping me here. I did look at the Celestron Astromaster 130EQ, and I like that one, so that one is the one I'm thinking I will purchase. If you don't mind, I would like to ask another question. I have seen that some people can take photo's through their scope. Is there some kind of mount that one has to have to mount the cam to the eye piece, or is the cam just held to the eye piece on the scope ? I did read all the features about the scope that you suggested above, but I didnt see anything regarding taking photos through it. So, have you any thought about this ?

Roger Sayers Hi Roger; good call on the scope. As for astrophotography, I got that question a lot, so I wrote a blog post about it. Check it out here: eyesonthesky.com/Blog/tabid/80/EntryId/52/Amateur-astronomer-beginners-and-astrophotography.aspx

Reversed left to right and inverted up and down.

No.

Until 200 what do u advise?

@@Diogom1917 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/m8CkaciW1bCykZc.html

A Schmidt or Maksutov Cassegrain would be a good option. Need lots of aperture to get planets well though, because a Barlow lens is typically necessary to get the needed amplification of the image on the camera sensor.

Doesn't have to be all that costly! A really nice 6" f/8 Dobsonian telescope that will show you a LOT of the universe is under $300, and add two decent eyepieces for $60 to $80 each and you're still under $500 for a telescope that can last you for decades. It gets pricey when you want to start taking photos.... LOL.

OH NO!! anyways

@@seanberard1464 geez

There are so many variables and options in that price range, it is really hard to say.

I was tinking of 2 telescopes dobstan and a eq and for eyepieces mabey a kit but there so many types of telescopes and so many brands to choose from what do you recamend

Almost any 8" Dobsonian telescope from any manufacturer is likely going to be a decent telescope. I personally like Explore Scientific's eyepieces right now.

ok thanks