The emails will start soon, I’m sure.
"Dear Phil– I am new to astronomy, and my son/daughter/cousin/niece is interested. I want to buy them a telescope. Which one should I get?"
First off, let me say that I get so many of these emails that I created a web page with telescope-buying advice. It’s almost ten years old now (yeesh, when did this site get so ancient?) so it needs updating, but the general advice there (and the links) should still be true.
Basically, buying a telescope is like buying a car. What you should get depends on what you need. If you only need a car to drive to the store for groceries, don’t get a Hummer. If you live in the mountains and it snows ten meters a year, don’t get a VW Bug.
‘Scopes are the same. If you want to do general observing, looking at big things like the Moon, open clusters of stars, and bright nebulae, then a small telescope will be fine. If you want to see planets in details, or take deep astrophotographs, or go galaxy hunting, your needs will change.
My usual advice is threefold:
1) Buy a pair of good binoculars first. They are extremely useful, show you wonderful things, and can test your appetite for observing. They are an excellent tool for getting used to the sky, and can be used during the day for bird spotting and other things, too. If the interest keeps up, then move on to a telescope.
2) I cannot stress this enough: find a local astronomy club and go to the meetings! At least attend star parties when they throw them. The best way to shop for a telescope is to let others show you theirs. At a good star party there might be two dozen or more telescopes of all different flavors, and you can see how easy or hard they are to set up, to use, and what they can show you. Amateur astronomers are only too happy as a whole to talk about equipment. This is absolutely the best way to gauge your level of potential involvement in astronomy.
3) And if you decide to take that fateful step and buy a telescope, avoid department store ‘scopes AT ALL COSTS. The overwhelming majority of these ‘scopes are cheap garbage with poor optics, bad eyepieces, and wobbly mounts. Instead of instilling a deep love for astronomy, these lemons will instead make it a frustrating and aggravating experience. You may be tempted by the beautiful pictures on the box and the claims of 200X magnification, but what you’re buying is a sure-fire way to grind someone’s enthusiasm into the ground.
Having said that, there are good entry-level ‘scopes out there. I won’t go into details, because I don’t need to; Astronomy Buff already has several good blog entries about it: Good Telescopes for Christmas, How To Buy a Telescope for Christmas, and Characteristics of a Good Beginner’s Telescope.
If you want to buy a ‘scope for someone this holiday, remember that you may be leading someone down the path of a lifelong pursuit. That first step is a doozy, so treat it with respect!
November 29th, 2007 at 1:54 pm
Last year I bought an Eye Toy(TM) for my niece as a Christmas present. I could have kicked my self when I saw that her grandparents had bought her a microscope, I’m the science buff in the family and I got a microscope when I was her age, I should have come up with that idea.
Well at least she and the rest of the family liked the Eye Toy better, so I could play around with the microscope all night without any interference (have you ever seen a pine needle up close?).
This year I might get her a telescope (and a new game for her Eye Toy).
November 29th, 2007 at 2:23 pm
I’m curious what your opinion is of the “name brand” telescopes that are sold through stores like BJ’s and Wal-Mart? I’ve seen what look like decent ‘scopes from Celestron and Meade for good prices. (Perhaps “too good”, which is why I’m hesitant. Newtonian, equatorial mount, computerized motor control, from Celestron for something like $229. When I bought my last ‘scope some 15-20 years ago, it was a non-motorized discontinued model discounted from something like $3,000 to $400.)
Do the “name brand” companies also make cheap models for such markets?
November 29th, 2007 at 2:41 pm
Episode number seven of Astronomy Cast is about getting a telescope.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:56 pm
A number of years ago I got a friend an 8″ Dobsonian reflector as his first scope (I think it’s still his only scope). It turned out to be a good choice — he just quit his job so he can move to Boston and work for the AASVO.
I wonder if he can use the Dobby in Boston.
November 29th, 2007 at 2:56 pm
Like Minds Phil.
Every year our astronomy club puts up their page (with a link on the main page) about purchasing telescopes. And we make sure the local planetarium and television meteorologists know about it, so they can direct people who are interested in getting a scope.
The page usually goes up just after Thanksgiving and stays up through the middle of January (for those late shoppers).
November 29th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
Thanks for the post Phil… this helps tons. Kevin… what’s the link to your astronomy club? The more knowledge I can get about a beginner scope the better.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
Buying binoculars first, and avoiding department-store scopes, are great pieces of advice. Visiting a local astronomy club is tremendously bad advice. Nothing, and I do mean nothing, is as off-putting as being cornered by an astronomy geek in full cry. I’ve gone to lots of meetings and star parties over the years, and every time I do I swear I’ll never do it again.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
Never mind Kevin… I found it through the link in your name. Cheers!
November 29th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
Sage advice. I bought a nice pair of binoculars first and wound up sticking with them instead of buying a telescope. I honestly thought I was going to buy a telescope when I started out.
However, I went to a few local astronomy clubs and tried out some of their telescopes; some were really nice ones. I realized that even in the bigger telescopes, all those stars still look just like a whole lot of dots. Nebulae and other interstellar and galactic structures were often gray fuzzies, which is fine, but it is a far cry from the colorful astrophotographs in magazines and on the ‘Net. I sort of had the expectation of seeing spectacular colors and large, up-close views of planets when I first started out (although the Moon is easier to get a satisfactory magnification of).
It seemed that nothing I could buy would approach my expectations anyway, so I figured I would continue to marvel at the universe through the optics of professional observatories and good astrophotography in magazines and online.
I still like my binoculars. They’re easy to use and transport and they still allow me to see things I find fascinating. Maybe one day I’ll get even bigger ones.
November 29th, 2007 at 3:47 pm
Suppose I just want to spy on my neighbors. What’s a good telescope for that?
November 29th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Ken B.
The quality of the “Brand Name” scopes in department stores are reflected in their cost. In other words, you still get what you pay for, and they are fine for looking a the moon, and anything closer… but for anything further out, you’ll want to spend the money on a good scope.
jbs
November 29th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
I like a simple Dobsonian…Orion makes several sweeties…inexpensive…and great scopes…my choice was the 8″ but they make a sweet 10″ and a very light and handy 6″ Dobsonian…
Ya just point it and look…even a kid can do it…Orion makes a 4″ kid’s scope that kids really love and they all work just great. VERY simple to use…and my 8″ can spy on my neighbors real good…I can see the pimples on their noses…LOL
Just point the thing where ya wanna look…does good!
November 29th, 2007 at 5:09 pm
[...] Original post by The Bad Astronomer [...]
November 29th, 2007 at 6:03 pm
The best telescope you can buy is the one you will actually use.
If it’s too big for you to comfortably carry, it will stay in your closet. Not a good scope for you.
If it’s too complicated to set up quickly or operate easily, it will be not worth the effort most nights. Not a good scope for you.
If it’s too small or too cheap to show you what you want to see, you’ll get bored. Not a good scope for you.
November 29th, 2007 at 7:05 pm
I got a cheap 4″ refractor on an equatorial mount for Xmas in 1990 (I was 15). I still have it, even though my interests have far outgrown it. I’m a member of my local club, and their scopes are free for my use, so I’m not going to get another for a while. I’m getting a small toy scope for my 4 year old son, just because he likes looking at the stars with me. I fully intend to buy him and his brother a proper one eventually!
November 29th, 2007 at 8:46 pm
I have 80mm and 100mm binoculars, and they both get used a lot more than my 8″ telescope. Just last week I was showing a friend the Pleiades (sp?) through the 100mm… it’s very much an “ooh aah” sight.
I totally agree with Phil’s first point. Buy binoculars first. Then if you get into it more, buy a telescope – you’ll have a better idea by then what you really want/need.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:12 pm
I agree with BA 100%
I’m sorry for Pedant’s experience. PsyberDave’s experience is far more common. I’ve never met such a club as Pedant found. But every barrel seems to have its bad apple. Unfortunately he found it. Most clubs have many beginers. They are the life blood of a club and it will die a slow death without them. Most host special meetings for the beginner showing them how to get the most out of their new telescope and the hobby. Our star parties are more for the beginner than ourselves. Many have loaner telescopes for beginners that are of quite good quality that allow the beginner to sample several types and sizes of scopes to help them find what their interests are. Just because Pedant found a bad apple doesn’t mean that’s the normal experience. There’ll soon be no clubs if it is.
Yes sometimes it is easy to get carried away and go over a beginner’s head. Just tell them to slow down and explain what they are saying. Most will be very willing to go back and explain slowly.
Our club has a very active beginners section and with other clubs we host the Nebraska Star Party each summer which is set up especially for the beginner and their entire family, even if they aren’t stargazers. While you’ll find a complete range in amateur interests and abilities the main idea is to introduce these fields to those unfamiliar with them be they a very beginner or someone who hasn’t before ventured into that phase of amateur astronomy.
To Ken B’s question; unfortunately the answer is yes in some cases. I’ve seen some very poor name brand scopes in department stores and never, as yet, any worth buying by a beginner of any age. And in my experience the bad ones go to the “department stores” and sometimes camera stores as well. If the box or ad pushes power and/or shoves great photos of planets, galaxies nebula and star clusters in your face, my advice is run. I’ve never seen a scope sold this way that was worth buying no matter what brand it was.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Just because it carries a well-known brand name such as Meade or Celestron doesn’t mean its any good. Just about all the major telescope companies make a junk scopes for BJs, Wal-marts, Target and the like. Meade used to call their junk scope line the “Saturn” series – not sure if its still called that. Celestron seems to be calling theirs “Poweseekers” now.
November 29th, 2007 at 9:48 pm
Just because it carries a well-known brand name such as Meade or Celestron doesn’t mean its any good. Just about all the major telescope companies make a junk scopes for BJs, Wal-marts, Target and the like. Meade used to call their junk scope line the “Saturn” series – not sure if its still called that. Celestron seems to be calling theirs “Poweseekers” now.
Basically if it sound too good to be true – it probably is!
November 29th, 2007 at 10:11 pm
I was helping my niece work on a school science project a few years ago. We were doing some simple planetary observation with a very inexpensive 60mm refractor and a modest 114mm go-to reflector. We were doing some comparisons of different scope types, looking at the same objects with the same eyepieces, etc.
It was very cold, and the sky was dark and clear after the sun and Venus had set. I was showing her how to find Mars, when she asked what this other bright “star” was.
I told her we could look it up in a chart, or we could use the scopes to see if it was something interesting. She wanted to see it thru the scopes first, so we pointed one of them way up, and there was a sudden surprised “HELLO!” Saturn, in all its ringed glory, was big and bright in the eyepiece. We looked at it the longer than anything else that night.
Neither of us can afford the big fancy scopes (yet), but sometimes you have to work with and make the best of what you have.
November 30th, 2007 at 5:20 am
Saturn is one of the coolest things you can see, and you need only very modest equipment to see it. Saturn is a great object in my binoculars… always a crowd pleaser.
Brocchi’s Cluster is something I find to be really cool as well.
November 30th, 2007 at 6:38 am
I am on Holiday in the West of Ireland at the moment, and I must say even though it is cloudy at lot of the time (I have only had one clear night so far), but it is sooo much darker hear than in London, and I only have a pair of binoculars but it is just totally amazing!
November 30th, 2007 at 6:56 am
Binoculars are great but also limited. I often think a good entry-level scope would be a relatively cheap spotting-scope – say 60mm, x15-x50, built-in erecting-diagonal and with a reasonably robust camera tripod. You get something easy to point, good for wide-rich-field stuff, but with the possibility for a bit more oomph (technical term) for the craters of Saturn and the Moon’s Rings. Er, did I get that right?
Plus you can use it for birdwatching.
Has anyone got any experience with such a scope?
November 30th, 2007 at 9:30 am
I’ll challenge any 60mm spotter scope against my 80mm and 100mm binos any day. The binos have to be on a tripod (I’m a big guy and I can operate them by hand, but I don’t like to and most people probably couldn’t).
No problem seeing the rings of Saturn, the phases of Venus, or the hotties on the beach with either binos.
Oh, and you can look at avians too.
I’ve used a spotting scope for, oddly enough, spotting back when I was on the rifle team at university. I agree that you could use one for simple astronomy and it would probably be pretty cool, but I can’t help but think it would be more limiting than binoculars.
November 30th, 2007 at 9:31 am
Aside: Comet Hyakutake (1996 IIRC) was discovered with binoculars.
November 30th, 2007 at 9:41 am
I think the spotting scope idea is great. I’ve been casually looking for an appropriate one for a while, and while there is a variety available in the $400+ range, there are few modestly priced ones. What I’d really be interested in is the 10x, 70-80mm range. Most of the cheaper ones are zooms, which I assume cannot have sharp optics for that price (I’ve only actually looked through a couple zoom spotting scopes, and one was good but very expensive, the other was atrocious). The fixed magnification ones usually have higher power than I would choose for the aperture. You can get a Celestron 15×70 pair of binoculars for
November 30th, 2007 at 9:48 am
[I don't know why my first post got cut off in the middle. Trying again...]
I think the spotting scope idea is great. I’ve been casually looking for an appropriate one for a while, and while there is a variety available in the $400+ range, there are few modestly priced ones. What I’d really be interested in is the 10x, 70-80mm range. Most of the cheaper ones are zooms, which I assume cannot have sharp optics for that price (I’ve only actually looked through a couple zoom spotting scopes, and one was good but very expensive, the other was atrocious). The fixed magnification ones usually have higher power than I would choose for the aperture. You can get a Celestron 15×70 pair of binoculars for
November 30th, 2007 at 9:50 am
[Sorry for the multiple posts, apparently the post system is interpreting a less-than sign and dollar sign as the end. One more time, without consecutive symbols...]
I think the spotting scope idea is great. I’ve been casually looking for an appropriate one for a while, and while there is a variety available in the $400+ range, there are few modestly priced ones. What I’d really be interested in is the 10x, 70-80mm range. Most of the cheaper ones are zooms, which I assume cannot have sharp optics for that price (I’ve only actually looked through a couple zoom spotting scopes, and one was good but very expensive, the other was atrocious). The fixed magnification ones usually have higher power than I would choose for the aperture. You can get a Celestron 15×70 pair of binoculars for under $100, but you can’t get an equivalent of half of that pair for twice the price. Supply and demand, I guess.
I know that using both eyes is an advantage for most people, and binoculars are more comfortable, but I have one bad eye, so half of a pair of binoculars is useless to me anyway. I would love to find a wide-angle, reasonably priced spotting scope or monocular.
November 30th, 2007 at 9:57 am
Of course, a 60mm scope vs. 80-100mm binoculars is not a fair contest. You should compare equal light-gathering power, say 80mm binocs against a 113mm (4.5″) scope, or 100mm binocs against a 141mm (5.5″) scope.
Now, how they compare in price, magnification, and optical quality is another question.
November 30th, 2007 at 10:41 am
Thanks for the reminder! I just put a little thing on our club website -and a plug for your scope article – even if it is a little old.
Click on my name to read it.
Tom
President – Eastside Astronomical Society
November 30th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
[...] Phil has suggestions for holiday telescope shopping, I have to offer some suggestions for microscope shopping. If you really want to get a kid [...]
November 30th, 2007 at 5:41 pm
I’d like to add a little. All too often, the purchaser of the instrument won’t be the kind of person who will read telescope selection advice on a blog, or else they already would have had access to any number of excellent articles at on-line sales enterprises. They will see something nice in a store, and presto! it’s gift-wrapped.
Similar things happen with every hobby that requires a degree of expertise: photography, chess, etc., so It’s good to know how to maximize the performance of something it’s impossible to return, whether for economic or sentimental reasons.
Most ‘department-store’ telescopes are limited more by their eyepiece optics than their objectives. Normally, these instruments come with a small assortment of eyepieces and accessories based on simple lenses, which results in narrow fields of view and image distortions. For a modest investment, low-end achromatic eyepieces can be bought from reputable on-line companies which will greatly improve the image.
Often, the department-store scope also has an eyepiece holder which only takes 0.965″ O.D. (outside diameter) eyepieces. It’s possible to get a ‘hybrid’ star diagonal which fits into 0.965″, but also accepts the more common 1.25″ O.D. eyepieces. Other 0.965″-1.25″ adapters are available for reflectors, too.
Next, much beginner frustration stems from believing exaggerated advertising claims, but this can be easily cured by better information. All 60mm objectives begin to show degraded image quality at 120X, a 3″ at 150X, a 4″ at 180X, all well below the commonly-advertised 500X+. Really, a beginner only needs 30X-40X for the vast majority of nebular objects, and 100X-120X for planetary detail. Even the largest instruments available to amateurs experience trouble at around 300X, because of the Earth’s atmosphere (which is why they put the big guns on the tops of mountains!).
The finder is another frustration; these are commonly extremely cheap low power refractors mounted in difficult-to-adjust housings. Fortunately, it’s possible to ‘upgrade’ to inexpensive red-dot sighting tubes which give better performance.
Finally, the infamously wobbly mounts can often be improved by simply tightening the screws, but suspending a 5-10lb. weight from the tripod head also helps.
Now, assuming that the original scope cost around $100, a ‘full’ upgrade might more than double the total investment (prices approximate):
inexpensive 1″ achromatic eyepiece: $35
inexpensive 1/2″ achromatic eyepiece: $35
0.965″-1.25″ hybrid star diagonal: $35
inexpensive red-dot finder: $35
weight & string: scrounge it
Many might not want to invest at this level to rescue a poor telescope, but the benefits would be immediately apparent. Certainly it would be better than putting up with all the frustration.
Finally, a caveat: if the scope includes an eyepiece-plane solar filter, put it on a sturdy table, take a hammer, and smash it. It is dangerous to use, since the objective-intensified heat of the Sun can crack it while in use, a fact made even more dangerous by the unpredictability and suddenness of the malfunction. We’re talking about blindness here.
Even the more-common solar projection screen causes enough heat to build up rapidly in the optical system to melt cemented lenses, so it isn’t recommended with most modern eyepieces and achromatic objectives.
December 1st, 2007 at 5:47 pm
What a crying shame! Not a word about building it, yourself.
The money spent on purchasing today’s “made-in-China” (or other prison-labor or sweatshop countries) ‘scopes would be much better spent acquiring the parts to actually assemble/produce one of your own. All it takes is a bit of time and patience – with a result usually far better than you’d expect, or the market can provide.
And, it isn’t all that difficult – as can be attested to by any winner of the children’s division of the Stellafane Annual Telescope-making Awards.
December 2nd, 2007 at 10:18 pm
John Dobson (of Dobsonian mount fame) teaches classes on building your own telescope in Dec in San Francisco then on to LA for a few months of classes). This is a great way to build a good scope at a low price, built with your elbow grease. Click on the link for more details. Don’t waste your money buying a commercial product.
John travels all over the country (and world). If you get a chance, try to hear him speak or attend his telescope making class. He’s known as the barker of the stars for a reason. He was featured in the PBS documentary “The Astronomers,” and selected by Smithsonian Magazine as one of the 35 people who have made a difference http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/dobson.html.
December 4th, 2007 at 5:20 pm
A few thoughts:
1) First, understand where they live and what the observing is like there. I live east of Seattle, where there is lots of light pollution, lots of clouds during the winter and long days during the summer. All of these impact how much you can use the scope
2) Understand your expectations about what you’re going to see, because if the gift is to somebody who is used to images from Voyager, Hubble, or Cassini, they are likely going to be disappointed. Yes, you can see a lot more than with the naked eye, but Saturn looks anywhere from something vaguely ovalish to a recognizable outline without a lot of detail.
+1 on joining a club and trying out some scopes so you understand cost/performance.
December 6th, 2007 at 5:36 am
[....][…]I looked for the orginal interactive Whiteboardssolution, cu-seeme which is around somewhat,http://www.electronicwhiteboardswarehouse.com/ for a free ware solution or you could step all the way up including
3G mobile videoconferencing.
http://www.electronicwhiteboardswarehouse.com/
[…]
December 6th, 2007 at 4:28 pm
Thanks for the great advice. Keep it up