If you're looking across the street it doesn't much matter, otherwise Canon
2006-11-11 16:23:39
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
First: you get what you pay for. Do NOT be fooled by companies advertising 2" telescopes that magnivy 500 times. They can be made to do so, but the limit to what is called useful magnification is 50 X the diameter of the mirror or objective lens. Any more than that is just magnifying defects in the telescope and atmospheric distortion.
Second, the important thing in a telescope is the diameter of the mirror or objective lens (the objective lens is the one opposite the occular lens...that is, where light first enters the telescope. The bigger the objective lens the more light is gathered, and the better the resolution of the telescope. The more light the fainter an object can be and you can still see it. Resolution is the smallest distance between two objects (in the sky, usually measured in seconds of arc (a second of arc is 1/3600 of a degree)) that you can separate.
Size for size reflecting telescopes of any type are least expensive. However, reflecting telescopes of today all have a central obstruction (a secondary mirror) inside the body of the telescope to reflect the light from the main mirror to the eyepiece. This secondary mirror obstructs some of the light and also causes a bit of distortion of the incoming light, so the image you see (while fantastic) is a bit less contrasty and a bit less sharp than with a similar sized refracting telescope, which has no such obstruction.
If money is not a problem and it is your first telescope I would, therefore, opt for a small refracting type (4" or bigger). If money is a problem then a small (8" is common) schmidt-cassegrain or newtonian telescope is the answer. Whichever you choose make certain it comes with an equatorial mount, not an altazimuth mount. The equatorial mount allows for ease of locating objects in the sky that you cannot see with the naked eye, and if it has a clock drive the telescope can be made to counteract the rotation of the earth and follow the object in the sky. The mount type of the telescope will be specified in the literature or website. Both Meade and Celestron put out excellent reflectors and refractors, as do Orion and several others. Just don't buy a dimestore cheap brand..you will be disappointed.
2006-11-11 23:54:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by David A 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no best telescope because different types of telescopes are better for different things. Some telescopes are better for viewing star clusters and planets, while others are better for viewing galaxies.
Generally though, the more aperture a telescope has, the more you can see. Aperture means the diameter of the telescopes main objective. In reflector type telescopes, this is the primary mirror. In refractor type telescopes, this is the lens.
The quality of telescope you buy also depends on the cost. A serious quality telescope starts at around $400.
Celestron, Meade, and Orion are all good brands. If you plan tio buy a telescope, do some research first as a lot of people are duped into buying cheapo Bushnells and Tascos. Most telescopes you find at Wal-Mart and the likes are not quality telescopes and are generally a waste of money.
2006-11-12 18:29:26
·
answer #3
·
answered by minuteblue 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Depends on what feature is more important to you. If you want portability but still a large telescope, you should try a truss design. Meade just came out with one recently.
If you want one that can track objects and do astrophotography, then I would go with schmidt cassegrain...like Meade or Celestron & other brands have.
There are also dobsonians, which are good for quickly changing the direction you're aiming the telescope. Some, like the Orion brand, come with go-to devices.
Takahashi has some very powerful telescopes, even the smaller ones.
Good luck with your telescope shopping!
2006-11-11 16:49:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by cassicad75 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
If money is not a problem, any that are orbiting outside most of the atmosphere, such as the Hubble are the best.
If your talking land based, within reach of most people, a Schmidt-Cassegrain telescope like Meade or Celestron work well for ordinary viewing they start at about $1000 for small ones (not sure here though). For beginners a small refractor or reflector for a few hundred is good, but make sure the eyepeices are comfortable to look through.
2006-11-11 18:21:23
·
answer #5
·
answered by Labsci 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
If you have 2 billion $ you could buy a Hubble
2006-11-11 23:12:54
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
canon
2006-11-11 16:22:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by iftikhar a 3
·
0⤊
1⤋