Telescopes: Reflector or Refractor?

Question

I am looking to buy my first scope, and ive come to a fork in the road... reflector vs. refractor!?

now, ive already checked out other yahoo answers questions and seen many recommendations for "beginners" to buy binoculars, etc. thats not what im interested in. ive saved $1500 and i am looking specifically for a scope that will give me some impressive views of the universe that i have never seen outside a astronomy magazine!

so, heres what im hoping for: a scope with autotracking features, and the ability to view deep space objects. id like to be able to see the planets in our solar system, comets/large asteroids, galaxies. i would also like to have a scope that can be connected to a camera for astrophotography (when im ready). i very rarely have this much money to buy a scope, so this is a "one shot" deal.... i need a scope that i can use for YEARS to come!!

any suggestions? whats the difference between reflector & refractor and what minimum size should i be looking for?

Answer 1

For the amount of money you intend to spend, and for your desire to do astrophotography, you will need to spend some more time checking out some of the suggestions that other have made.

You probably have ruled out dobsonian mounted scopes since they are not designed to track with the accuracy needed to do the photography work you want to try.

There are really two choices of scope: Schmidt-Cassegrain, or pure Newtonian. The Newtonians are simpler so you get more mirror for your money. They are bulkier, which means the mounts are correspondingly heavier, and take more time to transport and set up. They require collimination of the optics on occasion. Schmidt-Cassegrains are more compact, the optics are sealed, but the primary corrector lens may dew. There are more options for mounts for them, too.

Dew can be a problem with both scopes. So check out "dew eliminators (heaters on the sc's and fan(s) on the newts).

For astrophotography, check out scopes with a 2" focuser. They offer you a greater number of options for cameras and the like.

I have included 2 links to get you started with options. I have no vested interest in any 'scope company. I use a dobsonian, myself.

Please, be aware, that no scope, even the Hubble, will provide you with the jaw dropping views at the eye piece that are obtained with the best photography. The eye does not work like CCD's or film. So, do not be disappointed with what you see. So, if you really, really are interested in photog work, get the very best mount your money can by. A great scope on a shaky mount with really, really disappoint you photography-wise!

HTH

Charles

Answer 2

The main difference is that a reflector telescope flips or inverts the image you are viewing... it's upside down. So they won't work very well for terrestrial viewing. The refractors do not invert what you are seeing, so they can also be used for viewing earth based objects without having to stand on your head.

If your going to spend that kind of money though get a good schmidt cassegrain telescope. Check out some of the major manufacturers websites first and talk to some astronomers and see which ones they prefer and why... I'm sure there are some good online forumns that have a wealth of knowledge out there. I wish I could help you more but I haven't started looking at the schmidt cassegrain's in detail yet since I don't have the money right now but I know there are some great scopes in that price range. When we upgrade from the $400 meade reflector we have now that is what we are going to get.

There's a guy on here named Astro and I really appreciate reading his answers on the Astronomy subject... I would take his advice if he gives it... he really knows what he's talking about.

Here's a link to his blog... you could just ask him.

http://www.asktheastronomer.blogspot.com/

Good luck and happy star gazing!!

Answer 3

For $1500 you should get a reflector as you can get a bigger mirror that reflectors use than you can a lens of a refractor. Refractors are much more expensive per inch of aperture. This will enable you to see more planetary details as well as fainter deep space objects.

You should look for at least an 8 inch computerized reflector. You can get one at Orion Telescopes for around $1000 and have money left over to get some objective lenses to go with it (the smaller lenses you actually look through to magnify the image from the mirror) and still have money left over for camera connectors. Have fun!

Answer 4

Step 1. Go to the local bookstore and pick up an issue of an astronomy magazine, such as Sky and Telescope...there are others.

Step 2. Check out the ads from companies such as Meade, Celestron, etc.

For $1500 you will be able to get a scope with "auto-tracking" (generally a misnomer) suitable for astrophotography.

The most important two features are diameter of primary mirror, and a stable mount. For $1500, probably around 8" (200mm) diameter, maybe 10". Good heavy fork mount or equatorial, don't buy altazimuth or Dobsonian for astrophotography, won't work.

Answer 5

Quality is most important. There are a lot of crap scopes out there of all types. A small quality telescope will outperform a larger (supposedly "more powerful") but poorly made telescope. All things being EQUAL, a reflector will give you the most "bang for the buck" as they are easier to manufacture and hence cost less. A Dobsonian mounted Newtonian reflecting telescope being the ultimate in this regard.

Answer 6

I just bought my first telescope after doing research on them for a couple months. You do not want a refractor. They are really only good for looking at the moon and nearby planets. A reflector is better, but with the amount of money you have you should really consider a Schmidt-Cassegrain.

Here are some I was looking at. The one I purchased is the first one. I got it used, so it was about 1/2 price of a new one!

http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=119853&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=4&iSubCat=10&iProductID=119853

I wanted this one, but it would have been twice what I spent.....
http://www.telescope.com/shopping/product/detailmain.jsp?itemID=133356&itemType=PRODUCT&iMainCat=4&iSubCat=10&iProductID=133356

Those are the two I narrowed it down to. Celestron has a great reputation, and seem a little more affordable than Meade, or Orion.......At least in my opinion. Good luck, and don't rush your purchase!



OK since you gave me a thumbs down I think you should buy a 4 inch refractor.

Answer 7

for viewing deep sky objects like you describe i would get a big (8-20") computerized reflector from celestron or meade. you can attach cameras to them, and even without a camera you will be able to see excellent views of almost anything up in the sky. plus for the same amount of money you would end up getting a smaller refractor. so go with a reflector.

Answer 8

From photography and DSLR camera basics right through to advanced techniques used by the professionals, this course will quickly and easily get your photography skills focused! Go here https://tr.im/CPeYc
By the end of this course you will have developed an instinctive skill-for-life that will enable you to capture truly stunning photos that not only amaze your friends and family... but could also open the doors to a brand new career.

Answer 9

I think you should get a reflector.