- A plain-old 6" or 8"-aperture Dobsonian: inexpensive at $300-$400 CDN, very easy to set up and use, but bulky (we don't have a lot of storage space), can't track the sky, and the focusser is a basic rack-and-pinion.
- An 80mm refractor with high-quality ED glass on an EQ-3 computerized (i.e. Go-To) German equatorial mount, with a Crayford-style focusser, somewhat similar to this one: more expensive at $1099 CDN (though this would have been almost twice the cost 2 years ago), less light-gathering power but much sharper optics, comes with a metal case.
- This one looks very nice too, comparable to the previous but a bit higher-end for about the same cost. This is just the optical tube though, not a package deal, so I'd have to sort out my own mount (and mounting rings) and shipping, and that would bump up the cost by a couple of hundred.
At the moment I'm tending towards the second (could you tell?)
2 comments:
Is portability important?
I live in an area that has a lot of light pollution. When I want to get some decent viewing in I usually need to drive about 20 minutes north so portability is important for me.
I had a Celestron NexStar 5. At only 5" this thing was still a lot to handle even with the metal case ;)
http://www.celestron.com/c2/product.php?CatID=13&ProdID=414
What I loved about the NexStar was the ability to control it with my PocketPC. The software I used had a real-time star map and with just a touch of the stylus I could have the NexStar locked on an object in seconds.
I ended up trading this in for the highly portable and timeless classic, the Astroscan. It's also very inexpensive.
http://scientificsonline.com/product.asp_Q_pn_E_3002001
Yes, portability is a big factor. I also don't want it to be too bulky in the car. While we're beyond the crib and stroller stage, we still usually cart around a ton of junk.
Thanks for the info on the NexStar 5 and the pointer to the Astroscan. Interesting that it has a parabolic mirror. Is it quite sharp as a result?
Post a Comment