I am new to Astronomy, what scope is best?

[WWPierre]

Originally Posted by yiangoss
"hello everyone

My name is jackob and I am new to astronomy, I have no experience with telescopes, and I am think of buying my first telescope. Could you give me some advice as to what brands are good and a good shop to go to, please?

Thank you"

Hi, Jackob,

Welcome to Astronomy Forum.

What kind of telescope should you get? That is a very difficult question for anyone to answer. Telescopes come in all kinds of sizes, designs, and prices. A telescope is very personal …. what is perfect for one person is often very bad for another. In reality, only one person, you , can answer the question “What kind of telescope should I buy?” In order to answer that question, you will need to do some studying.

The very first thing you should be doing is learning as much about telescopes and viewing as you possibly can. How can you do this?

1. Local astronomy club. If a club is nearby, contact them. There you will be able to personally see and view through a large variety of telescopes. The members are knowledgeable about your local conditions. They will give you a lot of good advice.
2. Your local library. Go and check out books and read, read, read. Also, look at the back issues of Astronomy and Sky and Telescope Magazines. You asked what brands were good telescopes. The brands you see advertised in either Sky and Telescope Magazine or in Astronomy Magazine are good ones to consider.
3. Astronomy Forums. Each forum generally has a “Beginner Forum” like this one. Read the stickies as well as the postings.
4. Get a pair of binoculars 8x50s or nice but smaller ones will work and look at the night skies. Try to identify some of the brighter stars and planets. Search the skies and try to find some of the brighter Messier objects.

Next you should take a serious look at your personal situation
1. How much money do you want to spend?
2. Where are you going to use your telescope?
3. Do you have to carry it up and down stairs?
4. Do you have to transport it across town?
5. Do you have to worry about someone stealing or damaging it?
6. How much weight can you personally pick up and move comfortably?
7. Is your observation location in dark skies or are you in the middle of a city?
8. Are you doing this on your own or do you have who knows astronomy to help?

Telescopes come in three basic types. A refractor, Newtonian, and catadioptric telescopes often called CATs. Catadioptirc telescopes have two basic variations, the Schmidt Cassegrain telescopes (SCT) and the Maksutov Cassegrain (MAK). The Newtonian and both types of CATs (SCT and MAK) use a mirror to gather light and are also known as reflectors; the refractor uses a lens.

Which one is best? All of them. Each has its strengths and weaknesses and place under the stars. This question can stir up emotions and you will find some people can become very vocal about one type being better than another …. take their responses with caution as they may not be very objective. Me, I prefer CATs, but that’s just my personal preference. If you have any questions about telescopes and their capabilities, go and do your home work ….. see the paragraph about astronomy clubs, reading books, etc.

Telescopes come basically with either an equatorial or azimuth mount. Which mount is best? It just depends upon you and what you want to do with your telescope.

The equatorial mount, the most common version being the German Equatorial Mount (GEM), when set up properly and motorized can easily track a star or deep space object across the sky making it ideal for taking photographs. It, however, is not intuitive to use and can be intimidating to beginners.

An azimuth mount swivels up and down and around. It is very intuitive to use and easy to move around the sky. However, it is not that suited for astrophotography and automatic tracking of objects. An azimuth mount is generally much lighter and cheaper than an equatorial mount. Most inexpensive GOTO mounts are azimuth mounts. Today, two types of azimuth mounts are generally available, one known as a DOB (named after the inventor) which is generally a low cost mount that is easy to use or the other, a fork mount that often comes with a computerized star finding system.

Only you know which type of mount best meets your needs and physical abilities to move around and setup. Here again a visit to your local astronomy club is a way to see the different kinds of mounts and decide for your self which one you prefer.

How do you find objects in space? Until the latter part of the previous century, the only way to find objects was using precise setting circles or a method known as star hoping. Star hopping; you look at star charts and use the stars to work your way across the sky to the particular object you want to see. This takes homework before you go out at night. Like most things in life, it has a learning curve and is sometimes very difficult for beginners to do. Today, another method exists, computer controlled telescope mounts known as GOTO or PUSHTO mounts.

A GOTO mount is motorized and has a small hand held computer that has, dependent upon make and model, from a thousand to well over a hundred thousand stars, nebula, clusters, and other deep space objects programmed in its data base. The operator tells the computer what he wants to see and the computer points the telescope directly at the object. Another version, called a PUSHTO, is not motorized and the user must move the telescope under the guidance of the computer. GOTO telescopes are available on GEM and Azimuth mounts. PUSHTOs are generally found on DOB mounts but recently GOTO has also been added to some DOBs.

Which method, GOTO/PUSHTO or none GOTO/PUSHTO, is best? That is a personal question. Again I think the answer is both. Some people use nothing but GOTO mounts while others find the hunt very rewarding and find stars, nebula, clusters, etc. on their own and have no desire to own a GOTO mount. Most advanced amateurs use only GOTO telescopes. However, they have the skills to find objects on their own should the need arise.

For a beginner, GOTO telescopes are like having an experienced astronomer at your side ….. a very good thing to have. Another advantage is that a GOTO telescope is often the only way to find objects in cities with light polluted skies where star hoping is difficult or impossible because you can’t see enough stars. These attributes of a GOTO telescope eliminates the initial frustration that many newcomers never overcome as they place their telescopes in a closet and take up other hobbies. Again, participation with your local astronomy club and taking the time to learn the night skies with a pair of binoculars before buying a telescope are also good ways not to succumb to beginner frustration.

There is a dark side to GOTO telescopes, especially the lower costs ones. From time to time, they can be troublesome. A GOTO mount that is not working generally renders the entire telescope unusable …. not a good thing at all. It is impossible to use most GOTO telescopes even with something as simple as dead batteries. Also, exclusive use of a GOTO mount means that you are a slave to its technology and can not enjoy the night skies without it. The other aspect of the dark side of a GOTO telescope is that part of the purchase price is for electronics not the telescope; thus, for any given amount of money the optics of a non GOTO telescope are generally superior to that of a GOTO telescope.

I personally like GOTO mounts and would not be without one. However, I realize that I need to be able to find objects without it and do spend time honing my star hoping skills. Others have an opposite view and think you should learn how to find objects on your own without the assist of a GOTO telescope. Neither philosophy is wrong and neither is right. Here again, only you can answer the question of to have or not have a GOTO telescope.

How big a telescope should you buy? A telescope’s performance is not based upon how powerful it can magnify something but on how much light it can gather. The light gathering ability of a telescope is dependent upon the diameter (aperture) and quality of its lens or mirror …. the bigger the aperture (diameter), the more light that can be collected and the more you will be able to see. Most people will recommend that you buy the biggest aperture that you can afford and that you can comfortably use (pick up, carry up and down steps, setup, etc.). Typically, the larger a telescope’s aperture, the heavier it is and the more difficult it is to move around. Also, the larger the aperture the more expensive in generally it is for any given type of telescope.

However, there is one undeniable fact. The larger a telescope’s aperture, the more you can see. While there are no fast rules, generally scopes under 3.5 inches (90mm) in aperture are considered on the small side for satisfactory viewing of deep space objects and scopes with at least 6 inches (150 mm) aperture are required to start seeing details. Perhaps the most popular size scope is the 8 inch (200mm) aperture scope as the compromise between portability and aperture. Scopes larger than 8 inches rapidly become very heavy and difficult for one person to handle.

On the other side of this aperture coin, many experienced and very accomplished astronomers use small aperture (80 to 150 mm) refractor telescopes and are very satisfied with their performance. Here again, only you can answer the question of how large a scope you can afford or want to move around.

Another saying is the best telescope is the one you will use. There is some truth in this statement. My first scope was a 102 mm SCT. I later purchased a bigger one, a 150 mm SCT. However, my smaller 102 mm SCT remains my primary telescope. Why? Because easily I can grab the smaller scope, mount, and tripod in one hand; a folding chair in the other; and walk about 400 meters with my accessories in a small back pack to a dark spot and be viewing in a few minutes or just take it out the back door into my light polluted back yard on a moment’s notice. The larger scope weighs 56 pounds and is much bulkier. To use it, I have to pack it up in the car and drive up to my viewing spot then reassemble it. Taking it out and setting it up in the back yard is not too bad and is where I use it more often. However, many would say I am just lazy and would have no qualms about even moving around a much larger and heavier scope. Like I said, it’s a personal kind of thing. To me portability is more important than size. Others look at the this picture much differently.

One thing to remember. No matter who you ask, their answers will be based upon their own personal likes and dislikes. Filter all the information you receive and decide based not upon what some one else thinks is best for you but what you feel is best suited for you. As you do your homework and learn about telescopes; look realistically at how you will use and where you will store your telescope, do you want or need a GOTO; how much weight can you comfortably lift and carry, etc.? Cruise the internet and visit the sites of all the telescope manufacturers and see what they have to offer. As you do this, the answer to your question, which scope to buy, will slowly evolve.

Good luck finding that perfect scope.

Joe
Sxinias
Meade 2045LX3 102 mm SCT
Celestron C6S 150 mm SCT


AUTHOR’S NOTE:

An addendum titled “Addendum to WWPierre's post” was posted by swing848 to this posting “I am “New to Astronomy, What Telescope is Best.”

The addendum provides many technical details that I left out mainly to keep my posting reasonably short and generic. It is well worth your time to read and I do recommend it.

It does have one area that I take issue with …. the comparison of telescope types.

I purposely stayed away from comparing one telescope type to another because of the emotions it often creates and often leads to discussions that are not productive. I also mentioned that all too often personal prejudices heavily slant such comparisons. Please keep this in mind as you read the comparison of telescope types in the addendum. These are the opinions of the author of the addendum and he has the right to express them. Others will agree with him. HOWEVER; Others, myself included, have a different opinion about many of the pros and cons that were presented and can offer other issues that were not included. Neither perspective is wrong. They are based upon different personal requirements which then impact personal opinions. I think that, unless you are doing some very advanced astronomy work, the differences between the optical performance and upkeep of the different telescope types (refractor, Newtonian, and catadioptric telescopes) mainly fall into the “So What and Who Cares” category. Each type has its place under the stars …. That’s why telescope manufacturers make them and people buy them.

Also, least you get the impression that Newtonian telescopes only come on a Dobsonian azimuth mount, this type of telescope is also sold in great numbers attached to German equatorial mounts and other types of azimuth mounts which also come in manual, motorized, or computerized configurations.

Do your homework and form your own opinion about which telescope type, size, mount, and price fits your requirements; then buy the telescope you think is best for you.

Joe
Sxinias

[swing848]

WWPierre, thank you for copying the good post by Joe/Sxinias as it will help many new to astronomy. One of the most important things to consider in astronomy is fun, will you use the scope often, or will you decide to put the scope in the closet. For example, you might purchase a telescope that is too large, heavy, or complex to operate, then decide it is so heavy and cumbersome that you give up using it. Many amateur astronomers have more than one scope, at least two, a large or larger one that seldom or less often gets used and a smaller, lighter, easier to handle scope that gets used a great deal. You would be surprised at how many people more often have and use a quality, very light weight ~70mm to 80mm refractor, even though they own 4 or more telescopes. Refractors up to 100mm can be light weight and easy to use if the rest of the telescope system is light weight.

I did not see the initial post by Yiangoss and therefore will be shooting in the dark [no pun intended to astronomers].

I recently wrote this post, for people new to forums just click on the blue words. The person that I wrote the post to was considering a DOB and was saving up for one, therefore much of that post was about DOBs.

In addition to what Sxinias wrote I will add the following. What he said about what kind of scope types individual amateur astronomers prefer and recommend, he both stated that he preferred SCTs and was wise in the following statement, quote, "One thing to remember. No matter who you ask, their answers will be based upon their own personal likes and dislikes. Filter all the information you receive and decide based not upon what some one else thinks is best for you but what you feel is best suited for you." This is a great statement, it is both wise and sincere. You will find many, probably most, amateur astronomers both humble and willing to help. Don't get me wrong, if you keep bugging someone so much that they can't look through their eyepiece they may eventually tell you to get lost.

In contrast to Sxinias my favorite scopes are truss DOBs [lighter than older versions or non-truss] because dollar for dollar a truss DOB with quality optics yields the most light gathering power than any other telescope [important for deep space or dim objects]. Favorite mount, motorized go-to because my eyes are not good enough any more for star hopping [used to be my favorite way to scan the heavens], though star hopping is probably not the best idea for someone new to astronomy because it takes knowledge of the heavens, something those that are brand new to astronomy have not yet acquired.

I have owned Newtonians, refractors, MCT [Maksutov-Cassegrain Telescope] and have observed through SCTs [Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescopes] up to 12.5 inches [primary mirror diameter - in other words, big and heavy]. There are other telescope designs, however, the above are probably the most common.

The reason that Sxinias suggested 7x50 [7 power, 50mm objective lens'] binoculars is because the eye pupil is usually open no more than 2mm or 3mm in the daytime and up to 7mm at night [slightly higher for many teenagers]. As the pupil opens in the dark 7x50 binoculars allow as much light as possible into the eye because the eyepieces will be as wide or wider than the eye pupil. The objective, or bigger pieces of glass on the other side of the binoculars are large enough to take in both large areas of the sky and with enough light gathering ability that you will see many more stars and DSOs [deep sky objects] than with the naked eye, and 7x50 binoculars are of moderate weight, which means most people will have no problem using them.

Also, you do not need to purchase the most expensive binoculars to get very good results. If a person has more money than he or she knows what to do with, other than to give Bill Gates billions of dollars for humanitarian purposes, then get the absolute best 7x50 binoculars. If you are like most people and have to watch your money, go to any store that sells binoculars, Wal-Mart, K-Mart, telescope, camera, sporting goods, and even gun stores, and look through the least expensive 7x50 binoculars they carry. If the view is clear and free of false color, purchase them. I have used an inexpensive set of 7x50 wide angle binoculars for decades and they have done well for me under the night skies.

A few telescope shops will often set up telescopes in the parking lot after hours for people to look through, ask if near by shops do this. You can check out different scope types and ask questions, free. While in stores, ask sales persons to assist you with the functions of different types of scopes, ease of assembly and ease of moving the scope to an observing site [the back yard or 15 miles away], ease of use, ease of scope movement, ease of movement of the focuser, weight, computer driven, how long does it take for the image to settle after touching the telescope, including focuser, and so on.

Note: Often heads, mounts, and/or tripods are too light and cause the image to shake too much while you attempt to bring an object into sharp focus. Tightening the legs and adding weight to the tripod often reduce shake dramatically. I add weight to one of my mounts by simply placing a Celestron Power Tank in the accessory tray.

Observatories. Google search for your region. I live in Ohio and, as an example, this is the results for a search titled Ohio observatory locations.

Astronomy clubs may be a little more difficult to find, however, if you can find an observatory near you they will know of clubs in the area. Go to colleges or college branches, many of them have observatories and/or clubs, and they should be able to tell you of other clubs or help you with a search closer to where you live. Lots of options are available to find clubs. They are a great place to go to both look at and through different scopes, but also to pick the brains of seasoned amateur astronomers.

If you cannot find anything near you to give you a leg up with astronomy follow Sxinias's advice, get some 7x50 binoculars, a lawn chair, a blanket [helps with dew or cool weather at night], a red flash light [red does not effect night vision, white light destroys night vision and you will need 45 minutes or so to regain full night vision again]. Purchase a book that includes star charts and DSOs or print your own with computer software. Stellarium Planetarium is a free computer program and I have been told it is very good, but I am using a program that I purchased years ago and cannot personally comment on it.

If you feel that you are absolutely on fire to get a scope right now, first do the above, then purchase the least expensive, good enough quality, light weight, go-to refractor or reflector telescope you can find. Sometimes you can find something on eBay, but be prepared to do at least a little work after getting the scope. Check the lenses or mirrors and diagonal to make sure they are clean. Sometimes all you need will be a light brush from a hobby shop or Wal-Mart, sometimes you may need to use a burst of compressed air, also from stores like Wal-Mart or online stores like newegg.com because compressed air is [or should be] used to clean computer components. If filth continues to stick to surfaces, go to a computer, telescope, or camera store or online stores, again such as www.astronomics.com, Newegg.com, and Adorama.com, just to name a few, as they sell lens cleaning materials. Also, learn how to properly use the lens cleaning materials.

I recently purchased a Celestron NexStar 60 SLT for $72 U.S. I did not want the scope, I purchased it for the go-to mount/head, the tripod is useful after adding more weight. I have seen Celestron NexStar 130 SLT [or Orion's copy] for under $130. I contacted one woman that was selling a 130 SLT and she was getting rid of it because her husband had purchased it, did not use it, it had set in a corner of the house and she wanted to get rid of it on eBay [I suspect there were issues between husband and wife], in any event it went cheap.

Reputable forum sites, such as this one, often have areas to purchase telescopes and you may get something in better condition than on eBay.

An inexpensive Newtonian on a light weight go-to mount is a good idea, if you are willing to learn how to collimate it. Sometimes any scope, including refractors, SCTs, and MCTs need collimated, however, they are usually more difficult than a short tube Newtonian. Once collimated all of the above hold their collimation much longer than Newtonians.

If you want to look at the moon and planets an inexpensive small refractor of 70mm to 80mm with a moderate to long focal length [F/8 to F/12 or more] from a good name brand company will do the job. If you want to look at the moon, planets, and a lot more deep space objects [nebulas, galaxies, and so on] look for a light weight 5" to 6" go-to reflector such as one of these from Orion or Celestron, again, look for a used one in good condition. Make sure you have the option to return the telescope if there is something wrong with it that you can't fix or if it is missing something.

I mention the above reflector telescopes because they are light weight, have good optics, and have go-to mounts that make it easy for those not used to astronomy to get into the hobby quickly and easily. If you decide that you want to park the telescope in a corner of the house as an object of beauty or sophistication, you will not have much tied up in the cost of the scope.

Come to this site or another good telescope site often for advice, such as, how to collimate, I can't see anything [are you looking dead center in the eyepiece?, did you remove the protective cover from the optical tube?]. Everyone either needs advice or opinions at some point, no matter what their experience. Even experts find that something simple or less expensive than expected produces astounding results and views. True amateur astronomers never completely quit researching, there is always something interesting going on or being said somewhere.

Generally speaking a few of the pros and cons of scope types are:

MCT and SCT: Considerably more expensive than Newtonians, use a correcting lens [one more thing to reduce light], central obstruction [secondary mirror], take much longer to cool down compared to Newtonians and refractors, very short [compact] tubes compared to most refractors and Newtonians. Over time they need taken apart and cleaned, this may be too much for some people who opt to send the scope back to the factory, moral, do not smoke around this scope and do not store or use it in dusty or filthy areas. Good for astrophotography when on the proper mount.

Newtonian: DOBs: Dollar for dollar more light gathering ability than any other scope, including Newtonians mounted on EQ mounts. Central obstruction including usually 4 "arms" to hold the secondary mirror in place. The "arms" produce spikes in stars, especially under long exposure times with a camera. DOBs are not good for astrophotography, they are great for visual astronomy at low to moderate power, usually no more than 300x because the object quickly moves out of the eyepiece. Every several years the mirrors need recoated. The optics can often need cleaned, however, this is an easy process compared to MCTs or SCTs. Newtonians on the proper mount are good for astrophotography.

Refractors:

In general: 6 inch objectives and larger become very heavy. Refractor objectives larger than 6 inches [especially air spaced objectives], compared to other scope designs of the same size begin to catch up to and surpass refractors in light gathering ability because the refractor objective can become thick especially with air spaced ojectives, through which light has to pass. My knowledge on this is old and I am not sure if technology has produced thinner refractor objectives.

Apos and high quality ED Refractors: Are renowned for crisp, sharp images, however, they are very expensive, even small objectives. They provide much better definition and contrast in cities and areas where there is a lot of light. The quality, contrast, sharpness, and brightness compared to other scope designs would require a telescope up to 30% to 50% larger, especially those with central obstructions. Also, size for size they produce better planetary and lunar definition than any other scope, also great on stars including doubles and double doubles. As for astrophotography I have seen some very good photos taken with these refractors using ~70mm objectives.

Achromatic Refractors: Much less expensive than Apos and quality ED telescopes, however, to a great extent depending upon objective size and F/ratio, they produce false color and washing out of detail on bright objects [Venus, Jupiter, or the moon], especially at high power. Some achromatic refractors 102mm and smaller provide very good views beginning at F/7, usually F/8 and higher. Shorter length [fast] achromatic refractors can produce more false color, sometimes a great deal more on bright objects, even bright stars. If you want to look at bright objects you might not want an F/5 achromatic, even in small diameters, they are best at wide fields of view at low power. Depending upon the design and quality of F/6.5 to F/7 and higher F/ratio achromatic refractors much of the false color can be reduced by use of filters, such as the Fringe Killer and/or a relatively good prism star diagonal [sometimes as cheap as ~$35 U.S.]. Achromatic refractors often need add-ons that increase the price of the scope, even if slightly, in order to provide better views. Objectives with long focal lengths are best, however, an F/12 refractor will provide narrower views of the sky and are not the best at large DSOs, also, many DSOs require larger objectives for best visual viewing. Achromatic refractors and astrophotography, good when combined with the proper F/ratio related to what you photograph and proper mount.

Note that over the years many Chinese optics have greatly improved. And, because of the current economic conditions some scopes are dropping in price. I am unsure how long this will continue because the value of the dollar will decrease.

There is much more to add, however, I do not think most forums are the place to write books.

Note: I ran out of time and could not completely review this post, so if you find typos or improper English, please overlook it.

Dan

[fogboundturtle]

The best scope is the one that get you motivated enough to go out an use it. There is no point in buying the most expensive equipment if you will not be motivated to use it.

[WWPierre]

AMEN, Claude.

I should clarify here that the original answer to Jakob was from Sxinias, one of our moderators. My only contribution was to recognize the quality and copy it to a sticky, because it attempts to answer the first question many people ask.

[swing848]

AMEN, Claude.

I should clarify here that the original answer to Jakob was from Sxinias, one of our moderators. My only contribution was to recognize the quality and copy it to a sticky, because it attempts to answer the first question many people ask.

Thank you for crediting Sxinias, as I was unaware of the original poster. This thread will be a great asset to those new to astronomy.

Dan

[WWPierre]

I am locking this thread now. I think an aspiring astronomer will get a pretty good idea from the above of the chain of questions they need to ask themselves before investing in astronomy equipment. If anyone thinks they have a point that should be added, we'll add it.

The only thing I can think of that may have been missed, is that everyone comes equipped with a beginner astronomy kit; their eyes, and all they have to do to begin astronomating is go outside, and look up.

Peter Legere

[sxinias]

The best scope is the one that get you motivated enough to go out an use it. There is no point in buying the most expensive equipment if you will not be motivated to use it.

I agree completely.

One reason I like my two small aperture CATs is to me the increased portability of their compact design means I can easily take them out and use them. I know I pay a price for this but for me it is acceptable. Others have a different definition than I for "portability" and "acceptable aperature." A larger Dob for less money, an expensive high quality refractor, a newtonian on a GEM or a goto azimuth mount, a larger CAT, etc. makes more sense to them and better fits their usability criteria.

In any case, if you can't easily use a telescope, can't find anything but the moon and a couple of planets, or if it doesn't produce the images you want, it may just sit unused doing no one any good.

Joe
Sxinias
Meade 2045LX3 102 mm SCT
Celestron C6S 150 mm SCT

[WWPierre]

The introduction of computer-guided telescopes has changed Amateur Astronomy fundamentally over the last decade or so. It has brought the ability to easily find targets to those who are not blessed with dark skies.

It is generally agreed that one should obtain the largest scope one can handle, however, if one can't find anything to observe, frustration can soon dampen enthusiasm, and the equipment begins to spend more and more time in storage.

In my short career as an observer, and as a moderator of these forums, I have concluded that there is a general dividing line between spending one's budget mostly on aperture, or forgoing some aperture, and spending a portion of the budget for the technology of the go-to scope.

Before you decide on a scope, stand in the place where you will do most of your observing on a clear, moonless night, and look at the sky. If you can see only a few of the brightest stars, you will have only a few starting points from which to begin your exploration of the heavens, and you will probably soon become lost and frustrated. In this case, Technology is your friend, and you should consider a go-to scope.

If, on the other hand, there are myriads of stars in your view, and you can see the Milky Way, even dimly, stretching overhead, then you can forgo the electronic help, and spend the extra money on larger glass.

Of course, If you just want to get there quick, a go-to is for you, no matter what your conditions are. Personally, I enjoy the hunt, and the satisfaction of star-hopping to a particular target.

If you can see the Milky Way, you don't need go-to. Of course, if you want it, then you need it.

[oxfordlove]

Thanks to all for your time in these articles; indeed they "aspiring astronomer" (new ones like me) to choose the right telescope. Base on these commentaries I'm making my mind for a go-to; nonetheless, I just need to select between 10" Newtonian reflector with Equatorial mountain (F/4.7) or a 8" STC with Equatorial mountain (F/10). (I want to see everything). If is possible, any advise.
Thanks to all
Rodney

[DigitalNinja]

As a new person to astronomy, and reading threw many threads, I ender up going for the Sky-Watcher 8 inch, dobsonion, this scope was cheap at $400 canadian while offering a lot of aperture for the money. It should fit in small cars just barely, but it will fit.
It is cheap enough that you can put other money that you would have spent on a scope into more needed accessories for it.
A big thumbs up to the dobosnion mount!
I recommend it as a new beginner