Suggest a telescope

[El Sapo]

I used to love looking at the stars when I as a little kid. Back then I just had a 150x scope and a sky washed out in city lights to contend with. I still saw some interesting things : Good detail on the moon, Jupiter's 4 biggest moons, and even a really big solar flare on Sirius one time.

As a child I always dreamed of having a 'grown up' telescope one day. I think that day has come. I also live out in the country, now, where you can see the Milky Way and satellites with the naked eye.

I don't know anything about telescopes at all. I'd like to have something pretty powerful that would open up some more 'deep space' objects for viewing. I't would be nice like to have something with tracking / GPS features so I can find objects quickly and also don't have to 'chase' them like I did when I was a kid.

I'm setting a budget of $1000-$1500 for the telescope and had my eye on this 8" model.

Even though though they lack the computerized features, I gotta say this one and this one. definitely caught my eye.

Any suggestions / experiences? I'm going to do my research on this but I would sure like some good opinions too.

 

[amnosis]

I can't offer any advice because I haven't got around to buying one yet, but I have done a ton of research on telescopes, intending to get one myself. Head over to cloudynights.com . They have tons of reviews and a forum full of people with experience.

 

[MadTrapper]

The two biggest factors in a recreational telescope is the type of lens and the coating on the lenses.

You will get clearer images at higher magnification if the mirrors are parabolic (more expensive) as compared to spherical (cheaper). If you want to look at more deep space objects, then definitely go with the parabolic mirror.

Also, some lower end telescopes apparently won't have all the lenses coated, only the main lens. So you may want to look into that because having all the lenses coated really cuts down on the diffraction of the light as it passes through the telescope. If the lenses aren't coated, you will get color hues that aren't there in reality.

 

[ScoPro]

Can't go wrong with the Meade SCT series:
The Link

 

[austintex]

Celestrons are good, too. I have an 8-inch schmidt-cassegrain. Nice thing about them is they're compact.

-AZ

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

Meade's suck. Avoid them.

An 8 to 11 inch Schmidt Cassegrain by Celestron is what you want. There are several different telescope series out and price points will vary depending on the model you choose.

 

[ScoPro]

Indeed, Meade refractors do suck.

 

[madscientist]

depends on how many houses down the street the hot neighbor lives.

 

[McLovin]

I have a Meade and for the life of me can't get the damn thing to work. Seriously. Had a buddy over to the house who is a aerospace engineer and teaches at Cal Tech; he didn't have any better luck.

Meade's suck.

 

[ScoPro]

Bought my 4 year old grandson a Meade for Christmas. He's had a ton of fun looking at the Moon and lots of other stuff around his 'hood.

 

[El Sapo]

I really appreciate all the responses. I'll consider the Celestron as being 'in the lead' at this point.