Best refractor telescopes according to redditors

Camera: Sony a6000
Telescope: Sky Watcher Pro 100ED Refractor Telescope
Focal Length: 900mm (1350mm effective focal length due to crop sensor factor)
Aperture: f/9.0 (f/13.5 effective aperture due to crop sensor factor)
Shutter Speed: 1/1000
ISO: 250

No eyepiece with this setup. I connected the camera using a T-mount adapter and a 2 inch coupler to connect it directly to the focuser, in place of the telescope's diagonal.

Scope: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004Q75864/ref=twister_B00YE0KATS?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

T-adapter/coupler for Sony e-mount cameras: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B01JFPC38M/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o03_s01?ie=UTF8&psc=1

The best way to view stars is actually going to a darker area. There can be no other method that can top that.

Buuut, there are ways that can slightly improve your star-seeing ability. First of all, the less the moisture in the air is, the better the night sky will look, so winters is a pretty good time for some star gazing. Also, try going up to your roof late at night, after 2-3am, I find the light pollution much less and since it's much quieter, I can focus on the stars and the planets much better.

Finally, get a telescope and/or a camera. Get the cheapest telescope you can afford, doesn't matter, it would still take your breath away. I bought this at 3000 bucks or something half a decade ago on Flipkart, and it was enough to blow my mind. You can see the Moon in its full glory, you can see Jupiter and its 4 largest moons, on a good windless night you can also see Saturn and its rings, so I'd say it's worth it.

A DSLR would help too. It sees what our naked eyes can't see, so just propping up your camera for a 30 second shot of the sky and lowering the haze in Lightroom, you'd be able to see more stars than you've ever seen with your bare eyes.

Also remember that the Milky Way season is from April to September, so if you ever plan a trip to a darker location to see the Milky Way, make sure you do it in these months. Let me know if you need any more help. Happy Stargazing!

Album of processing steps, updated as I add to the tutorial

Hello to both new /r/astrophotography visitors and old pros. In this tutorial, I wanted to run through the various steps and options for astrophotography processing in PixInsight using an M8 data set from /u/RupeshJoy852. His hardware is fairly modest: a DSLR and an Orion 80mm ShortTube refractor. He took a set of 90 second exposures at ISO 1600 and then gave the data set to me to see what could be done in PixInsight.

For each step, I'm going to discuss the Newbie, Intermediate, and Experienced options, and I want to show that even with a fairly basic workflow using a PixInsight trial license, you can get decent results.

First step for all three is to get a look at the data.

• Newbie: Use the Blink process to load up all your images and flip through them to see which had good tracking and which have bad streaks. When using a DSLR, the image is often completely dominated by one color, in this case red, so you click the red, green, and blue striped button to be able to unlock the color ratios and really see your data.
  
  
• Intermediate: Same thing, look through your stack of data and select out the good from the rest. You can use the Move button in Blink to select the ones that are good and put them in a separate folder. You should also be shooting darks, flats, and bias frames, so look at those too.
  
  
• Experienced: Use Script>Batch>SubFrame Selector as well to really measure and filter your best frames. You can sort by SNR, FWHM, Eccentricity, and other measurements of your stars.
  
  For DSLR data, you Batch Debayer your data
  
  N: Load Script>Batch Processing>Batch DeBayer and load in your good images. Run it and get the resulting FITS files.
  
  I: You should be shooting darks, flats, and bias frames, so use Batch Preprocessing instead to load all your data in and calibrate. Debayering is part of the process.
  
  *E: Following the advice of /u/EorEquis, you should be Dithering your exposures, so you should be able to skip dark frames -- they might be injecting noise into your final frames! There's an active debate about it, and I still use darks, but I understand the logic.
  
  Align all the images so that you can stack them
  
  
• Load the Process called StarAlignment and load in your newly Debayered FITS files. Pick one of your best frames and use it on top as a reference that all the others will be aligned to. Choose an output directory for all the new aligned images. The defaults should work fine.
  
  
• Same for intermediate and experienced, but if you used Batch Preprocessing above, you will get the aligned frames as output.
  
  "Stack" your images, getting an averaged result with greatly increased signal to noise ratio. We shoot multiple frames so that the uncertainty (noise) in any given frame cancels out with the rest of the frames when averaged. The real astronomical light, the signal, will be revealed, showing the Deep Sky Object.
  
  
• Use Image Integration, load your frames, and then adjust the Pixel Rejection settings. Choose Winsorized Sigma Clipping if you have more than 8 images and try using the defaults. The result is a master light frame that we'll be processing!
  
  
• Intermediate users should inspect the resulting Rejection maps and tune their Sigma High and Low to reject only artifacts like hot pixels, cosmic ray hits, satellite trails, etc. Keep everything else in order to add to your signal.
  
  
• If you are dithering (you should be!) and your data is undersampled, consider giving the new Drizzle option a try.
  
  'Screen Stretch' the master frame to see what you've got (all levels)
  
  
• Once you get your master, it doesn't look like much. It's a 32-bit image file being displayed on your 8-bit display, so all the good stuff is in the darkest pixels. Here's a great explanation by /u/EorEquis, I highly recommend it. In PixInsight, you simply hit Ctrl-A (PC) or Cmd-A (Mac) to automatically screen stretch your data. However, in this case, we get an even more red image. So we need to 'decouple' the red, green, and blue channels and re-stretch. Open the Screen Transfer Function process and click the little Chain Link button in the upper left. Then click the 'radiation symbol' button or just hit Cmd-A again to re-stretch. Voila! Your data is visible.
  
  Rename the image by double clicking its tab on the left. I usually just call the raw file 'RGB'.
  
  Background Extraction -- remove the gradients on the image from the sky glow and vignetting from equipment.
  
  
• Newbie: You can use Automatic Background Extraction to automatically model the background of the image and remove it. I set it in this case to Subtraction and it did a reasonable job with the big gradients. Since this field is rich with nebulosity, it might not always do well, but it generally only deals with big gradients, so I don't think we lost any detail.
  
  
• Intermediate: Use Dynamic Background Extraction to place your own points that represent the background. It's tough in this case because of the thick nebulosity, but it should do a fine job.
  
  
• Experienced: To better place your DBE points, try downloading a DSS frame or a well-processed image of your object from the web. You can register that image to your own data, then place your points. Then you can use those points on your real image, confident that the points match the real background.
  
  Background Neutralization and Color Calibration -- now that the big gradient is taken care of, our color channels need to match each other and reflect reality, where blue stars are blue and red stars are red.
  
  
• Newbie: Make two Preview boxes with the New Preview tool at the top. Preview 1 is a small box with the background of the image (if you can find any!). Stars can be included, but avoid nebula structure. Preview 2 is the thing you want to Color Calibrate against. The best thing for this is a face-on galaxy, but for nebula fields, I tend to pick the main DSO or even just use the entire image. Then run Background Neutralization with Preview 1 and Color Calibration with Preview 2 (white reference) and Preview 1 (background), turning Structure Detection off. When done, hit Cmd-A again to auto-stretch, this time with the Color Chain linked again in STF.
  
  
• Intermediate: Same as above, the defaults work well and you can double check the results with Histogram Transformation.
  
  
• Experienced: If you are shooting a nebula field like this one, try a new technique that I just learned. At some point in the night, take a one minute image of your field, just enough to get the colors to register. Then slew to a nearby face-on spiral galaxy at the same altitude (to account for extinction) and get the same one minute exposure. When doing Color Calibration, you can refer to this other frame and guarantee a real valid representation of white light!
  
  Histogram Transformation to 'Stretch' your data -- all along, we've kept our files 'linear', which is very good. In other programs, you immediately have to stretch your data permanently so that you can't do important steps like gradient removal and color calibration while linear. Again, I refer you to /u/EorEquis 's [excellent video explanation]((https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWXj6Pc_hog). We're now ready to permanently stretch the data to work on it in non-linear space, so what we see on our monitor is the real image.
  
  
• Newbie: We will simply take the automatic stretch done by STF and apply it to the Histogram Transformation process. There is a little triangle icon at the bottom left of STF, and you just drag it to the bottom bar of Histogram Transformation. This transfers the settings, so you should see the diagonal line (linear) suddenly curve tremendously -- that's the stretch! Then just apply that Histogram Transformation to the image. It turns white, meaning it's doubly stretched (by HT and STF), so hit Reset in the bottom right of the STF and it will return to looking the same.
  
  
• Intermediate: Same process, but did you know that you can tune the STF's autostretch settings? Cmd-Click or Ctrl-Click the radiation symbol button (autostretch) and you'll get a dialog of options to tune. I frequently just darken the background by lowering the Target Background, but you can also boost the highlights more if you'd like. You can of course do these things in post-processing next, but getting a nice stretch up front can save time.
  
  
• Experienced: Consider using Masked Stretch. It's not perfect for every image, but it can really help retain star cores on some data.
  
  (more to come)
  

Hello :-)

You did the right thing and asked here before buying some random "best seller" at an online-store :-) There is a lot of garbage in this price-range.

While some telescopes under $200 can be fun, they will be limited.

If possible: See if you can get some family and friends to throw in a bit of money, as for $199 you can already get the z130 (sometimes $179), Meade Lightbridge mini 130 or the compact AWB Onesky. These are a noticeable step up from the usual ~3" telescopes you'll find at $150 or under.

Telescope.com has the xt4.5 and xt6 refurbished/used sometimes for a good price, but it's currently sold out :-(

There's also the Meade Polaris 130eq but it's mount is not ideal regarding stability, which can make focusing and tracking tedious! Still, it's optics are better than some of the sets in this price-range.

 

At $150 the choices get a bit difficult. You will have to compromise regarding aperture, stability, quality of optics, or all three.

What to expect in different telescope aperture sizes

The cheaper alternatives are the Lightbridge Mini 114 (smaller aperture, aperture ratio results in contrast issues -> coma, obstruction, magnification), Celestron c90 (very compact, but small aperture), 114/900 reflectors for $100 (usually on a horrible, horribly weak mount, but with a bit of DIY they make good telescopes), or a small refractor (Infinity 90az-> Short=not the best for planets, Powerseeker 80eq=small aperture).

You could of course check out some used ones. Sometimes you find a deal on Amazon (4" refractor, sometimes the mentioned Mini 130). If you post what area you're from, I could check on CL :-)

Avoid all 127eq telescopes (127/1000 Powerseeker 127, Polaris 127), 114/1000 (Astromaster 114,...) and 150/1400 with much shorter tube than their focal length. They are a flawed "bird-jones" telescope of poor quality. No matter how good the reviews might be. The Astromaster 130 also is not recommended as it has a spherical mirror, reducing it's contrast greatly.

Also consider a guide such as "Turn left at Orion" (tight budget: App, ebook, printouts) and a planetary eyepiece (depends on the choice of telescope, don't buy a short Plössl or set, there are some sub-$20 options).

Clear skies!

From my reply in your other post:

We need a picture or a model. Celestron telescopes range in cost from $40 to $8,700.

• $40 Celestron
  
• $8,700 Celestron
  
  And any number of prices in between. So without knowing what model, there's no way to know if you actually have a moral dilemma or not.
  
  Celestron's cheaper models are actually quite poor and I wouldn't recommend them at any price other than free. Their high end stuff is excellent and well worth the price. So it really depends.

it came with a generic phone adapter. its this one: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07GX8L24K/ref=psdc_499152_t1_B00WCG3UOS

Where did you buy yours ? My son was very interested in astronomy and I decided to invest myself in his new passion . I bought one from Amazon for a 100$ . Since I don't know anything on the subject, I'm not even sure ive made a good choice .

https://www.amazon.ca/Meade-Instruments-Infinity-Refractor-Telescope/dp/B00LY8JVZ2/ref=sr_1_346?qid=1565063428&refinements=p_36%3A7500-15000&rnid=12035759011&s=electronics&sr=1-346&th=1

I wonder what it would cost to get one installed in your house.

Edit:

Check out this SWEET BALL PIT CALCULATOR.

From this link provided by CombustionJellyfish, there are plastic crush-proof plastic balls, which come out to 1.6 cents per 2 3/4 inch diameter ball (Best price I could find), which could fill a 10'x10' 4' deep ball pit for less than 1000.

And from what I've read, they're clothes washer safe, so if they need to be cleaned, you can wash all those balls in less than 40 loads in the washer.

• Le Creuset. Just one example - they have lots of nice gifts.
  
  
  
• Ice cream maker with recipe book and two stoneware bowls.
  
  
  
• Maybe they have a dark sky and enjoy stargazing? If so, a telescope
  
  
• In a rural area, they probably don't have access to high end grocery stores. A gourmet gift basket could be nice: Dean and Deluca; Harry & David; Vosges

Celestron 21035 70mm Travel Scope:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001TI9Y2M/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I probably could have spent more time researching one, but it had good reviews, travels easily, isn't too complicated to set up and it's a great price. I decided I'd rather start here and work my way up to something more advanced later on than buy one now that's too advanced for me and more expensive.

Plus it has 70mm in the name, and I saw Interstellar on IMAX 70mm so the Murphy in me told me it was fate. :)

I want to point out that you don't necessarily need a RCA out. A standard 1/8" is fine as you can use a 1/8" to rca cable. My previous setup was Fiio e10k as a DAC into Topping TP22 into those micca speakers.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000MLHMAS/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1 -- I bought this one a few years ago, looks like it's about $115 presently. Very basic scope, very basic mount, but the second thing I ever saw through it (after the moon) was Jupiter and its moons, and you can see them pretty well.

Alt-Az mount is way cheaper than an equatorial mount, but it means you'll have a harder time tracking objects across the sky. And you'll be surprised at how fast they move when you're looking at them under high magnification. So your investment should also consider how old your kids are and whether they're going to be able to track with the scope themselves.

OK, not a bad question, the answer is actually well-known. The telescope he made most of his discoveries with was 1" or smaller diameter, and roughly compares to a Dobsonian (2 lens) design, although his used one concave and one convex lens, and the standards today use two convex lenses.

This 2" telescope for under $30 is much better than Galileo's in aperture and has comparable magnification.

https://www.amazon.com/TruePower-40-0224-Refractor-Telescope-Tripod/dp/B00I38S3BE/ref=sr_1_11?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1465409397&sr=1-11&keywords=telescope

Galileo's Magnification: 30X
Galileo's aperture: 0.62", later 1"

You will be able to observe it's surface colors with a very cheap telescope like this one.

Source: I own one.

I felt the same way and picked up one of the “department store telescopes” people will tell you not to buy... so long as you don’t mind getting what you pay for, they can be great “gateway drugs” to enjoying astronomy.

Orion SpaceProbe II 76mm Altazimuth Reflector Telescope https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0732TBPJW/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_XfTCCbEP3BWTW

This is something you could look into just to start. I began with this:


Celestron 21061 AstroMaster 70AZ Refractor Telescope https://www.amazon.com/dp/B000MLHMAS/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_fyTCCbET2H4X6

Just food for thought. Will you probably turn around and wanna spend more money? Maybe... but in my mind, spending ~$100 to try something is a lot better than ~$400.

Strictly speaking, wattages and THD are a good guide for figuring out quality, but are certainly not a hard-and-fast rule. Knowing your brands and trusted opinions are better, listening to it yourself is best.

The link in the sidebar has some good ones.

I'm actually in exactly the same position as you at the moment, I'm considering this one as it's the cheapest (50w per channel, ~au$80 delivered), but apparently this one is much better even though it's only 30w per channel and is $20 more.

Or then again I could anticipate future upgrades and just go for this yammy amp which is 100w per channel for ~$190.

I really like that Denon one you've posted, though. Decisions, decisions.

OK so a basic 2 channel amplifier would work, amazon has quite a few. I have this one and love it. https://www.amazon.com/Topping-TP22-TK2050-Digital-Amplifier/dp/B005VR1VQE/ref=sr_1_sc_1?s=aht&ie=UTF8&qid=1484862119&sr=1-1-spell&keywords=toppingt+t22

These speakers are a really good buy and popular among budget audiophiles.
https://www.amazon.com/Micca-MB42X-Bookshelf-Speakers-Tweeter/dp/B00E7H8GG2/ref=sr_1_1?s=aht&ie=UTF8&qid=1484862170&sr=1-1&keywords=mb42x

I personally find surround to be a gimmick. Especially at this price point you get so much more from investing in a decent pair of stereo speakers than if you have to spread your money across 5 speakers.

If you could live without the soundcard and just use USB, I would spend just over $250 and get Pioneer SP-BS22-LR (just google reviews of these speakers), a Topping TP22 amp, and a HiFiMeDIY Sabre USB DAC. You will also need speaker cable, and a RCA to 3.5mm cable.

Sonya, Your Momma wouldn't tell you this but ,Every failure prepares you for greatness.Use them as steps to reaching your goals.Not as reasons to stop reaching for perfection.
Also I believe every child should be able to see the wonders of Space

You can get a basic refractor for 100 bucks. This is what I was using. If you really want into it, I'd say go for a reflector with a good mount. Computerized ones are more expensive, and doing it manually teaches you to navigate the night sky as well.

With that price point it's pretty hard. here are some options that you may want to consider, http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-21037-PowerSeeker-70EQ-Telescope/dp/B001592LFC/ref=sr_1_18?ie=UTF8&qid=1462242322&sr=8-18&keywords=telescope

http://www.amazon.com/Meade-Instruments-Infinity-Refractor-Telescope/dp/B00LY8JVZC/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&qid=1462242120&sr=8-16&keywords=telescope

Also, if you pick him up a new telescope, depending on what you spend within your budget, you might want to get him an eyepiece to go with it. Or even a moon filter since I'm sure that will be one of his main targets living in a high-rise in downtown Chicago. I hope this helps.

Never say never.

• Canon T3i (modified: missing IR cutoff)
  
• Celestron AVX Mount
  
• [Skywatcher 80ED \(600mm f/7.5\)](http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-Advanced-VX-Computerized-Mount/dp/B00AYGIQDS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1406820193&sr=8-1&keywords=Celestron+AVX+Mount)
  
  
  Learn Photoshop and photography!

Thank you so much for the help! Watched a few youtube videos on it and that also helped, thank you for the suggestion. If you wouldn't mind checking this and letting me know if I need anything else if you have any time, I would highly appreciate it.

mount

Telescope tube rings (Does the size matter, like is there a way to tell if it's good for the telescope or not? this is my telescope

mounting plate

[T-Ring adapter] (https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0140U9IWQ/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1) (The camera I am using is a Nikon D750)

camera adapter

And possibly this autoguider

Once again, thank you for the help.

My grandpa mentioned recently wanting a telescope to play around with so I sent him this one a few days ago when I saw it for ~$60 on sale (not bought on Amazon though). He's told me he's managed to resolve some of Jupiter's and Saturn's moons with just the eyepiece and tripod and everything else that came with the telescope, and pictures of planets taken with the scope from some of the reviews seem decent enough, though obviously nowhere near as good as the OP's (and from the review the former picture is technically long-exposure and using a fancy tripod, so not quite what you're eye would see).

I've had this about a year and I'm extremely happy with it.

https://www.amazon.com/Meade-Instruments-Infinity-Refractor-Telescope/dp/B00LY8JWAQ

I've got the Celestron 70mm Travel Scope. The tripod it came with sucks (I replaced it with this), the eyepieces aren't great (but I've got plenty of others to choose from), but the 'scope itself is entirely decent for a lightweight travel scope with enough aperture and focal length to observe the night sky.

Tell them to get a better telescope. :P

It's just funny how photos in expensive, glamorous places like this always feature such dirt cheap telescopes.

I need to replace the Lepai 2020 that I've been using at the office for monitoring demos and as an amp for my Fiio X1/tablet.

I lucked out when I grabbed the Lepai and got a REALLY quiet one. Now I need another for a project and they appear to be out of production, so I figure it's a good excuse to upgrade my office system.

What I need:
A sub $100, compact, digital amp similar to the Lepai in size. I need 2 inputs, preferably at least one set RCA and a front-mounted power switch.

Headphone out would be nice, but isn't required. Banana plug friendly is nice, but not required. I don't need an EQ on the amp as long as it's relatively flat (for the money).

My problem is that while I enjoy making music, I'm definitely not an audiophile. I've been looking at the
Topping TP22 and the SA-60, neither have a headphone out but do seem to tick all the other boxes. Are there any other models I should be looking at, or are these pretty much where it's at in the~$100 range?

$100 enjoy!

I'm not really sure, found one in Amazon that I really liked : https://www.amazon.com/Celestron-21041-60mm-PowerSeeker-Telescope/dp/B0002CTZAC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1539988222&sr=8-1&keywords=celestron+21041+60mm

Best to provide links as there could be some confusion about which scopes you are looking at. That being said if it is this orion vs. this skywatcher. I would say the extra $300 cad might be worth it as the Orion doesn't come with tube rings, dovetail, finder scope, etc. Also, the focuser on the Orion looks pretty basic, while the Skywatcher focuser should work for basic astrophotography. If you are planning to replace the focuser sooner than later, and/or don't want the accessories than go for the orion. They are the same scope optically made by Synta.

Ack, don't buy that telescope it's crap. I'd advise you save a bit more and get something like this: http://www.amazon.com/Orion-10015-StarBlast-Reflector-Telescope/dp/B00D12U1IK/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1374094182&sr=8-2&keywords=starblast+4.5

But if $60 is your top dollar you can do better than the Barska with these:

http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-21024-FirstScope-Telescope/dp/B001UQ6E4Y/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1374093969&sr=8-3&keywords=celestron+tabletop

http://www.amazon.com/Orion-10021-FunScope-Reflector-Telescope/dp/B00D05BIGC/ref=sr_1_7?ie=UTF8&qid=1374093969&sr=8-7&keywords=celestron+tabletop

http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-21036-PowerSeeker-70AZ-Telescope/dp/B003AM87PU/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1374094004&sr=8-1&keywords=celestron+70az

I know they're poor telescopes, astronomically-speaking, but a Celestron travel scope, or one like it, might be a good option.

The eyepiece provides an upright image (so aiming it is intuitive) and is set at a 45 degree angle, which might be easier to use on a table or tray.

It's light, has a tripod mount (which can be secured or stabilized in several ways) and can be operated with one hand - both aiming and focusing.

Again, not a premium scope, optically, but it might be what you're looking for. I've used one and enjoyed the experience.

I'd get a telescope. Just a 2 min Amazon search shows that you can get decent stuff in that price range, for example: https://www.amazon.com/Celestron-21035-70mm-Travel-Scope/dp/B001TI9Y2M

Note that this is just the first shopping result I have found, I am sure that on reddit (e.g. /r/telescopes/ ) will be people who can recommend you the best one.

As someone who lives in a city as well, it depends. If you can see at least a few stars at night, you might want to consider buying a telescope. I use a $70 Celestron travel scope 70. While it is pretty cheap as far as telescopes go, it does great where I live. And because the telescope will have more light collecting ability than your eye, wherever you point it you should see at least one faint star. Besides stars you should be able to see Mars, Jupiter, or Saturn. planets are relatively bright compared to other things in the sky. Really the one thing you definitely will not be able to see clearly are deep sky objects (nebula, galaxies, etc.) these unfortunately are too faint, and while you may be able to see a few stars where the nebula should be, it will be very difficult.

So really it depends on what you plan on looking at: planets/moon are great, stars are okay, DSO are very faint and difficult to see. I hope this helps!

EDIT: link to the telescope I own- http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B001TI9Y2M?pc_redir=1411188054&robot_redir=1 it's fairly good for the price, however the tripod is a bit flimsy.

I got my wife the Celestron Travel Scope 70 for her birthday and gave it to her a bit early on Sunday since she was talking to me about the "moon dancing with Jupiter" thing that was going on over the weekend. She's been wanting a telescope for ages so I finally got one for her. It's not the greatest, but it's certainly inexpensive (~$70). We were able to score a picture of the moon and Jupiter, however, the Jupiter pictures weren't all that great. I will say the tripod that comes with it is absolute shit, and I'm lucky I had this thing in the closet that I could attach it to.

This is the photo my wife shared on facebook. Both the moon and Jupiter images were taken with a 10mm eyepiece, but I have zero experience with telescope and have no idea what I'm doing. From what I could tell in the manual that came with it, that eyepiece should give roughly 40x magnification. A pinpoint enlarged 40 times is still a pinpoint, yet I was able to see Jupiter and the Galilean moons.

Now she's on a quest for filters and eyepieces and anything she can find online for it.

Well keep in mind with speakers like screens it's a long term investment. I think they retail for $350/pair but Amazon has had the black ones for $199 for a while now. I can almost guarantee you won't find a better speaker out there for $100 each.

I'm using a small class T pre-amp to drive them. The Topping Tp22 is pretty great, zero distortion and small footprint. It doesn't have a ton of wattage but if you don't want to blow your eardrums out it should be plenty powerful. My Genesis Model 1 is probably my quietest system and when I want to rock out to some Lightening Force and crank it I get it up to about the halfway position on the knob. You can see my setup in this pic. (ignore the center speaker, it's a holdover while I finish changing my setup over to my new TV)

Probably a desktop amp and a pair of bookshelf speakers. Something like this:

http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B005VR1VQE

http://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B009IUIV4A

Or find one of those "home theater in a box" setups and use the receiver from that, which would allow you to add more/better speakers later if you end up moving or something. I got mine fairly cheap on craigslist when I couldn't afford much else, then bought higher quality speakers later on.

is there any difference between these two amps?
https://www.amazon.ca/Topping-TP22-Tripath-Class-T-Amplifier/dp/B00IZS5C3O/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1484775422&sr=8-1&keywords=topping+tp22

and

https://www.amazon.ca/Topping-TP22-TK2050-Digital-Amplifier/dp/B005VR1VQE/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1484775422&sr=8-2&keywords=topping+tp22 ??

they seem to be the same, one is in stock and one isnt and they are named a little bit differently? if they are different, what is different about them? thanks

The turntable I was looking at has a switch to go from phono output to line and includes RCA cables, would that be sufficient to go straight into the amp or is a preamp still needed? I was reading that this turntable had a built in preamp.

As far as amps go, I was looking at this: https://www.amazon.com/Topping-TK2050-TC2000-Digital-Amplifier/dp/B005VR1VQE

I was gifted my telescope, so I'm not sure exact model and specs.

[But this one](Gskyer Telescope, Travel Scope, 70mm Aperture 400mm AZ Mount Astronomical Refractor Telescope for Kids Beginners - Portable Travel Telescope with Carry Bag, Smartphone Adapter and Wireless Remote https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07GX8L24K/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_APklDbR3FJEZ9) is probably a good place to start. Download the Sky Map app (free) and see what you can see

This. my Dad got it for Me, its also why I recently purchased this.

Same as /u/Garak, came in looking up VX1 and this review was on top. Great review btw.

I bought this a couple of weeks ago to power my P4s and my turntable but it doesn't seem to like my PC at all. The DAC input keeps dropping out and freaking out my PC to the point where it completely stops playing any audio and prevents it from playing unless I go into the control panel and disable the VX1 drivers. Have you ever had this issue while testing/using it?

This is the second VX1 I've gone through and im just thinking of getting the TP22 and use and AUX to RCA cables for my PC input. You have a review of the TP21 and was wondering if you have any experience with the TP22? Sounded like the TP21 was just pretty horrible. Maybe i should just stay away from Topping in general...

I have been eyeing the skywatcher 80ed, but it seems a little too similar to my current scope. 80ED is 80mm f/7.5 and mine is 70mm f/8.5, which I know is worse, but if I had to choose where to budget my money...

It's either that or an 8-10" reflector, though if I went with that, I know I'd have to get a stronger mount. Which would you recommend?

-a hammock because the outdoors is awesome

-this sharpie is amazing

-these pens, although a little pricey, are AMAZING. Additionally, you can get refills for them on Amazon and those are inexpensive

-best coloring pencils imho

-Some really awesome book series one, two, three and four

-for math, here's some sodoku

-Some movies: Overboard, When Harry Met Sally, Burlesque

-Telescope

-Picnic basket

-Spirituality book

-some incense and an awesome fairy burner to go with them

I'll try and add some more later :)

Thanks for the contest

I really really want it! ( $5 and $10

Amazon sells the balls for 300/$50. So not too bad; $500 should get you a pretty decent sized ball pit.

The real problem would be sanitation; I hear those things get filthy.

Given that you said you want to see clearer and high quality images I'd recommend going with as large of a scope as possible- aperture wise. Aperture will trump telescope type. At the price of the AWB (a 5" reflector), you can probably get a 90mm (3") refractor; however, the extra 2" of the reflector means you get 2.7x more light than a 3" scope which results in better quality views. In addition, achromatic refractors have chromatic abberation which is clearly visible on planets and the moon.

In short, please don't think that a refractor is better than a reflector. There is no reason to not get a reflector when it's larger size will allow you to get better quality views.

Btw, over 200x magnification is impractical for most small scopes. All you will see is a fuzzy blob. A 3x barlow is not needed. I'd recomend eyepieces at 9mm, ~24mm, and 32mm as well as a 2x barlow.

For whatever reason you are still adamant on a refractor, don't waste time/money with the powerseekers. See this one here: http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-22150-Omni-102mm-Refractor/dp/B014EQ1LB2?ie=UTF8&keywords=celestron%20refractor&qid=1462474568&ref_=sr_1_1&sr=8-1

The problem with all telescopes is they can get real expensive for a good one.

For the money and his age (in case he out grows his interest I'd start cheap).

This one would make for a half way decent beginner telescope without breaking the bank.

Also another thing I thought of for a young kid interested in astronomy is one of these.

I had a more primitive version of one of those things when I was a kid but would still stare at my ceiling for hours when I had it turned on.

Amazon. http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-21061-AstroMaster-Refractor-Telescope/dp/B000MLHMAS/ref=sr_1_2?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1324870310&sr=1-2. It looks like it is more now. I could have sworn my wife said it was on sale for $70.

Unless I'm mistaken, he's got his Canon attached to his Telescope, the Skywatcher 80ED he mentioned. Still very impressive though.

http://www.amazon.com/CELESTRON-Powerseeker-50-Refractor-Telescope/dp/B0000UMLYI/

I have a common 700x76 so its fine if I cant really see much detail (of course I would like to upgrade but right now my only option for sky viewing is hiking). As long as I dont downgrade from there Im fine. I got a plossl 25mm lens which improved the quality a lot but it's still hard to distinguish much detail.

My current budget would be around a 100 dollars. Where I live (Argentina) things are pretty rough with inflation and basically anything like this costs almost twice as much when you make the conversions. I have a relative travelling to the US and they could pick up a scope like this for me. Of course I could simply hold on and save for the next occassion.

Nebulae is something I would love to see but I could never do it, probably due to the light pollution. I basically gave up on them thinking its impossible. Would I be able to see them with a refractor? Clusters and panning scross the sky also sounds good and kind of what I want to do.

Maybe I should get some binoculars instead but I would really like a telescope I can take on hikes and take some beginner pics with my phone, sorry for the link but something like this is what I had in mind: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B001TI9Y2M/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_9dnDDbVM2WANA

You should get yourself a telescope!

https://smile.amazon.com/Celestron-21035-70mm-Travel-Scope/dp/B001TI9Y2M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1495505189&sr=8-1&keywords=astronomy+telescope

This pen

https://smile.amazon.com/Nikola-Tesla-Engraved-Quote-Pen/dp/B01N6BO458/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1495505256&sr=8-2&keywords=engineering+gifts

or the fountain pen on your wishlist since it's something you've been wanting, affordable and has many good reviews

https://smile.amazon.com/dp/B0002T401Y/_encoding=UTF8?coliid=I1R5BQE0JNYFYY&colid=226JO509390Q8

These two you posted seem to be pretty good

1. https://www.amazon.com/Gosky-1-25inch-Plossl-Telescope-Eyepiece/dp/B00YREL9HI/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1494703842&sr=8-1&keywords=10mm+plossl
   
   
2. https://www.amazon.com/Gosky-1-25inch-Plossl-Telescope-Eyepiece/dp/B00YRKO2M6/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1494703670&sr=8-2&keywords=32mm+eyepiece
   
   Should I be fine with just these two plus the 26mm that comes with it?

Hello,

I'm a complete noob to amateur astronomy. I once had a cheap refractor telescope as a kid, but it's long broken. I'm currently looking to get a new one, primarily for the purposes of stargazing, but perhaps further down the line take some photographs (issue is I don't have a camera, nor am I sure I will get one). I'm more interested in viewing deep field objects, but as I understand it, the only way to do so is through long exposure with a camera (?).

I'm currently looking at a few different models:

Celestron NexStar 4 SE Telescope -this one being the absolute limit of my budget

Celestron 21035 70mm Travel Scope

Celestron 127EQ PowerSeeker Telescope

From what I've gotten from the 'What Telescope?' post, I need to choose between deep field and planetary viewing. What will I be able to see with my eyes, versus a camera?

Am I blind or did Amazon just adjusted their pricing AND reduced it with a promo? Link

I swear I was looking at it just before I made this thread and it was 165$...

I started with a Nexstar in LA and would not recommend that to a newbie astrophotographer. Nexstars are fine for visual observation and even planetary imaging but they’re the worst for everything else. Instead, get him this telescope and this mount . That should keep him busy for a long time in astrophotography. Plus both have good resale value in case he doesn’t stick with the hobby ;-)

Oh, and bring him to the LA Astronomical Society’s HQ in Monterey Park! We have open house every Wednesday. Anybody there will be happy to show him the ropes

Maybe this is the time for a short travel refractor like this one?

Celestron 21035 70mm Travel Scope https://www.amazon.com/dp/B001TI9Y2M/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_ke03BbBWZF532

Agree with this setup so much. Only thing I did was downgrade to the Dayton SUB-1000 and switched out the SMSL A2 for a Topping TP-22 and a Schiit Modi 2. I wanted the modularity of having separate components, plus the electrical isolation was a big help.

If you do decided to go this route, you'll need to do four runs of speaker cable (one from each speaker to the sub, and one for each channel on the sub to the amp) and buy an RCA to RCA cable. The Modi 2 will come with a USB that'll connect to a computer and Win7+ will install drivers automatically. I would also recommend getting these. A good set of banana plugs will save you a lot of frustration if you need speaker wire going to terminals that can accept these. It's too bad, though, that only the amp I use feature the right connector.

I've been on the hunt for a receiver for a bit and no luck. Would something like http://www.amazon.com/Topping-TK2050-TC2000-Digital-Amplifier/dp/B005VR1VQE not be good enough?

If you want something small, chances are you won't find anything with all the extras you're looking for. u/explosivo563 had a good point with the art preamp with USB in, I had forgotten about that one. For a good small amp something like the smsl sa50 or 60, or the Topping Tp22 for a small step up would be perfect. The downside to these style amps is you don't have the bass and treble adjust, but honestly I don't think it's that necessary anyway.

My first scope was the Meade Infinity 102 (a great starter scope btw) Learned lots of do's and donts with it and two years later gave it to my dad. After seeing a used 120MM Skywatcher ProEd for a 1000$ on the used market over at cloudy nights I bought it and OMG the difference was literally like night and day, all false color GONE, colors and contrast were incredible, zooming in on the finest detail on Saturn/Jupiter at over 200X was now possible given good seeing conditions.... the hype is real.

Given the quality and awesome views this scope has provided and seeing as how your looking for something a little smaller I could not recommend the ProEd series scopes enough, heres a link to my scopes little brother and im sure its nearly as capable.

https://www.amazon.com/Sky-Watcher-ProED-Doublet-Refractor-Telescope/dp/B004Q75864/ref=sr_1_2?crid=1QKJ16FP6KQNR&keywords=skywatcher+proed+100&qid=1570781346&sprefix=skywatcher+pro%2Caps%2C251&sr=8-2

I bought a Celestron Powerseeker Accessory kit on Amazon: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B004OUMTT2/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_EVyZDbCS9SD3K

Along with an Orion 1.25" extension tube: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0000XMUH8/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_TXyZDbS7EK4SW

Thanks for answering my question!

I have a low grade refactor telescope.

https://www.amazon.com/Celestron-PowerSeeker-50-Refractor-Telescope/dp/B0000UMLYI/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1503083358&sr=8-6&keywords=celestron+telescope

> I need something that will be good for a beginner

The "What telescope should I get?" sticky on this subreddit has a wealth of information that may help you about this.

>a Base model and possibly can be easily upgraded in the future

Unfortunately, manufacturers really don't make low-end telescopes this way anymore (to be frank, I'm not sure they ever really did). To get a low-end, decent "base model" type of mount (not the telescope, just the thing that holds it), you're looking at $300 to $400 - then you purchase the telescope separately to go on it. Different telescopes can be swapped on and off the mount then. That's where the "easily upgradeable" price point really starts in terms of the telescope tube itself.

For lower end telecopes ($50 to $400), what can be easily upgraded are things like eyepieces, finderscopes, star diagonals, and filters. These are almost universally interchangeable between telescopes and brands. So fortunately, even a lower end telescope can be "upgraded" with these items, and if a better telescope is purchased in the future, the better accessories will all work with the new telescope.

As u/schorhr pointed out, larger aperture matters. That said, if you really want a telescope on a tripod, this is about the largest aperture I would recommend given your budget. It has it's flaws, but should be largely a decent option to consider.

Hope that helps.

https://www.amazon.com/Celestron-21061-AstroMaster-Refractor-Telescope/dp/B000MLHMAS/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1481412776&sr=8-1&keywords=celestron+astromaster+70az

I just got a Topping TP22 to power my 2 Monoprice studio monitors. The monitors take TRS or XLR inputs. The Topping's output seems to require banana cables, which I've never used before. How do I connect the amp to the monitors? I can't seem to find any "banana cable ---> TRS/XLR" cables.

Thanks Sp3cia1K for doing this!! Also give your boss a big thank you too. <3

Oh man.. Something I REALLY want, and to brag about. That's really hard because I really want a Kitchenaid stand mixer <3 but that's way out of the price. :p

Personal: I need a new pillow asap. You... umm.. should see... my current .. pillow. ^^^it's ^^^yellow

Activity: The other day on Reddit, I read that they found a new planet within our solar system. This made me want to get a Telescope!. My #1 thing I want to do before I die is see the Aurora Northern Lights.

Activity: I used to have an Instant Camera, but that was over 15 years ago. I never knew what happened to it once digital cameras came out. It'd be cool to have one of these again.

College: While I'm still in school (3 years left majoring animation/illustration! :) ), something I really need and will always have a purpose for is a printer. I need a printer that prints in both color and monochrome. I don't really know which printer is better, but here's one and two.

College/Activity: I've never had a tablet before, but maybe this Fire tablet will help me pass the time between classes or even help me finish my classwork with.

Which of these ones do you think would be what I needed for the Miccas?

Dayton DTA-120 60WPC w/ headphone

Topping TP21 25WPC w/ headphone

Topping TP22 30WPC

SMSL SA-60 60WPC

SMSL SA-50 50WPC

I think I'm missing something about the Toppings, is there a reason they are the same price as the others but with only half the WPC?

I used my telescope and I put my iphone camera right up to the eye piece. It's kind of hard to keep it steady but with some practice you can get it.

The telescope isn't even that expensive. It's similar to this one.

Wow I hadn't thought of that... So something like this?

Definitely seems do-able and within my budget. Certainly a lot less complicated than setting up a true lens relay.

$100 is pretty low. This one is as good as it gets:
http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-21037-PowerSeeker-70EQ-Telescope/dp/B001592LFC/ref=pd_ybh_7?pf_rd_p=280800601&pf_rd_s=center-2&pf_rd_t=1501&pf_rd_i=ybh&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=1A6YCH6PAHMWK6M2XAV3

My sister is 7 and pretty into learning so I got her things to try and keep that spirit alive. I bought her this telescope and a childrens book about celestial bodies. I also bought this for a girl about Isla's age for Christmas. I got to play with it in the store and it feels pretty awesome and never dries up.

Edit: Adela might be interested in the other things I got for my sister which were a Crayola crayon/marker maker, Bill Nye science books and this DohVinci thing

man i am and i think its just convoluting my decision! everything looks great lol

here are the two i'm really liking right now, any opinion between them?

http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-21035-70mm-Travel-Scope/dp/B001TI9Y2M/ref=sr_1_4?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1373176171&sr=1-4&keywords=telescope

^carrying case, kind of thick (i have a complex ok)

http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-21049-127EQ-PowerSeeker-Telescope/dp/B0007UQNKY/ref=sr_1_3?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1373176171&sr=1-3&keywords=telescope

badass looking as well.. but maybe not compact enough to move around?

http://www.amazon.com/Celestron-21037-PowerSeeker-70EQ-Telescope/dp/B001592LFC/ref=sr_1_5?s=photo&ie=UTF8&qid=1373176171&sr=1-5&keywords=telescope

idk pics show it zooming into the moon a lot

What about a kellner set?


https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B004OUMTT2/ref=psdcmw_499164_t3_B00006RH5I


Or aspheric?

https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B01IMZC0O8/ref=mp_s_a_1_11?ie=UTF8&qid=1519804046&sr=8-11&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=eyepiece+set

I'm about to purchase my first kit for deep sky imaging but have one simple question to ask, just to be sure before purchasing.

Would a Skywatcher ProED 80mm Scope fit on a Celestron Advanced VX goto Mount?

Thanks!

incase you're wondering. The Celestron 21061 AstroMaster 70 AZ Refractor Telescope is the telescope I used. I bought it for them as a combined Mother's/Father's day gift. I also took a picture of Saturn. Looks better with your own eyes, but you can still see the basic shape

I am pretty new to this, but my old roommate had a setup and I just couldn't get over how much better the sound can be so I went searching and I found two turntables that I am buying. One is a Scott PS 49A and the other is a Kenwood that I can't recall the model of.

My question is more of a setup. I was looking at some devices and I am looking to keep it realatively budget friendly ($150 or less for preamp and amplifier). My parents are providing me some old speakers so no cost there and I was looking to, buy this preamp and this mini amplifier.

Are there any receivers for $150 or so with a built in phono preamp that can also power some passive speakers?

Here is the mobile version of your link