Enter OZSCSWK3 during checkout and get this SkyWatcher 114/900 EQ Telescope with Motor Drive for $199.95!
Limited Stock Available!
Link shows $259.95
Hi singlemalt72 ,
Please enter the OZSCSWK3 at checkout page.
D'OH - didn't see the code!
Do you have any of the higher quality scopes for sale with a coupon code?
Normally we don't reduce price for higher end scopes, however we do customize bundles for customer, please visit our website for more details or just let me know which product you interested with, so i can help you further.
Also worth a look is the 5" Dob for $229 - http://www.ozscopes.com.au/skywatcher-heritage-5-dobsonian-t...
At this price point any extra aperture is desirable, so I would go with the dob too.
This is suitable for the moon, planets and maybe some brighter Messiers?
The only real reason to favour an equatorial mount would be if you wanted to do astro-photography, but I suspect there would be too much play in such a cheap mount to be useful.
My first scope 20 years ago was in this league and cost $1000!
The problem with these Dobs is that there's no equatorial mount and no motor. So while the larger aperture is nice, things in space move surprisingly quickly!
(We have a 6" Dob from some other shop in Burke Road, but bought a T-piece for attaching the SLR from OzScopes)
Andrew's are a reputable low-cost supplier for price comparison:
I picked up my 8" dob from andrews for $475, but they regularly have them on sale for $449
A dob is a much better option for casual visual observing than these tiny reflectors and refractors on shaky mounts. The scopes today are pretty good compared to 10-15 years ago.
how this compare to aldi national geographic telescope..
Both are far superior, the Aldi scope is only useful for the moon, both listed above will see the rings of Saturn, Moons of Jupiter, phases of Venus and maybe some messier detail. I like the dob mounts because the can be inexpensive and still rock steady.
but how good can you see the rings of saturn?
is it just a blur ring etc..?
btw do people who have this telescopes, how often do u use it?
seems like it better just to watch some clips on youtube, much better clarity etc..
Nothing beats the buzz of dialing up Saturn for yourself and looking at in real time. But I can't comment on the detail resolution/clarity since I have a different setup.
yes, it is cool to see how the world/universe is so much bigger than what we are used seeing daily…
it makes u get this sense of awe, about the great unknown..
and philosophical questions…
btw how good can u see the rings?
the only thing, is how often do people would use it?
With my Celestron NexStar 8SE, and the right eyepiece, the features of Saturn, its rings, and its moons, are so plainly visible that it blew my mind the first time I used it. And that's from a suburban backyard with all sorts of light pollution.
How often do I use it? Not that often these days. But I'll never part with it because I'm always supremely glad that it's there whenever I get the urge.
You can download Hubble images if all you want is clarity. That'll beat anything you see with a telescope and there are a lot of long exposure shots in magazines and on the net that far outdo anything you will ever see with your eye through a telescope. That is not what buying a telescope is about. It is about seeing the universe with your own eyes. It is about gaining and appreciation for what 400 years of science have done for us and the challenges faced by early astronomers. It's about trying to gain an appreciation for how hard won our knowledge of the vast universe around us is first hand. You can do basic things that some of the earlier astronomers could only dream of with their limited optics. You'll see better images than Galileo ever did with any decent telescope.
Yes you'll see the rings of saturn on a good day. Here's an idea of what you'll see:
Here's what you'll see through $50 binoculars. (Disclaimer: I wrote this and gave a talk to my local astro club)
The image of Saturn above this bit - (This is Saturn as seen through a Celestron NexStar 130SLT Computerized Telescope with a 130mm aperture.) Is about what I see with the 5" dob.
The images are not amazing but the fact I can see things like that was very exciting (for me). The 5" dob is very small compared to the scope listed here and I've taken it travelling and got into some very dark skies (even areas around the SKA scopes in WA) and its easy and fun to pull out around the campfire.
I probably pull it out once a month and are really glad I have it.
The aldi national geographic scope is a joke and nat geo should be ashamed to associate their name with it. The box tells you the size of the lens when it's actually talking about a mirror. I wouldn't even give it to a child to play with.
can u explain what the numbers mean?
and what are aldi numbers compared?
114 is the aperture. This bigger the aperture number the better, as this indicates how much light can be collected (contrary to popular belief, a telescope is more about amplifying dim objects rather than magnifying small objects). The 900 number is the focal length. This number is used when calculating the F Ratio (look it up) and also the magnification, though this is dependent also upon the eyepiece used. Each eyepiece has a focal length and the magnification is the focal length of the scope /focal length of the eyepeiece. Eg with a 25mm eyepiece mag = 900/25 = 36.
The aldi scope (also available at ozcopes at $75) is 76/350. Note I picked up an aldi scope a year ago for the times when I just couldn’t be bothered setting up my 8” dob, and after collimation (it was a very long way out, esp the secondary), I’ve actually been quite impressed; I used it a couple of months ago looking for comet C2 Lovejoy and found it had no problem seeing stars of mag 9 and less.
You'd be much better off with a cheap pair of binocs. 350/25 = 14x magnification. You can pick up good 10x50 binocs (10x mag) for ~$50.
114 = diameter of mirror ("aperture" - the "opening" collecting the light).
Larger mirror or lens (aperture) = more light collecting power. Double the diameter = quadruple the light collected (because area of a circle increases by the square of the diameter). Your eyes need more light to see colour and to see dimmer objects. So you'll see more detail and colour in a nebula or other deep sky object…whereas you'll probably collect too much light for bright planets and want some way of cutting it down (filter or aperture mask - piece of cardboard/metal/plastic that goes in front and blocks a lot of the light).
114mm = 4.5 inches. How much light? Well what's the area of the circle. Pi*(4.5)^2.
Since when radius doubles so does diameter you can just square the number of inches (or mm as long as you're consistent) to get an idea of how much more powerful a scope is
4.5 inch 4.5^2 = 20.25
6 inch 6^2 = 36
8 inch 8^2 = 64
10 inch 10^2 = 100
12 inch 12^2 = 144
16 inch 16^2 = 256
So as you can see an 8 inch scope is going to collect more than 3 times as much light as a 4.5 inch scope. A 12 inch will collect over 7 times as much. A 16 inch more than 12.5 times as much. This is why amateur astronomers get "aperture fever" and want bigger and bigger scopes.
(Now there is one other thing to consider - reflectors have a central mirror that blocks part of the light so for equal sizes a refractor will collect more light than a reflector. It affects the smaller reflector scopes more because you have a larger percentage of that central mirror blocked by the secondary mirror and the arms holding it in place…so less light).
900 = 900mm focal length - literally the distance at which rays will focus from the primary lens. Larger numbers mean longer instruments (unless they have an expensive corrector plate that bends the light to shorten the path). Longer focal length magnifies more and is useful for resolving planets and is easier to align/collimate as small changes don't throw the light farther away. The down side is the more you magnify the dimmer the light so if you want to look at deep sky stuff you want to keep the focal length divided by the aperture low. It's a trade off. When you divide focal length by aperture you get f/ number (same idea as cameras). So a large dobsonian telescope will often be f/4.5 which can be fiddly to collimate/align whereas a smaller refractor might be f/11 and typically has a solid build and often no need or means to align. The telescope you're looking at is 900/114 so f/7.9.
@syousef: If you have managed to find a good pair of 10x50 binocs for $50, please let me know where. The cheapest astronomy binoc on OZscopes are $179. I do have a trusty pair of 8x40s, and with the aldi scope I was able to easily see stars several magnitudes dimmer than I could with the binocs. (I was using both side by side back in Nov when hunting for Q2 lovejoy, as the aldi scope doesn’t have a finder – and with 14x mag you wouldn’t think you would need it, but I’m too used to the lovely finder on my 8” dob). This performance really suprised me - I been involved with amateur astronomy for about 15 years, and have warned many people off department store scopes - but the little aldi scope well exceeded my admittedly low expectations. Note I cannot comment on the quality of the supplied eyepieces, as I have only been using my existing eps.
I gave this talk a couple of years ago.
Some of the particular sources I mentioned have dried up or gotten more expensive and our dollar has tanked but $79 will still get you the same pair I bought at Andrews if you can't wait for a sale, and I would be surprised if the binocs I bought at Parklea Markets were completely gone. Note also I said good not great.
It's not fair to use good eyepieces when judging the Aldi scope. A beginner would not have those lying around.
On the aldi scope your light gathering power in units of square millimeters is
76^2 = 5776
On your binocs:
(40^2)*2 = 3200 or about 80% less light.
So I'm not surprised you don't see as faint a magnitude in your 8x40s…especially since those trusty binocs don't have newer factory fresh optics.
On 10x50 binocs it's (50^2)*2 = 5000
which is much more comparable (about 15% less), especially if you consider there's no secondary mirror obstructing the center of your view as with the Dob.
That's an excellent little exercise to show how a small increase in diameter for aperture can make a significant difference.
Also, ironically the Nat Geo binocs sold by Aldi were pretty bad. The optics were okayish but I couldn't get eye separation wide enough for my eyes and I have rooftop kids binocs for my children that give enough separation. A real disappointment. To try them out I had to buy then return them.
@syousef: Thanks syousef, excellent article (and I read it all the way to the end – and now know what those tiny screws in my binocs are for…)
I understand about the not being able to fit the dob in the car for family holidays (especially after the wife has packed everything she needs); It was this plus my inability to find a reasonable pair of binocs at a sensible price (and I’ve been looking for years – which is why I asked) that resulted in my grabbing the little scope as a suitcase scope (plus the fact that some folk take exception to you walking around family campgrounds at night with binocs)
Glad you liked it.
It is unfortunate that some people are suspicious of binoculars. Taking your wife or kids with you may or may not help depending on where you are. Using a telescope if people are less suspicious of it is also a good technique. The dob is good in that it's very clearly not made for terrestrial viewing and people can easily see that it points up.
Hi, if you have any scopes for the 400 mark that are amazing deal ill get one. No idea whats good so if you come up with a good deal and good model after a quick search ill get one.
Does it come with the 2x Barlow?
This telescope doesn't come with barlow lens, you have to buy it separately.
Shop is based in Melbourne only? Shipping to Sydney is killing the deal for me :(
Would this or the 5" Dobson be a good first buy ? I have little knowledge of telescopes but am fascinated by the idea of looking at other planets, their moons and stars. Hobart has some beautiful clear nights sometimes. I would really appreciate any advice and websites/books too.
Astronomy sites often recommend an 8" reflector on a dobsonian mount as the best value first telescope. But there are other options.
A good Southern hemisphere web site is http://www.iceinspace.com.au/. You can ask questions on beginners forums and you will get all the help you need. They also have a classified ads for second hand equipment.
Bintel in Sydney and Melbourne, have showrooms where you can handle scopes - they give straight advice too. Plenty of other dealers as well.
Don't waste your money on a toy shop telescope , and research before you buy .
but the reverse could be said, should one spend so much money, if you only gonna use it a few times, and maybe it end up in the garage…
maybe someone could get a kick out of looking at the moon, and that is enough for them, as a first scope
No way should you buy a flimsy scope. I started with one. I made the most of it but I laugh at what I tried to do with it. Don't go out looking for a car then get talked into buying a bicycle instead because you're not sure how much use you'll get out of the car. "Department store" scopes just don't do the job. If you don't like your 8" dob, you can resell it for half the price or more with a clear conscience.
Problem with 8" dobs are they are fairly big.
Great thing about the collapsible 5" is its light and packed up about the size of a carton of beer. Problem with the 5" is its aperture is too small but many over in Ice in Space agreed that it wasn't a bad starting point for $200.
I think the point people are making Tyler is that many people get a crappy $39.95 scope with 90,000X mag and are so disappointed with it they never look to the sky again. Invest in something (often just decent bino's) with just a little quality and it might ignite a spark that leads to a real hobby!
P.S. The moon with the 5" is insane, very clear and basically as good as the second moon image on the page listed before.