What should I look out for when I want to get a telescope? What kind do I need to be able to see saturn in a quality of pic related? Do I need a special one if I want to hook up my DSLR onto it, or will pretty much any one do?
>>7585173
You don't need a super powerful telescope to be able to see the planets up until you hit Uranus. Plants are generally the easiest thing to see in the sky right behind the moon and the sun.
>>7585217
Thank you, glad to hear that.
Should I go for a refractor or a reflector? Is getting a used higher model better than a new cheap model or is it not worth the risk / problems of a used one?
>>7585244
Depends on your budget. Depends on the pros and cons of refractors and reflectors and which pros suit you more. Getting a better "model" of a telescope is going to more expensive than going for cheaper models. Again, depends what budget you are setting and how much you are going to get into astronomy. Some scopes have the bare basics (the scope itself). Some scopes come with computer searching and tracking equipment.
If you are unsure, I wouldn't splurge a bunch of cash.
Here are some cheaper scopes that I think would be able to view planets just fine and come with 2 eye pieces:
>http://www.telescope.com/Telescopes/Refractor-Telescopes/Refractor-Telescopes-for-Beginners/Orion-Observer-60mm-Altazimuth-Refractor-Telescope/pc/1/c/10/sc/331/p/102294.uts?sortByColumnName=SortByPriceAscending
>http://www.telescope.com/Telescopes/Reflector-Telescopes/Reflector-Telescopes-for-Beginners/Orion-SpaceProbe-3-Altazimuth-Reflector-Telescope/pc/1/c/11/sc/339/p/102295.uts?sortByColumnName=SortByPriceAscending
Look around on various sites; see if there is anything cheaper (there probably is).
I personally have a refractor telescope with a few different eye pieces.
>>7585444
Thanks fam I'll check your links and try to get more info.
http://www.meteorwatch.org/beginners-telescopes-easy-guide-review/
I think getting and learning how to use an equatorial mount is really worth it if you're at all serious. I have an alt-az mount and it is an absolute pain in the ass having whatever you're watching slide out of view every ten seconds.
Location is more important than equipment. If you live in (or near) a big city with smog and haze, the viewing will be crappy no matter what 'scope you have. Conversely, if you have clear skies, even a small cheap 'scope will give you good images.
>>7585506
Ues, it seems like equatorial mounts are better for photography as well.
>>7585549
Noted, thank you.
I'm primarily asking here because it may be a special case in that I'm not scared of technical stuff and want to do photography from the start). Looks like I'll need a computer controlled motor for that as well which ups the price (or kills the quality for the same price). I might go for the viewing experience only and not worry about photography after all.
>>7586332
I think it takes a pretty serious investment to do any high quality timelapse / multi photo stuff yeah, but if you're just doing it for fun it's entirely possible to take photos manually.
I got this by just holding a smartphone camera up to a rickety 60mm. With a mount and a proper camera and I bet you'd be getting good stuff really quickly.
>>7585173
I can see Saturn's rings very clearly with my 6in reflector. And that's with medium to heavy light pollution. I can also clearly see Jupiter's stripes and moons.
I haven't had time to drive to a dark sky location to try to see Neptune or Uranus or some of the deep sky objects
