Total Beginner - Computerised Telescope Advice

[Magic86]

Hi All!

I’ve always loved space and star gazing and would like to explore a little more. I’m probably mainly after your typical moon (as close as I can see), nearby planets and stars.

It’s something I just want to be able to go in the garden or out camping and take a telescope and explore. That’s sort of where I’m at.

I was looking at computerised telescopes because they sound amazing. Taking all the hard work out of it and letting me see what I want to see.

With that in mind, I was looking at the Celestron LCM 80 and wondered if anyone could give some advice? Is it right for what I want is are there better options for under £200?

Thanks!!!

[helicon]

Hello and Welcome to the Forums. I'm not familiar with that scope but I am sure someone will be along to answer your question.

[Lady Fraktor]

Hello and welcome
Are you buying this from a retailer or used?

If it works properly then 200 is not a bad price, does it come with any accessories?

[Magic86]

Thanks for replying. It comes with 2 eye pieces and a tripod so pretty basic.

I was also looking at the Celestron Starsense 114AZ which although isn’t computerised it does use a smartphone to help you track the stars. It’s a Newtonian and looks slightly better spec.

[Lady Fraktor]

These telescopes are the bare basic for goto mounts, as far as I know the LCM is discontinued so my question if used or not.

These do work generally, reasonably well can can get you out viewing. Either will require a bit of setup and tweaking that people here can help you with.

[Magic86]

It’s new.

The LCM is £170 and the 114 Newtonian is £199.

[Lady Fraktor]

For ease of use to start I would suggest the refractor version as they seldom need collimating of the lens cell where as if traveling with the newtonian you will need to learn to collimate the mirrors.
A easy enough thing to do but is one thing less to worry about with the refractor.

[John Baars]

Hello Magic,
Welcome to the forums!
Maybe this is not the digital and computerized answer that you want, but it comes from the real world.

-Buy yourself a planisphere and discover the constellations. https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/pr ... rsion.html or just download the free planetarium program http://stellarium.org/ Online (less impressive): https://stellarium-web.org/
-Buy a good atlas and make yourself familiar with the brightest stars. https://www.teleskop-express.de/shop/pr ... -6mag.html
-Buy a pair of 10X50 binoculars and try to find some of the brightest deepsky-objects.

Then comes the moment to decide whether you still want to buy one of the two telescopes you suggested. That may be the case, but at least you will have a solid base of observing experience by then, which will prevent your new telescope ending up in a cupboard.

Beware:
Goto systems seem rather easy.
Every goto or computerized telescope needs calibration on the brightest stars. In most cases you must know their name....some don't need it. Those with GPS calibration are very expensive.
"If"... you succeed calibration, your database will direct to 4000 objects. Of which 3900 cannot be seen. Because they are too faint for your telescope under moderate light polluted skies.
On the whole most of you money goes to the electronics and not the optics. Economic closing post on these kind of telescopes are the mechanics.

[Ylem]

Hello and welcome to TSS

Do NOT buy that 114mm

Notice that it states that the focal length is 1000mm (40"), BUT the scope is only 18" long!

That is what's called a Bird Jones design.
It uses an internal lense to create the 1000mm.
They are a PIA.

(An SCT or Mak is generally the only scope that effectively "folds" it's focal length)

Personally, I would look at Celestron's Nexstar series, quite proven.

If you go with this new LCM, get the refractor.

A Newton reflector should be approximately the same physical length as it's focal length.

Hope that helps

Feel free to ask more questions

[JayTee]

To piggyback on Jeff's caution above, the reason the manufacturer uses that little lens in the focuser tube is to correct the image coming from the spherical primary mirror. A standard "vanilla" Newtonian uses a parabolic primary mirror. Parabolic mirrors take more work and time to make therefore making them more expensive to produce. This is the reason why the focuser tube has that little lens (aka sub-aperture corrector). Go here to learn way more than you ever wanted to about this design: https://www.telescope-optics.net/sub_ap ... htm#bottom

Can you get a decent image from these scopes, yes, but the steps necessary to keep the optics aligned (collimated) requires more work than is necessary for a Newtonian with a parabolic primary mirror.

Cheers,
JT

[Ylem]

Because it's a new scope package, it's difficult to recommend it. It's quite "affordable" for a go-to scope.
You get what you pay for.

If you can swing for one of the scopes in the Nexstar series, you will have a scope that will last years.

If not, I would look at non goto scopes and use your phone to help find stuff

[Greenman]

Hi Magic, welcome to the boards, I would be tempted to look for a second hand NexStar. For visual these are good once you get the hang of alignment.