Help with a Meade NGC60 Telescop?

I recently bought a new Meade NGC 60 Telescope. and I was wondering if anyone had one of these and if you do can you give me some tips on it and what I can expect to see with it. it is not the biggest most expensive telescope around. just a temporary one for now till I can get something much bigger. but it is supposedly not a beginners telescope either. also I was wondering if anyone had takin any pictures with this telescope through an electronic lense or camera attachment. thanks

It's this one, isn't it?



It's good for looking moon, planets and other bright objects.
Its light gathering power is way too small for deep sky objects.

yup that would be it. So as far as viewing things like saturn and other planets its pretty good?

You'll probably have to get some extra lenses (get a 4, and 6) and filters. The moon will look really cool with a blue filter, and if you hook yourself up with some 2x and 3x Barlow lenses you should be able to see Saturn fairly clearly.

MK

With a telescope of this small size, it has small lenses, and a short focal length, so a Barlow 2X or 3X will only cause you a lot of problems with
trying to see the rings of Saturn. It will be extremely hard to find an
object to begin with and, it will be hard to focus, it will shake and wobble
and it will be in view for only a few moments with the rotation of the
Earth. I would suggest leaving it on the lowest power, you will see
a lot clearer, it won't shake, and you will be able to keep objects in view for
quite a long time. This type of scope is best for moon viewing, although
the rings of Saturn should be seen, the main moons around Juipter
will be clearly visible. You will be able to see tons of stars though, and
you will probably be able to see large globular clusters and an occasional
galaxy, but you won't be able to peer into deep space with this scope.
Also, when you look through it, everything is actually upside down
from the naked eye view. Some extra colored lenses will be very nice,
especially looking at the bright moon.
I would also suggest just experimenting with different lenses, and
different powers to get a feel for what this scope will or won't do.
ZOOMER

[edit on 9-10-2004 by ZOOMER]

Thanks for the help. I do have a 2x barlow lens and a few other lenses. A 25mm and a 9mm. I have a few grand saved up and when I get about 3 or 4 more I am getting a 12 or 14 inch Meade Lx200

Stick with the 25mm eyepiece as it will give you the best results.
After you have an object in the center and focused, switch over
to the 2X or 3X and then try to focus. You might have a hard time.
The 25mm is more wide angled than the 9 obviously.
The 12-14 inch Meades are great scopes and will allow you to see
deep space objects. All sorts of star clusters, nebulae, galaxies
and you can look right INTO the craters on the moon. You can even
see the Space Shuttle when it zooms over.
I am looking at a 25 inch Dobsonian light bucket made by Obsession
Scopes in Wisconsin in the US. With the Go-To tracking system and
all the rest of the goodies including laser collimator, I am going to
plunk down around 15 grand. I want to see deep space objects.
Galaxies are especially appealing to me. Anymore questions I can
help you with, fire away.
ZOOMER

Originally posted by Ignorance Is Bliss
I recently bought a new Meade NGC 60 Telescope. and I was wondering if anyone had one of these and if you do can you give me some tips on it and what I can expect to see with it. it is not the biggest most expensive telescope around. just a temporary one for now till I can get something much bigger. but it is supposedly not a beginners telescope either. also I was wondering if anyone had takin any pictures with this telescope through an electronic lense or camera attachment. thanks

you would have been better off buying a decent set of binoculas - this approach is a better and cheaper option until you know for sure astronomy is your hobby.

I have a crap pair at present, (i looked at m45 (pliedies) the other night - i saw more with my crap binos then my slightly more expensive tasco (btw stear clear of tasco scopes - they do suck somewhat ) but considering getting the canon anti shake binos variety - they are about 300 sterling for 7 x 50 - but better than these telescopes that promise the world - that infact dont come anywhere near their aparent spec.

ALso a good astronomy sw is a good idea too - i use starrynight pro 4 to determine the earth shadow etc for darker skys - just soo happens m45 is currently in the east and stays there more most of this month - also theres a nice earth shadow at the end of the month - that sits right where the pleidies are moving thru the eastern sky - if you point ya scope towards here you should see over a thousand stars within the area of the pleidies.

So you have a target for later this month - it should eather make ya interest deeper or just bore you to tears.

hope this helps.





[edit on 10-10-2004 by The_Visitor]

Bliss:

The poster above mentioned Tasco Telescopes. Please take your
money and run as fast as you can. That is one of the worst types
you can buy in my opinion. I was stupid enough to actually buy one
of these about 15 years ago. Look for a good quality scope. The one
you have is alright for up close objects, but not much more.
If you hear of someone advertising power, power, power in a telescope,
that is another sign to take your money and run. Power is the LAST
thing you want to look for in a telescope.
The Meade you are looking at in the future is one of the best you can
buy. You will also be able to do astrophotography with the right setup.

I am not sure where you live, but there are a number of objects in the
Eastern sky to observe. In the Northern Hemisphere you can clearly see
Pladieus (sp?) or the 7 Sisters Constellation that is fun to view.
In the Central US where I live, I can go outside around 10 PM and see
this Constellation 30-40 degrees up from the horizon in the
East. At around 11 PM or later, look straight down and to the right,
and you will see the Orion Constellation.

Again, leave your scope on low power with the wide angle lens, and
you will be able to focus sharply and keep the object in view for a long
time without a lot of shaking and wobbling.

ZOOMER

Originally posted by ZOOMER
Bliss:

The poster above mentioned Tasco Telescopes. Please take your
money and run as fast as you can. That is one of the worst types
you can buy in my opinion. I was stupid enough to actually buy one
of these about 15 years ago.

ZOOMER

I tend to now put tasco scopes in the same catergory as those cheap n cheerful russian import cheap microscope kits. - rather sad and cheap, putting it quite mildly.

btw - did the tripod your tasco come with also wobble due to that annoying 1/4 inch gap between the scope holder and the three wooden legs of the tripod? - bad oversight by tasco - makes the tripod next to useless (without the aid of 3 washers, an intelligent improvisation on my part i thought).

Visitor:

I agree with what you said. I can't stress enough to people how
UNIMPORTANT power is in a telescope. You can buy a number of
really good scopes on the market today, and not have to pay an
arm and a leg for one.

The refractors do indeed cost more that a reflector, but there are
some not so good refractors around also.
Look for focal length, quality of lens, quality of mount or tripod.
Forget all this stuff about power. I have a Barlow 2x and 3x,
and what a waste of money actually. The only time I can use these
is to view the Moon, and even then it is not so great.

ZOOMER


[edit on 10-10-2004 by ZOOMER]

Thanks for the tips everyone. I am not new to astronomy at all. I have been interested in it for a long time. and I took a class at the community college. and they have their own observitory. So I know what focal length is and arc minutes (or resolving power) 'n everything else. but untill now this was all I could afford. I can wait till I can afford what I want. should be cool

I have another question whilst I have your attention. In everyones own opinion. What is the best type of teliscope? i.e. Muskatov, schmidt-cassegrain dobsonian, newtonian or whetever you think is the best one.. and why......

Your question about which telescope is best is like asking which car is best -- You can make a good case for a Toyota Prius, Honda Civic, Lomborghini Countach, or Chevy Suburban ....

...depending on what you want to do.

First off, as my other colleagues have said, the most important thing about a telescope is not its magnification, but its light gathering power. This is, of course a function of the size of its objective lens (in a refractor) or its primary mirror (in a reflector).

Here are my very biased opinions:

Reflector versus refractor: reflector. A 5- or 6-inch refractor gives you some of the best possible optics around, but it's heavy and requires a second mortgage on your house.

Newtonian or Folded optics: This is a tough one. A folded-optics (catadioptric) telescope is much shorter and easier to haul around, but it's more complex and expensive than a Newtonian. I'd personally go with a Newtonian, unless you have to haul the thing twenty or thirty miles out into the desert to get away from the city lights; in that case, the SC or MC is a lot easier to schlepp around.

If you do go with a catadioptic, you have a choice of a Schmidt-Cassegrain or a Maksutov-Cassegrain. The latter has a corrector lens in fromt of the primary mirror which is supposed to decrease chromatic aberration, but it costs a lot more. I'd stick with the Schmidt; I think the money you save is worth the possible slight degradation in optical capability.

Finally, there are several kind of mounts. the cheapest one is the Dobsonian; this is just a free-wheeling mount using teflon pads, that allows you to move the entire assembly with just the touch of a finger. the problem is that it's very difficult to hook that up to a computer-controlled finder (the "GOTO" you hear about); and, since it doesnt track the object, makes astrophotography impossible for anything but, say, moon shots. The upside is that the Dobsonian mount is very inexpensive, which means you can spend the money on a very big (say, 16-inch/38 cm) mirror.

My personal choice is to go with a tracking mount, either an equi-azimuth or fork-mount, with the computer controller "GOTO" capability: for a beginner, a Meade ETX-70 AT (www.telescopes.com...); for a serious astronomer, a Meade 8- or 10-inch LH-200 (www.telescopes.com...).

Brand Names: I mention Meade because they're the most commonly sold brand of real telescopes, and because I have one (an 8" SC). But my neighbor has a Celestron which he admits costs more and I admit has just a bit better performance.

I guess it boils down to how much money you have and how interested you'll be.

[edit on 11-10-2004 by Off_The_Street]