_ylu=X3oDMTI0aWxjaW84BHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDaW1nBG9pZAM5NjRiMjcxMDFmYzNhNmZkOTIwNDVjNGUzZDRmMjQ3YwRncG9zAzEzNwRpdANiaW5n?back=https%3A%2F%.com%2Fsearch%2Fimages%3Fp%3Dbushnell%2Btelescopes%26_adv_prop%3Dimage%26va%3Dbushnell%2Btelescopes%26fr%3Dush-mailn%26spos%3D24%26nost%3D1%26tab%3Dorganic%26ri%3D137&w=365&h=240&imgurl=%2F365-240-ffffff%2Fopplanet-bushnell-100x45-voyager.jpg&rurl=http%3A%2F%2FThat particular model had a spherical mirror, it only worked well at low power, so ok for that, but not higher power, so stay with the 27mm eyepiece, lots to see, as with low power binoculars. Second edit - is it this one _ylt=A2KLj.vnttBTVkkA4SpNBQx.
Joining or visiting an astro club is often a good idea, most are friendly and helpful.Įdit - just read post # 6, can you comment please on what ronin mentions ? Thanks. I'd not bother with filters for now, that could come much later, if at all.īut see what others say, so many differing and valid options. Your focuser is 1.25" fitting, so look for eyepieces with that spec. Look for an eyepiece that gives decent eyerelief between 10 - 20mm, and it will be much nicer to use. But your $150 budget gives you the choice of something better. A problem with many less expensive 4mm eyepieces is short eyerelief, that means you have to get your eye very close indeed to see anything. With your 400mm focal length scope, you would need a 4mm eyepiece. There's so much to choose from, and so many opinions, however, this Canadian store looks like it has a wide choice of eyepieces Nice to see specs that don't try to get you to silly high powers, 16x and 100x is good, opens up a whole lot of good astronomy. It also says 16 and 100 magnification, but no mention of an eyepiece to give 100x. The specs you posted mention a 27mm eyepiece. I'd try the scope as it is, see how you get on. I am really puzzled by the 100x4.5 reference? Will do fairly good for the moon, and will pick out the brighter clusters (often depends on how dark it is) and you should be able to seperate a number of double stars. The 114/900 on the Bushnell site look right (not a short tube) and it will have a spherical mirror. Why Bushnell combine imperial and Metric I have no idea. If it is a 4.5" 900mm scope then is more often referred to as 114/900mm over here. Really need a link to the scope itself, the one given just gets me on to a page on AstronomyForum Wiki and not to a post on a specific scope. The mirror is poor and you cannot change the eyepieces, they are threaded and dedicated to the scope.
A sort of plastic blue ball with a "chimney" coming out of it ? Other description is a bit like a "Wibbly Wobbly man". If this is the scope that bears resemblance to a chemistry lab "beaker" that you added 2 chemicals to and heated them up then I would ignore it. The copied specification now implies something else with the 400mm focal length bit. I looked for this yesterday and from the initial description all I could come up with was a 4.5" 900mm reflector, I assumed a slight typo, but the copied specification shows 100x4.5. That's not to say the views with a modest scope are not worthwhile, far from it, but "Hubble" they are not, also, a lot can be seen using the lowest magnification the scope can give, running up to around 100 or maybe 125x. Last December, at my local Asda (Wal Mart) they had 50mm Celestron refractors on sale at £40, with glorious technicolour pics on the box, with detail completely beyond the capabilities of the scope. If you are expecting "Hubble like" views, again, disappointment is certain. One example is that many modest telescopes are advertised as giving very high magnifications, like 500x, but if you try that, disappointment is guaranteed.Īnother problem is to manage expectations as to what you will see. Most telescopes will allow a lot of good astronomy to be done, but the trick is to use it within the limitations. If you could post a link to the exact scope you have, that would help, or failing that, a fuller description please, or pics, together with any eyepieces etc, and an idea of what you can spend.
0 kommentar(er)
