Stargazing Using a Telescope: 30X Power for Planets & Moons

  • Thread starter Thread starter m~ray
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    telescope
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the limitations of the Tasco 30X telescope for viewing planets and moons, emphasizing its instability and poor optical quality. Users report that the telescope struggles to provide clear images, even of nearby objects like birds, and the small aperture restricts light intake, resulting in blurry views. Recommendations suggest that for a better experience, investing in a good pair of binoculars is preferable, as they offer more satisfying views of celestial objects. The importance of aperture size over magnification for astronomical viewing is highlighted, with a call for potential buyers to consider these factors before making a purchase. Overall, the consensus is that the Tasco telescope may not meet expectations for serious stargazing.
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Before you pay for that Tasco telescoope, may I suggest you read the "Important. Planning to buy first telescope?" in this subforum. (Look just above your post) This is a great place to get consumer reports on telescopes.

I have used that same Tasco you linked to. It was so unstable that looking at a star cluster was out of the question. The moon's details were blurred, and, in the daytime, even a nearby bird was hard to see. My personal opinion is "don't buy that one".

Also, check out this link:
http://www.skyandtelescope.com/equipment/basics
 
That telescope is about right for the price, which is less than $10 if I'm reading the page correctly. Remember the phrase, "You get what you pay for".
 
OOPS! I misread the price at the website and mis-took Rupees for dollars! Excuse me, please! For that price of less than TEN DOLLARS I would then say: Yes, buy that telescope!
 
Buying optics like this one is guaranteed to be disappointing at any price. A nice 8 x 50 binocular will be much more pleasurable, and you will probably keep it for years. The milky way viewed through these can be breathtaking.
 
The problem with owning a small telescope is so many photographs of astronomical objects are published taken with 10 meter telescopes with adaptive optics on mountain tops that one tends to be dissapointed that ones own views are nothing like as good so don't expect too much !
 
thanks for the replies... i think the magnification factor isn't that bad but objective lens aperture is too small to allow much of light to enter.. :(
 
m~ray said:
thanks for the replies... i think the magnification factor isn't that bad but objective lens aperture is too small to allow much of light to enter.. :(

That plus it's not big enough to even allow for a decent zoom. The larger the aperture the further you can zoom in before you hit the diffraction limit. Once you hit the limit further magnification does nothing but make a bigger blurry image.
 
I think every one should understand that for astronomical use, diameter of objective lens or mirror is far more important that magnification. Indeed, typically, one uses a variety of eyepieces with different focal lengths that give different magnifications.
 

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
25
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
25
Views
5K
Back
Top