Celestron 76mm Firstscope, Amazon, 29.98 - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit
37Expired

Celestron 76mm Firstscope, Amazon, 29.98

richlyraumi Avatar
5y, 10m agoFound 5 years, 10 months ago
Seems like a good reduction and a decent price. I am tempted to get one of these as a starter scope for my family. If we get bored, its not such an expensive item (compared to obviously much better telescopes that are available).
More From Amazon:
×
Get the Hottest Deals Daily
Stay informed. Once a day, we'll send you the deals our members voted as the best.
Failed
richlyraumi Avatar
5y, 10m agoFound 5 years, 10 months ago
Options

All Comments

(23) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#1
Its catch22.
as if you can't see much detail, then the chances of you getting fed up of it is high.
More frustrating are clouds, though.

My Son wanted one for Christmas, so it took a few phone calls and some reading on the web about what to go with for a first Reflecting scope. We have had some great nights out so far.
The great thing about this subject is you can learn as little as as much as you wish, or just look at stars, moon and the odd satellite.

76mm mirror scope for £30 is hot, even if its a table top type.
going to buy one and take it on holiday with us to Africa.
#2
Opia - I know exactly what you mean.

I bought a second hand Bresser 6" reflector with all the equitorial munts etc. A great piece of kit, but it was so big, complicated and awkward, I just couldn't be bothered with it. It needed dismantelling just to take it out into the garden! I've put that back on eBay and am looking for something much simpler, even if it is nowhere near as good.


I'm torn between something like this and a huge pair of binoculars, but this is a very good price, and it looks nice and simple.
#3
I'm torn between something like this and a huge pair of binoculars, but this is a very good price, and it looks nice and simple.[/quote]

You have obviously researched this but for what it is worth my opinion is the binoculars is the way to go due to the ease of use for the kids
#4
A good compromise then might be (you need a little space for storage) a sky-watcher 76mm SK767AZ1 - i have seen them sell for ~£20 on the bay ! ( about £75new)
http://www.skywatchertelescope.net/swtinc/product.php?id=39&class1=1&class2=104
Folds up and comes with a fully adjustable tri-pod, a couple of eye pieces/2x barrow lense.
its not half bad for its price and does most things you would want.
#5
In some ways, but there's nothing like having one thing to look through that's just fixed on a table rather than handing binocs to somebody else and describing where to point them. I guess you could tripod mount them, but that defeats the object of their simplicity.

Mmmm.
#6
1 Like #8
The number of people who buy this kind of thing, try it once and bury it in a closet is astonishing. Three inches is just too small for a reflector. Traditionally, beginners are recommended to get a reflector of at least six inches or a refractor of at least three inches. Anything less does not have the resolving power required. There is an accessory kit for this scope on Amazon for twenty pounds that has a finder scope and two more eyepieces. These normally come included with small cheap scopes, so add that to the "bargain" price above. You can get comparable quality binoculars for 15 quid now, and use them for all kinds of other purposes as well as looking at the moon once.

Here is a link to a good article on what kind of telescope NOT to buy:

http://www.rocketroberts.com/astro/first.htm
#9
"Three inches is just too small for a reflector"

Mmm. I wonder what Galileo used....
#10
richlyraumi
"Three inches is just too small for a reflector"

Mmm. I wonder what Galileo used....


Gallileo used a couple of pretty poor telescopes. They are on display in a museum somewhere. They didn't have the resolving power necessary to make out Saturn's rings properly. He thought they were like handles on a cup, then he couldn't see them at all (they turned edge on) and doubted his earlier observations.

The reflector was invented by Newton.
#11
3" is plenty , just ask your Mrs :p

You buy the largest mirror you can afford, don't waste over £100 on a start scope.
1 Like #12
"The reflector was invented by Newton."

My point is that they had much cruder equipment than is available now. This kind of telescope is really just to look at the moon and stars and is priced/sized to do that. £30 is fine for that. Its when you start kidding yourselves that you can see a gnats ass on Mars that the frustration begins. This isn't that. Its a £30 telescope down from (apparently) about £80. It looks and feels like a 'grown-up' telescope that just might spark an interest.

Opia - my wife lurves my Dobsonian!
#13
richlyraumi
just might spark an interest.


I think this is the the key !

My Son is only 9, and it was something he wanted without any involvement from me. But 'WE' have learnt a fair amount already together.
He likes his PC games (as do I), so its just something else that can get us out doing something together was worth it, but its far more interesting then I imagined it would be.

Next thing he has asked for is a web cam adapter for his scope, since we struggled with the compact camera to get photo's.
#14
I bought a 3" reflector for my daughter a few months ago, after she showed a bit of interest in a couple of astronomy programs on tv, but in all honesty it is next to useless. Although the manufacturer claimed 'up to 200x magnification' or whatever, you can only see anything at all (other than a vague blur) out of the lowest magnification lens and then it is only really on a par with some decent binoculars we already had - you can make out areas of light and dark on the moon, but it is not very distinct and the planets are just slightly brighter dots of light than you can see by eye.

I appreciate what one or two others say about larger telescopes being unwieldy, but 3 to 4" telescopes simply don't have anywhere near enough resolving power to capture a child's imagination (or anyone else's) IMO.

Frankly, if you're interested in astronomy, you are much better off either joining a club, where you may be able to look through other people's decent sized telescopes, or just watching the documentaries on TV, you will simply not get a positive experience out of a 3" telescope - sorry.
1 Like #15
Og well, they've sold out now!
#16
In your case, its obvious you was not even focused !

But ok, just to clarify something
There are 2 measurements to a scope, and the mirror is only one of them.
the focal length is the other.
Also its true that not all scopes are created equal, or in fact set-up correctly in the first place.
To flippantly disregard ALL 3" scopes when you can't get to grips with your own is just ignorant.

You would need some pretty trick binoculars to capture as much light as a 76x700mm reflecting scope :p
#17
richlyraumi
Og well, they've sold out now!


they only had a few naywya, but others are available at similar +postage.

I hope who got them takes the time to read some guides and maybe even get googlesky app for their smart phone (amazing software !)
#18
opia
In your case, its obvious you was not even focused !

But ok, just to clarify something
There are 2 measurements to a scope, and the mirror is only one of them.
the focal length is the other.
Also its true that not all scopes are created equal, or in fact set-up correctly in the first place.
To flippantly disregard ALL 3" scopes when you can't get to grips with your own is just ignorant.

You would need some pretty trick binoculars to capture as much light as a 76x700mm reflecting scope :p


Well thanks very much, Opia, clearly ignoramuses like me would be better just keeping their ill-informed opinions to themselves.

For your information, though, numerous experienced astronomers hold my view rather than yours, are they all ignorant incompetents as well?
#19
andyken
opia
In your case, its obvious you was not even focused !

But ok, just to clarify something
There are 2 measurements to a scope, and the mirror is only one of them.
the focal length is the other.
Also its true that not all scopes are created equal, or in fact set-up correctly in the first place.
To flippantly disregard ALL 3" scopes when you can't get to grips with your own is just ignorant.

You would need some pretty trick binoculars to capture as much light as a 76x700mm reflecting scope :p


Well thanks very much, Opia, clearly ignoramuses like me would be better just keeping their ill-informed opinions to themselves.

For your information, though, numerous experienced astronomers hold my view rather than yours, are they all ignorant incompetents as well?


I doubt an experience astro' would have trouble getting a 3" reflector to focus on the moon, so I don't think they would like to say that they hold the same view as you. :p
I am not here to argue with you, but we have a 3" scope that was recommended to us by more then 1 store when its NOT in their interest to under sell, and then checked on forums as a good starter scope.
Its not Just about the magnification, its about the amount of light.

And you are ignorant if you are so flippant when you clearly do not know about the subject to make such a remark. You not even said what size lens you used, but by large I presume you had maybe 2 and used the one with the bigger number on it?
Did you acclimatise your scope, or get it away from ambient light?
Did you set up your scope on a know object and check the mirrors for alignment prior to looking at the moon?
You see, its all in the manual and help available on sites if you do run into issues.

We can look at some of the craters on the moon with our 10mm lens & 2xBarrow with good detail, but we should use a filter too.
We even got some semi-decent photo's with a 25mm and just holding my compact camera close to the eye piece !
#20
What is the cheapest acceptable telescope that you can attach a Canon SLR to please? I'd like to like to take some proper high res photos through one :)
1 Like #21
You are much better using a compact camera, or better still, a webcam (google search for best models and techniques) for taking pictures through a telescope.
1 Like #22
LotusJas
What is the cheapest acceptable telescope that you can attach a Canon SLR to please? I'd like to like to take some proper high res photos through one :)


u can get an SLR ring to 1" eye so attaching the camera is far better then the compact rout, depends what you want to take pics of though tbh.

To be totally honest with you, its better you ask on a dedicated forum IMO.
#23
Thank you both. Yes, makes sense to ask on a dedicated forum :)

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Top of Page
Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!