Joshelerry wrote:Hi Guys, thanks for the many comments and advise here.. really appreciate.
1) CG4 mount was sold as a complete set with the 150mm both Refractor & Reflector series of the Celestron omni versions. Hence I suppose they should have consider this? I might not be really sure what it mean by getting "streaky stars" due to tripod mount capability because I thought there will not be much movement unlike photography?
2) As for the 6" series to be too heavy.. well, its not that we will be moving too much but of course almost most of the star gazing will be outdoor. I do forsee probably sometime to be overseas like Ubin, St John island which requires travelling by boat (therefore I cap at 6" to 8"). Malaysia maybe will requires drive in and hence with the boot should not be a big issue.
3) Brand wise, based on remarks here shouldn't be an issue with Celestron, Orion etc...
4) Refractor vs Reflector .... understand that reflector is not usable on daylike due to the reverse images which refractor can double up as some spotting scope. In this case it makes the refractor more versatile. But mainly I will use telescope for astronomy as it will be too heavy to luge around for bird/wildlife photography which I also am doing
5) The main point here is even though I will be a beginner but I know that I will be interested in this as this is something I like since young. Budget wise will not of course wan to blow out too much (maybe within $1.5k the most roughly). And based on experience with photography, I don't want to get the entry level and later on try to sell it and upgrade, this lose more money actually. And hence I want a scope that can not just view planets but also some deep sky objects (of course I know location matters but for me I will say over 95% of the time I will be viewing in locations in Singapore mainland). Therefore I suppose getting a f/5 6" scope will be quite around the mark?? Of course do take note that I will not be buying until I did some trying and testing....
(1) "Streaky stars" refers to astrophotography. For long exposures and highly magnified view of deep sky objects, the imperfections in tracking of the mount will result in stars captured being anything less than a pin point circular dot - e.g. a dash.
(4) Do also consider the third type of telescope design - catadioptric. Examples are MCTs and SCTs. A portable Maksutov-Cassegrain Telescope (MCT) can be a very versatile telescope for both stargazing and terrestrial viewing but at the expense of smaller field of view compared to refractors and reflectors.
(5) For basic lunar/planetary and some brighter/bigger deep sky objects (DSO) at shorter exposures, $1.5k may be a sufficient budget. For most of the stunning DSO photos you see in astronomy forums and magazines by veteran astrophotographers, $1.5k is too low. Some of the astrophotography accessory required in those setups will easily cost much more than that, let alone the telescope and mount.
(6) Good to know you will do some actual viewing/trying before buying. This will be the most important and useful part of your research.