Focal length, in the main—smartphone lenses are very wide, and the human eye is more moderate.
I couldn’t explain the physics if I tried, and I couldn’t say exactly why your field of view is much larger than your cell phone’s despite your eyes having narrower lenses, but it’s a partial answer, at any rate.
…because we are so used to taking pictures with a cell phone it has become habit. I thought about it. But it was extremely cold, and I already had one tripod out with the telescope and didn’t feel like seeing up another.
Tim do you mind me asking which telescope? I have someone in mind for one as a gift but really don’t know recommendations. I did stumble across this a while back, explaining at least some of it for me. I just want something beginner(ish) and an added smartphone mount. Some of the ones mentioned in that article are pricey, so I’m afraid I’m going to be shooting in the dark on what is good and what is not.
Please don’t look to me for any for of authoritative telescope advice. My choice was heavily influenced by budget (under $200 Canadian). I got a Meade Starpro 70mm AZ refractor, based on the recommendation from a specialty telescope shop that was less than an hour drive from me. I explained to them what I was looking for:
Based on that, they provided the recommendation of the Meade 70mm as a good choice for me as a beginer’s telescope. They also sold 90 mm and 102mm versions at a higher price. More aperture equals more light equals better view.
I have only used it during the eclipse. It was easy to put together, aside from aligning the red-dot finder which I can’t seem to do. Not a big deal when aiming at the moon. It’s also quite lightweight, and the tripod controls are easy to work. The included smartphone mount was difficult to use. But that might be me fumbling in the dark and frigid cold trying to use it for the first time.
That sounds ideal. I’ll look at that or similar. I’m trying to make this a surprise but will be sniffing out what the recipient thinks about it. Thanks again Tim!
FWIW this is the one I have.
I forgot about the red moon even though it was a crystal clear night perfect for viewing. :(
Ugh. Just glancing through that made me wince (anything that mentions “magnfication” is groan inducing)
There are only 2 planets worth looking at for more than 30 seconds and they’re only visible for a few months of the year (Saturn / Jupiter). The moon is awesome and you can look at that every night for a completely different view (the best view is the line where dark separates from light), but if you want to do anything else with a telescope, you’re going to need apeture.
The one @RichVR has is a fun scope and you can see many clusters, larger galaxies (but they will still be pretty “smudgy”) and binary stars - which are pretty cool with the color contrasts. A binocular astronomy book would show you a lot of what you can see well with this scope.
I’d really recommend getting up to 8" and get a dobsonian. They are stupid simple, can fit in most car trunks and you can do the entire Messier list with one. Most are around $350-$400
This is really good info, Tman. I very much appreciate this. I have quite some time before making any gift decision, so no worries that the only site I had linked has some bum info. Thank you for the great corrections.
Based on your info I did look up a few examples and what I’m worried about is I’m just not quite sure what the gift recipient will be doing. Sight viewing, taking quick pictures via their camera or phone, or long tracked shots with multiple pics/exposures, etc. There is a lot to it and I’d rather get them a gift they will use, not one that is 5 times too much for what they need.
When I first started, I had money so I got a 8" Schmidt Cassegrain and the first 5 or so attempts at using it were comical with literally nothing found. I finally went to a star party and found out how to polar align the scope - anything with “equatorial” in its name will need to be polar aligned.
It was a great scope and I really got into it but after 3-4 years, I had easily spent $2,000 on lenses, filters, accessories, books, etc and upgrading to a bigger 20" dobsonian meant I only had to spend $$ on the telescope. Almost everything I had could be used on the bigger scope.
I found that taking pictures is hours you are spending not looking at the night sky and I abandoned that pretty quickly. It’s just too cool to see things with your own eyes. One of the few pursuits where the amateur gets access to the same thing the pros see and the concept of a photon travellihg for millions of years and stopping on my eye was always something I cherished.
A dob is a decent starter scope. No harm, no foul if they only use it a few times a year. You really can’t take pictures with them though - and I personally wouldn’t let that be a deciding factor as getting into picture taking requires super great polar alignment, computers, and adapters not to mention a camera.
You can look on craigslist and likely get a used one with many accessories ( more lenses, books, red flashlights, etc) for the same price as new. You might hunt down your local astronomy group and go to a monthly meeting as they have swap n sells and you’re guaranteed a good scope.
EDIT: here is a good example of this type of scope on the portland craiglist:
Thanks for the info, Tman. Most helpful.
Orion is good stuff, especially for entry-level. Meade is also solid. Avoid like the plague anything that talks about how much magnification it can do in marketing materials.
If you want to dive a bit deeper into finding reviews, both professional and anecdata from users, check the Cloudy Nights (https://www.cloudynights.com/). Their forums, especially, are superb.
I have the 6" version of this, and it is pretty nice. Tman’s advice is good-- Dobsonian reflectors are the best bang for the buck.
