Which type of telescope is most often used to view distant land objects?
92830
A type of telescope known as "refractor." Telescopes called "reflectors" are most often used to view distant celestial objects.
214155
I am gessing that you want to knoe about "optical" telescope.\n\nThere are basically two types of optical telescopes.\n\n1. Refrective Telescope\n==========================\n\nThere is an objective lense that creates a virtual image of the object you are trying to see very close to asecond lense called the eaypiece. The eyepiece magnifies that virtual image many times bigger.\n\nMagnification = focal length of objective/focal lenth of eyepiece\n\n2. Mirror type (Newtonian)\n==========================\n\nThis type uses a parabolic mirror to create a virtual image of the object you are trying to see very close to the eaypiece. The eyepiece magnifies that virtual image many times bigger.\n\nMagnification = focal length of mirror/focal lenth of eyepiece
628131
It depends on what you want to observe. For the planets and moon, you can do very well in the city. If you want to see galaxies and faint nebula, you want the largest aperture you can get.\n\nLet me recommend to resources. First, start monitoring www.astromart.com It the classified section for astronomers. But before you buy anything, go to http://skyandtelescope.com/resources/organizations/ and find your local astro club. Contact them to find out when their next public night is and go. You'll get to look through a lot of different telescopes at a lot of different objects. By the end of an hour or two, you will know what interests you most and what kind of telescope you want. And, you are likely to get a good deal as there are always members looking to upgrade from their first scope.\n\nIf you are intersested in astronomy, try\nhttp://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing \nYou will find a large number of amateur astronomers who are glad to help.\n\nChuck
734040
Parks telescopes have a reputation for being well-made and of good optical quality. However, you don't see many of them because they seem to be overpriced compared to the competition. For example, for the same price as the az8 (an 8" Newtonian), you can get a 12" Meade Lightbridge. The Meade has more than twice the light-gathering area and a 2" focuser. The larger focuser lets you use 2" eyepieces for wider views at low power.
840527
Of the three you mentioned, I'd favor the Meade, but there may  be better choices depending on your husband's level of interest and knowledge. A couple of good places to shop for telescopes: http://www.telescope.com/ and http://www.first-telescope.com/. \n\nYou can discuss your options  and learn more about telescopes online at the yahoo telescopes group or the cloudynights.com forums.
1170213
It depends on what you need telescope for.  Things like Jupiter, Saturn, the Moon, the Orion Nebula will look great.  This is a great out of the box scope but it isn't a large one.  If you want to do a lot of deep space exploration you need a bigger/different scope.  There is an article at Sky & Telescope about chosing the right scope.\n\nhttp://skyandtelescope.com/howto/scopes/article_241_1.asp
725849
Sure, it's possible. But you won't see any artifacts there. Even the largest telescope on earth does not have the resolution to see a 10 meter spacecraft from a distance of 350,000 km.\n\nAn object that size at that distance subtends an arc of .005 arcseconds. Both Hubble and Keck (the best telescopes on or near earth) have a resolution limit of about .05 arcseconds.
129856
I suggest the Celestron FirstScope 114 EQ Short Newtonian Reflector.  It's an excellent first or second telescope for an excellent price.  On sale right now actually for $159  at:   http://www.telescopes.com/products/Celestron_FirstScope_114_EQ_Short_Newtonian_Reflector_5936.html
399868
Actually no, here is a very good example....\n\nFocus on something across the room......\nNow, take a piece of paper and poke a very tiny pin hole in it and look through the pin hole and the same object.\n\nEverything will be much clearer.\n\nIt's kind of how old telescopes and spyglasses worked.
138088
The hubble telescope it up above all the atmospheric disturbance, allowing for much higher quality photos.\n\nFor the same reason stars twinkle, land based telescopes have a limited resolution power, after a certain size, it doesnt really help any (unless you want to build a complicated atmospheric correction machine to adjust the mirror to compensate).
175203
Any photos of space require timed shutter release, a time exposure. So in answer to your question - any camera that will allow you to take a timed exposure. Your telescope needs to have an equatorial mount and clock drive to get really good pictures as a still camera will give you trails. Given the above, a list of targets, a star map, and off you go.  Camera does not have to be expensive, just must have a timed shutter release.
805037
I'm no expert, but I'd go for the Oberwerk binos.  If you plan on using them for astronomy, I'd also highly recommend a decent tripod so your neck and shoulders aren't in pain after a night of viewing.  It will also give you steady images.\n\nThere are many favorable reviews for Oberwerk 15x70s on www.cloudynights.com.
761501
If nothing else,you can use this but I am not positive.  "A telescope can refract images."
828006
It's a great toy. A 60mm aperture (2.4") won't gather much light (which also determines the amount of detail you can make out at higher magnifications). Is this a refractor? Cheap models suffer from various distortions produced by inferior coatings, poor collimation, etc.\n\nYou can see a long way (moon, mars, stars, etc), but thre real question is how good the image is (fuzzy, dim, etc)\n\nTry the following website (page goes to a celestron 760 mm refractor - a decent instrument. Lots of description.)\n\nhttp://www.telescope.com/jump.jsp?itemID=116608&itemType=PRODUCT&path=1%2C2%2C4%2C13&KickerID=699&KICKER
24803
Any telescope with a very accurate tracking mount which affords the ability to handle field rotation effects will work. Fork mounted SCT's are popular but you will have to address field rotation or enjoy lots of pretty "streaks" as a result of long exposure times. Accurate GEM (GermanEquatorialMounts) address this by design.\n\nYou will need a matching T-ring adaptor or at least a "universal" type adaptor that will clamp onto your eyepiece so that the field lens of your camera will be aligned and spaced accordingly to the eye lens of the eyepiece.\n\nBe prepared to also invest in some software (Photoshop, Maxim DL, Meade Autostar Suite etc, etc. that corresponds to your setup and how much processing you want to do.\nIf you are influenced by the photos you might see in Sky and Telescope or Astronomy magazines I warn people that you can figure on spending around $2-3000.00 more than just what you spend on your telescope and visual use eyepieces to acheive those kinds of results.\n\nAlthough I own Dobsonian reflectors, refractors, and an SCT (Schmidt-Cassegrain Telescope). I consider the Meade/Orion/Celestron SCT's as the "most bang for buck/least compromise/ most aperture combination/ easily portable " design of the bunch.\n\nGood luck \n\nBTW: you didn't mention whether your Canon is a traditional film type or the digital model with or without the IR filter. The IR filter makes a difference with respect to the cameras usage for AstroPhotography.\nAlso... you could just skip the telescope and mount your camera on a good GEM mount "piggyback" style or piggyback the camera onto a GEM mounted telescope instead of imaging through the eyepiece on the telescope.
730616
Give this site a look.  And I think everything on it is under $300\n\nhttp://space.about.com/cs/telescopes/tp/tpbegscop300.htm\n\nGood luck.
148937
Use Google Earth. You can get an instant free program which enable you to see the earth by the images from satellites. Go to http://earth.google.com/