Experiences with Tasco Luminova telescopes?
439819
As someone else already said, *never* buy a telescope that markets itself primarily based on magnification.  This is a sure sign that not only is the manufacturer playing on common assumption, but also that the scope itself is probably junk.\n\nThat said, I used--and still use--such a telescope that I got for a present as a kid.  If you treat it well, it will work well enough.  A few pointers, though:\n\n1.)  Do not use the telescope above about 120x.\n2.)  The tripod will almost certainly be jittery in the slightest wind; you may want to weigh it down with something.\n3.)  Don't use the Barlow.  You should probably ditch the eyepieces as well, which I'm guessing are cheesy Ramsdens or Huygenians; even mine at least came with a decent Kellner.  If you see an "SR", "R", or "H" symbol on the eyepieces, save your strength--order a few basic eyepieces from a reputable dealer (Orion, Meade, Celestron, etc.), perhaps with an adapter as well, from .965 to 1.25 for a better field of view.\n\nUnfortunately, ordering this extra equipment will put you well above $100, making it almost worth returning the scope and buying a more expensive one.  I leave that judgment to you, though--as someone else already wrote, this telescope could at least whet your appetite for something better.\n\nI'm sorry I can't be cheerier, but good luck.  For what it's worth, there are a few excellent, but relatively cheap scopes that can be had from Orion for $200 and under, namely their XT 4.5, which has had nothing but stellar reviews.
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
32162
C is true. The others don't really make sense.\nThey are also inherently chromatic, more efficient. Even small ones are cheaper for the size than refracting. \nHubble Space Telescope is reflector also it will work with Ultra violet light, and more precisely focuses than glass can.
366979
You have two very good eyepieces already. Do you want more power? I don't think buying another eyepiece will help you, a 10mm eyepiece is close to the limit of your telescope performance (I guess its around 900mm focal length?). You will loose a lot of quality image with a shorter focus eyepiece, and you already have Plossls which gives very good quality images. If you want something different maybe an Erfle, but it is wide angle with low power, awesome for milky way. If you expected more, maybe the problem is that it is a small reflector. Also if you want to see deep space objects, the more power the less light you will gather, deep space objects are faint, so your eyepieces in my opinion are just right for your telescope. I think a pleasent experience will depend more in having very dark nights, with no city light contamination. This makes a lot of difference.\nPlanetary and lunar filters never have surprised me very much, I wouldn't spend money on them, but that is only my opinion.\nAnyway there's a lot to see with a 4.5, you will be able to see Jupiter's red spot (very faint), and Saturn's rings, but don't expect to see them big. There are lots, lots of clusters that don't need power, only light gathering. As I say before it is very important to watch in a place with no light contamination.\nYou won't get discourage if you learn what to aim at. Good luck and good dark nights.\n\n---Addition---\nWatching a full moon with a 4.5 hurts a bit, but it won't burn your retina, don't worry. You can cover some of the light entrance of the telescope if you don't have a filter.
354230
Greetings,\n\nFollow this link to Sky and Telescope magazine's website almanac.  Plug in your information and it will give you the info you requested.\n\nhttp://skyandtelescope.com/observing/almanac/\n\n-matt
106252
There are two good technical sites.\n\nSIMBAD Astronomical Database - http://simbad.u-strasbg.fr/Simbad\n\nand \n\nSkyview - http://skyview.gsfc.nasa.gov/
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
254369
Ahhhhhhh...A fledgling Amateur Astronomer!!...WONDERFUL!!\n\nThe first and foremost thing to consider is APERTURE..This is the SIZE of the opening of the telescope...The reason is, except for the moon, astro objects are dim...the larger the aperture, the more LIGHT will be gathered and focused into your eyepiece, so the clearer the image and the higher magnification you can use without blurring.\n\nYou mention a price range of $2000...That much money will buy a GREAT telescope, however, I suggest you start with a less expensive Dobsonian telescope for your first purchase.\nThis will give you some experience, HOURS of enjoyment, and will let you see if you are REALLY interested enough to upgrade to a more expensive piece. Dobsonians ( or NEWTONIAN...Same principle, REFLECTORS ) of good quality can be purchased on E-bay for around $300-$500.\n\nIn the $2000 range, look for a 'Schmitt-Cassegrain' with ' Go-To' electronics...Readily available
926392
Do you have to build it or can you buy it? Radio Spares/ Allied Components supply these things off the shelf.\n\nYears ago tacho generators were made using a dc generator (hence the name) that produced a certain number of volts per number of rpm, usually expressed in volts/100 rpm. This may not give the accuracy you require.\n\nModern tacho generators are basically pulse encoders, that may be optical or proximity switch based, and the pulses are counted by some electronics and converted to an rpm reading. The actual design depending on the application. Do you want a display or a signal (0-10v, 0-20mA etc) that can be used in control? Optical based encoders can give you much more accuracy than you want but I could never understand wanting to make, or being able to make something of this complexity.
798548
That price range is difficult...You're honestly better off buying a pair of astronomical binoculars at that price.  If you're willing to go to $230, though, you should check out the Orion XT4.5....or $260 to get the Orion XT6.\n\nWhatever you do, *don't* buy a telescope based on magnification. If a telescope brags on the case it can go "up to 500X!", it's most likely junk with poorly made optics.\n\nIf you really do want to get a telescope, a lot also depends on how manual or automatic you want it to be.  On the manual side, if you're willing to learn the sky and adjust the telescope's optics (known as "collimating"...not as hard as it sounds, really), you should go with a dobsonian, which is essentially just a big light bucket you push around.  On the automatic side, if you want to just align on a couple stars and type in an object to make the telescope move there itself, there are the "go-to" mounts, such as the Meade ETX-60 (runs about $240).\n\nDobsonians ("dobs") such as the Orion XT4.5 do require you to manually know where to point the scope, and objects will slowly drift across the image due to the Earth's rotation.  The Meade ETX's will track so objects don't drift...but all this automatic stuff comes at a price - the main mirror on the ETX is only half the size as the one on the XT4.5, meaning your resolution is only half as good and your light grasp (the dimmest object you'll see) is only one-quarter as good.  So while Saturn's rings should be visible in the ETX60, they'll look a whole lot better in the XT4.5.\n\n Also, you'll need to buy a separate tripod for the ETX...the dob just sits on the ground in all its bucketness.\n\nYou might also want to set aside some cash for a good eyepiece and a barlow ($80 or so), or upgrade over time.  The eyepieces that come with most scopes are not so great, and the barlow will come in handy to double or triple the magnification on nice still nights.
1074276
Yep, check out the Meade Telescope site.  Great new stuff in astronomy.
552520
My favorite of the free ones is Celestia.\n\nhttp://www.shatters.net/celestia/\n\nyou can fly to any star and then center the view on our sun, Sol.  By turning on constellation boundaries, you see what constellation it is in--and how badly mangled the constellations become when you go far away!  It has some extra solar planets modeled too (generic planets, since we don't know what they really look like).\n\nSo if you go to this site and download and run Celestia, you can do the following:\n\nclick Navigation at the top, then goto object.  Type Arcturus in the "Object" field and click "goto".  The way I have it set up, my screen is now all white (I'm TOO close to arcturus!).  I rotate my scroll wheel down to move back some to see the star better.  (HOME and END move forward and back if you have no scroll wheel).  Then, I click Navigation, then Select Sol to select our sun.  Then hit Navigation and Center Selection, and there's a teeny yellow dot in the center of the screen--that is the sun. It appears to be in the constellation Cetus (a really mangled barely-recognizable Cetus).
30504
I cannot find a a tasco with that name, but all telescopes have a dial, likely black plastic, probably there are 2, on either end of the same shaft, that you rotate, and it causes the eyepiece (the small lens you look thru) to move back and forth.  Try it during the day, and point the scope at a far away object ( at least 1/2 a mile) and try moving the focus knob all the way to both extremes, while carefully looking thru the eyepiece.  At some point, you should get the far away object to focus.
676886
http://www.obliquity.com/astro/accuracy....\n\nhttp://www.obliquity.com/astro/bluemoon....
965276
Newtonian telescopes are especially easy to collimate, since there is only one curved mirror and an eyepiece.  Basically, you need to get the eyepiece centered in the image formed by the mirror, you have to get it pointed in the right direction, and you have to get it focussed.
709163
Hello, I think these site are good for you. I am using them triple a week:\n\nFor Info:\nhttp://www.heavens-above.com\nhttp://www.NASA.gov\nhttp://www.spacetelescopes.com/\n\nFor Pics: \nhttp://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/\nhttp://www.spacetelescopes.com/
837333
If you want good data and you are not trying to observe something that is temporary like a comet, I highly recommend skyview. You don't get to steer the telescope and see real time images, but there are some great surveys in many different wavelengths there.\n\nhttp://skyview.gsfc.nasa.gov