When I first visited a store I was amazed and confused by the various types of telescope available. As I had no prior knowledge I was at the mercy of the salesman and relied entirely on his advice.

I wanted a telescope that would be good at both viewing planets and deep sky objects such as galaxies. I also wanted a telescope that I would be able to use for imaging at a later date. As it turns out, there isn’t a one size fits all solution. There are scopes which are great at imaging planets that in their standard form might not be so good at imaging deep sky objects and vice versa. I’ll try and do a basic explanation of the different types of common telescopes and mounts in a different section.

I only visited one retailer and that retailer specialized primarily in one brand. In hindsight I should have visited more shops and spoken with more than one salesman but as it happens I chose a great scope, it's just that it was so expensive for a first scope

Due to the advice I received I bought an 8” Meade LX200R on my second visit to the store. The LX200R belongs to the catadioptric family of telescopes, has a focal length of 2000mm and a focal ration of f/10. I have tried to explain these terms and why they’re important in the section labelled Focal ratios etc.

Overall the 8"LX200R is a fantastic piece of engineering. I almost opted for the 10" LX200R which wasn't that much more expensive but it was so much heavier that I thought the 8" was the more sensible option as I'd be moving it in and out of the house until I finally housed it in an observatory.



The 8”LX200R is good for viewing the planets although be prepared for disappointment when it comes to Neptune and Uranus as they're so far away you'll only see a small coloured disc (but still it's great to spot them. In my experience the planets are quite small in the eyepiece when using lower magnifications (magnifications explained in Focal ratios etc), so you have to strike a balance between using the highest magnification you can depending on the seeing conditions. I read an article in The Sky at Night where they mentioned seeing the polar ice caps on Mars with a relatively low magnification of 80 times. I tried this and Mars was very small. I had to use a greater magnification to see any ice caps so I'm not sure what the article writer was seeing.

When I first got the scope home I manually aimed it at a bright object I'd seen night after night quite low down in the South West. As soon as I had it in view with a 26mm eyepiece (giving a magnification of 77x) it was instantly recognisable as Jupiter with some of its moons that appeared like stars. The view was crystal clear and I had trouble sleeping that night as I couldn't get the image out of my head, I was blown away.

Saturn is probably the most impressive planet to view because of the rings. Again, I first viewed this at a magnification of 77x. At this magnification Saturn was tiny but there was no mistaking what it was as Saturn was pin sharp in the eyepiece. As I increased the magnification Saturn became larger but also less defined if you really crank up the magnification, so you have to strike a balance between size and clarity as you can't have both (unless you've got a scope with a far larger aperture). I could see the rings well, and the gap between the rings and the planet, as well as the Cassini Division on a night of steady seeing.

As for viewing deep sky objects with the 8”LX200R, I’ve seen brighter objects such as the Ring Nebula well, although dimmer objects such as galaxies are far harder to spot unless I take my scope to a dark site which makes a huge difference. At home I can make out the central core of a galaxy but not always the fainter arms that spiral round, but then I've got a bright orange street lamp in my front garden which doesn't help! Luckily with the GOTO system on the LX you at least know the telescope’s pointing at the object you want to see, but detecting it with your own eyes can sometimes be challenging.

Essentially this is a fantastic scope and it's a joy to use. I would definitely recommend it.

Dim objects aren’t such a problem when you’re imaging as a camera can take in light over long exposures which brightens the image, whereas your eyes can’t do this. Eyes are massively affected by bright lights though so to give yourself the best chance of seeing something faint you have to dark adapt them. This means staying away from lights as much as possible, apparently eyes take about 40 minutes to fully dark adapt. Another trick people use is called averted vision where you don’t look directly at the object you want to see as your peripheral vision is more sensitive to light.