Best telescope to view planets in detail?

*sharp image

How come you can't sees any stars in the background?

>>8873605
>How come you can't sees any stars in the background?

http://www.iflscience.com/space/why-can-t-we-see-stars-in-space-photographs/

>>8873588
I think you can get a 10 inch dob for around that. You might consider just buying a membership to a local observatory/astronomy club instead, they likely have better telescopes than you can afford.

>>8873615
>iflscience
Apply kill to self

File: DIY telescopes.jpg (350KB, 1127x665px) Image search: [Google]

350KB, 1127x665px

>>8873588
>budget is less than $500
>Best telescope to view planets in detail

You can make a down payment with that amount. You could always DIY one I suppose.

>>8874018
"The rings of Saturn should be visible in even the smallest telescope at 25x. A good 3-inch scope at 50x can show them as a separate structure detached on all sides from the ball of the planet"

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/observing/celestial-objects-to-watch/viewing-saturn-the-planet-rings-and-moons/

I'm just looking for the best under 500 to view saturn, I know it won't be THE best

File: Dave-Lillis-Saturn-Feb-2007.jpg (76KB, 727x727px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 727x727px

>>8874035
So, you don't want a lot of detail. Okay then.

Seriously though, a good 20 inch DIY mirror is well worth it to make.

File: 1485834430289.png (8KB, 205x246px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 205x246px

Can someone please just recommend the best telescope under 500$ to view saturn? Why is this so complicated, no diy mirrors please

File: 71iArtz6e4L._SX522_[1].jpg (21KB, 522x293px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 522x293px

>>8874122
Bro, if you're on a budget just buy the biggest Maksutov-Cassegrain you can. For example: http://www.telescope.com/Telescopes/Cassegrain-Telescopes/Orion-Apex-127mm-Maksutov-Cassegrain-Telescope/pc/-1/c/1/sc/14/p/9825.uts

Maks are cheap, have great imaging (usually diffraction limited), and are super compact.

>>8873588
YouTube

>>8873588
I've seen Saturn way clearer than that through a ~$800 telescope
>get more money

>>8873684

I literally just linked the first page that google gave me.

>>8874069
This

File: IMG_3169.png (3MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2048x1536px

>>8873605

Saturn is pretty bright. When I took this photo I had the ISO and shutter speed set so low that all stars were invisible. If the ISO was high enough to see stars then Saturn would look all bright and washed out. Here's one I took that has stars and moons.

I will bump this because I am also interested.

Most people who buy telescopes tend to bust out hundreds of dollars on overpriced crap that ends up gathering dust in the garage after 5-6 sessions.
You probably should start with something really cheap and kiddie, no more than 100$, and if you find yourself using it very frequently and feeling limited by its resolution start working up from there.
Don't skim on the mount, though. A good mount is a good investment either way.

File: Scruffy_2_9337.jpg (88KB, 720x540px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 720x540px

>>8876131
>Don't skim on the mount, though.

Second.

Nothing ends an interest in sky watching like a shaky mount that makes viewing impossible.

>>8873588
I think you can even see Saturn with a stock slr camera lens.

>>8876131
>>8876136
Can you link me to a good mount?

Go to your local astronomy club. The best thing to do when looking a telescope is to use one. Can you point it? Is the optical quality ok? How difficult is it to use and set-up? That will be far more illuminating and you're less likely to regret buying one.

>>8874069
No it's not. If you have no experience of making telescopes or even owning one building a big one is a mistake.

You don't need a huge dob to look at planets and they are a nightmare in terms of practicality. Site and seeing make a far bigger difference than a 12 inch over an 18 inch.

>>8874251
Maks are not great. They are very slow, which is terrible if you want to look at DSOs.

>usually diffraction limited
Lolno. Maks were designed to be cheap, not good. They have terrible field curvature. I've tried to image with one and it was a waste of time.