"You're not afraid of the dark, are you?" - Riddick "The best scientists are humble. They seek to understand, not to ensure their legacy, but merely to understand." - Mori
Quote:what is glow at bottom of screen
Thank You, Matt - Astro-Video Systems http://www.astro-video.com/ Home of the NO AMP-GLOW Astro Video Cams
NSN Channel: BigAppleSkies
CPC 1100 with HD Pro Wedge with ETX-70 Finder Celestar C8, C80ED and PST Istar 150 Anistigmatic R30 on CGEM Jason 313 from 1975! Mallincam Extreme & Mallincam SSIc & Mallincam Micro DSI Pro, Orion SSAG, GPUSB, Nautilus Filterwheel JMI, Celestron and Orion MotoFocus, FCUSB1&2 Hyperion 5,13, ES 18, 30, OR 18, 25 TV 2.5x Powermate, WO Binoviewer with pairs: TV 7 Naglers, WO 20 and RKE 28
Quote:I believe that if I had not gotten into video astronomy that I probably would have packed the C8 back up and left in storage for another 25 yrs... so for me at least, I can say that video astronomy has exerted a powerful pull and definately drawn me back into the hobby.Al
Quote:I was really wondering how this compares to what you folks have seen in a large dob.
First and foremost observing love: naked eye.
Last but not least, telescopes.
And I sometimes dabble with cameras.
Quote:M51, the Whirlpool Galaxy. In my C8 under dark desert skies this barely shows as two bright smudges at the core of the Whirlpool and its companion.
Quote: M51's spiral arms are definitely visible through an 8-inch scope under dark skies. Not even difficult once you understand what they look like. The key is to concentrate on the dark areas inside what at first looks like a uniform circle of light.
LS60THa/B1200 Cerevolo 8" F5 MN Orion 11 SCT Tak EM200, Meade 6" F5 Newt, Starblast 4.5", ETX 90 C6 SCT, Meade 90 mm F9 refractor Meade 10"SN Canon T3, Mallincam Extreme
18" f/4.2 homebuilt truss 12.5" f/6 hybrid tube dob
Nytecam 51N 0.1W Meade 30cm LX200 astrograph+C8+Ha+CaK PSTs+spectrographs SX M9+Lodestar-C+M CCDs/Canon 1100D DSLR My Meade astrograph-colour deepsky My supernova discovery My dome build/spectroscopes/DSO images/Lodestar colour images & videos
Quote: I presume people buy large telescopes so that they can see fainter objects and see more detail in brighter objects. If that’s why you bought a telescope, then you would be better served with an 8-inch SCT and a video camera than you would be using any large Dobsonian. If your goal is to somehow commune with nature or the night sky or some other esoteric activity then you can certainly get that same “feeling” by just standing out under the Milky Way in a dark sky BUT, of course, you don’t need a telescope at all for that.
Quote: BUT if you are looking for a cure for aperture fever (which is really just the quest to see more and deeper by gathering more light) then that cure is spelled VIDEO.
Quote: BUT finding is not seeing detail and seeing detail is what we are talking about.
David W. Knisely . . . . . . "If you aren't having fun in this hobby, you aren't doing it right." Hyde Memorial Observatory http://www.hydeobservatory.info Prairie Astronomy Club http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Quote:... I am kind of spoiled in terms of CCD imaging, as I have a friend who does them from a dark-sky site with his own observatory using some of the finest CCD cameras, mounts, and equipment available to the amateur today.... I think that if I were to go the electronic route, I might be tempted to follow his example rather than go with a single-shot camera system.
Quote:Very true what Dwight said about dynamic range--I was thinking the same as I looked at the OP's mallincam images. -George
Quote:For nebulous objects of low surface brightness, the Mallincam makes visible details which would require for visual work an aperture at least five times larger.
Quote:I'll take my eyepiece view under pristine skies over the camera view all night long and twice on Sunday night . There is something special about the eyepiece view that cannot be substituted by any other means . The intimacy and tranquility of it all cannot be recreated with a camera . Awestruck through the ocular . That's astronomy .
Quote:Perhaps your queston needs a bit of rephrasing . Instead of asking how much bigger needs the scope to be in order to see the same details visually as in the smaller scope using a Mallincam, the simpler question would be how much bigger needs the scope be in order to see anything at all . Compare minimum scope sizes that allow seeing certain objects visually and with the Mallincam. Forget about whether they look the same or different and if the subjective impression gives the same feeling etc. Just the plain and simple see vs. not see .