rmollise
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 07/06/07
Posts: 1534
|
|
Quote:
I use the following system:
"wee"
"not-so-wee"
"friggin' huge"
Now THIS is a system I like.
--------------------
Uncle Rod
Watch for Rod's New Book:
Choosing and Using the New CATs--coming soon!
|
KWB
Postmaster
Reged: 09/30/06
Posts: 7618
Loc: Westminster,Co Elev.1646Meters
|
|
I use 3 classifications myself:
Convenient Models
Hernia Models
Marquis de Sade Models
--------------------
Kenny
"When dealing with a mystery,choose the most unlikely of the likely possibilities"-Sherlock Holmes
|
StacyJo
professor emeritus
Reged: 07/08/04
Posts: 639
Loc: Oakland, CA
|
|
I like the fuss factor.
--------------------
Stacy
"Why yes, there is a difference between photon deprivation and PMS"
AKA Konstellation Kitty
M42Gal
Stellarvue Nighthawk II
Orion Starblast 6" Newtonian - newest addition to the family!!!
7x50 Orion Scenix Binoculars
Old 3" Jason Comet Chaser
|
Scott Watson
super member
Reged: 05/26/06
Posts: 168
|
|
I'll break it down this way.
> 24" a professional telescope.
> 10", a serious investment for the serious observer.
< 10", a hobby.
|
Astrolabe
member
Reged: 07/08/07
Posts: 81
|
|
Quote:
Having owned 18 scopes and looked through hundreds, while observing for 45 years under dark skies, I would add to the above a classification based on what the scope will show under real dark skies:
Basic small scope for casual lunar and planetary use, with observations mostly of the Messier objects and a few hundred to a couple thousand of the brightest objects beyond that: 4-5.9"
Medium sized scope for examination of the brightest several thousand DSOs, with a real "lifetime" (you'll never see everything the scope can see) light grasp: 6-10"
Large scope wherein the number of DSOs is more than can be seen in a lifetime, and which produces photo-quality images at times: 11-16"
Very large scope for serious observations of details in the brightest 30,000 DSOs and detection of up to 100,000 DSOs and more: 17.5-25"
Obscenely large scope where galaxy clusters and ultra-faint planetaries become not only objects to view but display details. Too many DSOs visible to see more than a fraction in a whole lifetime: 27+"
Hi Don
I like your definition of different sizes etc. Very wise. However one thing got me worried, and that is the "lifetime" bit. Up to now I thought that I was going to be around forever but now I have second thoughts.  I think I am going to downgrade in size and just keep the 6" Newt and 4" Refr. Time is running out.
Thanks and regards
George (astrolabe)
Sydney Australia
|
Astrolabe
member
Reged: 07/08/07
Posts: 81
|
|
Quote:
I use 3 classifications myself:
Convenient Models
Hernia Models
Marquis de Sade Models
Hi Kenny
You are spot on. May I add "Bad back models" or do they come under the " Hernia models". It is possible to get both you know.
Regards
George (astrolabe)
Sydney Australia
|
KWB
Postmaster
Reged: 09/30/06
Posts: 7618
Loc: Westminster,Co Elev.1646Meters
|
|
Hi George
I also have a bad back and that's hernia territory for me as well. The scopes that are heavy and require 2 or 3 people to assemble are the de Sade models IMO.
--------------------
Kenny
"When dealing with a mystery,choose the most unlikely of the likely possibilities"-Sherlock Holmes
|
dave b
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 2429
|
|
all joking aside;
you guys do know that a well designed 36" telescope can be moved and assembled by one person, right?
dont lift any telescopes larger than 12" !!! you WILL hurt your back!
ROLL your scopes around. roll them already assembled out of the garage, roll them into your van or trailer.
floyd blue rolls his 18" scope fully assembled in and out of his trailer all the time. he never takes it apart.
10" best beginner scope. small enough to fit in the backseat, big enough to keep you interested.
12-18" good intermediate scope. you have made a real commitment to the hobby, but you still can roll it into your SUV or wagon. if you observe under really dark skies, it may put your aperture fever into remission for some time.
20-25" big dobs! this is where the big boys start. if you are under 55 years old, you can roll one of these all by yourself into a SUV. if you are older, you should use a trailer so you only have that 12" incline on the ramp door. at this point, you are certainly a "lifer".
28-30" bigger yet. these are the last scopes a fit person can roll up into a van themselves. everyone else, better get the trailer with the ramp door. these scopes are true workhorses that not only show you color in nebula, but they show the world you married the right woman.
32-40" seriously a big dob. you are allowed to give scopes this size a pet name and no one will laugh behind your back. you need a trailer, as they might be wider than your SUV doors. wheel barrel handles begin to get heavy, best to use trailer jack crank wheels. ratcheting hand winch is good idea to pull 36-40" up the trailer ramp. air conditioning on your trailer is a good idea to start the night off with a cool mirror. color is everywhere. you literally start to believe there is nothing you cant view with the human eye.
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
dave b
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 2429
|
|
oh yes, not to date myself, but i do remember as a kid at the club meetings, that a 10" scope was often referred to as a "yard cannon" .
the skies were darker then....
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
WadeVC
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 12/02/05
Posts: 2776
Loc: Lodi, California,
|
|
Quote:
I use 3 classifications myself:
Convenient Models
Hernia Models
Marquis de Sade Models
I think a lot of folks who are fortunate to own or observe with larger scopes (12"+) often times have forgotten just what one can see and observe with 6"-10" scopes. Yes, larger is always better in regards to what one can observe, but as Don pointed out, even a "lowly" 6" light-bucket will offer more DSO's than what many people will ever be able to see in a lifetime.
--------------------
Orion XTi10 f/4.7
Orion XTi8 f/5.9
Meade NGC 70mm f/10
Orion UltraView 10x50 Wide-Angle Binoculars
My Sketch Gallery
My Astronomy Blog
A wise man can see more from the bottom of a well than a fool can from a mountain top.
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10917
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Having owned 18 scopes and looked through hundreds, while observing for 45 years under dark skies, I would add to the above a classification based on what the scope will show under real dark skies:
Basic small scope for casual lunar and planetary use, with observations mostly of the Messier objects and a few hundred to a couple thousand of the brightest objects beyond that: 4-5.9"
Medium sized scope for examination of the brightest several thousand DSOs, with a real "lifetime" (you'll never see everything the scope can see) light grasp: 6-10"
Large scope wherein the number of DSOs is more than can be seen in a lifetime, and which produces photo-quality images at times: 11-16"
Very large scope for serious observations of details in the brightest 30,000 DSOs and detection of up to 100,000 DSOs and more: 17.5-25"
Obscenely large scope where galaxy clusters and ultra-faint planetaries become not only objects to view but display details. Too many DSOs visible to see more than a fraction in a whole lifetime: 27+"
Hi Don
I like your definition of different sizes etc. Very wise. However one thing got me worried, and that is the "lifetime" bit. Up to now I thought that I was going to be around forever but now I have second thoughts. I think I am going to downgrade in size and just keep the 6" Newt and 4" Refr. Time is running out.
Thanks and regards
George (astrolabe)
Sydney Australia
Then there are guys like Larry Mitchell, who has probably viewed more different objects than I will even if I live to 100.
In truth, few people push on beyond the first couple thousand DSOs.
I figure a good 8" can see (at least detect) about 15,000 DSOs in a dark sky.
You have to spend a lot of hours viewing before your log passes 15,000 objects.
It's funny, I have a 12.5", but my log seems stuck around 10,500 objects. It seems that all the objects I'd viewed with an 8" just look a heck of a lot different in a 12.5", so I'm spending some time revisiting the ones my notes say I should go back to. Now, it seems, I see a lot more detail and/or a lot more companion objects in the field. It's a whole new experience.
Then along came the 13 Ethos, and I feel almost as if I should go back and simply start over.
Perhaps you could view all the objects visible in a scope if you never went back to view any object again. But can you imagine depriving yourself of a view of something spectacular on a really good night?
Late last spring I viewed M51 fairly high in the sky on a superlatively clear and dark night. I saw, visually, the dark lane in the bridge and several "fingers" of nebulosity extending away from the companion. Not to mention the spiral arm that extends out on the other side of M51 from the companion. Sure, I've seen M51 a hundred times, but never like that.
So now I "mosey" through the lists, stopping here and there and taking time to really see each object. My list will get bigger, probably, but I'm only 4 years into a 12.5", and I had an 8" for eleven. 
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
Edited by Starman1 (09/05/08 02:02 AM)
|
denodan
professor emeritus
Reged: 10/06/04
Posts: 595
|
|
I would not say an 8" is in the small catagory at all, but more like a medium scope.
|
Lamb0
professor emeritus
Reged: 07/25/07
Posts: 668
Loc: Fairbury, Nebraska
|
|
 A feet on the ground large ~16-20" truss Dob awaits a bigger budget. I thoroughly enjoy my medium 8" f/5's premium optics with the reasonably wide TFoV and decent magnification. It's a great all around performer, and quite a crowd pleaser at public star parties - especially with the ~3-4' bunch! 
Clear Skies,
John 
--------------------
John "Have eyepiece - will travel!"
8" f/5 Dob w/2.14" sec in a 12" alum tube 'The Mortar' - w/PCorr 2° TFoV @ 36.5X ~70% illum *NICE*
Typical eyepieces: 32 Burg, 24 Pan, 20T5, 5-8 SW, Others ALL 2": Pcorr, 2X PwrMt, Ast H-b, Lum UHC + OIII
60mm $50 Walmart Special in training - aka "Backpack Observatory"
Minolta Activa 12x50 , Steiner 15X80
|
Scott Regener
scholastic sledgehammer
Reged: 03/31/06
Posts: 835
Loc: SE Minnesota
|
|
Small: Whatever you have now
Medium: A reasonable upgrade
Large: Mortgage the house to afford it
--------------------
Orion SkyQuest 4.5XT
Orion SkyQuest XT10i w/COL
Urban (red) skies
Limiting Mag 3.5-4.0 Average
|
sabir
sage
Reged: 06/23/07
Posts: 466
Loc: Pune (India)
|
|
Quote:
Small: Whatever you have now
Medium: A reasonable upgrade
Large: Mortgage the house to afford it
IMO this is by far the best classification
Sabir
|
Gordon S.
member
Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 11
Loc: Brevard County, Florida
|
|
Dave B –
I appreciate your advocacy of larger telescopes. Often, your comments express an underlying theme that big dobs aren't so intimidating after all and that they are more manageable than many think. This does us all a service by opening our minds toward future upgrades. (On the other hand, should we all be putting our marriages to the test?)
In your review of the 28" Webster, you stated that your definition of large begins at 24 inches. Here, you backed off a quarter turn and said that 20" - 25" is where large begins. I think this definition is more in line with what most people think. To call a 22" dob an intermediate sized scope, you would have to be seriously jaded.
--------------------
Gordon Schafer
Obsession #361 18" f/4.5 - Pegasus, AN, FT
Discovery PDHQ 12.5" f/5 - DD-II
Orion ST-80 f/5
|
Gordon S.
member
Reged: 08/23/08
Posts: 11
Loc: Brevard County, Florida
|
|
Don P –
I appreciate how you tie your assessment of size to what can be seen in truly dark sky. This indicates to me that your passion in this hobby is actually observing things and that you prefer quality over quantity. You are not a hardware junkie.
--------------------
Gordon Schafer
Obsession #361 18" f/4.5 - Pegasus, AN, FT
Discovery PDHQ 12.5" f/5 - DD-II
Orion ST-80 f/5
|
dave b
Carpal Tunnel
Reged: 05/10/05
Posts: 2429
|
|
Quote:
Dave B –
I appreciate your advocacy of larger telescopes. Often, your comments express an underlying theme that big dobs aren't so intimidating after all and that they are more manageable than many think. (On the other hand, should we all be putting our marriages to the test?)
ive built plenty of big telescopes, and i teach telescope building, so my opinions come from actual experience rather than just repeating the same old wives tails.
a big dob is not scary or difficult. my old girlfriend use to say she "could not drive a big truck". over and over she would chant "how can you park this thing?" "i cant back it out of the driveway to get my car out" bla bla bla. one day i made her (over great protest) start driving it. sure, she started slow, learned to use the mirrors (i dont think she ever looked at the ones on her mustang), and what do you think she drives now? a big truck.
yes, i do think you should put your marriage to the test. i know too many people who are in miserable marriages, or have to beg or bargain for saturday night out with the guys. be a real man (or woman), life is way to short to live under somebodys thumb.
Quote:
In your review of the 28" Webster, you stated that your definition of large begins at 24 inches. Here, you backed off a quarter turn and said that 20" - 25" is where large begins. I think this definition is more in line with what most people think. To call a 22" dob an intermediate sized scope, you would have to be seriously jaded.
my only defense is you have to write for your audience. in an article about "big dobs" a 22" might be the near the bottom of the pile. remember, it was not that long ago that obsession did not even make a telescope smaller than 20".
but, call me jaded, ill go with it...
--------------------
dave bonandrini
30" f/5.2 Dobsonian
President of GCAC
Astromart Moderator
|
Starman1
Vendor - Scope City
Reged: 06/24/03
Posts: 10917
Loc: Los Angeles
|
|
Quote:
Don P –
I appreciate how you tie your assessment of size to what can be seen in truly dark sky. This indicates to me that your passion in this hobby is actually observing things and that you prefer quality over quantity. You are not a hardware junkie.
Is there anything better in life than being under a star-filled dark sky with a telescope?
--------------------
Don Pensack
12.5" Truss Dob, 5" Maksutov
Sustaining Lifetime IDA member, TeleVue junkie
|
2682
super member
Reged: 02/18/08
Posts: 190
Loc: The Heartland
|
|
Quote:
Dob Size Categories Based On Aperture:
==============================
4.5" - 8": SMALL - Good for "basic" viewing of planets and brighter DSOs.
Dob Size Categories Based On Fuss Factor:
================================
4.5" - 10": SMALL - Easily transported and set up quickly by one person. Fits on the back seat. Tubes are not too cumbersome to bear hug. Seated or flat footed viewing for most adults.
I like your post and what you are trying to do very much. I think that the fuss factor category for "small" should be the same as for aperture (i.e. the 10" NOT be categorized as small) for 2 reasons:
1. Your portability assessment is too much of a "male scale", there is a large difference in upper body strength between males and females. If your categories applied only to males, I would agree with you. But, the 10 - 14# OTA weight difference between an 8" and 10" is very significant to my mind because when I supervised college students in a reagent lab decades ago, few female students could lift a 5 gallon carboy of water, I believe every male student could. So, even though they weigh less than a 5 gallon carboy of water, I see the weight difference between an 8" OTA and a 10" OTA as being large enough to be in different categories when one of the categories specifies "easily transportable" and we are including males and females.
2. Most 10" Dobs seem to be f 4.7 - 5.0, whereas most 8" Dobs seem to be f5.9 or 6. The impression I get from reading the experts' books, laser vendors, and from posters here is that there is much more of a collimation fuss factor with f5 and faster Dobs, than with an f5.9 or slower Dob.
I was very interested in your post because I just bought an 8" LB instead of a 10" LB so that my 30 year old daughter could easily transport it by herself.
Excellent thread and I agree with you that a 10" Dob is "easily transportable" by almost all fit males.
--------------------
Benders 1000/11 1180/9.29
Folder, Newt 1219/6
"(Sigh!) I sold it for a song. But, that song was 'White Christmas.' I made millions!" - Montgomery Burns
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
[Re: 
Edit
Reply
Quote
