Return to the Cloudy Nights Telescope Reviews home pageAstronomics discounts for Cloudy Nights members
· Get a Cloudy Nights T-Shirt · Submit a Review / Article

Click here if you are having trouble logging into the forums

Privacy Policy | Please read our Terms of Service | Signup and Troubleshooting FAQ | Problems? PM a Red or a Green Gu… uh, User

General Astronomy >> General Observing and Astronomy

Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | (show all)
azure1961p
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/17/09

Loc: USA
Aperture versus experience
      #5805927 - 04/18/13 12:02 AM

Here's the hypothetical. It could pertain to deepsky as well but for the sake of simplicity, lets use Mars...

Say you have a novice observer with a 10" Reflector looking at Mars with all his heart for the first time ever. Along side him we have a high ranking visual observer with seasoned expert skills and experience also with a 10" identical scope.

Obviously the expert will see more. The question however is simply: how large a reflector would the novice need to be able to see the same details as the expert?

I'm going to throw out 12-15" in aperture - my guess.

On deepsky the same scopes, again and a seasoned expert with a novice, but now its M51.

How large a scope might a novice need to see the same nuances? There's real technique here.

We often debate scopes but what about abilities?

Thanks guys.

Pete


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Arizona-Ken
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 08/31/08

Loc: Scottsdale, Arizona
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: azure1961p]
      #5805938 - 04/18/13 12:12 AM

Gee, it must be really, really cloudy where you are.

Arizona Ken


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Asbytec
Guy in a furry hat
*****

Reged: 08/08/07

Loc: La Union, PI
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: Arizona-Ken]
      #5805953 - 04/18/13 12:27 AM

It might be cloudy where he is, but someone asked the question in another forum. Gosh, Pete, I just dont know. It might be a complex problem because we dont know what experience means, or how good the novice is at attention to detail or how good his eyes are.

I would think experience is important, however. How much? I dunno, but it does take a while to learn to really observe. I remember, even with the same aperture, it took me a while to recognize (through experience) how small Jupiter's white ovals are. Once I understood what to look for, they became easier. And the more I observed Jupiter and Mars, the more I could see...in the same aperture.

Maybe this is not really an aperture problem at all, just an experience one. There are probably folks who briefly glance at Jupiter in a C14 and only see it's two prominent EQ belts pretty much like the view in a 60mm refractor (APO, of course...LOL. KIDDING!)

Here's my nickle, got $0.03 change?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
azure1961p
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/17/09

Loc: USA
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: Asbytec]
      #5805965 - 04/18/13 12:46 AM

Its probably fairly difficult to nail down because acuity can be so fluid. There's that age old understanding that subsequent observations during an apparition will quicken the eye brain detection to the point previously invisible things will begin to show with clarity. The observer will often think the seeings improved but the eye brain has accommodated the demands of the repeated tasks. That's the edge Im referring to.

I think a lot of beginner success or failure is a perception or expectation thing too so that's factored in.

Pete

Ken, your avatar is perfect.

Edited by azure1961p (04/18/13 12:47 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Tony Flanders
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/18/06

Loc: Cambridge, MA, USA
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: azure1961p]
      #5806084 - 04/18/13 04:52 AM

Quote:

Here's the hypothetical. It could pertain to deepsky as well but for the sake of simplicity, lets use Mars...

Say you have a novice observer with a 10" Reflector looking at Mars with all his heart for the first time ever. Along side him we have a high ranking visual observer with seasoned expert skills and experience also with a 10" identical scope.

Obviously the expert will see more. The question however is simply: how large a reflector would the novice need to be able to see the same details as the expert?




Planets are fundamentally different from deep sky in this regard.

Planetary viewing is almost always limited by atmospheric seeing, and in most locations a 10-inch scope is pushing the limits of what the atmosphere will allow even in the best circumstances. So even for an experienced observer, it's a fairly rare night when using a scope bigger than 10 inches will yield significantly improvements.

You would do better to start with a much smaller scope as the base scope -- say, an 80-mm refractor. In that case, on a night of superb seeing, doubling the aperture might, just possibly, compensate for inexperience.

Translating that to your 10-inch scope, that means that on the 1-in-100 night that occurs at the best locations, a newbie with a 20-inch scope might see as much detail on Mars as an experienced observer with a 10-inch scope.

In practice, an experienced observer will almost always see more, regardless of which telescopes the two are using.

On deep sky, it depends greatly on the target. For some large, low-surface-brightness galaxies and nebulae, aperture is almost irrelevant. In those cases, again, an experienced observer will always see more regardless of the instruments the two are using. In fact, the inexperienced observer won't be able to detect the object at all regardless of how big a scope he or she is using.

On objects like globular clusters, the gap is much smaller. For bright spiral galaxies like M51, it's somewhere in between. Here, I think a newbie with a 16-inch scope would have a good chance of seeing as much as an experienced observer with a 4-inch scope -- assuming dark skies, of course. But it would depend greatly on the newbie. I've known people who couldn't see M51's spiral arms through a 30-inch scope under dark skies.

I know for a fact that Sue French has seen things in her 4-inch refractor that I've failed to see in my 12.5-inch Dob. And I'm not exactly inexperienced.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Maverick199
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 02/27/11

Loc: India
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: Arizona-Ken]
      #5806146 - 04/18/13 07:00 AM

Quote:

Gee, it must be really, really cloudy where you are.

Arizona Ken




I would also like to factor in dark sites. How much would that attribute towards what the novice sees vs the experienced?


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
jpcannavo
scholastic sledgehammer
*****

Reged: 02/21/05

Loc: Ex NYCer, Now in Denver CO!
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: Maverick199]
      #5806153 - 04/18/13 07:06 AM

There is no question that any “as-if aperture gain” function here is multidetermined. But nonetheless the phenomenon is likely quite real, and often reveals itself on a case-by-case basis. (this perhaps at odds with an earlier post of mine suggesting it be conceptualized across a population).

I can clearly recall one night, early in my deep-sky experience, at the Oregon Star Party. I was standing with a handful of experienced observers (one of them, I think, was Steve Swayze) who where commenting on H II regions in M33 with a moderately large dob (16”, 18” ? I’m not sure). I took a long hard look – focusing on the relevant portions of the field - and then quietly slinked away feeling like a dumb-posterior (ahem), I couldn’t see dingy!

Frustrated, I wandered over to some scopes of significantly larger aperture (22” or 25” ?), which began to reveal some of what I could not see earlier. I remember truly thinking I needed an eye exam, as other similar phenomena had occurred that night. It was later that I came to realize that the needed Rx here was experience.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
azure1961p
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 01/17/09

Loc: USA
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: jpcannavo]
      #5806168 - 04/18/13 07:33 AM

Nice account Joseph. I noticed in deepsky things like realizing the most sensitive part of the retina is between eye looking straight ahead and to the bridge of the nose made a difference. The other thing I realized - and this is a CN thing, faint stars and small planetary nebula can stand and benefit from far higher magnification than I was using. Another is becoming familiar with the look and elusiveness of those fringey features. Lastly, time. More experienced deepsky observers can put in a whopping amount of time on objects I wrote off with the same aperture - even the same galaxy. I was amazed Jake Saleronta (spelling) saw details in a face on spiral I gave five minutes and moved on with disappointment . He on the other hand spent well over an hour with the same aperture and began to see clumpy arm shapes. I'm into this for decades - I just recently found out Im too quick to move on. Experience is a progressive thing!

Tony, You make a good point. For the simplicity of it I assumed good seeing. The refractor would've been a more logical choice for the example but most experts use larger aperture. I understand your angle here however.

Thanks.

Pete


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Mark Costello
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 03/08/05

Loc: Matthews, NC, USA
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: azure1961p]
      #5806276 - 04/18/13 08:55 AM

Quote:

Here's the hypothetical. It could pertain to deepsky as well but for the sake of simplicity, lets use Mars...

Say you have a novice observer with a 10" Reflector looking at Mars with all his heart for the first time ever. Along side him we have a high ranking visual observer with seasoned expert skills and experience also with a 10" identical scope.

Obviously the expert will see more. The question however is simply: how large a reflector would the novice need to be able to see the same details as the expert?

I'm going to throw out 12-15" in aperture - my guess.

On deepsky the same scopes, again and a seasoned expert with a novice, but now its M51.

How large a scope might a novice need to see the same nuances? There's real technique here.

We often debate scopes but what about abilities?

Thanks guys.

Pete






Hi Pete, this is a good thread and I saw it's antecedent "side trail" in the planetary reflector thread.

In another forum (Cats & Casses) someone (Eddgie IIRC) wrote that with patience one can see a lot with any scope. I believe that. Several weeks ago, in the Refractor Forum, I wrote that I wasn't seeing discernibly more planetary detail with my 5" achro then I had with a 4" F6.5 achro I owned before that, attributing that to the extra false color in my current refractor. By the following week, I was ready to eat my words. The interceding weekend, I had a 45 minute session with Jupiter, sketching it. At some point in that session, I hit me that two extra bands and a lot of swirls in some of the major bands had showed up. I was seeing more with Jupiter than I ever saw with any other telescope I owned. A couple of these were 6" and 8" Newtonians. Although I believe I have a nice refractor, IMO it was extra degree of patience and willingness to draw and write about what I was seeing that allowed me to see far more details in Jupiter with a 5" refractor than a 6" and 8" reflector....

Best Regards....


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
ensign
professor emeritus


Reged: 12/16/08

Loc: Southwestern Ontario
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: Mark Costello]
      #5806542 - 04/18/13 12:31 PM

I think that this is one of those issues that has so many variables it's next to impossible to quantify.

A number of years ago I was observing Jupiter with an 80mm achromat from my light-polluted driveway. My son, about 15 years old at the time, asked if he could have a peek. He then started describing in great detail features that I was having trouble seeing.

Ahhh, to have 15-year-old eyes. . .

In this case youth and enthusiasm trumped age and experience.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
StarStuff1
Post Laureate
*****

Reged: 04/01/07

Loc: South of the Mason-Dixon Line
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: ensign]
      #5806565 - 04/18/13 12:44 PM

Yes, a lot of experience at the eyepiece will reveal more details. Try this: set an egg on a table and draw it. Try to get the smallest details. This will help your eye "train" itself to see faint details on planets in any scope.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
buddyjesus
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 07/07/10

Loc: Davison, Michigan
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: azure1961p]
      #5806566 - 04/18/13 12:44 PM

Quote:

Lastly, time. More experienced deepsky observers can put in a whopping amount of time on objects I wrote off with the same aperture - even the same galaxy. I was amazed Jake Saleronta (spelling) saw details in a face on spiral I gave five minutes and moved on with disappointment . He on the other hand spent well over an hour with the same aperture and began to see clumpy arm shapes. I'm into this for decades - I just recently found out Im too quick to move on. Experience is a progressive thing!

Thanks.

Pete




I am continually learning the same lesson. 5 minutes just isn't long enough to get a deep feel for the features of an otherwise grey fuzzy. I just recently started giving a minimum fifteen minutes for each object even if they are not getting sketched. I find even this amount of time is short for trying all the observing tricks and playing the waiting game with variable seeing.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Eric63
scholastic sledgehammer


Reged: 06/16/12

Loc: Ottawa, Ontario
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: ensign]
      #5806572 - 04/18/13 12:46 PM

Very interesting thread and one that could help many newbies with aperture fever. I would love to increase my aperture right now to see more, but I think it would be better to learn to see more with the aperture I have before jumping to the next. This way I will better appreciate that larger scope when I decide to upgrade. (or Perhaps this is another way convincing myself since I’m too cheep to get another scope )

Eric


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
csrlice12
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 05/22/12

Loc: Denver, CO
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: Eric63]
      #5806739 - 04/18/13 01:27 PM

Yes, but your FIRST view of Saturn/Jupiter/Mars, etc... is the one you remember....do you remember your 350th view? The experience will allow you too "see" better (not more), eeking out the fine details; but it's that first view that really determines if there is a 2nd...or 350th....

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
FirstSight
Duke of Deneb
*****

Reged: 12/26/05

Loc: Raleigh, NC
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: csrlice12]
      #5806781 - 04/18/13 01:52 PM

Well, I would certainly like to experience more aperture. Alas, my application for a grant to purchase a 20" reflector to conduct some experiments on the question at hand wasn't approved.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Kraus
Pooh-Bah


Reged: 03/10/12

Loc: Georgia.
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: FirstSight]
      #5806973 - 04/18/13 03:43 PM

Hmmm...that's a good one. I learned a long time ago not to expect objects to appear bright and colorful unless they're bright and colorful.

Might be why many scopes end up on e-Bay. Look at some of the telescope advertisements. Folks see a telescope in front of or next to a long-exposure photograph. Folks buy the telescope and don't see the 'photograph'. Now they're disappointed.

So to answer your question. I don't think experience or aperture is the issue, it's expectations.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Jon Isaacs
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 06/16/04

Loc: San Diego and Boulevard, CA
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: Kraus]
      #5807431 - 04/18/13 06:40 PM

Quote:

So to answer your question. I don't think experience or aperture is the issue, it's expectations.




Expectations are, in many way the key to life. Realistic expectations are the result of experience.

Personally, I just like looking through a telescope at the night sky. Big or small, top notch or not so hot.. I enjoy it.

The whole idea of gauging skill by aperture, I just figure we see what we see. If I with someone who is more skilled than me, hopefully they will help me out. If I am with someone who is less skilled than I, I hope to be able to help them...

But, if one wants to track ones gain in skill or amateur against amateur, probably the "Smallest aperture I saw X" with is a viable measure. Unfortunately, such comparisons can bring out the competitive aspects... I enjoy using smaller scopes because they challenge my skills and help me develop them...

So, such a tool looks like: Beginner Jon barely saw NGC ???? in his 10 inch wizbang. Experienced observer Wilbert can see NGC???? in his 4 inch Didley from the same site.. That's a measure of experience, how much aperture can you give up?

Jon


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
David Knisely
Postmaster
*****

Reged: 04/19/04

Loc: southeastern Nebraska
Re: Aperture versus experience new [Re: azure1961p]
      #5807474 - 04/18/13 06:52 PM

I got "trained" early on, being forced to put up with observing with a little 2.4 inch f/11.7 refractor for a number of years as a youngster. This experience taught me how to push myself and learn how to eek-out objects and the very faintest detail using proper dark adaptation, averted vision, proper power selection, and other viewing techniques. This was true of several of us in our club who also started in the late 1960's with the small refractors and then eventually worked up to the larger apertures some time later. When I 'graduated' from my little refractor to my 8 inch f/7 a few years later, the amount of detail I could see was astounding, so all that "training" really paid off. Indeed, one night a few years ago, I had my 100mm f/6 refractor out on my driveway testing the 8.5-12mm Speers-Waler eyepiece I was reviewing, and abruptly saw the dust lane in M104, which surprised the heck out of me. Some others I observe with could not see the feature in that aperture, so I began to notice this difference more and more. I could really notice this one night when we were observing the Horsehead at one of our club's star parties. It was quite faint, but after seeing it several times before, I had little trouble getting it in my Nexstar 9.25 inch SCT with the H-Beta filter. However, a friend with a 10 inch couldn't see it in my scope. He hadn't come up through the ranks (started with a 10 inch), so his observing experience hadn't been as fully developed. Eventually, he gained at least some of that experience and closed our observing "gap", but I find that even now, I still tend to have a small but definite edge over others in our group who didn't start out "small". It might be a 20% to 25% gain in "effective observing aperture", but it is hard to judge an exact level of improvement, as levels of observing experience vary widely. On planets, the difference due to experience is less noticeable, but may still be there, especially when looking at the finest low-contrast detail. Clear skies to you.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
rdandrea
Carpal Tunnel
*****

Reged: 06/13/10

Loc: Colorado, USA DM59ra
Re: Aperture versus experience [Re: azure1961p]
      #5807559 - 04/18/13 07:30 PM

Percival Lowell had a REALLY big scope (almost even by today's standards)
http://www.lowell.edu/news/2013/03/its-time-to-restore-the-clark/

Yet he saw a lot of stuff on Mars that wasn't really there.
There's no substitute for experience and a good eye.


Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
HCR32
sage


Reged: 08/27/10

Loc: Australia
Re: Aperture versus experience [Re: David Knisely]
      #5807564 - 04/18/13 07:33 PM

I had a first timer look at Jupiter through a 6" at about 180x and didn't know what he was looking at to the point where he had to google an image of Jupiter to spark off he's imagination. I couldn't believe it. Some people need things to slap them in the face. My guess would be 10" for experience, 16" for novice.

Post Extras: Print Post   Remind Me!   Notify Moderator  
Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | (show all)


Extra information
1 registered and 5 anonymous users are browsing this forum.

Moderator:  cildarith, panhard, tecmage 

Print Thread

Forum Permissions
      You cannot start new topics
      You cannot reply to topics
      HTML is disabled
      UBBCode is enabled


Thread views: 2781

Jump to

CN Forums Home


Cloudy Nights LLC
Cloudy Nights Sponsor: Astronomics