13 replies to this topic

[12BH7]

For the last few years I've been doing more lunar and planetary. When I use my 12" SCT, most nights the views are difficult simply because larger SCT's are more sensitive to atmospheric turbulence. Besides taking longer to cool down.  Please, let's not go down the Reflexic road right now!  

 

Far too often during my session I end up switching to my smaller 8" SCT for lunar and planetary. Simply because it handles turbulence better and cools quicker. I'm finding that my downsized scope IS giving me more viewable nights. Now that was a reason I didn't expect for downsizing.

[CowTipton]

For the last few years I've been doing more lunar and planetary. When I use my 12" SCT, most nights the views are difficult simply because larger SCT's are more sensitive to atmospheric turbulence. Besides taking longer to cool down.  Please, let's not go down the Reflexic road right now!  

 

Far too often during my session I end up switching to my smaller 8" SCT for lunar and planetary. Simply because it handles turbulence better and cools quicker. I'm finding that my downsized scope IS giving me more viewable nights. Now that was a reason I didn't expect for downsizing.

 

It makes sense.

Everyone has a sweet spot that best suits their needs when it comes to what factors determine the amount of use and enjoyment a scope will bring.

Size, weight, cooldown times, set-up, portability, potential resolution, max magnification, etc.

[JohnTMN]

Like the above post say's,

It not complicated,, there isn't any competition,, just enjoy looking at what you enjoy looking at.

It's that simple,,

Thank's for posting here.

[RAKing]

Like the above post say's,

It not complicated,, there isn't any competition,, just enjoy looking at what you enjoy looking at.

It's that simple,,

Thank's for posting here.

Agreed! And to complete that thought:

 

Just enjoy looking at what you enjoy looking at, with what you enjoy using!

[TheChosen]

I am not surprised, there is a reason why the 8" is the universally most recommended aperture. It hits just the right spot in so many areas. 

 

I am very happy with my 12" because I am not much of a planets/moon guy. So yeah , on the planets and the moon I am not seeing a whole lot of difference because most of the time I have looked, the seeing did not support a 12" or even a 10" , maybe not even an 8".

 

DSOs however have made the 12" more than worth it but I get that some people are focused on the planets/moon instead.

 

p.s. I used to have an 8" DOB

Edited by TheChosen, 02 October 2024 - 10:13 AM.

[grif 678]

There are several reasons for downsizing, and yours is a very prominent one. But when you put all the reasons in a bag, the name of the bag is age. I know, that has happened to me. Things like weight, not wanting to stay up that late anymore, not wanting to drive to a darker spot, and others become magnified by age.

If a smaller scope gives you more pleasure, then go with that. It is for enjoyment as we get older, not trying to see what could be seen with a larger scope, when most of the time the larger scope does no better than the smaller one.

You can become friends with a smaller personal scope than a bulky one that causes more frustration than ease of use and enjoyment.

[gene 4181]

      Seeing limited me at this  general location .  Using aperture here was always a waiting game  for the best views planetary  .      .

[12BH7]

I am not surprised, there is a reason why the 8" is the universally most recommended aperture. It hits just the right spot in so many areas. 

 

I am very happy with my 12" because I am not much of a planets/moon guy. So yeah , on the planets and the moon I am not seeing a whole lot of difference because most of the time I have looked, the seeing did not support a 12" or even a 10" , maybe not even an 8".

 

DSOs however have made the 12" more than worth it but I get that some people are focused on the planets/moon instead.

 

p.s. I used to have an 8" DOB

I plan on keeping the larger scope for an occasional deep sky night. However, I'm finding that most of my viewing limitations has been simply being too tired. So now, the bulk of my DSO have been Messier's, clusters, etc... Simple easy taking a peek stuff.

 

This year I'm going to take a hard look at just how much I need the 12" on MY deep sky viewing. I love this scope, but I'm finding that I'm using it less and less. 

[12BH7]

      Seeing limited me at this  general location .  Using aperture here was always a waiting game  for the best views planetary  .      .

I find that the larger aperture too particular on too many nights. When I'm out there doing planetary, I'm not making scientific study notes. I'm just enjoying the view. The smaller aperture gives me more nights AND with less fuss.

[12BH7]

There are several reasons for downsizing, and yours is a very prominent one. But when you put all the reasons in a bag, the name of the bag is age. I know, that has happened to me. Things like weight, not wanting to stay up that late anymore, not wanting to drive to a darker spot, and others become magnified by age.

If a smaller scope gives you more pleasure, then go with that. It is for enjoyment as we get older, not trying to see what could be seen with a larger scope, when most of the time the larger scope does no better than the smaller one.

You can become friends with a smaller personal scope than a bulky one that causes more frustration than ease of use and enjoyment.

When I first started to consider downsizing there were some reasons that were not the typical ones.

 

I never thought frequency of viewable conditions would be one of them. I wish I could find a graph of aperture vs viewable nights. This is probably why the 4" apo guys are so happy with their setups. Sure, I'm doing more planetary, but I'm finding that I'm getting more nights out using a smaller aperture doing that.

 

Then you throw in this like my current location not being good for galaxy hunting. Even using a larger scope, at best, all I would see is a dim haze against an milky background.  Great, I bagged NGC what ever - so what?  Having to go after the best and brightest DSO I find that I can use a smaller scope. Sure, a larger scope is always better for DSO, but that brings us back to the trade offs.

[ABQJeff]

While yes, in this hobby there is the adage “aperture rules”, a more important phrase is “the best scope is the one you most enjoy using”! (for whatever reason). I am happy for your joy!


Sorry for the tangent on aperture vs enjoyment…
I guess that is what bothers me about the vast majority of big 20”+ Dobs going to bed by 1 am at Okie-Tex. I wonder if the owners are not enjoying using them…and that makes me sad, for an astronomer to shell out $20K plus on one scope and not be enjoying the hobby. I would be much happier if they used the Dob, but then switched to a smaller scope or better, visit us mortals who have scopes less than 20”. I would have shared!

[12BH7]

While yes, in this hobby there is the adage “aperture rules”, a more important phrase is “the best scope is the one you most enjoy using”! (for whatever reason). I am happy for your joy!


Sorry for the tangent on aperture vs enjoyment…
I guess that is what bothers me about the vast majority of big 20”+ Dobs going to bed by 1 am at Okie-Tex. I wonder if the owners are not enjoying using them…and that makes me sad, for an astronomer to shell out $20K plus on one scope and not be enjoying the hobby. I would be much happier if they used the Dob, but then switched to a smaller scope or better, visit us mortals who have scopes less than 20”. I would have shared!

If I had the sky to support it I would do what EVER I had to do to get a big aperture under those stars. But the conditions you what they are.  

 

These days I just roll out the 12" onto the drive way and view. Which is the same exact spot I'm using with the 8". So there's NO difference in setup, time or energy expenditure.  It's not a matter of joy, but more of surprise that the 8" is working out better.

 

Go figure???

[Cpk133]

Since the temps have dropped here in MI, I’ve been using the 80mm instead of a TEC140FL or my C9.25.  It’s just too easy, too fast, and puts up images too good for its diminutive profile.  Tonight, I’m driving to a semi dark sky, hoping to catch aurora borealis the 80mm is going for the ride, but I’m hankering to deploy the bigger ones.

[Jon Isaacs]

While yes, in this hobby there is the adage “aperture rules”, a more important phrase is “the best scope is the one you most enjoy using”! (for whatever reason). I am happy for your joy!


Sorry for the tangent on aperture vs enjoyment…
I guess that is what bothers me about the vast majority of big 20”+ Dobs going to bed by 1 am at Okie-Tex. I wonder if the owners are not enjoying using them…and that makes me sad, for an astronomer to shell out $20K plus on one scope and not be enjoying the hobby. I would be much happier if they used the Dob, but then switched to a smaller scope or better, visit us mortals who have scopes less than 20”. I would have shared!

 

In my view, the best, the best scope is the one I happen to be using at the moment. In my mind, the key is having a range of scopes so I can choose the scope that matches the conditions as well as my energy level. 

 

I'm one of those 4 inch refractor guys as well as guy with 16 inch and 22 inch Dobs and several in-between. 

 

As to why some folks put their big scopes to bed early.. Maybe they're older, I'm 76.. I don't last all night. I take a nap and arise refreshed and ready to go until dawn.

 

Jon be