Orion 8 inch Dobsonian or 10 inch?

[Young_astronomer]

Hey All!

So, I've recently gained the opportunity to buy a telescope and I was thinking a dobsonian for DSO's! However, I've come to a

conundrum. Obviously the age old question, should I go with an 8-inch or 10 inch dobsonian. I've been leaning more toward 8 inch because I will be often hauling my telescope out to darker skies. However, I am a spry 17 year-old, so the weight issue doesn't really concern me as much as maneuverability. Will it be harder to scope out targets in a 10 inch rather than an 8 inch? Also, I'm stuck on the issue on whether or not to buy just the dobsonian, or the beginner pack which comes with barlows.

Thanks for your help, and I love the site re-vamp.

Clear Skies,

Mark

[JamesF]

I don't think the 10" would be significantly more difficult to use than the 8" as long as you can comfortably reach the eyepiece and there's no reason that should really be a deal-breaker. If you're happy with the weight and the increased size for storing and moving it then it shouldn't be a major problem. What comes in the beginner's pack besides a barlow?

James

[Moonshane]

the 10" Skywatcher is the same focal length (apprx) as the 8" so there's no issue with eyepiece height (unless you are very short - I use the 8" SW at school with 10 year olds). I don't think there's much difference between the bases either so I'd go for the 10" as this will provide better views. the 8" is a great all round starter but the 10" is an even better scope in my opinion, providing excellent aperture.

I would always say for visual, buy the biggest aperture you can afford and move about, you'll be glad you did.

rather than eyepieces, budget for a Telrad or other red dot finder (maybe £20-40) a decent star map (£10) and if you can stretch to one, a right angle correct image finder (6x30 or 9x50). these three things will provide more value for money than eyepieces currently I feel. eventually a couple of better eyepieces and a decent barlow will serve you well for many years to come.

[knobby]

the 10" Skywatcher is the same focal length (apprx) as the 8" so there's no issue with eyepiece height (unless you are very short - I use the 8" SW at school with 10 year olds). I don't think there's much difference between the bases either so I'd go for the 10" as this will provide better views. the 8" is a great all round starter but the 10" is an even better scope in my opinion, providing excellent aperture.

I would always say for visual, buy the biggest aperture you can afford and move about, you'll be glad you did.

rather than eyepieces, budget for a Telrad or other red dot finder (maybe £20-40) a decent star map (£10) and if you can stretch to one, a right angle correct image finder (6x30 or 9x50). these three things will provide more value for money than eyepieces currently I feel. eventually a couple of better eyepieces and a decent barlow will serve you well for many years to come.

Go big!

I bought a 6" and part ex'd it for a 10" a year later

Good luck choosing

[Moonshane]

ps I have assumed that the US Orion is f6 in the 8" and approx f5 in the 10"

[Young_astronomer]

Hey guys thanks for replying!

The beginner's set comes with 2x 1.25" barlow lenses and a bunch of beginner books, but I already have star charts. It looks like I might just invest the extra $150 and get a 10 inch dob.

Clear Skies!

[rory]

well as the others advise really, opt for the 10" if you can afford it. ive been very pleased with my 8" dobsonian , but if money wasnt an issue id certainly get more appeture.

good luck with whatever you decide.

[JamesF]

I'd pass on the beginner's set then. If you decide you need a barlow you can always pick up a decent one later.

James

[Bart]

10 inch

10 inch

10 inch

Need I say more?

Might be the only one you'll ever need.

Good luck!

Bart

[sunshine185]

Not sure about Orion Scopes but I recently upgraded from 8" dob to 10" sw. Now I could manage to lift the 8" from the kitchen to the garden in one piece, I cannot do this with the 10", have to add that I'm not the tallest person and I have a problem with my right wrist ( work injury ) also sound that even though both Scopes are the same length, the 10" ota is higher than the 8", I think the bearings on the ota are lower down the tube, I have some garden chairs that I used with the 8" and the ep was at a perfect height for seated viewing, but the 10" was too high, solved this by lowering the ota by 4 inches on the base. but the difference in viewing is very noticeable, to me the pros of the 10" outweigh the cons. If you are undecided between the 8 or 10 now , and you get the 8, you will wish you'd got the 10, if you were happy just getting an 8" and wasn't contemplating a ten inch, you would not regret it.

Edited July 3, 2012 by sunshine185

[swamp thing]

Hi

For me it would come down to what I wanted my scope to do?

For planets there is little to seperate the two as seeing is just as likely to limit what you can and can't see when you get to these kind of sizes. The limits of seeing are very easily reached with an 8" scope so there is little to gain from the 10".

On DSO,s though it's a different story here the advantage of the extra aperture of the 10" is pretty noticeable. It pulls out more detail specially in globs. It can also really help with galaxies and nebulae.

it is often said that the minimum deep sky scope is an 8", so as you can imagine 8"= good, 10" = better

Just as an extra thought:

There is also of coarse the upgrade in a few years. With a 10" you may never wish to go bigger, with an 8" the next jump to a larger scope for me would be to 12". This can be a big bulky lump.

Of coarse if you do go on from 10" you are realistically looking at a 16"

Good luck with your decision

[Bart]

Of coarse if you do go on from 10" you are realistically looking at a 16"

Good luck with your decision

He speaketh the truth View sig !

[Saleratus]

For me the decision would come down to what sort of nature do you have with regard to astronomy. If I could only have one scope, I'd have something around 8". I currently have 8" and 11" scopes and I use the 8" much more often, just because it's easier. I'm not 17 any more, but I can move the 11" when I want to. It's just that the 8" is so much easier that I know I can set it up and take it down without any fuss. An often repeated saying in amateur astronomy is: the best scope is the one that gets used the most.

However, if you have buckets of enthusiasm and energy and fairly reliable weather (so that you don't have to worry about rain rolling in and making you take down your scope 10 minutes after you set it up), maybe the 10" is for you.

[Young_astronomer]

Do you guys know if Astro-Tech or Zhumell are realiable brands? Or should I stick with known brands like Orion and Celestron (note: you guys prob guessed that I live in the U.S)

Edited July 4, 2012 by Young_astronomer

[Bart]

I understand that GSO a company that manufacture many astro related stuff, including scopes (I have a 10" GSO dob) and these are rebranded under many names, such as Zhumell, Meade, Orion etc, not sure about Celestron (I also have a Celestron dob)(I also have a Meade Dob)(I like Dobs), anyway, back to your question. They do make repuatble stuff and therefore assume Zhummel would be fine. Many folk your side of the water use Zhummell and are around for years, which in itself is no recommendation, but I don't hear anything negative about them. Someone would need to comment on the Astro-Tech, I have no experience

Good luck, you'll love your Dob, everyone does!! Did I say go for the 10 inch already?

Barry

[umadog]

The difference at the eyepiece between 8" and 10" is noticeable but not huge. The other difference between the scopes is focal ratio. In order to make the 10" of similar focal length to the 8", manufacturers must obviously make the 10" mirrors of faster focal ratio. There is, therefore, noticeably more coma in a 10" f.4.7 than in a 8" f/5.9 (which is often how the numbers end up). It's unlikely you'll be forking out a few hundred for a coma corrector so you will end up with some blurring in your low power fields of view. Cheaper eyepieces (or just badly designed eyepieces) will show astigmatism below f/5 but at a lot less around f/6 and slower. So going for the 10" will affect your eyepiece choices. I'm not saying any of this to put off: like others on this thread I have a faster 10". But you do need to know that there are more differences than just aperture and if you want to get sharper views more cheaply than an 8" is a better way of going about things.

[estwing]

all well and good you 10"ers going 16 but where do us 1`ers move on to next? i feel as if i'm being discriminated against and poked fun at

[Bart]

all well and good you 10"ers going 16 but where do us 1`ers move on to next? i feel as if i'm being discriminated against and poked fun at

Estwing , if we knew what the 1" was. we might be able to poke fun properly.

[knobby]

all well and good you 10"ers going 16 but where do us 1`ers move on to next? i feel as if i'm being discriminated against and poked fun at

If you have a 1" scope ... anything would be an upgrade

[Moonshane]

I went from 12" to 16" and it's a notable upgrade.

[estwing]

i thought 1` represented a foot

[knobby]

i thought 1` represented a foot

fair point!

[swamp thing]

1341511993[/url'>' post='1566728']

i thought 1` represented a foot

It does

I understood you. You can either go 16" or bigger

[knobby]

Pedantic statement alert ...

1' would be 1 foot

1`... what the heck was that

[estwing]

i'm gonna have a gander at some price's on 16 n 18