Lightbridge or flex tube Dob?

[Mr Moff]

Evening everyone,

I'm suffering from aperture fever and plan on picking up a 14 inch Dob,or maybe a 16 if I can save enough.

So to the question, what would other people go for. The skywatcher flex tube or the Meade lightbridge?

Also are there any build quality issues with the Meade or any problems right out of the box?

[Pingster]

The 14 and 16in Flextube will be good straight out of the box. I have a 12in and a 16in and both are optically great. Ive not looked thru a 'premium' dob, but i have a lot of different scopes and based on them i will say the flextubes are excellent. From what i have reade the LB requires a few mods to get it to work well.

Only problem is... as you go over 12in they get heavy. I would not recommend the 14in or 16 in if you dont own a van with a tail lift. As a one man operation, they almost impossible to take to a dark site without. If you plan to keep it in your back garden... then perfect.

I have only ever viewed thru one 16in lightbridge... the image in my flextube was brighter and sharper. In fact i would describe the image from a flextube using general observing mag of x60 as tack sharp.

The advantage the lightnbridge has over the flextube is portability. Even the 16in one can be transported to a dark site on a car quite easily by one person. The 16in flextube deffo a two man job.

So whats more important to you? Quality of image or ease of portability? I prefer quality of image. The LB i viewed thru may not be a perfect unit, and it was a few years older than my then 6months old FT.

Saying that a 12in flextube is easily transportable in a hatchback car by one person. I do it with mine. I use the 12in one all year round... yet my 16in scope hides in my warehouse waiting for trips to wales Which happens about once a year.I do miss using the 16in scope, is a cracking scope. But ease of transporting makes the 12in a very special size to consider indeed.

[earth titan]

Excellent answer. My sole reason for selecting a lightbridge was portability. I can take it to a dark sky site on my own.

Typed by me, using fumms...

[cotterless45]

Yep, even with little strength the Lightbridge base and primary go in the boot along with a large plastic box which holds the top unit ( focuser and 2ndry) and the struts. The focuser and fan are excellent and an AE shroud will tighten up the truss.I hear that a 14" Dob is the optimum size for shifting around and general viewing.

Have a good check on delivery, mine was a Friday afternoon effort. Spider back to front and bent out of shape to get collimation, nice,

Nick.

[Pingster]

To cure app fever get the 16in scope. It sure cured mine, as realistically we cant buy bigger in the UK for a decent price. It makes you realistic about what can be seen even in a 16in scope, hence i can use my 12in content knowing i an not missing out on that much. So it stops the mind think "what if". Clear skies.

[acey]

If the scope is going to be permanently set up then obviously you just go for the biggest you can afford (assuming you don't have issues with eyepeice height, i.e. you don't mind possibly using steps to reach it when looking at the zenith). If it's going to be moved then it's a whole different issue.

The 12" flextube is, as has been said, easily transportable by a single user, and you're ready to go in minutes. If I were upgrading to anything larger then the first thing I would think about is transporting it, along with considering how much extra aperture I'd want to make the effort worthwhile. Personally I consider a 50% aperture increase to be the optimum upgrade, which in my case would take me to 18", and for transportability at that scale (given that I'm a single user with finite strength, limited vehicle space and only so much tolerance for faffing around in the dark) I'd be looking to "ultra-portable" designs rather than the heavy-based Flextube or Lightbridge - it's the bases of those scopes that look to me the real limitating factor in terms of ease of transport, though the ease of assembly of the Lightbridge upper cage would also be a consideration.

You can see a heck of a lot with a 12" at a dark site (anything in the NGC is potentially viewable) so I'm in no hurry to get the extra 0.9 limiting magnitude that a 50% upgrade brings. My previous scope was an 8" - I made the 50% step with the 12" flextube.

[Mike73]

From what I've seen the practical size for a flex tube starts at 12" and finishes at 12" so if I was in your shoes it would be a one horse race!

^(but thats just my opinion based on my requirements of a biggish dob.)

[Rob_UK_SE]

I think it is worth starting with the old saying 'the best scope is the one you can use most regularly'.

Both scope designs are very good for the money. However, there is a significant difference between their weight and portability. I have a Lightbridge and am a huge fan of its ability to collapse into a much smaller package. I can managing the 12 with no issue at all. I can also move the tube when it is fully built - should I wish to re-locate at speed.

The flextube is, without question, far better out of the box. The Meade is a wonderful scope, but the do require so upgrades (then they really shine). Skywatcher scopes hold collimation well and usually have good springs etc. The lightbridge rocker is not quite as substantial and will require collimation each session due to the truss design. If you have not seen a 14 / 16 flextube in person you really should... they are HUGE! I was put off purchasing one after seeing a 400p. I am sure the views are fantastic but the rocker will not go through a conventional doorway (neither the 14 or 16 Skywatcher will). The Meade should be ok.

As mentioned, the Meade will require a greater number of tweaks immediately. In addition to the usual bits (telrad, bobs knobs, etc) you would need to look at some sort of counter weight system - particularly if you plan to use heavier eyepieces such as the larger Naglers etc. I use taxi magnets on mine and then attach dumbbell weights as required. The flextube has a slightly better balancing point and is more friendly to heavier eyepieces.

The views are probably very similar between the two 16s. In my opinion, the 14 is too close to a 12 to justify the significant difference in weight and size (I think only 33% more light?).

I would have suggest having a good look at the lightbridge 12 and the flextube 300p too.

Best regards,

Rob

[Mr Moff]

Thanks for the replies,

The plan is to only use this scope in my back garden and it will be stored in the shed which has double doors. I literally have to move it about 10 feet to be in position. The skies here are very good with hardly any light pollution.

I'll be keeping my 8 inch Dob for traveling to a dark site, so no troubles there.

I was originally thinking 12 inch but then I thought maybe it's worth saving the extra for the 14. Then when I decided it should be 14 I figured maybe it's worth going the extra 2 inches again.

I think I'll definately stick with the flex tube and spend a little more time thinking over the size.

Does anyone have a picture of a 16 inch flex tube next to something like a chair?

[Moonshane]

if you are not moving far and can afford it then the 16" would be a large improvement over 12". I have a solid tube 16" f4 and this is readily transportable in my standard hatchback. although I am reasonably strong. the eyepiece height was designed when I made the base to be at around my eye level when standing / at the zenith. I sit the bulk of the time on my home made observing seat.

for me there's a major leap from 12" to 16" even from light polluted gardens like mine. there's also an unavoidable increase in cost, size and weight. I bought mine used and this way you save a lot of cash.

[Moonshane]

ps I forgot to say that fiddling with dob to make various improvements is as far as I am concerned on of the attractions of the design. it's unusual for me to look at a dob and think "yeah it's perfect". there's always something to work on, tweak or improve and that's half the fun.

[Mr Moff]

Thanks moonshan, yeah I definately think it's the 16 for me.

Hopefully aperture fever will be a thing of the past then.

[Pingster]

Can i offer one last piece of advice.

Since you are usog the scope from a bavk garden.... How tall are your fences and are you the type that are neighbour shy? Or have nosey interfering ones? If so the 16 in flextube is not for you asat zenith it sticks over 6ft fences and you will be "seen".

If this is not an issue. Get the 16in flextube, as peopel say it sets up so fast and collapes away so fast for that reason uou woll use it more than a LB.

Then sell your 8in and buy a second hand 12in FT. Its so easy to bright to dark sites. IMO the scope you use at home should be as big as possible, cos after your first year into the hobby your desire to run off to dark skies will be only once or twice year. Enjoy the bi scope in your garden xD the resolution it gives is amazing.

Im gonna get my 16in scope and put it in my garden this winter. The warehouse it not the right place for it.

[estwing]

Thanks moonshan, yeah I definately think it's the 16 for me.

Hopefully aperture fever will be a thing of the past then.

...Doctors around the world scratch there heads trying to find a cure for this...

[Mr Moff]

I'm very lucky with the neighbours. The guy on one side always turned his floodlights off when I'm outside. He even closes his curtains when he has lights on inside.

The walls are 6 foot and I'm 6 foot 6 so they always see me setting up. I think all my neighbours have a hidden astronomer side just waiting to get to the surface.

[Pingster]

If you do get the 16FT. In advance buy x4 5in trolley dtyle wheels with hard rubber tires. Screw em onto the base, it will make it so easy to roll out from your shed. The first time you use the extending truss feature you will fell very smug. As its beautiful and fast.

If i was to advise you must need accessories thwn in this order:

1. Wheels ~£25 ebay

2. Small three step-ladder with top arm rest/handle. Makes it easy to perch on it. ~£25 B&Q

3. Hotech lazer collomibator. Buy the 1.25in ver pernamentlly attach i to a 1.25in to 2" adaptor. Makes using it more consitant each time. ~£95. I get such great results at x340mag i get good stars and in moments of great seeig i can see festrons on Juiptor.

4. thinnest yoga mat you can find as a light shroud.

5. Baader Multi perpuse coma corrector to make your wife fields 95% sharpe to the edges.

6. Good luck saving.

7. Sell your 8in AFTER you get a 12in. Really a second hand 12 in costs just a bit more and after your look into your 16in you wont care for the 8in anymore.

[Xlracer]

Hi

The Flex Tube eats the Lightbridge alive in just about every respect from stability of collimation, performance, and ease of set up. The only issue I have had with the North Wales Astro Society 12" is that the main side pieces suffered 2 breakages found on delivery. Its not an issue when assembled, but the packaging was obviously not good enough to protect the areas that are vulnerable when flat packed. Other than that Its been a great experience using it.

Regards

Dave Smith

[vlebo]

This wil give you some idea of the size

[Pingster]

XLracer mirrors my experience. I had heard from readin forums that the flextube and LB mirrors come from the same source and optically give simular views. How wrong i found this to be. I was suprised how much better the flextube optics are. It is a night and day difference.

Jupitor: in the LB looked like a fuzzy circle In the flextube its got fine bands on both poles and distnct varying colour bands in the middle.

Faint stuff such as nebs and galaxy are so almost twice as bright and appear to have +double the resolution in the flextube. Compared to the flextube the LB looks always out of focus.

I dare say the LB views match what ones would expect froma budget dob, and in comparison the FT looks like a premium dob.

Please dont get me wrong, im not a "my stuff is better than yours", i just love owning and using the best possible too for the job and the satisfaction that comes it experiencing fine equipment.

I am not a "brand loyal" person, if a better scope thn the flextube comes out, i would sell up and jump ship. Right now GSO have a fantastic looking range that has a superb super smooth looking alt bearing/clutch. I dont know if the optics are as good as the flextube tho and i dont like the way its a solid tube. The collapsing FT design makes it so easy to store and move about. A true innovation.

For me visual quality is most important and i would never be able to accept a lower quality view if i knew theres better.

[estwing]

this thread is NOT helping me to choose between the two, seems it could be a choice for portabillaty/optics....which shouldn't be an option

[earth titan]

Can I just clarify, having owned both a 12" and 16" lightbridge, that the collimation springs in the two are very different.

Although my 16" was second hand I have checked with the previous owners (both forum members) and neither of them changed the stock screws. The 16" doesn't seem to suffer with weak springs.

As for optics, I would argue there isn't much difference (I would say that wouldn't I!) having looked through both and under UK viewing conditions I don't think it would be too critical.

The best aid to viewing is to get the scope out to a dark sky hence portability for me. I dark sky will let you see far more than marginally better optics IMHO.

Typed by me, using fumms...

[Mike73]

Who makes the optics for Skywatcher and am I right in thinking that GSO supply to Meade?

[Pingster]

I may be completely wrong. But i think the difference in optics, from all the info i have gathered via reading the web, its poss because skywatcher makes their mirrors cosistantly better, while meade seems a bit hit and miss. A good one can be equal to an flextube, but a bad one being very bad. I wont say anymore because as i said ive only viewed thru one LB, but it was never optically good on any of the times i viewed thru it.

I know im porbally making the decision even harder!

[estwing]

Who makes the optics for Skywatcher and am I right in thinking that GSO supply to Meade?

..i was under this impression mike, thats whats confusing me even more...the skywatcher is nicer to look at,which makes all the difference when it's dark!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Moonshane]

the main characters for DSOs (faint stuff) are:

dark skies (portability)

aperture

optical quality of mirrors

I my experience it's only vital that optical quality is high when looking at high brightness/magnification. a good mirror will allow both but it's not essential for faint targets.