Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
By using SGL or closing this notice you accept our policy.
The SGL policy on cookies can be found >>HERE<<
SGL XI Bookings Open
Monday 12th October 7pm
Click HERE for more information..
Is there much of a difference between the Celestron Nexstar 6” and 8”
Posted 08 July 2008 - 02:05 PM
Posted 08 July 2008 - 03:37 PM
Having owned both (or at least the OTA's), I can say that there is a difference in what you can see, although it varies somewhat. I have been able to make direct head-to-head comparisons on objects such as M13 (noticable improvement in the 8"), M31 (couldn't see much of a difference), M51 (slight improvement in the 8"). M42 (couldn't see much of a difference).
Whilst it looks like the difference is slight, it really depends on you and your personality how much this might bother you. Astronomers, when they've been doing this hobby for a bit, start trying to get any improvement they can out of their viewing instruments, even though this might be costly. You may well find that you're tempted to kick yourself later if you don't go for the bigger scope, but it might also be the case that if you get the 8" you find yourself hankering after more aperture a bit further down the road. One thing I would say is that the difference between decent dark skies compared to moderately light polluted suburbia is more pronounced than the difference in 2" of aperture. So think about what you can physically (be bothered to) transport.
There has been some concern about the stability of the 8SE on the single arm mount, but I've not heard a really convincing opinion on this one way or the other. My C8 is mounted on the CG5-GT mount, and that's solid. Also remember that if you have ambitions for astrophotography, at some point in the future you'll need an equatorial mount.
Hope that helps, Martin
Posted 09 July 2008 - 07:08 PM
After considering it I'll got for the 6" its something I could afford right away. Of course could just change my mind when I'm ordering it...
Posted 09 July 2008 - 07:25 PM
Therefore, 6 squared = 36, and 8 squared = 64, so 64/36 = 1.777.
Therefore, the 8" scope has a theoretical light gathering advantage of 1.8 times that of the 6".
In round figures, the 8" has almost twice the light gathering power of the 6", which is a very useful gain.
Hope this helps.
Posted 27 August 2009 - 04:29 PM
Whilst the 8 might get 1.8 times as much light it does not make everything twice as bright. So a very faint galaxy in the 6 inch might only be a faint galaxy in the 8 inch etc.
To be honest even if you get the 8 inch you will then want a 10 inch one anyway...
Mark..the galaxy hunter!
Meade 16 inch
25 x 100 bins
Thornbury nr Bristol eye limit mag 5.5
Galaxies count 1,070 as at 11/09/2015
Posted 27 August 2009 - 05:04 PM
I personally think the 6" is a really portable scope, its the one im going to go for
TS Planetary HR Eyepiece 25mm, 9mm, 5mm
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users