blusky

My appreciation to all people who voted. The list of equipment updated - see signature below (Yeah!)

PS Space out there is all fantastic, however missus started going on about the space indoors, which has reduced somewhat... :-]

Tracking is very useful for visual work. I love the little RA motor in my EQ mount. It allows me to concentrate on observing faint DSOs.

Thanks. Dob, (almost by definition) being not an equatorial, is not well-suited for imaging work on DSOs, esp. using extra-long exposures, as the objects distant from the centre of the frame do not remain exactly stationary, correct?

Since a Dobsonian is a Newtonian asking 6" or 8" is somewhat redundant.

Dob is about a particular type of an altazimuth mount, so that makes them different for me.

Especially as the poll misses out SCT/Mak.

Just to be clear - am not interested in other types. Those wanting to learn more about various telescope design may read here: List of telescope types - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the dobsonian.

but get the skyliner (solid tube) then you can mount it on an EQ later if/when you get into imaging

Ah, was considering the extendable as well. I would guess the light pollution affects the extendable ones more since they are more open, no? Any particular models I should be considering/walking/running away? Thanks...

i would'nt go for the 4mm dob ! however portability would be good,could fit in your pocket .

Yes, indeed, and won't break the bank at all!

Here:

Buy Pocket Telescope and Microscope, Red online at JohnLewis.com - John Lewis

Hi all,

I was lead to believe that a 4" refractor would give a sharper and crisper image of planets when compared to a 5" Dobson. However I can stretch the budget to about 8" Dobson vs perhaps 5" refractor.

Not looking to do any imaging, hence tracking is not required (however this may change).

Appreciate if you can tilt my opinion one way or another: a large aperture of a manual altazimuth Dobson vs clarity + daytime use of a smaller diameter refractor.

Many thanks!