Aperture and light pollution

[mrphildog]

Is there a point where using a scope with a bigger aperture will not have any gains over a smaller aperture due to light pollution?

I am thinking about what scope I should get (isn't almost everyone around here) and I live in an area with moderate light pollution. So what I am wondering is whether getting a 200P would actually give better views than a 150P or whether light pollution would make the extra 50mm aperture a waste of time... Or does the light pollution make the extra aperture all the more important?

I won't get the chance to travel to dark sites except for on rare occasions so I will have to settle for observing from my garden. If extra aperture won't get me better views from home then I may as well get a smaller and cheaper scope and look at the brighter objects in the sky...

I like the idea of the 200P but at the same time find the size a bit offputting. I've actually been contemplating getting a small refractor to look at the moon and planets as I could easily get that out for short viewing sessions but ultimately I know this would mean I'd end up with two scopes as I suspect the urge to get a 150P or 200P will be too strong (unless you guys tell me that light pollution make them not worth getting...)

[Shibby]

Well... light pollution limits the magnitude you can observe down to. So, if you're interested in lunar & planetary observation, the bigger the aperture the better is still the case! They are unaffected by light pollution as they are so much brighter. Bigger apertures should also reveal better detail on DSOs provided they are bright enough; remember that the aperture effectively gives you better "resolving" power. Wide, diffuse nebulae are where light pollution has its worst effect I would say. I need other more experienced members to confirm/deny this though...

[Ian123]

Hi, i recently purchased the Skyliner 250 (10") and i view from my back garden also.

Was out with it for the first time last night and some great views of various clusters even though the moon was pretty bright.

I am looking into the near future flocking it which will detract any form of light scattering into the EP which should slightly improve from my position.

I would go for the 200 if i were you.

[ollypenrice]

It's very difficult to say. Some will have it that a long focal length refractor will do best in LP and an SCT will suffer the most. I suspect that it is only the very big scopes which will really gulp up the LP but I never used my own 20 inch in the UK.

Using a venerable 4 inch TV Genesis refractor at 200x I remember watchng a shadow transit of Jupiter, though, from literally underneath a street light in a small town.

If you are already wondering about how much time you want to spend humping the gear outsde then you might be heading into the ED100 camp. On the moon and planets I doubt that there would be any radical difference between that and a larger Newt. Arguing over the niceties of this or that scope is best reserved for dark sites, I'd say.

Olly

[mrphildog]

Thanks for the responses folks. I am still leaning towards the 200P I think but slowly coming to the conclusion that no single scope will tick all the boxes for me.

[rowan46]

Thanks for the responses folks. I am still leaning towards the 200P I think but slowly coming to the conclusion that no single scope will tick all the boxes for me.

Ahh wisdom the beginning of.

[mrphildog]

Haha! :-)