Orion 8 inch Dobsonian or 10 inch?

[estwing]

Pedantic statement alert ...

1' would be 1 foot

1`... what the heck was that

...that's for the .5 extra i've got

[alan potts]

If your going to have one have a big one! size is all for DSO the image in a 10 inch is a fair bit brighter than in an 8 inch.

Alan.

[knobby]

...that's for the .5 extra i've got

It all becomes clear on a P.C., cant see sig's on Tapatalk !

[Thomas Blose]

On 03/07/2012 at 18:32, swamp thing said:

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

For lunar and planetary viewing is there a big difference between an 8 and 10?

[NGC 1502]

3 hours ago, Thomas Blose said:

For lunar and planetary viewing is there a big difference between an 8 and 10?

For lunar/planetary very little difference I’d suggest.  The 10” having a bit more resolution but affected slightly more by a turbulent atmosphere.

For DSOs the 10” gives a noticeable but not dramatic improvement.

Both are capable of being a long term satisfying scope you could use for many years without exhausting what it can show.

Ed.