time for a change

[geoff1962]

im using a skywatcher 200p on a eq5 mount at present and am looking for something larger for dso's,didnt know wheather to go for a dob or a larger newtonian or something else,im not into astro photography and prefer something without a goto, i like scanning the skies myself, find it more challenging and more rewarding when i find what im looking for .anybody got any ideas on what to purchse{i have a budget of £1600)also if i got something larger, lets say 350mm as to my 200mm is there a real difference in what u see.any advice welcome, thanks

[Ganymede12]

I'm no expert but that budget would easily get you a larger dob in flextube form. It's what I'd go for. Others may have better ideas.

[Capricorn]

A bigger newtonian may be a bit heavy for the EQ5, so it sounds like a 250/300P on either a bigger equitorial or on a dobsonian mount. Since a bigger equitorial is costly it would make most sense for a 250/300 dobsonian mounted scope.

Concerning the difference in what you see I recall someone saying that a 50% increase in area made a noticable difference.

200 to 250 is a 56% increase.

200 to 300 is a 225% increase.

A 350mm will have to be a fast scope, so will be relatively more costly, and eyepieces could be in a more expensive bracket also.

[Carbon Brush]

My worst case of aperture fever got me a 10" Orion Europa.

It was bit wobbly on a Synta EQ5 mount. By comparison the 8" Europa was reasonably rigid.

What I'm saying is that your EQ5 will be too small for any reasonable tube size increase.

An EQ6 type of mount is really the minimum for a bigger 'light bucket' and will take a significant chunk of your budget.

These are quite heavy to handle on their own.

If you don't have a permanent setup, a dob is probably the way to.

It will be interesting to hear the lifting/setup vs photon catching arguments on a big dob choice.

[Ganymede12]

I may be wrong but can't you use the Sky-Watcher flex tube goto's manually and they can track? If so then won't a Skyliner 300P Flextube Synscan Goto work for what you want? You could also change the focal length of the scope (being a flextube) so you could change the F/Ratio.

[Shibby]

If I were you, I'd definitely go for a 16" Lightbridge!

[swamp thing]

Hi Geoff

What are your main targets buddy, as this is the most important question when contemplating any upgrade?

[ollypenrice]

If all questions were so easy to answer! You have large Dob written all over you. It's a Newt, it can have serious aperture and it doesn't, by default, have Go To. If you'd like it to track then I'd say an equatorial platform would be the way. One thing I would say, though, is that telescopes quickly get to look enormous (we have a 20 inch Newt) but the real gain at the eyepiece is less dramatic than the increase in physical size. Worth having, yes, but 'four times the light grasp' does not translate into what you'd call 'four times the view.' Not by a long way. Sad but true.

Olly

[rory]

going by your opening statement id say it smacks big dobsonian , but one thing missing was you didnt say weather you travel to observing sites or from your home ? a large scope could prove hard work if you travel alot or limited to storing options.

olly beat me to it

[geoff1962]

observe from home only,lucky to have very very little light pollution, barring the kids opening curtains,must beat them more often lol,just a little concerned that if i went for a 16" dob paying quite alot of money ,the differece i would see by observing lets say m13 or andromeda galaxy would there be a significant difference in detail from what im using now.i use quite alot of different lenses and barlows but am somewhat dissappointed with what i see when people using the same scope as me seem to see alot more detail, i collimate every time i setupjust abit dissilutioned

[geoff1962]

thanks for all the advice folks cheers

[rory]

i think you might benefit a visit to your local astro group, maybe you could get some views through different scopes. might be worth while if your unsure wich way to go.

[swamp thing]

In a 16" scope M13 is an incredible sight. Even at low power the resolving ability of a large scope drags out breathtaking detail, every star is easily seen, this is no longer a faint fuzzy in a scope of this power. Now pump the power right up over 300x and climb inside the cluster as you scrutinise the very core of it, a 16" scope allows this. No photograph can rival the view through an eyepiece of a large scope on globs.

You can do this with huge numbers of Globs with a large aperture scope. Objects like M31 need dark skies even through big scopes. Yes it'll show great detail but only if the sky conditions allow.

[rory]

In a 16" scope M13 is an incredible sight. Even at low power the resolving ability of a large scope drags out breathtaking detail, every star is easily seen, this is no longer a faint fuzzy in a scope of this power. Now pump the power right up over 300x and climb inside the cluster as you scrutinise the very core of it, a 16" scope allows this. No photograph can rival the view through an eyepiece of a large scope on globs.

You can do this with huge numbers of Globs with a large aperture scope. Objects like M31 need dark skies even through big scopes. Yes it'll show great detail but only if the sky conditions allow.

yes , thankyou steve thats enough of that ,you trying to bring on mass apperture fever or what ?

[Ganymede12]

yes , thankyou steve thats enough of that ,you trying to bring on mass apperture fever or what ?

Yes, please don't. I have just started to recover from my last case of aperture fever and that was only resolved with the purchase of an 8" Dob!

[swamp thing]

Sorry guys!

Blame the OP he wanted to know what it's like viewing M13 with a 16" Dob. What else could I do

[rory]

well i dont know if the o p is still undecided or confused, but im sold on the 16" ....doh

[geoff1962]

the lenses im using are standard issue 25mm and 10mm sold with the skywatcher 200p also bought williams optics sp l3mm ,6mm,swa2" 32mm,ed 40mm,soligor 3.8mm, obviously some of the lences are used for different things, laser collimator, 2 xbarlows lens in 1.25 and 2",this isnt about aperture fever,been observing with telescope for 2 years now,using bins for years, using 15 by 70 celestron at present , this is more about people using the same equipment as me but getting alot more detail ie looking at galaxies in leo or virgo people using the same equipment rave about all this detail which i never seem to be able to achieve,my eyes seem to be fine,BANG just walked into wall lol, am i using the wrong lenses,am i just going mad,might just go out and buy a space ship lol

[GJBC]

A curve ball for you as Its does sound like appature feaver

have you considered upgrading your eye pieces 2 inch ones if possible, dont know what you have at present but when i changed form the standard set that came with my scope to Pentax the jump was remarkable much higher quality image they were expensive but proved worth it. i actually went from a 10 inch to an 8 inch after that. so size does not mean better quality

[geoff1962]

cheers for that gjbc , the 32mm and 40mm lenses are 2" all the rest are 1.25