Minimum sized dob for faint DSO's in relatively good detail?

[spektrumdx8]

Great reading this as I'am now finding that on the RARE nights when its truly cloudless and clear, I can get really good views even with the meade 4504!

When I retire in 10yrs time (hopefully!!), we would like to move away from London and settle in Cornwall or maybe North Wales- better skies yes ???

[Pete Presland]

I'd love to, but I know what I'm like.

A passable image or two would set me off on the path of relentless self improvement and the inevitable selling of a kidney to fund that next essential piece of kit.

For the sake of my sanity I'm happy to just observe... for now.

very sensible, i wonder what the going rate is .......? joking aside, i do find the imaging side very addcitive!

[ollypenrice]

It's interesting, the difference between seeing when you know what to look for and seeing without preconceptions. I know that looking for what photos tell you is there can be rewarding. I do this quite a bit and with some apparent success. However, the fact remains that nobody said 'spiral' before Lord Rosse and there were some big refractors out there. (In the 1820s Fraunhofer was building 9 inch achromats, though I don't know which was the biggest refractor prior to the Leviathon.) The danger of looking for something is that you may find it when it isn't there, the classic example being Lowell's Martian canals. The origin of this may well have been linguistic, Lowell unconsciously taking the Italian word for channels to mean canals. While many of the great astronomers of the world joined Lowell in sketching them the greatest telescopic observer of them all, the humble E.E. Barnard, just said, 'I can't see 'em.' If Percy had had a grain of sense he'd have listened!

Olly

[rory]

I've had aperture envy since a week after it arrived. Looked like a dustbin when I first saw it, now it resembles a drinking straw.

made me laugh . interesting thread.

id like to eventually have a 12 " ,trouble is they become harder on the eyepiece and back ! and my mrs thinks the 8" is an ugly big thing ,she hates it . so the thought of a 12" beast will is a no no. unless i want to live in the shed with it !

honestly though, i found the jump from 3.5" frac to the 8" newt a considerable improvement . not so much with planets ,but globs come alive with individual stars at the edges. thats from a l/p town site.

[Stu]

There is a lot to be said for spending time with smaller scopes initially. They are easier to move around and use, and you get used to having to spend tone at the eyepiece teasing out every last bit of detail using averted vision. You can train yourself to observe well, then gradually work your way up the aperture scales. I think going to a big aperture ie 14" and above very quickly could rob you of this.

Just the opinion of someone who can't currently afford a 16" dob so read into it what you will ;-)

Stu

[Bart]

Just the opinion of someone who can't currently afford a 16" dob so read into it what you will ;-)

Stu

:-)

[skir]

very sensible, i wonder what the going rate is .......? joking aside, i do find the imaging side very addcitive!

about 70-80 thousand US dollars according to this http://kidneykidney.com/ but if their surgery is anything like their English I wouldn't bother using them!