First glimpse of the Explore Scientific 16" Dobsonian

[Pig]

Your a very sneaky snake Imad   Good plan though I like it.

[emadmoussa]

Your a very sneaky snake Imad   Good plan though I like it.

[Pig]

LoL were do you find them     I couldn't have put it better myself.

You definitely need therapy

[jetstream]

Emad,did you notice the eyepiece height of the 16" -can you use it sitting?What focal ratio did they say-F4...?ES is supposed to email me when available here in North America

[emadmoussa]

Emad,did you notice the eyepiece height of the 16" -can you use it sitting?What focal ratio did they say-F4...?ES is supposed to email me when available here in North America

That's I wanted to know myself actually. But judging by the height of the 12" vs the SW 12" Flextube I'd guess the eyepiece will be perhaps lower than the SW 16".

Tassilo is almost my height and this is his photo standing next to the 12"...you do the maths   I can certainly tell you that my 12" Flextube is a bit higher.

[jetstream]

My new spin adjustable stool gives me a max eye height of around 63" seated/feet on ground.I hope then that the 16" will be an F4 or so giving about a 61"-63" max EP height.If the scope holds collimation well,no big deal about the fast mirror-sight tube and barlowed laser would make short work of that.As Swampthing says the AL is prone to vibrations-did you see how the mirror box is held together?bolts,rivets?diameter of truss tubes approx?

[Mike73]

An affordable 16" f/4 would be a very welcome improvement to the current f/4.5 16" scopes.

Currently a f/4.5 scope means your either stand or have a big seat, an f/4 would mean a normal observing stool should be fine.

[clarkpm4242]

I think that when you start getting to 16"+ the ultra high grade mirrors become less desirable because you don't see any benefit from them on DSO's, even a HiLux coating will only give you roughly a 5% brighter view which I think most people would struggle to notice.

If I had the money to get either a 16" 1/10pv or a 20" 1/4pv I would get the 20" without a doubt.

Hi

As a long time abuser of large aperture dobsonians I'd recommend at least 1/6 wave (gives a bit of slack on 'diffraction limited') and high reflectivity coatings.  At least on the secondary.  You don't want to be moving around all that heavy aperture without reaping maximum rewards

When you get familiar with what you can see through large apertures, you do notice the difference.

Spend, spend, spend...  

Cheers

Paul

[jetstream]

An affordable 16" f/4 would be a very welcome improvement to the current f/4.5 16" scopes.

Currently a f/4.5 scope means your either stand or have a big seat, an f/4 would mean a normal observing stool should be fine.

I made my stool with the 16" f4 in mind,but it is easy to get another 12" or so and have a foot rest-it has 14" of adjustment height and is rock solid.Like you say Mike the 16" F4 would be great....if it holds collimation and doesn't act like a tuning fork!

[Mike73]

Hi

As a long time abuser of large aperture dobsonians I'd recommend at least 1/6 wave (gives a bit of slack on 'diffraction limited') and high reflectivity coatings.  At least on the secondary.  You don't want to be moving around all that heavy aperture without reaping maximum rewards

When you get familiar with what you can see through large apertures, you do notice the difference.

Spend, spend, spend...  

Cheers

Paul

Hi Paul

I have got 1/10thPv optics on my secondary and a 1/6thPv 16" primary but I was told (and to me it makes sense) that your optics are only as goos as its weakest link, to be honest I only got the decent secondary because it was a fairly good upgrade for the price and to future proof the scope incase I ever did want to upgrade the primary.

When I did look into upgrading the primary OOUK told me that I would see an increase in contrast, be able to use higher magnifications and have a sharper view of the moon and planets but I also realise that I would need excellent seeing conditions to get these benefits, they didn't say anything about the benefits for DSO's.  

My standard coatings are 93% strehl thats just 4% less than HiLux coatings and I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be able to see a 4% increase in brightness if I compared the views.

I guess I'm sticking up for the diffraction limited chinese optics here  

Clear skies

[clarkpm4242]

Hi

Indeed, I wouldn't upgrade that primary at 1/6th.