Does light pollution play a big role on what equipment one should get?

[dcobb]

Hello everyone!

I'm new here and to astronomy, was looking to get my first scope (Apertura AD8) mainly for backyard viewing of DSO's, placed an order which is backordered until March, and???  Since then I recently discovered I live in a red zone according to https://darksitefinder.com/...  Question is, does & should red zone light pollution affect what equipment I should get and is an 8" DOB no longer a good choice as a first scope?

Little more background:
After months of online research (as I'm not able to see or try anything in person sadly) I finally ordered the 8" DOB above thinking it would be a good first cost effective scope, and recently I made a post here as to whether I should upgrade to a 10" instead as DSO seem the most intriguing to me, and most replied that was a good idea.  I then called up High Point Scientific with the intent of canceling / changing the order to the 10" and spoke to a knowledgable guy who asked what my light pollution level was like, which oddly is something I didn't even research prior to him asking.  Thinking back I guess I didn't think to much about this as my backyard is pretty secluded and free of most visible neighborly light.  So from my naive perspective I guess I thought I didn't have much light pollution.  It didn't occur to me that the ambient light of my entire city and other surrounding cities would affect my viewing conditions.  So after discovering I live in a pretty large red zone he mentioned there wouldn't be much point to the 10" vs. the 8" as the light pollution level would mask most of the gains of the larger aperture of the 10", unless I was planning on taking it to darker zones where it would make a difference.  Since I primarily see myself using this in our back yard it seemed like I should just stick with the 8" right?

Here is where things really went sideways:  He then mentioned I should really consider going with a cost effective EAA setup instead, suggesting the Celestron Nexstar 6SE, and ZWO ASI224MC camera (Roughly a $1,050 - $1,200 setup, which is really starting to push the first scope budget), and view things on my laptop instead of through eye pieces as I guess the camera on a 6" aperture scope can cut through the light pollution and as he put it produce better images of DSO than even a 24" DOB could in my light polluted skies.  He forwarded me some reading material where he described all this in detail, and mentioned he was not working off commission or trying to up-sell me anything, and I believe him.  I read through things, but honestly, all this blew my mind and if anything took all the air out of my astronomy balloon.  To put things into perspective, I'm a total newb at this, I would like to keep things simple, and really have no desire to get into astrophotography even if it's just viewing things on the laptop, maybe that could change someday, who knows...  But the very concept of viewing things through my laptop vs. eye pieces while it may be much better, more detailed and great for the family, seems like it would be ripping the magic right out of everything I had envisioned about astronomy in the first place.  I mean why not just cancel my entire order and just view DSO pictures on the internet right?  IDK, maybe I'm not giving it a chance, maybe he's right in the end, maybe I should get the 6SE, use it with eye pieces and spend the extra $250 at some point and try the EAA setup out?  At this point I feel like things are a bit warped and I'm losing perspective, and to make an analogy I would rather drive a real Ferrari 60mph on a freeway vs. driving driving one 200+MPH in a computer simulated race track, if that makes any sense.

If you've made it this far, thank you very much and if you have any wise words of wisdom, please share as I'd really appreciate some perspective as I'm somewhat discouraged and at this point and seriously considering canceling everything and just picking up a pair of inexpensive binoculars instead (already have a photography tripod), riding out the pandemic, and then do some more tangible research when I could see & handle things in person and maybe even attend a star gazing party or two where I could look at things through other peoples scopes and really give me some perspective

 

Thoughts?  And many thanks!

[dcobb]

To add another analogy that's a little more close to the heart.  I guess I feel like the planets, stars, and nebula are heavenly, other worldly, almost Godly.  And seeing them through eye pieces even if dim or very faint and fighting through light pollution, yet it's real, like you can see God with your own eyes.  However to pipe that through a camera, and then onto my laptop computer screen where even know I'd be able to see things in much more detail, it would somehow seem synthetic and fake, and I might as well just view DSO pictures on the internet

Don't get me wrong I love stars and heavens, seeing celestial pictures and have had them as my computer desktops and avatars for years, and as beautiful as they are I get that they are enhanced, sharpened & colored up and that's fine, but I guess just the idea of me and a scope and nothing else seems real, but lugging my laptop out and seeing things (even know they are through the scope) on my laptop just somehow seems fake, like bad movie effects that bounce you right out of the movie

Again I've not seen any of this in person, this is all just in my mind and me thinking how I would take to all this.  But as I've researched things for months I've seen many people say "Rule #1, don't buy your first scope through a department store" as it will be crap, you'll hate it and will kill any desire to further your interest in astronomy, and I'm afraid the same thing could be true here as well, for me at least.  IDK....

Edited January 30, 2021 by dcobb

[pete_l]

6 hours ago, dcobb said:

He then mentioned I should really consider going with a cost effective EAA setup instead,

My first reaction is that this is nothing more than an upselling ploy.

To the best of my knowledge there are no telescopes or types of telescope that are designed specifically for light polluted areas. Nor are there any telescopes that are marketed as "best for" that. However, there are types of light pollution filters available as add-ons for practically any sort, size or price of telescope - so the problem is acknowledged. Just not with special models of equipment.

On the subject of light pollution filters, these do cut out certain types of LP. Mainly that which comes from streetlights that have narrow bands of colour. One issue is that they also block out some of the wanted light which leads to the conclusion that a telescope which gathers more light would couteract that filtering. Making a 10-inch Dob a better bet than an 8-inch.

It is also said that a longer focal length has the effect of darkening the sky surrounding star clusters, as they have a narrower field of view (while stars remain pinpoints). This making them stand out from the background.

[Surreydocker]

I'm also fairly new to astronomy and I live in a grey zone. I started out with binoculars before purchasing a 4" refractor (because it suits viewing from an apartment balcony).

I have managed to view some of the brighter DSOs such as M13, M31, M42, M45 etc both through the scope and the binos. With less LP and a bigger scope, you will certainly be able to see some DSOs through the eyepiece and as Pete mentions above, filters help. Stars, double stars, planets & the moon are brighter and therefore less affected by LP.

There is however, a limit to what you can see in high LP areas and I've now chosen to go down the EEA route but, from one newbie to another, I'd advise a decent pair of binoculars first then choose a scope based on what sort of targets take your fancy.

Have fun

Ian

Edited January 30, 2021 by Surreydocker
typo

[dcobb]

SuperchargeYourObservingExperience-1.docx

Thanks on the replies so far, I'm attaching the doc that Dave from HPS sent me if anyone is interested to flip through it.  He sounded like he's been at this for years and I don't doubt what he says and knows.  That said, no offense to him or what he's done but I wasn't wowed by any of the pictures in his writeup.  Maybe they look better and more detailed than what I'd see through the eye piece, but IMHO they pale in comparison to other pictures I've seen on the internet.  But most important to me is they are just pictures on a screen and don't contain the magic of actually looking through the eye piece and seeing it raw and unadulterated if that makes any sense at all

My goals are simply to learn the skies, discover, locate and view objects, and have a good time doing it.  Finding objects manually at this point I think of as part of the adventure and my hope is to spend many hours of many nights doing this and develop a real hobby & passion for it.  Given the number of DSO I naturally think "Go for as big a DOB as I can reasonably afford and move around" and on that note I think the 10" is my limit.  Now maybe there will come a point when I will want to embrace GoTo, EAA & astrophotography, but that time for me isn't now.  And if that day comes and it means I end up adding a tracking mount, scope & camera to my collection then I'm fine with it.  About the only thing that intrigues me going with the SCT vs. a DOB is I can store it more easily when it's not in use.  Unfortunately the conversation I had with him left me disoriented and pondering if the amount of light pollution a red zone has will leave me disappointed regardless if I were to get an 8" or 10" DOB?

So I guess in addition to what I've mentioned above, here's what I'm curious about, and would appreciate viewpoints on:

1. Considering the red zone I live in, if I had a 10" & 8" DOB side by side, would they essentially produce the same or similar amount of details in objects as a result of the light pollution?
2. Or is it just that neither will perform as good as they could, but the 10" would still out perform the 8" regardless of the light pollution?
3. If light pollution does neuter the 10", should I then consider getting the 6" NexStar 6SE like he said?  Would it produce the same / similar details of objects that the 8" or 10" DOB's are capable of, again in my red zone?  If so then maybe down the road I could add on the camera and explore that as I'll already have the GoTo capabilities for tracking...
4. I still think my main goal is going to be DSO's, Considering that does it ultimately make sense to get the 10" DOB?
5. Should I cancel everything, just go with some binoculars for 6+ months and then revisit these questions after the pandemic and I can visit some astronomy stores & attend some star gazing parties?

[Carl Au]

The larger the scope the more light it collects, all of it, including light pollution. The contrast is never particularly good in reflectors, the more light from the environment the more milky the background becomes. Images are bigger this is true, but in light polluted skies much of the additional detail your bought the bigger scope for gets washed out sadly. The same is true of seeing, the bigger the scope the more effected by seeing they become. Take them out to a dark sky site however and nothing can touch them. I have had 3 dobs at 10 inch, I now use a 4 inch refractor. It simply gets used more. I should never have sold my old Vixen refractor. It's really easy to get caught up in aperture fever, god knows I did, and then everything starts becoming cumbersome and I stopped going out as much. If you read through the various astronomy forums you will read about guys with huge scopes and amazing views, they usually have a much smaller scope for the bulk of their observations and only get the big guns out a handful of times a year.

[Pixies]

Hi @dcobb,

According to Dark Site Finder, I'm borderline red/orange (although there are 2 shades of red). In terms of the Bortle scale, I'm more 5/6 though. I have an 8" dob and can find many DSOs (planets are not a problem with light pollution). Obviously darker skies would improve things.

Are you able to make an estimation on NELM (Naked Eye Limiting Magnitude)? how many stars in Ursa Minor can you see (assuming you are in the Northern hemisphere)

 

I can make all 7 on very rare occasions, when the sky is particularly transparent, new moon, and obviously completely dark-adapted (and hiding myself from all nearby light sources). More often, it's just 6.  A casual glance without the above would give just 3.

[Pixies]

And nothing beats local knowledge. Do you have an astronomical club nearby?

[dcobb]

Thanks Carl & Pixies!

Carl - I totally get what you're saying, and the 10" DOB being 35lb's for just the tube alone vs. 25lb of the 8" does make me question if sticking with an 8" is better for manageability.  But again I'm mainly going to be using this in my backyard.  I could see myself lugging it to a dark sky area maybe a couple times a year, who knows.  I'm 46 and in decently strong so I think I can manage the 10" but again I've never even seen a DOB in person, let alone lifted an 8" or 10" and walked it around.  As a crude test I lifted a 25lb & 35lb dumbbells over my shoulder and walked around with each of them independently, but that's only comparing the weight, not the size, or going through doorways or up and down stairs...

Pixies - I obviously have a lot to learn as I don't even know what Ursa Minor is, lol.  So it sounds like you're happy with your 8" DOB?  If you could trade up to a 10" would you?  Or does the 8" give you enough details of DSO's?  I live in the Seattle area of Washington state, so here's what my light pollution looks like.  I'd have to drive ~ 60 minutes to get to a dark green zone, 90-120 minutes away to find a dark zone.  Technically I'm in the dark red zone, 4th from the worst zone, between the light orange and bright red

  

[dcobb]

20 minutes ago, Pixies said:

And nothing beats local knowledge. Do you have an astronomical club nearby?

There is one, but they are pretty dormant right now and don't have any star parties planned in the near future

[Nikolas74]

I have been doing astrophotography mainly from a Bortle 8-9 , I have changed lots of equipment hoping that something will offer me something better but at the end I realized that I am just spending my money.

The most important part though is the filter that I will use....I have started from cheap filters only to end up to he most expensive Astrodons.

So the only thing I wouldn't feel sorry to spend would be a good quality filter.

There are still though objects that is impossible to see unless I go to a dark site no matter what I do or what equipment that I use.

The other thing is that from the city sky I will never be able to get nice detail of the objects that I photograph.

[Pixies]

Hi again. having a look via another site:

Which is a little brighter than me (5-6), but a Bortle 6 site isn't a disaster. I'd reckon you would be able to find a good majority of the Messier objects, although they won't appear at their best. I have accepted that from my location - but I can get to a Bortle 3 site in 30 minutes by car. The fainter galaxies and nebulae will be hidden by the light pollution, but globular clusters, open clusters, brighter planetary nebulae and galaxies will be seen - albeit not like the pictures in the books. 

Planets will be fine, and a larger instrument will be able to handle more magnification. Double stars are a good target too. have a look at the observing sections in this forum. Also have a read of this:

For context in the above link, under the section for galaxies and nebulae, the  faint fuzzies appear better in my scope at my home location than in the sketches.

Whether a 10" would be better, I can't say. If I had the cash at the time, I would have probably gone from the 10" version of my Bresser dobsonian, but I am more than happy with the 8". I've seen much more than I expected and even with a bright moon in the sky (which has a more dramatic effect than the actual urban light pollution), there are countless objects to observe, including the moon itself. 

1 hour ago, dcobb said:

There is one, but they are pretty dormant right now and don't have any star parties planned in the near future

Yes - but you can ask their members for advice an what they find the best scopes for the local environment.

[Nik271]

I live in Bortle 6 zone (SQM 19.32) so just a bit darker than yours. In my first year I used an Astromaster 130, that's a 5 inch reflector. It showed me so much, any Messier object I tried I could see with the exception of M101. The Orion nebula and the Dumbbell nebula were among the best.

My thought is: The 8inch Dob, even factoring the extra light pollution should show you at least as much as the 5 inch, which is a lot.

I advise sticking with the 8inch Dob, it will be easier to use and after some time if you decide you want to go even deeper you can upgrade. 

[dcobb]

Thanks Nikolas74 & Pixies.  All great information!  As you mention I will seek some information from the local club and get their take as well.

[Charles Kirk]

I had a quick look through the EAA document.

The images are very impressive and show what EAA can achieve. It does not make sense to compare EAA with Astrophotography which uses far longer exposure times and a lot more post capture processing.

But it is clear from your posts that you aren’t interested in the technology driven approach. To observe Nebulae and Galaxies you really need very dark skies. Star Clusters and double stars, not so much, because you can increase the magnification to darken the background.

I would go with option 5 which will make it much easier to come to a purchase decision. Availability of equipment will likely return to normal when the pandemic is over.

[Cosmic Geoff]

I am not sure what exactly you mean by a 'red zone.'  Where I live, the skies are said to be Bortle 6,  and trying to look for deep sky objects (galaxies) is not a rewarding exercise.  I was able to see far more galaxies when I took my C8 SE to rural Devon.  So, if your objective is to view galaxies and you live in a city, it just isn't going to work.

The suggestion that you invest in EVAA has merit.  I experimented with this here, and was astonished to find that on imaging a galaxy I'd also seen in Devon I could make out another fainter galaxy in the image that was less visible in the Devon skies where I used a telescope twice the aperture.

If you are confined to observing from a city, you should concentrate on observing objects like double stars, globular clusters, planetary nebulae, open clusters, and planets, as their high surface brightness will cut through the murk.  For this a long focal ratio telescope such as a traditional achro refractor, Maksutov or SCT will serve better than a short focal ratio Newtonian. 

Likewise you should invest in a GoTO mount, not a Dob mount, as 'star hopping' will be difficult when fainter stars are hidden by light pollution.  With GoTo you need at minimum to be able to see and identify a couple of brighter stars, and the electronics will do the rest of the work of finding faint objects.

I would also point out that when seen visually, galaxies do not look anything like the photographs. All you can typically see is a faint grey smudge representing the bright central nucleus.

Edited January 31, 2021 by Cosmic Geoff
Last paragraph.