Hello from Bortle 8

[corso]

Thought i'd say hello, been scanning the stars with binos for some years. I used to have a scope when I was little, but it wasn't really any better than binoculars, I've just started doing some digging on buying myself a scope and lo and behond, the internet points me to this forum which is a goldmine of info. With two small humans to look after, the opportunities to sneak out to darker skies are few and far between, so in terms of bang for buck, I have probably settled on an 8 inch dob, but going to let that sit a while as i trawl here fore more info and feedback. 

[Mr Spock]

Hi, welcome to SGL 

There's no better performance for money than an 8" Dob.

[Space Hopper]

Hello from Bortle 7 😉

I'm a refractor man myself, but you've made a good choice : you can see a lot with an 8" Dob 🔭

[seven_legs]

Welcome to SGL.

8" Dobsonian are great value.

I know what you mean about refractors.

 

[Floater]

Welcome. Hope you have lots of fun. 🙂

[bosun21]

Welcome to SGL 👋. You have made a sound choice in an 8" dobsonian.

[wookie1965]

A warm welcome to SGL 

[laudropb]

Hello and a warm welcome to the SGL.

[Chandra]

Welcome! I had a Dob 8" (I think most of us have been there), I keep very good memories of it (I doubt anyone would speak badly of theirs)...

[corso]

thanks all!

[Sunshine]

Welcome! an 8” dobsonian is practically a must for a beginner, most of us (if not all) have owned, still love ours (me).

[SwiMatt]

Welcome to SGL! I'm chiming in even though nobody asked for my advice, here it comes  this is something I wish somebody told me right off the bat, it took me months of asking questions to understand this.

I also wanted an 8" dobsonian to start, and too many people throw it in the "top-tier category for beginners" often without considering that your living arrangements matter a lot. Ultimately, I did not buy a dobsonian because I live at the 3rd floor of a building without a lift, and my only way to get a good session in is to walk 15 minutes away from home with everything on my back - to avoid direct artificial lights. An 8" dobs is NOT a transportable tool, even though those who have a 12" might disagree  it is 26 kg (15 kg the base, 11 the tube - at least the Skywatcher model) and is designed to be carried in two pieces. Now, it's not to say that it cannot be a telescope that is fast to set up, but that's only true with the right space available.

I'm not trying to dissuade you - I'm sure I would have loved an 8" dobsonian if I lived in a house. But I know I would not have used it much in my current situation - and the best telescope is one that you use, regardless of aperture. 

[JOC]

1 hour ago, SwiMatt said:

your living arrangements matter a lot. Ultimately, I did not buy a dobsonian because I live at the 3rd floor of a building without a lift, and my only way to get a good session in is to walk 15 minutes away from home with everything on my back - to avoid direct artificial lights. An 8" dobs is NOT a transportable tool, even though those who have a 12" might disagree  it is 26 kg (15 kg the base, 11 the tube - at least the Skywatcher model) and is designed to be carried in two pieces. Now, it's not to say that it cannot be a telescope that is fast to set up, but that's only true with the right space available.

There is a lot of truth in what SwiMatt says, I own said 8" Dobsonian it sits just behind the porch door and I have to carry it no more than 15 metres to be using it.  It gets used about twice a year often during the daytime (with approved solar equipment), because the other thing that no-one ever explains to a beginner is you a) need the time to use it, b) it is still a damn heavy object to move (ditto above) and c) - this one is a killer in the UK - you need the weather to use it.  It might be OK in a country where you have endless warm, balmy,  CLEAR viewing (which often doesn't go with the other two), CLOUDLESS nights, ideally with little light pollution.  It is no fun unless you are really dedicated going out to get cold and damp just to look at the stars, and also bare in mind the limited attention span of the average small person - I bought the scope for a small person who seemed interested in the time, but grew up with no interest in it at all and never put the telescope up to use under their own steam.

NB.  I also note the OP is under Bortle 8 skies so the viewing won't be brilliant anyway.  I live under Bortle 4 skies and still don't go out to view a lot.  In actual fact I have my doubts that if you have to view under such skies that an 8" will offer my appreciable benefit over something smaller.  Since it will only capture all the appreciable light that is up there and surely that will include the light pollution.  The more I have found out the more I have come to the conclusion that the larger scopes are best deployed to scan for what little light there is and this works when there is a decently dark background to tease that light out from, i.e. when you are chasing distant dark sky objects DSO's.  It is the the contrast with the darker background that enables the seeing of these.  Any scope can provide apparent 'magnification - that seems primarily driven by the eyepiece you use and the focal length of the telescope.  From what I have learned big mirrors seem more concerned with gathering any available light there is (OK, a larger mirror gives the potential for a bit more magnification, but it is primarily down to the eyepiece and focal length of the scope IMO). 

In addition the 'seeing' that you can get also provide the barrier to apparent magnification - in many places in the UK we are limited to about 200-250X even under my skies I have rarely viewed at greater than x230 in the 8" Dob despite it being theoretically possible to view much higher - I envisage that you might also find there is a limit where you are based.    It strikes me that if you don't have a decently dark background (Bortle 8?? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bortle_scale  ) is it worth buying a light bucket which will just amplify everything. and still won't provide a truly dark background to tease the interesting stuff out of.  Under such conditions I suggest (though I am certainly no expert and those that are will surely chip in) that you may do just as well with something smaller, easier to set up and dare I suggest easier to transport to a dark sky situation.  FWIW I do own a lovely little baby portable scope (see signature) and have been truly amazed by the views it gives of the stuff the kids will be interested in - the big planets, the moon, the easier star clusters etc.   Those are actually quite superb in the tiny scope and very nearly as good as the views in the 8" dob.  Yes, the 8" Dob is better for distant feint objects, but under Bortle 8 conditions where you might struggle to see those anyway I do wonder how much benefit there is against a much smaller easier to move/transport scope which might be a better bet?  

Edited Wednesday at 07:55 by JOC

[Bill-T]

I hadn't heard of the Bortle Scale, interesting, thank you. I think my location falls into Bortle 3.

[Coco]

You have done your research well, young Sky Searcher. Yes, it would be my first choice if I were buying new. My first would be a second-hand 10" You will need a dry garage or wood shed as moving both around is annoying as the bases are bulky.

[corso]

On 23/10/2024 at 07:36, JOC said:

FWIW I do own a lovely little baby portable scope (see signature) and have been truly amazed by the views it gives of the stuff the kids will be interested in - the big planets, the moon, the easier star clusters etc.   Those are actually quite superb in the tiny scope and very nearly as good as the views in the 8" dob.  Yes, the 8" Dob is better for distant feint objects, but under Bortle 8 conditions where you might struggle to see those anyway I do wonder how much benefit there is against a much smaller easier to move/transport scope which might be a better bet?  

Your post is a really useful response, thank you very much indeed, and it has given me some food for thought. Given the amount of ambient light, i can totally see what you are saying makes sense. When you say your baby portable scope, did you mean the Vixen 80s? A smaller refractor would certainly take up a lot less space, and given i want the magnification to see the moon/planets, and there is too much light for many DSOs, that might make more sense. The issue then is cost, will need to do some digging on decent smaller refractors. 

Edited yesterday at 15:32 by corso

[SwiMatt]

2 hours ago, corso said:

Your post is a really useful response, thank you very much indeed, and it has given me some food for thought. Given the amount of ambient light, i cant totally see what you are saying makes sense. When you say your baby portable scope, did you mean the Vixen 80s? A smaller refractor would certainly take up a lot less space, and given i want the magnification to see the moon/planets, and there is too much light for many DSOs, that might make more sense. The issue then is cost, will need to do some digging on decent smaller refractors. 

This is gonna sound contradictory to my last message but: if you have the space and think the size won't be an issue, I would stick with your initial guts and get the 8" dobsonian. It's true that 8 inches in Bortle 8 will not promptly give you access to many more objects than smaller telescopes (most of the really faint stuff is limited by the sky before than by the aperture - if the background is as bright as what you're trying to see you will not get far). More aperture will also grant you access to more details on the planets and the Moon. But there is one aspect that has not been mentioned, and that is experience. The 8 inches should just make observing easier to start with (that is, after you set up and put your eye in the eyepiece). 4 or 5 inches are amazing, but also challenging in some aspects for an inexperienced observer - believe me, I started with 5" and I know how much more I can see now after 18 months into the hobby. It's not that experience won't matter with 8" (it will, big time), but you will be seeing more stuff and detailed views to start with. 

DISCLAIMER: All this is said by someone who has never even looked into an 8", but I have started with 5" and know what that experience has been like  great, but also challenging - especially when everybody on SGL is talking about resolving stars in a globular clusters, and it took me a year of observing before I could say that I resolved stars in M13. 🤣

Edited yesterday at 13:45 by SwiMatt

[JOC]

3 hours ago, corso said:

the Vixen 80s? A smaller refractor would certainly take up a lot less space, and given i want the magnification to see the moon/planets, and there is too much light for many DSOs, that might make more sense. The issue then is cost, will need to do some digging on decent smaller refractors. 

Yes, the little Vixen has always amazed me by what it can show and how well it shows it.  Don't forget to look for second hand scopes too!

[Bivanus]

Hello @corso and welcome. My locative situation is small town house with small courtyart sorounded by streetlights. The sky Bortle might be a 6 in those rare days when the power fails (municipal power fot streetligts, it's separated from normal residential power) but in normal operation is geeee....25+ or something. I am also a member of the worlwide renowed organisation "Lazy People Unite" and a certified collimatiophobyst. As such both my scopes are refractors, one 80mm one 102mm, and they spend most of their time on Alt Az mounts tho in those rare nights I feel the calling there is also a SW EQ6-R Pro available.

Probably unsurprising I would advise you to go for that 80mm refractor , be it Vixen or SW os TS or Technosky or FLO's StellaMira ( I have a particular soft spot for the longish f/10 obe StellaMira 80mm ED Doublet f/10 Refractor Telescope with R&P Focuser | First Light Optics but there is also it's more mundane  brother in f/6.5 StellaMira 80mm ED Doublet f/6.25 Refractor Telescope | First Light Optics)  Please note this are ED doublets that would fall into Apochromatic familly ( APO in short) and have a better Chromatic Aberation (CA) correction that a simpler Achromatic refractor ( and , alas , also cost more)

Probably surprising, while I personally don't really find myself currently drawn towards a mirror darkly   I can't disagree with the 8" Dobsonian as a good scope having seen thru other peoples rigs. However, having seen other people rigs, my 2c would be for you to do the same and fizically be near a couple of telescopes as to appreciate by yourself the heft required or , in the case of 12" and more , the size of forklift required 😃

[corso]

@SwiMatt @JOC @Bivanus thank you very much for your comprehensive replies, i've been on an entertaining tour of old threads on the forum. Nudged by your insights, i have now got to the stage that i think a <102mm refractor is probably my answer, as much as i would like a Dob, the grab&go/travel element of them is just too appealing. plenty of thinking to do, will probably start a new thread once i have done some more digging. Very easy to start looking at a nice little reasonably priced 70mm Doublet ED and then find i've persuaded myself that i need a 100mm Tak (that i can't afford!). 

cheers

Edited yesterday at 22:38 by corso

[Bivanus]

The 4" is in many people's opinion mine included a sweet spot that allows both visual and imaging with decent results while also maintaining a better portability than larger OTA's

I respect Takahashi and their performance is high, however, be aware that while anyone can see the difference between poor and good, in order to perceive the performance step up from good to better you must be really good too. Maybe a simply 'good' scope will suffice for now, and there are plenty available.

Also, never forget that you are talking about a rig composed from OTA / mount / accessories. Spend your cash wisely since a good OTA with a poor mount result in a poor rig. You'll notice I don't put a lot of emphasis on accessories (diagonals, eyepieces, finders etc.) The reason is that your tastes will evolve with time, and you'll change those rather often, they are much easier to buy/sell that the OTA and mount not to mention the average quality have gone up nowadays, take for example the rather ubiquitous SW 28mm that comes with a lot of SW scopes that is good enough to satisfy even advanced users.   

Edited 16 hours ago by Bivanus

[corso]

ha, there is absolutely no danger of me buying a really nice scope at the moment, not only can i not afford it, but it is more fun learning on something you dont mind getting dinged by kids or chucking in the back of the car. My first nikon binos for wildlife were £140 quid and bring me so much more joy than if i had dropped more money as they come everywhere with me and i'm not precious about them. Anything i buy now will be orders of magnitude better than my 12x36 binos, and as you say its worth putting money into a tripod and some lenses, so budget for scope likely sub £500 

[Bivanus]

The big advantage with FLO is that you can talk to them and they'll ofer good advice, they help even me with a SW72ED adapter conundrum even if the chances of me from Romania actually ordering from them is low. So maybe give a call and state the budget and see what is available, I can quickly point out a couple rigs I am confortable recommending for your consideration - not 'perfect' by any means, but good enough and with potential for upgrade (like adding an AZ GTI GoTo at a later date):

Sky-Watcher Evostar-90/660 AZ Pronto | First Light Optics - 245£

 Sky-Watcher StarTravel-102 AZ5 Deluxe | First Light Optics - 389£

The above-mentioned scopes are of course only examples, there are other out there too, and you can of course conjure up your own combo like 

Sky-Watcher AZ GTi WiFi Alt-Az Astronomy Mount | First Light Optics - 345£ (mount/tripod/extension pillar)

Sky-Watcher Startravel 102T OTA | First Light Optics - 219£ 

Total: 534£ ..... oops , overload 😂 (But only if bought new , as @JOC pointed out already, the secondhand market should not be forgotten) 

 

[bosun21]

If a dobsonian is off the cards then you should look at the go to 127 Maksutov by Skywatcher or Celestron. Far better than achromat refractors and great for the planets and moon. Zero chromatic aberration (false colour). Plus you will have go to to help find targets and keep them in view. Small and compact and easily transported. The only downside is putting it out to cool an hour before using and fitting a dew shield. It's the closest you will get to apochromatic performance. And under your budget.

[PeterStudz]

Although I don’t own one I think @bosun21 alternative suggestion of a 127 Maksutov is sound. For cool down time I use the opportunity to relax and scan the sky with binoculars. Relaxing is a big part of observing. 

I’m in Bortle 7 and started off under 4 years ago. I also have an 8” Dob which has been superb. These Dobs are also good on the planets and I’ve had countless nights observing the planets, moon and don’t forget solar (with addition of a quality white light filter). Solar on its own has been fab. Of course with the sun then light pollution isn’t a problem. And as the planets and moon are so bright being in a light polluted area isn’t an issue. Also had fun with some of the brighter DSO, including a couple of comets from my garden. Open clusters and double stars too For me there’s something special about seeing these things from my home.

I’ve taken my 8” Dob in the back of my car and for me it isn’t an issue. And what is “portable”?  For that means it has to fit into aircraft cabin luggage. Anything bigger and I may as well take the Dob in the car.

I’ve taken a small, cheap, reasonably priced telescope (cost less that a mid range eyepiece) and due to the sky being dark - Bortle 2 - plus the weather - every single night for 2 weeks clear - I saw an amazing about of objects. More deep sky targets in that time than I’ve ever seen. The problems I’ve had with going to a dark site in the South of the UK are: the weather. My life doesn’t allow me to take many last minute nights off when/if the sky is clear; Tried to take the telescope camping but the times I’ve tried it’s been cloudy; Best viewing season for DSOs tends to be the winter months, with all the hassle of going somewhere and having to wrap up as well. 

Anyway… good luck and welcome to the site!

Edited 9 hours ago by PeterStudz