12" or 16"

[ryouko]

I am having troubles with chosing between the meade lightbridge 12" and 16" For short, is the 16" that much better than the 12" or would it be wise for me just to save that extra money? For anyone that has tried both, how much better is the 16" compared to the 12"? Also, what would a suitable lens kit be for these scopes?

[Doc]

Personally I wouldn't think better I would think bigger.

[Peter Drew]

If you're interested in DSO's the 16" will have nearly twice the light grasp of the 12":icon_eek:.

[Doc]

The 16" is awesome and will out do the 12" at a dark site. But make sure you have the room to store and transport it.

[John]

For me, the 12" Lightbridge was the largest / heaviest scope that I could handle. The views through the 16", especially on DSO's will beat it of course but I think you need regular access to dark skies to make the most of a scope of that aperture.

Have you already used a large dobsonian ?.

I think you will need to budget for some decent quality eyepieces - the 16" is F/4.5 as I recall.

[brantuk]

I have an SW 12" and make occasional use of my friends 16" LB which I allways look forward to. The difference is astounding

[WayBig]

...what a lovely dilemma to have!!

[NGC 1502]

The Meade LB 12" & 16" are both very capable scopes.

But I'd urge you, if possible, to see these scopes in a showroom

or star party. I realise this is not easy for some, but it's the

best way to judge suitability.

What one person quite genuinely finds easy and portable,

another may find the opposite.

Best regards, Ed.

[ryouko]

So, what I am getting here, is if I can handle the "not so portable" of the 16 and can afford it, I should go with the 16"? My argument has been lately, is the big price difference jumping from 12" to 16" worth that much extra. The way I am precieving it here is yes... I do not so far have a way to see any of these in person, so the only way I can really do any research of one of these is through the internet. What optics would go good with this scope?

[Talitha]

TBH, if i'd have seen Seymour (my 16" LightBridge) in a showroom, the size probably would have scared me into settling for the 12".... makes me REAL glad there aren't any showrooms around here.

That being said, be aware that i'm extremely fortunate to live on 40 acres under a dark sky, which means i don't have to travel anywhere. The scope is fully assembled, on wheels, and stored in a shed. All i need to do is wheel it out, check the collimation, put in an eyepiece, and start observing.

If you live in a light polluted area and need to get the scope down a few flights of stairs and packed into a vehicle to go observing, you need to think things through very carefully. Bottom line though, if you can handle it, definitely go for the 16".

[Doc]

I agree totally with Carol. I have a 16" and also have light pollution, cannot see the milky way from my back garden. But the scope is fully assembled and takes just minutes to wheel outside.

Due to it's aperture I have almost seen the complete Messier catalogue from a light polluted garden, I bet a 12" wouldn't do this.

I agree it's a pain to strip it down to transport it, but once under dark skies it's 100% better and the views are to die for.

[ryouko]

Thank you so much for the replies, it sounds like you've talked me into a 16" over all. Plus, by the looks of it, it looks as if its quite mod-able, which I am sure in the long run will be quite fun to experiment with. I know now what toy I will be purchasing as soon as I get back from Afghanistan!!! Just as a quick question, what lenses would be good to look into for it?

[John]

....Just as a quick question, what lenses would be good to look into for it?

That's rarely a "quick question" as there are even more choices of eyepiece than there are scopes

Mick (Doc) has the same scope as you are thinking of getting - he uses a set of William Optics UWAN's (28mm, 16mm, 7mm and 4mm) though I don't know how often the 4mm would get used in an 1800mm focal length scope though - 450x is rarely used in the UK seeing conditions, even with a big scope

The set of 4 UWAN's costs around £550.

[Doc]

Sorry just seen this question.

As John says I use a set of Uwans with my 16". They are very good indeed and really help having a 82° fov.

The 7mm gets plenty of use especially finding elusive planataries but the 4mm is a hit and miss eyepiece. The only use the 4mm gets is on the moon when seeing allows.

[johninderby]

I agree with the previous posts. The 16" LB is a viable option, but only f you've got a suitable place to store it. An unheated shed that it could be stored in ready to just wheel out and observe whenever you wanted to would be an ideal solution.

Of course the SkyWatcher 16" dob will be out in a few months time.

John

[Chris H]

The 16" Dob is F4.5 and all Televue eye pieces are tested down to F4 so they would be great. But for a set of 3 or 4 Nagler's or even Ethos' budget around £1000 or more.

[adamsp123]

If the 16" is just a bit too big then maybe consider the Skywatcher 14" Dob

[moocher]

16". Aperture is everything...

Alan

[Earl]

All i need to do is wheel it out, check the collimation, put in an eyepiece, and start observing.

Does it get any better?

If I was into visual observing IT would be the biggest Dob I Could afford, and if I was to weak to use it, Plenty of protein and down the gym