If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum > General > Questions and Answers
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 09-May-2008, 03:59 PM
flintboy flintboy is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1
Default advice on telescopes wanted

Hi was I’m really looking at getting my first scope and was after some advice on weather a (Celestron 5 SE) that I believe is a 5" Schmidt Newtonian scope ,would have a greater light gathering ability than a (6" or 8" lxd mead) that I believe is only a Newtonian telescope? I’m kind of lost and would appreciate any help thanks
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 09-May-2008, 08:20 PM
aurora's Avatar
aurora aurora is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,618
Default

Look through the messages in the telescope and equipment thread here, there are lots of answers to similar questions, with many links to helpful information.

Short answer, the larger the mirror the more light is gathered.

Maybe a mod will move this to the appropriate forum.
__________________
"I'm as accurate as any psychic. And I'm a cartoon!" -- Squidward

"Arrrgh, the laws of physics be a harsh mistress!" -- Bender
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 09-May-2008, 09:53 PM
Tim Thompson's Avatar
Tim Thompson Tim Thompson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,152
Lightbulb Advice

A 6 or 8 inch aperture will always gather more light than a 5 inch, unless they have ridiculously large secondary mirrors. Also, I would personally advise a Newtonian on a Dobson type mount, over a Schmidt-Cass, as a first telescope. The Newtonian will perform better in Eyeball viewing, compared to a Schmidt-Cass of the same aperture. On the other hand, the Schmiidt-Cass is a better camera lens, and so is better if you are going to do CCD imaging or astrophotography. As an example, we are happy with our 4.5-inch SkyQuest Dobsonian as a telescope we can let the kids play with. You would want a larger version, and you would probably want digital setting circles as well.

And don't overlook the value of a good pair of binoculars. Their wide field of view can show star fields and clusters, like the Pleiades, that you are unlikely ever to see in a telescope.
__________________
Don't try this at home - We're what you call "professionals" - MythBusters.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 09-May-2008, 10:41 PM
dcl dcl is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 262
Default

Setting circles with a Dobsonian? Please explain.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 10-May-2008, 02:31 AM
Tim Thompson's Avatar
Tim Thompson Tim Thompson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,152
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcl View Post
Setting circles with a Dobsonian? Please explain.
Dobsonian mounts are alt-az, just like an LX-200 without the wedge. So, you align the digital setting circles on the Dob the same as you do an LX-200, by pointing at 2 or 3 known stars. Then you can move the telescope by hand to the desired (RA, DEC). There are lots of digital options for Dobs like that. The Orion Intelliscope series are SkyQuest Dobs with digital setting circles. You can also turn the Dob into an equatorial, in a manner of speaking, with a split ring mount; they are not much harder to make than a regular Dob mount.
__________________
Don't try this at home - We're what you call "professionals" - MythBusters.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 11-May-2008, 09:32 PM
dcl dcl is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 262
Default

Tim Thompson: Thanks for educating me on implementation of setting circles on Dobsonian mountings. It never occurred to me that it might be done by automating computation of equatorial-to-alt-azimuth coordinate conversion and installing alt-azimuth setting circles. I'd still think it would be annoying to have to track in both altitude and azimuth to follow an objecte that's not on the meridian.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 12-May-2008, 12:02 AM
Nick Theodorakis Nick Theodorakis is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 244
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dcl View Post
Tim Thompson: Thanks for educating me on implementation of setting circles on Dobsonian mountings. It never occurred to me that it might be done by automating computation of equatorial-to-alt-azimuth coordinate conversion and installing alt-azimuth setting circles. I'd still think it would be annoying to have to track in both altitude and azimuth to follow an objecte that's not on the meridian.
I don't really track with a Dob. If I want a longer look, I put the object off to one side of the field of view, then let it drift across as I watch, then give the scope another nudge.

Nick
__________________
Nick Theodorakis
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 12-May-2008, 12:15 AM
Tim Thompson's Avatar
Tim Thompson Tim Thompson is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 2,152
Default

Well, you could put drive motors on a Dob, but I don't know anyone who actually has. Generally the folks who want motorized tracking build a split-ring. The digital setting circles on a Dob make it easier to point the telescope by hand while reading out the coordinates, so finding things goes faster.
__________________
Don't try this at home - We're what you call "professionals" - MythBusters.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 12-May-2008, 12:19 AM
aurora's Avatar
aurora aurora is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 2,618
Default

I have seen dob's with motors.

But I put my dob on an equatorial platform, for tracking.

But I used it for years just tracking objects manually. You want your scope set up so that the amount of friction in azimuth is about the same as the friction in altitude, and so that there is no stiction and no drifting.

Works really well once you get used to it.
__________________
"I'm as accurate as any psychic. And I'm a cartoon!" -- Squidward

"Arrrgh, the laws of physics be a harsh mistress!" -- Bender
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Fortran conversion advice. pzkpfw Off-Topic Babbling 6 05-September-2007 09:51 PM
Could NASA have faked the moon landing if they wanted to? Drbuzz0 Conspiracy Theories 50 17-August-2007 03:01 AM
Twin Telescopes Peer at Distant Galaxy Fraser Universe Today Story Comments 0 07-September-2005 06:06 PM
Robotic Telescopes Team Up Fraser Universe Today Story Comments 0 07-September-2005 04:12 PM
Here Come The Thirty Metre Telescopes Fraser Universe Today Story Comments 0 07-September-2005 04:12 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:18 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.0.0
©  2006 Bad Astronomy and Universe Today