|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
10 inch dobs
Well it appears I will getting a 10 inch dobs tomorrow.(eBay)
This is a big upgrade from my 4.5 incher. Anything I need to know. Cool down time? -- Fly Lexx! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
10 inch dobs
Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky?? Oh you are going to LOVE the views! Wait about an hour. Congrats! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
10 inch dobs
On Apr 23, 6:25 am, "MTA" wrote:
Oh you are going to LOVE the views! Wait about an hour. Congrats! Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky?? Why not? TBerk |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
10 inch dobs
On Apr 23, 6:25 am, "MTA" wrote:
Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky?? You've obviously never used one, or you would know that a gentle nudge from time to time is all you need to track objects. It becomes second nature in minutes. Laura Halliday VE7LDH "Non sequitur. Your ACKS are Grid: CN89mg uncoordinated." ICBM: 49 16.05 N 122 56.92 W - Nomad the Network Engineer |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
10 inch dobs
Get an 8-10" mounted Meade or Celestron and you can have it both ways.
You've obviously never used one, or you would know that a gentle nudge from time to time is all you need to track objects. It becomes second nature in minutes. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
10 inch dobs
MTA wrote: Get an 8-10" mounted Meade or Celestron and you can have it both ways. You've obviously never used one, or you would know that a gentle nudge from time to time is all you need to track objects. It becomes second nature in minutes. And the additonal out-of-pocket expense will be...? |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
10 inch dobs
On Apr 23, 9:25 am, "MTA" wrote:
Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky?? It's cheaper, more powerful, more portable, more stable. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
10 inch dobs
Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky??
It's cheaper, more powerful, more portable, more stable. I think that dobs are great, but I don't agree with this claim that they are "more powerful, more portable, more stable". 1) I don't even know what is meant by "more powerful". 2) Some dobs are very portable and some are not, and the same can be said for other designs. 3) I don't see how they are "more stable" - at public events folks are constantly moving the dobs off target as they push on the scope, even if they intend only to focus. They are cheaper, and if the optics are good provide excellent views. Dennis |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
10 inch dobs
On Apr 24, 1:59 am, "Dennis Woos" wrote:
Why have a telescope that doesn't even track the sky?? It's cheaper, more powerful, more portable, more stable. I think that dobs are great, but I don't agree with this claim that they are "more powerful, more portable, more stable". 1) I don't even know what is meant by "more powerful". 2) Some dobs are very portable and some are not, and the same can be said for other designs. 3) I don't see how they are "more stable" - at public events folks are constantly moving the dobs off target as they push on the scope, even if they intend only to focus. They are cheaper, and if the optics are good provide excellent views. While you can't always compare apples and oranges, with a Dob you do get some conbination of more aperture per dollar, a lighter, easier-to- set-up scope for any given aperture, and a mount that is often more stable than all but the sturdiest (expensive and generally less portable) equatorials. The greater light-gathering power, and resolving power, combined with low cost, made even a medium-sized Dob more interesting than the old three-inch refractors, small SCTs, or 6-inch Newtonians that were the norm back in the 70's and early 80's. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
10 inch dobs
On Apr 23, 9:57�am, "MTA" wrote:
Get an 8-10" mounted Meade or Celestron and you can have it both ways. You've obviously never used one, or you would know that a gentle nudge from time to time is all you need to track objects. It becomes second nature in minutes.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Get an 8-10" mounted Meade or Celestron and you can have it both ways. I don't see how. I use a 10" dob and have owned several 8-10" mounted SCT's. The Dob is much easier and less work to set up and break down, easier to point, easier and more comfortable to use and sports a smaller obstruction and shorter focal length for wider field and higher contrast (better) views. For purely visual observing I prefer it greatly to the complicated and persnickety contraptions that most noobies call "telescopes" these days. Not that there's anything wrong with SCT's. It's just that there's nothing wrong with a good Dob, either, just depends what you want to do with your telescope and how much time to have to get going each session and how much you need it to do for you vs what you know how to do for yourself. rat ~( ); |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
2 inch focuser for 6 inch f 5 | zaph | Amateur Astronomy | 8 | January 3rd 07 02:23 AM |
8 and 12 inch Hardin DOBs on Special | Jon Isaacs | Amateur Astronomy | 34 | July 13th 04 03:01 PM |
Dobs | Howard | UK Astronomy | 1 | April 14th 04 12:30 AM |
2-inch vs 1.25-inch eyepiece | SPQR | Amateur Astronomy | 8 | August 26th 03 02:49 AM |