Aperture vs Portability

[Matty P]

If you were choosing a new telescope which is more important to you, Aperture or Portability?

[duncan]

Hi Matty,
I chose aperture as i have reasonably dark skies here. I also consider my 12"Dob portable.No different to putting any other scope in the car,ie; same precautions need to be taken. My wife is not into astronomy so if i go anywhere i'm on my own, room in the car is not important for a passenger.
Cheers:thumbsup:

[mick pinner]

after lugging a 12" SCT and pier around to a few get togethers l am certainly a portability guy now, even a 12" dob is a breeze compared to the other.

[Matty P]

For me aperture wins over portability. I don't move around a lot with the scope so the more aperture the better.

:thumbsup:

[erick]

Decisions, decisions!! :help::confuse2:

For where I currently live, it has to be portability, sadly.

[Omaroo]

I have chosen "portability" lately. I now have a high-quality APO refractor of small aperture that still gives great views with the right kind of EP and is fantastic for widefield photography. It'll get far more airtime than any other scope I own. It fits (with equatorial mount) into a single briefcase. It goes everywhere with me.

At the other end of the spectrum though - I'm still building my dual 12" binocular telescope - which isn't any where near as portable. Being a collapsible truss system it's still more portable than my 12" LX200GPS - which is too much for me to lug around any more. The views are phenomenal though a 12" bino.

If the question were: "If you were only able to have ONE, SINGLE scope...." than I'd have to answer "aperture". I'd then hire a slave to move it around for me.

[goober]

I've done both, and have finally settled on portability.

[leon]

Yep portability is for me as well, if the set-up job is reasonably easy when on the road you would probably be prepared to use the set-up much more than having to lug around a big scope and mount, IMHO.

Leon

[Jarrod]

portability.

for me the 10" dob is big enough to keep aperture fever at bay, but too big to simply "throw in the boot" without having to consider luggage space. so if i was choosing another telescope i'd go for something small that i could travel with easily.

J

[edwardsdj]

It's really a combination of the two for me. Largest possible apeture in a package I can fit in my small car.

[erick]

ps. I had a tow bar fitted to my little car today! I'm upping the portability aperture limit! ;)

[JethroB76]

Outgrown the 12' already Eric?:lol:

[erick]

I've realised I need it for the 12" :D And I can get the 8" in as well for anyone else tagging along (and a few sets of binoculars!). Only one minor problem - what to do with all the camping stuff currently stored in the trailer :confuse2:

[Karlsson]

Portability fever has cured my aperture fever...:D

[Greenswale]

Portability for me just now - goes well with buzzing around the country.

BUT - have you seen those Britz hire campers? Maybe they are really mobile observatories - you know, opening roof and all? If this is true, then portability could mean pretty reasonable aperture? Must sneek up on a couple and have a look......!

[Starkler]

Who says you cant have both? (two scopes)

I have my 15" truss dob for aperture, and the 130mm newt on porta mount for portability.

[wavelandscott]

I love them both...but picking one I'd say portability...aperture in the garage/house/closet does not do you much good.


Great idea for a thread!

[Rodstar]

I am indulging in an aperture phase right now.

And I am luckly enough that my scope is able to be wheeled out into position, fully assembled, in 30 seconds flat. But then, it takes a fair bit longer to pull it apart and reassemble it when travelling to a star party.

[Matty P]

Rod, how much does the "Mary Rose" weigh fully loaded?

[thunderchildobs]

Have multiple telescopes for different uses.

My 12inch LX200 was just luggable, but now permently mounted in the observatory, as it is now to heavy for my father to help me to lift it.

The 10inch lx200 is portablity enough for astrocamps,
while the C5 is the grab and go scope.

Brendan

[Rodstar]

Matty,

In short, I am not sure.

Judging by the weights listed for a comparable scope from Obsession, the mirror box is about 46kg, but weighs only 11 kgs in real terms when being wheeled along with the wheelbarrow handles. The secondary cage weighs about 5kg, and I would judge the truss poles to be about 15 kgs.

I have a locking mechanism that allows me to wheel the scope fully set up. It feels perhaps 50% heavier than when I wheel the mirror box alone, so I would estimate an approximate effective weight of about 15 kgs when wheeling it.

It is not light, but by the same token, surprisingly easy to manoevre after a few goes.

I might also mention that I used to own a 10 inch LX200 SCT, and the Mary Rose is MUCH easier to manovre except when I need to get the Mary Rose in and out of the trailer (in that instance I use ramps when no one is around to help, but prefer to find a lifting buddy and manually lift it out!). The LX200 was awkward to carry out from the house to the tripod, and on a couple of occasions, I nearly stumbled over! Heart-stopping stuff!!

[CoombellKid]

As long as I'm fit enough to move it aperture get's my vote. Although I still
need to get the aperture.

regards,CS

[sejanus]

I bought a 16" with lofty ideas to disassemble it and chuck it in the car. Hasn't happened yet :D

It is very easy to use though in my backyard, it's on wheels and I leave it permanently assembled. Collimation aside I can have it pointing up in 30secs but the bugger is my backyard has a very limited view of west and a light polluted view of north

[abellhunter]

Hey Astro Heads!:hi:

i can't stand the city! :screwy:So why would i have to move a scope around? :shrug:BECAUSE MY DARK SITE BECAME THE ~ C I T Y ~!:sadeyes:

___________________________________ ______________________
"Astronomers Worst Nightmare!" see post #17:scared:
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=28124
___________________________________ ______________________

All that said, it's allways been ~ A P E R T U R E !;) The BIGGER THE BETTER!:eyepop:

___________________________________ ___________________
Large Group Scope &/or The new OZ Observatory/Retreat plan [see post #35]:thumbsup:
http://www.iceinspace.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=27969
___________________________________ _____________________

Aperture Rules! Lance aka "abellhunter":D

http://www.anzaobservatory.com
...is Moving to the Southern Hemisphere any ideas, suggestions or comments?:hi:

humphreys@greencafe.com

[citivolus]

I must say that after getting the C9.25 on a GEM, the OTA is 10x as portable as my 10" LX200 was. I suspect that I could get a C14 and it would still be about the same level of portability as my other scope was.

[Inmykombi]

I know where I am off to for my next holiday.......WOW and WOW again.


___________________________________ __________________________


Back to the question at hand.

I had the need for aperture:P and went from an 8 inch Newt. to a 10 inch SCT.

I love it, but if I want anything bigger in a go-to SCT I will need to eat more "weet-bix" for energy.

My 10 inch is manageable for me, and can be transported very easily in its JMI case. But I can imagine the 12 inch being very heavy indeed and less portable.

Another difficulty is that I dont have a good viewing horizon from my home. Too many darn trees....So I have to take the scope to more remote sites.

I also may opt for a second scope to grab and set up for a quick fix at home, and then take " my baby" for a drive when we meet on the mountain.:D

fifty fifty for me....maybe aperture wins by a smidgen....

[JimmyH155]

I had to vote for portability. My Meade LX100 (8") with steel tripod is heavy enough even when all I do is lug it out of the shed. I carry the tripod out first then have to grab the OTA and lift really high to put it on the mount.
As some of youses have said, my little grab 'n go 90mm Celestron refractor gets lots of use - I can carry the lot out with one shoulder, plonk it anywhere to dodge the tree / street light / dog mess, and hey presto, ready for action. Even M42 looks good in it.:D

[skies2clear]

I want the largest aperture I can manage, so that means both in my book.

So, what's the largest aperture that is portable?

[Matty P]

It really depends on how much weight you can carry or pull.

I'd say that a 12" SCT would be fairly easy to move around. :)

[Domol]

I think a celestron 11 inch on a CG5 (EQ Setup), breaks down well and fits into my wagon boot ok (room for luggage too). Only takes 15 min to assemble, and heaviest component is 13kg tube. You want to drive the car to where you set up, otherwise it's a chore. I'm lazy at the best of times, but it's acceptable to me. I had a 6inch Newton before that was almost grab and go, but i'd prefer the extra work on set up for the better view!

[Starkler]

Depends on your definition of portable.

[Screwdriverone]

portability in my case coz my budget only stretches so far and because the neighbours always seem to turn on their porchlights at 4am ;((

Chris