My first scope was a 90mm refractor and its nice however I am looking to now upgrade. I came across a good deal on a Saxon 120mm refractor on an eq5 mount and I nearly pulled the trigger. But everything I read talks about how a dobsonian is best bang for buck and aperature is king. I have decided on the DOB more than likely an 8".
My reading the last few days got me wondering why do people specifically buy large refractors when reflectors are so much cheaper? What illlls the real benefit?
Also is there much difference between a bintel and Saxon DOB? I heard something about Saxon been synta and that's some sort of advantage.
Final q. Tomorrow is when I plan to get my new scope (sorry to those with star gazing plans I'm bringing clouds to Victoria) is a 10" worth the Hassel over an 8? Weight doesn't bother me and I'm sure a 10 could fit in the car but it becomes a question of could I be bothered fitting it in the car.
To me, visual astronomy is all about aesthetics. I have been involved with astronomy for 35 years now, and the most pure images I can obtain, come from a quality apo refractor-I just do not enjoy the images produced by other scope designs.
I find collimation of reflectors irritating and time consuming to the level needed for astrophotography. For visual use though, dobs / newts are my first choice.
I think the main reason why people buy refractors is low maintenance.
The collimation is factory set and doesn't need tweeking every night like a mirror based scope does. Plus the refractor is fully sealed from dust and dew.
There is no loss of light from a central obstruction that the secondary mirror does in a Newt.
As Laurie says people don't like looking at stars with spikes hanging off them.
I will agree with those statements. For a long time I have been a newt guy but recently took a step into the refractor world, buying first a short fl wide field scope and later a traditional long fl achro. The quality of planetary viewing and ease of use are the key benefits. I still love my 16" dob but it takes time to get it set right and as far as moving it to a dark site its a logistical nightmare, but once set up there it dazzles me. For grab and go refractors win.
The number one reason is probably for photography where aperture is less of a crucial factor than it is with visual - that doesn't take away from the points the other posters have made.
As for your question regarding 10" vs 8" I would say definitely go the 10 if you don't mind the extra weight and size (& price) - a significant boost in light-gathering power
The classic proverb with astronomy equipment is "The best telescope is the one you use the most". In this context refractors are arguably the most versatile in terms of ease of use, portability etc.
I can't count the number of people I have encountered whose interest has dwindled from the obstacle of dragging out the reflector, colliminating etc etc whereas the small refractor tucks under one arm and the tripod is in the other.
Finally, so much of astronomy has little to do with your equipment but instead the realities of the atmosphere - or specifically what you can see through it.
This one point largely underlined both the design features and marketing for almost a decade of one of Televues most successful refractors - the venerable TV-85.
As their advertisement famously displayed - a small highly portable, good quality refractor transported to the right location can provide better images than even some professional observatories can achieve etc.
In addition to all of these points are issues like mounting, photography, re-sale value etc
The short answer is that there is no perfect scope. Every one is a compromise. A good refractor will give much better images than a reflector in many cases, but reflectors allow much more aperture for the dollars. An SCT is compact and portable but suffers from mirror flop in many cases and is always a long focal length and large obstruction.
I am an enthusiastic recommender of a small dob (by small I mean 8 or 10") as an ideal beginners scope. Having said that it needs to be recognised that "ideal beginners" and "ideal" are 2 different things. The ideal scope for an experienced observer is going to be affected by a vast array of factors such as location, size of dwelling, budget, attitude of the significant others in their life, health, level of interest, potential targets, etc.etc. etc. And for many people a good refractor is the ideal scope. Meanwhile I'll stick to the big dobs!!
Refractors make great finder scopes for reflectors.
Yes they do , to me though it depends on what you want, what you need it to do, what you can afford or fit into your space. A good larger refractor is not at all cheap, a good bigger reflector is, or to be blunt I can afford a big newt, I cant afford a big refractor. Whats the size when refractors are classified as big?
Roger , 5-8 inches is a big refractor , f10-15 in that size is getting pretty large so a good EQ mount is needed , but some have built good Dob style mounts on tall tripods to use long thro refractors to good effect , but its at the high power 300x plus that these monsters shine on the moon , planets and double stars and in my opinion a good EQ mount is a must .
am a refractor guy ,,, but I am finding my new C9.25 is growing on me ...
I have had two SCT and have never experienced "mirror flop" , I think as a criticism of SCT in general it's a bit unfair . I t may be of consequence to very long exposure photography . Saying that , I have taken multiple subs at 1o+ minutes and not experienced it .perhaps you could describe mirror flop as "legendary"!
Philip
+1 on that , I don't have any either . ZERO 'Flop?' in my C9.25 either , it just gives great views that are almost 'Refractor' like , a good scope .
Brian.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ash
I have had two SCT and have never experienced "mirror flop" , I think as a criticism of SCT in general it's a bit unfair . I t may be of consequence to very long exposure photography . Saying that , I have taken multiple subs at 1o+ minutes and not experienced it .perhaps you could describe mirror flop as "legendary"!
Philip
To me, visual astronomy is all about aesthetics. I have been involved with astronomy for 35 years now, and the most pure images I can obtain, come from a quality apo refractor-I just do not enjoy the images produced by other scope designs.
I concur. Once you taste the delight of pin point stars across a wide flat field your palate has changed forever.
Refractors are my 1st choice...hasn't always been...but when I looked through a decent one many years ago....I wanted one myself.
I started out ' trying ' different sizes as my budget could allow me...some were very expensive and excellent quality....but something was ' missing '.
I would sell and move on to another Refractor....try it...most likely sell it on..and keep searching.....this went on until I bought a S/H Vixen NA140.
I was ' hooked ' on this from the first time I pointed it to the sky..but..I did not really have a decent Mount for it.
The Mount I had was just enough to hold it steady....I wasn't really happy with the ' setup ' ....so after a few months I sold it.
Within a week or so, I regretted letting it go....I missed it that much I was on the phone ordering a brand new one from Japan.....
I put it on the Mount and used it every time I could....even thou' the Mount was not really adequate .....then I waited and waited.....I wanted a T-Rex Mount to go with this beauty....the ' perfect ' combination.
A T-Rex Mount will arrive shortly ready for the Vixen NA140.
I have ' stopped ' searching now ...I have found my ' niche ' in this great hobby and look forward to many nights with my 140mm Refractor.
By the way...I also have 2 x 80mm Refractors ... Orion and William Optics.....they are nice quality Refractors also.
I might be wrong...but I think other people have ' searched ' for ' their ' Scope until they have found it.
.....why I love Refractors....ease of setup....Alt/Az Mount....just point and look , pan around the sky....crisp sharp views.
Flash.....
Last edited by FlashDrive; 24-03-2014 at 06:41 PM.
I am just like you flash , I have had all types of scopes , but find refractors give the more pleasing images of the stars and planets , not to mention the moon .
I have had refractors from 60mm -152mm ( about 10 or more ) and just like you have found my 'Niche' as well in my Takahashi SKY90 and beautiful home made Istar lensed 127mm f8 doublet .
Yes a good frak deserves a good mount and I would like a T-Rex as well , but find EQ mounts suite me better , that's why the Tak lives on a Vixen SP and the Istar on a HEQ5 , both great mounts .
Brian.
Last edited by brian nordstrom; 24-03-2014 at 09:24 PM.
Being a newbie myself, I also kept reading the best bang for buck is the Dobson. However, I also wanted to use my scope terrestrially so a big dob just isn't going to cut it. I would like to get a dob one day if the hobby stays, but for now, I want something that is quick and easy to set up day or night, because I know it will get far more use here. So a refractor it is. Both types have their place, you just have to work out which suits you best.
Personal preference and appropriate for the task is decider.
I built then rebuilt a 10" f5 newt which hooked me with the views but also because it appealed to me as a technical learning project. I then bought a small 80mm refractor which became a 'grab&go' option but persuaded me to get a decent 102mm f7 refractor for better pix. Now I want a High f refractor for planetary\lunar so I can explore that region. I intend to keep or upgrade all three for their various purposes $$$$$
I originally thought the 10" f5 would be the perfect scope for everything ..... Yeah Right !!
I am finding my new C9.25 is growing on me ... 
...I have found my ' niche ' in this great hobby and look forward to many nights with my 140mm Refractor.
) and just like you have found my 'Niche' as well in my Takahashi SKY90 and beautiful home made Istar lensed 127mm f8 doublet .
$$$$$ 
