I bought a 10 inch dobsonian Skywatcher for my first telescope and got better lenses and a Barlow, I'm happy on what it can do. I paid 550 brand new so for the price and it's the quality, I couldn't be any happier with it.
I decided 25 years ago that dobsonians are the perfect telescopes for me. I hate fussing with computers, cameras, polar alignment, etc. I just want to see a LOT, with my own eyes, and I want to easily point and look. I started observing with small refractors and binoculars in 1993, but in 1998 I got my first 6" dobsonian and never looked back. Other scopes have come and gone from my arsenal, but that 6" is still my favorite. It's unbelievably sharp. I hope to build my first homebuilt dobsonian later this year, a 12" truss scope.
Always enjoy your videos, production quality is great ,very informative and enjoyable , I can tell you put a lot of work into your videos ,glad I found your channel
I think that for observers over their long term career, they need 3 types of telescopes! - The grab and go 4 inch refractor - the compact travel refractor with a camera tripod - And the biggest light bucket you can carry!
I just recently bought the ES Ultra Light Gen 2 Dob, and I am glad that this model is confirmed among the best. The design is very cool, and it's also funny to use and put together every time. I use it with the Skeye app for Android completely manually and I can put the smartphone in any position pointing 'indirectly' at objects. I just applied some fluorescent stickers on the mounting points to make it easier in the dark and in the observations. Thanks for your videos.
I recently finally jumped aboard this hobby with an 8" f/5 newt and I love it. I'm so curious to how it would be to look through a 12" or larger. I just bought a Tele Vue Delos 10mm and it is fantastic. I can only encurage you guys to get at least one high class eyepiece instead of buying and selling through a lot of mid class and lossing money on the way. I live in the north so during the summer I only have the sun and the moon to look at, but wow that moon really really pops with the Delos. At 1000mm FL and 10mm eyepiece with 72 degree AFOV the moon almost fills the view. To use a newtonian on a mount with tracking is so enjoyable. Point and admire.
Excellent video - very informative. My first scope was a 4 inch Newtonian on a very heavy equatorial mount. Since I live in a heavily light polluted urban area and my main interest is lunar and planetary visual observing, I've switched to a 6 inch Maksutov Cassegrain and I really love the long focal length and significant resolution, especially when I look at the Moon.
They are excellent. I've had FAR more fun visual observing with my 8" dob than with my expensive 😭 astrorig. Planetary, lunar, deep sky, etc. I brought it out to Big Bend, Texas this summer and saw countless galaxies, it was mesmerizing.
thanks for the video, really good. I've just picked up a second hand 12" skywatcher and its light enough for me to man handle it into the boot of my car and take it out into the country (had to improvise with some gaffer tape handles because it is so bog I can't lit it easily without this).
Dobsonian telescope is the best affordable telescope one can buy. It's a very good customisation basis. And at f5 or f6 very versatile tools. From beginner to advanced everyone will be happy with a dob. 8" seems to be the more versatile, but with a flextube you can go to 10" if you can afford it.
Flextubes are actually heavier than solid tubes! Sturdy enough collapsing/extending mechanism simply weights more than length of tube it replaces, making weight half way to step bigger solid tube. SkyWatcher's global site sucks when it comes to specs, but US site has far more complete and precise specs.
With more and more people migrating to cities, I wonder if the 'Dobs are good for everyone' opinion still holds true. Dobs are not ideal for apartment dwellers. If DSOs are impossible due to light pollution and storage space is limited, I'd argue that Catadioptrics are better-suited to city-living conditions.
@oninoyakamo You have a valid point there. In the city, space is indeed limited and there is seldom place for a big dob, but even so the cost per optical performance is unbeatable in a dob and for me, this alone puts them in front of catadioptrics. Catadioptrics, however, definitely make more sense as an ideal telescope the more experienced you are and/or if the budget isn't limited.
6 inch Mak is best if all you can look at is planets and the Moon (and the Sun with a full aperture filter) and don't have the room for a Dob. Still not as good as a well set up 8 inch Dob, but shows a fair bit of detail on Jupiter, Saturn and Mars at opposition. But if the astronomy bug really bites a city dweller they will make the effort to travel to darker skies for nights/weekends/extended holidays away to observe. I know because it happened to me. Dobs all the way! 8, 10, 12 inch...
After I had my f5 Newtonian 150mm mirror refigured the little bit of coma it had disappeared. I cannot say enough about getting quality mirrors, even in my 100mm tabletop dob it was pretty decent. I found by not grabbing the open front, but keeping the dust cover in I seldom have to collimate my big scope. I noticed it was always the front secondary mirror going off center of the primary and figured out the vanes holding the mirror flexed and knocked it off. My primary stays in collimation very well as long as I am careful not to bump it. I saved the Styrofoam tube holders from the shipping box and use them when traveling with it in my truck. I also save old flattened pillows for transporting my telescopes even in a case, the case sits on a pillow.
@@guarmiron5557 I put them in the bed of my pickup and they are acclimated to ambient temperature if I travel 30 minutes to my Bortle 2 spot, but if I only go out of town to Bortle 4-3 I still need some time, but I always leave before dark so it is usually no problem. All my scopes get tied down so they cannot move. I put the tripods in the back seat.
Fast (f/5 is pretty fast) Newtonian primary mirrors need to be paraboloidal, and coma is inherent to all paraboloidal mirrors, and cannot be fixed even by perfect figuring. You would need at least an additional mirror or lenses to correct this aberration, or you could just live with it. At f/5, coma is noticeable, but arguably not too severe. If you saw an aberration that was eliminated by expert refiguring, then it wasn't coma, it must have been something else.
@@rbrtck A Strehl of .98 and 1/12th wave is what they ended up at. I only sent the mirrors in to be re-aluminized on sale for both mirrors at $88 and they offered to refigure them on sale as well. I was blown away when I got them back. I put a new PMI 2" focuser to replace the old 1.25 R&P one.
@@MountainFisher Like I said, even a *perfect* paraboloidal mirror exhibits coma as its main aberration, and the faster the mirror, the more there is. I'm sure your mirror was highly improved, and possibly it used to have even worse coma (or excess tangential astigmatism, which can look like coma and/or make it worse), but coma cannot be eliminated with a single optical element (the objective mirror, and the diagonal doesn't count, because it's a flat mirror). Coma could be reduced, but then the mirror would no longer be paraboloidal (or "parabolic" as most people say) and other aberrations would increase, starting with spherical aberration, which is worse because it blurs the whole image, even in the center (on-axis, while coma becomes more visible the farther off-axis you look). In an f/5 Newtonian, coma is still not really all that severe, so it often goes unnoticed, especially because the off-axis aberrations of most eyepieces are more pronounced. But it's always there and can be seen, especially in premium, well-corrected eyepieces and at low magnification. The only practical way to correct coma in a fast Newtonian is to use a coma-correcting lens, which sits in the focuser and accepts eyepieces or cameras, much like a Barlow lens. Additionally, Schmidt-Newtonians and Maksutov-Newtonians (which have a full-aperture corrector lens in front of the *spherical* primary mirror to take care of spherical aberration) have about half of the coma of regular Newtonians (which have a paraboloidal primary mirror to correct spherical aberration) of the same focal ratio, but they're customarily considered different types of telescope.
Note that with further investments, dobsonians are very capable of delivering perfectly acceptable photographs of the objects in the night sky. E.g. a computerized alt-az mount, combined with an (astro) camera, and (free) software like sharpcap. Of course, a laptop or desktop (with extension cord) is needed as well. With this software, you can take very short images which are then "stacked" to construct an image. The short exposure + softwares deals with the field rotation. Remember, most dobsonians have quite a wide view and a very large aperture. So collect a lot of photons in a short time. For even better images, a focal reducer/field flattener can be obtained. Another route that can be taken, is not to buy a "goto" dob, but an equatorial platform. Finally, starting astrophotography is never cheap. Even in case a dobson is used. Costs can be minimized, in case you use: 1) a second hand dobsonian, 2) a second had DSLR body, 3) a self built equatorial platform (many people have build such a thing). It is worth checking the youtube channel of "keep it simple astronomy" for starters.
Solid review! How about reviewing a SCT/MCT? i have heard that they are better for the planets, have great optics and seldom need collimation but would appreciate a trusted source's take.
@elray4832 I have a review of the 102 Mak from Skywatcher you could check out: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-pNiSYU4TeUM.html An SCT review is already in planing.
Cats certainly offer more compact tube size, no secondary spider and give high magnifications easily, but per price they're short in aperture compared to Dobsonian. And especially bigger MCTs have serious FOV limits for general use.
Very informative and interesting video Bogdan. Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us. Always look forward to one of your new productions. Keep up the great work! Ed.
Salve sono Raimondo piacere. Complimenti per il lavoro che fai. ❤ Domanda, io che sono un neofita che problemi avrei un dobson da 10"? E meglio un dobson da 8" o da 10" per il sistema solare e Deep Sky? Grazie mille arrivederci ❤
Salve Raimondo, grazie! Un Dob da 10" sarebbe un po' più grande e pesante da spostare. La differenza tra un Dob da 8" e uno da 10" non è così grande. Se nella tua zona ci sono cieli molto bui e non ti dispiace il peso, allora prendi in considerazione il 10", altrimenti opta per l'8". L'8" è un ottimo telescopio per principianti.
I like how you had to specify that a Cheshire eyepiece is an option. People in the comments would freak talking about a laser. It take 5 seconds to collimate the laser and 5 seconds to collimate the telescope. It doesn't have to be perfect unless it's astrophotography. And if thats what you do, you're the reason the mosquitos are out in winter and it makes me angry
Would you please consider for me i was planing to purchase a telescope for beginners so what brand should i buy and what is the average diameter of objectives lens size should i need to buy''???
@kokomaung Sure, I'll try to help. As a beginner telescope I would either get a 80-100mm refractor, like the Evostar from Skywatcher on an equatorial mount or a 6" Dobsonian telescope like the 150p from Skywatcher.
@randomthings8027 In my opinion the an 8" dob will offer best value for money. From there on up you get diminishing returns.
11 месяцев назад
Thanks for this informative and nicely made video. I am a novice who wants to get the first telescope for easy stargazing and most likely will not invest into another one for a long time. I have come across Sky-Watcher flex-tube virtuoso gti 150. How would you rate that for a beginner? I don't want to go beyond $500.
I think that it's a great beginner telescope. It will work well both when observing planets and DSOs. The GoTo functionality will only make it easer to find targets in the night sky. Let me know how you like the telescope if you end up getting it.
I love my newts (I own one newt and 1 dob) but my star telescopes are my catadioptric scopes. My 6 inch achromatic weighs as much as my 11 in Edge HD but its length can push my 40 pound limit mount after balancing. The compactness of my various schmidt-cassegrains (I own 3) makes for easier setups even in the dark (I also own a Mak-Cas). When they are properly collimated my nights are glorious (Thanks bob's knobs). I would put the schmidt cassegrains forward as the perfect telescopes.
@@lavers_1 I currently own an Edmund Scientific Newt that is f/6, 900 mm fl, and weighs 11 pounds. I really enjoy the scope and it is quite easy to set up. I like some of the f/4 newts on paper but that is starting to get fast for most of my eyepieces and even some of my filters for astrophotography. A 16 pound Newt would not stress my mount at all (my 6 inch achromatic Meade AR-6 weighs 27 pounds). If I was going to buy another newt (not on a dob mount) I would buy this scope: Sharpstar Optics 150mm f/2.8 Parabolic Newtonian Astrograph. I am very pleased with my APO from the same company.
I got my first dob a few months ago. I chose a stellalyra 8inch dob and it’s fantastic quality compared to skywatcher.has a right angled finder and a primary mirror fan and also comes with superior eyepieces for the same price as competitors!
I've read reviews and watched some videos on the brand. I believe you made an excellent choice. Congrats. Clear skies because I just pray for gaps in the clouds now. LOL.
The alt bearings on the Skywatchers aren't great and they get worse with use (eventually the friction pads fall off; they can be improved but it's a hassle). Don't know what the new fancy roller/ball bearing GSOs are like but their old simple teflon pads + spring tensioner was already a lot better than the SW setup. The AZ bearings are easy enough to redo with dimpled laminate and teflon pads, but the Alt axis is trickier so you'd want it to be decent out of the box.
Good video ! I have a GSO 6"f5 OTA that I made a Dobsonian mount for. This mount allows adjustment of the balance and focuser position by loosening the rings and allows me to remove the OTA from the mount with just one screw. I wonder how using a Barlow would affect any optical aberrations caused by the mirror if there are any. Now I also have (not used yet) a ES 10" hybrid truss Dobsonian which I have been modifying. For where I live, with nearby Bortle 4 sky, the 10" will be usable when seeing is good.
I live in bortle 5 skies. I own an old 6 in Edmund Scientific F6 with a 900 mm fl (As well as 11 other scopes . . . I have a problem). It is a great scope but I find that with even a little bit of atmospheric activity combined with the local light pool makes seeing nebulosity very difficult. I struggle with it a lot. The Edmund is loads of fun splitting binaries, clusters are amazing, and solar system views can make my heart leap (it is only 11 pounds so my EQ3 can just handle it visually). I hope to spot a well priced 8 inch dob on the used market soon (I own a 6 inch dob but I find it's 1.200 mm fl too long and getting it on faint fuzzies is challenging).
If you put a Barlow on that 6" 750mm focal length scope it will not fix aberrations if the mirror has any. Still GSO's are known for a little coma where the outer field of view has elongated stars or comas. I have a 6" Celestron with a refigured mirror and it needs no coma corrector. But the optical work I had done cost more than a coma corrector. Look at your outer fov and see how much coma you have, if it isn't much and you can live with it, you're good to go. If at high power you can't live with it the get a decent coma corrector. As for a Barlow get the Tele Vue 2x 1.25" with a two element lens, but with TV Barlows the lens screws off, but its threads won't fit anything except itself, no point to making it so it can screw off. They are without a doubt the best Barlow there is, but 2x is what you get. If I want that .5x I take the lens off my Omni.
@@MountainFisher I won't be getting a comma corrector/ reducer for the Edmund. It's views are shockingly clear. At the time Edmund was using great 1/10 wavefront PV mirrors. The main thing I need to do to the Edmund is put a better focuser on it. I have mirrors of the same quality in my old Celestron Super C8+ (an old hand assembled made in the states SCT with 1/10 mirrors as well). I bought the .63 reducer for it and I didn't notice much coma correction but the .63 is supposed to only correct a little. Not that the scope has a lot. I really have had a lot of luck finding old reflectors that are gems. I have an old Celestron Barlow that is pretty good but I do intend on getting the 2 inch by Tele Vue. At the moment I only own a Tele Vue Delite 7 mm. Beautiful eye piece and intend on slowly replacing my entire eyepiece collection with TV products. I do want to run a quick Explore Scientific test by buying one of their eyepieces to test against my TV eyepiece first.
@@guarmiron5557 I had my C6-N refigured to 1/12th wave and .98 Strehl ratio with 96% reflectivity almost the last refigure OWL did as the optics engineer went to better paying horizons. When I say near perfect .986 Strehl is pretty close. Farpoint had a sale on the JMI focusers and I bought one, they're out now. My $125 Pawn Shop scope with a 2x TV and 3 Fujiyama orthos turned into ow around $800. I use my Fuji's and the views I get of the planets is as close to perfect as possible with a 150mm mirror. I use them for M81 for instance and when the Jet Stream calms down I head to my Bortle 2 spot. Small galaxies fit in the field of view. I have some wide field EPs, but nothing beats those Orthoscopic Abbe design Fuji's.
@@MountainFisher I have some Research grade Meade Orthos (came in a box I was given with a used scope) that were made in Japan back in I believe the '70's. I really like them a lot but I must admit that the eye relief on the 4 mm is a bit close for me.
Excellent video! Can you use an F4 newt for planetary observation? I know the magnification would be limited but I am considering one scope with my budget on a good mount, especially for DSO.
@lazernteebbee Thank you! Yes an f4 reflector will be good for planetary observations as well. Just keep in mind, that the faster a reflector telescope is the bigger the secondary mirror needs to be, which in turn will lead to more image diffraction. The image will also be a bit dimmer compared to slower reflectors because of the larger secondary mirror covering more of the the primary mirror.
@lazernteebbee Not necessarily. Both have their pros and cons. An f4 for example telescope will be more demanding on the eyepiece and require a wider secondary mirror, but will offer the advantage of being more compact and having a wider field of view which is great for DSO observations. So it all comes down to what the main purpose of the telescope will be.
@@BogdanDamian Thanks for the reply! I was think of getting a Meade 8" f/4 LX85 Astrograph Reflector Telescope with a Tele Vue DeLite eyepiece for moon/planets and a Panoptic eyepiece for DSO.
@mohammadyasar5113 Hello! If you have access to Omegon, then go for a telescope from their ProDob series. Alternatively look at GSO (Deluxe series) or Apertura. All three series differ only in terms of paint and price. Everything i the same as all are made by GSO. Regarding the size, I would get an 8" or a 10" Dob. A 12" might be too heavy and bulky to transport around. Also check out the Ultra Light Gen II series from Explore Scientific if you want something that is easy to transport around.
For visual observing bigger is better... For as long as you can handle carrying the telescope. 10" is already fatter and heavier than 8", but 12" is even bigger step larger than 10" with also more length making it lot harder to transport in car.
There was a dent in my new 10" dob out of the box and the donut sticker at the bottom of the mirror was lose so it looks kind of bad and un suck on there , would u ship it back or accept 30% off on the scope ?
@SOLiDWiNG99 It depends on how bad the dent is and if the mirrors are intact. If you can repair the dent in a easy enough way and the mirrors aren't damaged, then keep it and get the 30% back. There are templates online that will help you center the mirror (put the sticker perfectly in the center) so this part isn't that bad. If all this sounds to much of a hassle to you, than send it back and simply get a new one. Maybe try out the telescope first and see if the mirrors are in perfect condition.
@@BogdanDamian Thanks , sad how this business has turned out , I'm pretty sure they shipped me that one deliberately to get rid of damaged products they cant sell
What about comfortability? With these dobsonian telescopes you have to bend your back in an extremely uncomfortable position when viewing! Only children will be able to stand upright.
That's my concern. You're back has to fit the scope because you have no option to rotate the tube or raise or lower the scope (assuming you are doing visual work, of course).
