APO or Dob in the rainy Pacific Northwest

I was all set to purchase a 4"APO (TV102 or FS102) on an alt-az (Gibraltar) when I started having second thoughts. An 11" Star Master would be in the same price range. I live in the Pacific Northwest in semi-polluted skies in the suburbs of Seattle. For those who don't know, it has been known to rain here, some say often ;-) Most of my viewing would be from the back yard looking East, away from the city and a quick setup and tear down would be ideal. I know the Dob would require a longer cool down period. I'd be looking at everything in the sky cause I'm new and have only looked through binoculars up to now.

Questions:
1) Does anyone own a Dob or an APO in the rainy side of the Northwest? Could I view from my backyard or would I have to visit dark sites? I'm trying to figure out if the seeing would push me to a 4" APO just because the Dob requires better conditions because of its' larger aperture.

2) Am I destined to suffer the curse of needing to own both?

Thank you for your advice,
John McGarvey
[email protected]

John,

I live right across from you on Bainbridge Island and use a 12.5" Dob. Granted it's darker over here, but I also use it in Vancouver, BC which blows Seattle out of the water for light pollution. You should get in touch with the Seattle Astronomical Society, . They have over 200 members and when the weather is clear they hold star parties at Green Lake, among other sites. Right, good luck this time of year.

Other than the fact that the 4" APO would be more grab-and-go, the 11" StarMaster would give the better views. Good luck.

Doug Tanaka

I've an 8" SCT and it is very washed out at Gasworks Park. A 5" SCT/Mak generally images planets/clusters better due to the light pollution overwelming the larger aperture. A Big Dob would have even a more painful time, I'm sure.

North 20 miles in suburban Everett, with moderate light pollution, the 8" to 12" SCTs perform fine. We can even pick up the Veil with even the 8" on a dark night with an OIII filter. Again, the 8" seems almost crisper/more constrasty than the 12" at times, because the 12" pulls in so much light pollution. Given a half moon and a haze layer, the advantage of smaller aperture becomes more evident. We've also used a 4" achro refractor and it has very nice images under these conditions. When it isn't raining. The nice thing about the 12" is that it is a GPS, so can align with a 95% cloud cover... which could potentially allow us to zip around the holes in the clouds. Pitiful, huh?

Big dobs/newtonians (12"+) we pretty much wait until we get to Monroe on a dark sky night. I'm a firm believer in transporting something like your proposed 11" Starmaster ( or a 12.5" Portaball ) well, well away from city lights.

The StarMaster would *shine* at Table Mountain, Mt. Bachelor or the Oregon Star Party.. really nice dark skies if you want to go for Planets and DSOs. And, uh, perform admirably on the planets given the (Zambuto?) mirror. The refractor, due to the aperture, would be painfully at a disadvantage if you wanted to go for galaxies/nebula at the dark sky star parties, even if it were more portable.

I really haven't had much success with "dark sky filters"/"light pollution filters". On the 8" from Gasworks, yes, it did help.. but in my opinion the 5" SCT *still* had better images most of the time for the moon, planets, doubles and brigher DSOs. When I used an LPR filter from the suburbs, it just seemed to wash the image out too much for DSOs. OK I guess for planets/binaries.

Hope this helped

Cheers

Karl

Hey cool, a fellow Pacific NW-er! Were in N. Idaho, and it's been raining, and raining, and snowing and raining here too! We have a 6 inch EQ. Cool downs aren't too bad. Do you have a covered deck or anything? I put ours out there to pre-cool before it get's dark, then your ready to go! A dark site is always better but either scope can give you much fun in the yard too. Hey, next time your at Woodland Park Zoo, say hi to the baboon for me, I got into an argument with him years ago haha! Take care! Ron

John,

I can't give you much help on the comparative views through the scopes you named. I have never looked through a dob, although I plan to take the first chance I get to try out a Starmaster. Based on what I read, the Starmaster will probably at least match the refractors, no matter where you set up. Under dark skies, the Starmaster should blow the refractors away, they say.

I can say from experience, as a person who chose a TV102 for a first scope, that I doubt you would regret making the same decision. I have never bought anything that gave me as much satisfaction. Someday, if I can afford it, I plan to buy a 14.5 Starmaster. However, I can't imagine ever selling the TV102. The views on clusters, planets, the moon, and other bright stuff are just so beautiful. Under darks skies, the double cluster through a 22 Nagler provokes an exclamation every time I show it to someone for the first time. You have never seen a picture of the double cluster that looks even remotely as good.

So yeah, you're probably doomed if you buy the refractor first. On that basis, avoiding doom, you might want to try the Starmaster first.

However, one thing that either of the refractors will do that might help you get going is they will make it somewhat easier to find stuff. They give wider fields. It has been a great pleasure to me to discover that by using a red dot finder I can quickly find pretty much everything I set out to look for.

What a great dilemma. You can't go wrong!

Steve

Thanks to everyone that replied. I was thrilled by how thoughtful and helpful your responses were, well, except I was a little lost with the baboons ;-)

I made my choice, a Tak FS102 for visual use on a Gibraltar mount to start. As we thought of our priorities, quick set up, easy to lift, easy to pack, easy to transport were at the top. Someday I'll be into GEMs and even Dobs, but for now, this will keep me going.

Thanks again,
John McGarvey