Refractor guy feels Dobish...?

As the very happy owner of a TV-102, I don't know much about what other kinds of scopes can show. My scope seems to show more on galaxies than I had been led to believe, but let's face it, it's only 4 inches.

I'd like to know what difference I might see if I added an inexpensive 8- or 10-inch dob. Here's what I see now on a few deep sky targets under mag 6 skies:

Whirlpool: both galaxy cores stand out, spiral structure just discernable with averted vision and effort. Seeing structure takes time.

M33: Spiral structure detected like with Whirlpool, averted vision, effort, and time to be sure.

M104: Dust lane evident with averted vision and maybe with direct vision in good seeing.

NGC 4565: Dust lane hard to see, but somewhat evident across core with averted vision

M13: Individual stars resolved across entire cluster with direct vision. Too many stars to count. Many more stars go unresolved. Magnification necessary to show resolution also makes cluster look quite dim.

Question is, would I see a great deal more with an inexpensive Dob?

Any experienced commentators who have compared premium 4-inch refractors with 8- or 10- inch non-premium dobs out there? Comments on these or other objects seen through the Dobs?

Steve

"Question is, would I see a great deal more with an inexpensive Dob?"

Depends on the inexpensive Dob. But typically - yes.

I have a TV102 as well, and even though it's my favorite scope and most used scope, I wouldn't be without a larger one. Currently this is a swayze 10" f7.5 (not exactly an inexpensive one tho).

Hardin Optical is selling 10" for around $400. At that price, whaddya got to lose?

Tom T.

I own a FS-102 and I have looked through a club Meade 12" Newtonian on a number of occasions. I haven't seen a great deal more detail through the Newtonian, but DSOs are definitely brighter.

In my light polluted CT skies, along with the so-so seeing that we have had this winter, I have had trouble seeing a number of objects, such as the Whirlpool Galaxy, through the FS-102 (I have a goto mount, so I KNOW it's pointing at the right spot). However, when I look through the 12" Meade, I can definitely see that objects are brighter.

On the planets, I can't see a great deal of difference between the two telescopes (given that I have been limited by the poor seeing).

I have been struck by aperture fever on occasion. After some analysis, here are my conclusions:

1) The APO is all I need given my current location

2) If I had a dark site, a telescope with a larger aperture would be of use, but I would have to sacrifice portability

3) The caveat to 2) is that you also need decent seeing conditions at the dark site. I have been compiling the conditions (number of clear nights, seeing conditions, etc.) at a number of possible dark sites around North America at cleardarksky.com

Hope this helps.