8"f/5 vs. 8" f/6

I am looking at a new Newtonian for imaging. Other than f.o.v. is there really any difference between shooting with an f/5 or an f/6 with a CCD?

In theory they should have identical resolution and with a CCD they should go just as deep in the same exposure... right? :S

Joe,
The F/5 will get the same detail with a shorter exposure. I don't know that the difference between F/5 and F/6 would be dramatic, but it would exist. Just as with camera lenses, Lower F/numbers equate to shorter times of exposure. Have fun shopping!!
Cheers,
Tyler

On extended objects (like nebulae) a faster focal ratio means shorter exposure times. However, on point sources, there is no difference for exposure times. (Increased aperture, however, allows better resolution and deeper (dimmer, more magnitudes) exposures.)

Alex

The biggest difference with CCD imaging will be the increased field of view with the f/5 and with CCD you already are severely limited in that respect, so i would go with the widest you can get.
I would even consider the Meade 8" f/4 Schmidt Newt. It will give you a much wider field of view with less coma than the f/5.

Plus the field of view is dramatic! While the shot below is with 35mm film, it shows just how HUGE the field of view is. You will have less of a view than this with CCD, but it will certainly be more then the f/6 and even the f/5 !

This is a single 40 minute exposure on Fuji Provia 400F with a stock Meade LXD75 8" f/4 SN.

Attached Image:

Keep in mind that with shorter focal ratios, focusing is more difficult and harder to maintain.

-Jason