Interesting and well done video. Thank you. I'm an old guy now , 82, living West of Phoenix and don't get around much these days...lol. However a few years back I was fortunate enough to have a 10" Orion Dob and use to lead star parties out into the Arizona desert well past city lights. Seeing was generally good except in the summer when the heat was intense and the ground heated up unequally. Imagine observing when it's 110 degrees outside...lol. I managed to see every Messier object. You could just make out the spiral arms on the Whirlpool Galaxy, M51 in Canes. I think that 10" is a decent size for an experienced amateur to do any serious observing and still be reasonably portable. Telescopes any larger become very heavy and ungainly to move around. It's all a tradeoff...lol. An electronic locater really helps and frees you from a lot of "star hopping."
Thank you. I agree on the size of the 10" Dob being a good balance between decent aperture and not too big for taking around. I hope I am still observing at 82 and beyond! I take trips to the desert in Utah every year and I have been out there when it was well over 100 degrees but usually it cools down once the sun sets. In Montana I drag out the computerized mount when it gets really cold and I cannot be out there star hopping for a long time. Thank you again.
I just got a Newtonian 10" with a 7' focal length. It was handmade (including the mirror) in 1930 in Canada by an amateur. I haven't got a clear sky to look at it yet. Thank you Tsula for your honest review of what we can see with direct sight. Love from Montréal
Hey Tsula, I just got this video recommended to me, and I got a 152/1200 Dobsonian for beginning with visual astronomy. I was able to see many Messier objects like M81 and M82 really greatly. I love the video and how you explained that people should not have high expectations... a lot of people tend to have that when starting. I am in Bortle 3 and the scope is just great for me.
Thank you. I'm glad you found it helpful. You will be able to see a lot in a Bortle 3 with that telescope. After you finish with the Messier objects then you can move on to some more difficult objects. Have fun!
You shouldn't feel compelled to use broadband light while filming. If you're doing astronomy videos, you should feel free to cover the light source with some sort of red cellophane to keep your dark adapted vision. I've always been confused while people on RUclips always destroy their night vision with bright broadband light just for the sake of filming. I think us viewers understand why you'd want to maintain your night vision. Either way, very cool video. Thank you for sharing!
Thank you. I have a red light that I normally use but I couldn't find it and I needed to take advantage of the one clear night. I'm going to buy another red light and use it next time. Thanks for the suggestion.
Just found your channel Tsula and just wanted to let you know that it's great to find an intelligent lady who has a genuine love for astronomy. I'm pleased to have found you and now subscribed.
So this is my first time watching your RUclips channel. I'm delighted to have found this! I can only dream of such a telescope, but becouse of You really I belive that I can have this one someday! Thank you so much for your passion!
Wow!! Great video. I liked the use of now almost forgotten star hopping and drawing what you see, I enjoy also doing that, in that way you really learn the night sky. Thanks for you videos!!!
@@mikehicks4411 I don't have any smoke because it won't stop raining. I'm not very far from Canada but I sure am happy that smoke didn't come down here. One year the whole state of Montana was on fire and it was awful.
I love my Dobsonian. I am thinking about buying another one to keep in the Bay Area. I would love a 12" Dob but I think it will be too big and heavy for me.
Loved it, Tsula! This felt just like my nights under the stars- "nope, can't find that one... the seeing is poor tonight.... is that dew forming on the secondary? (blower for a minute through the focusser)... oh, the battery has died on the RDF (or microphone for you)".... but enjoying it under the stars regardless 😄 Thank you and subscribed.
Thanks Tsula, love your enthusiasm, expertise and presentations! 21:15 re M13… have never viewed it as I’m in Australia-however, two grand southern sky globulars, Omega Centauri and 47 Tucanae, are the brightest globulars in the heavens. Omega Centauri, the Milky Way’s largest globular, is now thought to be a nucleus of a dwarf galaxy that interacted with the Milky Way and was stripped of all but its core.
I have viewed omega centauri many times, but it never gets high in the sky here. I can only imagine what it looks like higher up. M22 gets higher, but m13, m15, m3, m5 ,.m2, m92 etc get pretty high, some all the way to zenith here.
Hi Tsula I don't have a Dob but I use one a lot and love it. I have an SCT a 9.25 Edge HD Celestron absolutely love it. I do tell anyone interested in Astronomy that the Dob is the best Beginner Telescope.
Hi Walter. I think some good advice for beginners is to go to their local astronomy club and borrow a telescope. My club allows that. Dobsonians are great because you get a lot of aperture for a fraction of the cost of a SCT or a refractor. A 9.25 SCT is a fantastic telescope but it costs about $3000 and you also need a hefty mount to hold it. I think that telescope weighs 21 pounds. Whereas someone could get a 10" Dob for $900 that usually comes with at least one eyepiece, and therefore, that would be the entire cost and it would be ready for use out of the box. Thanks for your comments. Take care.
@@tsulasbigadventures How does one video record the night sky without using smartphones? Is there a telescope with built-in memory card slot for auto-recording?
@@ednak Hi Ed: I'm not quite sure I understand your question. I never use a smartphone while star gazing. But since you asked I wish that people knew how incredibly hard it is to make a video like this. You should never use a bright light while star gazing but it is essential in order to have a well lit scene unless I use WDavis's suggestion and only use a red light. Also it take incredible patience for me to find each object and record myself doing so. It takes hours for me to make a video like this but I do it using a quality Sony camera on a tripod to record everything I am doing. I can't show you what i am seeing through my telescope; it's just not possible. I have tried but it doesn't work except for planets. Instead I opted for these videos to provide accurate sketches of what I see. I make the sketches off screen with the lights out. With a Dob you can only make short videos with the camera attached to the telescope. And that's not long enough to capture enough light for a deep sky object to show up on the video. I can capture double stars and planets but that's about it. For any other deep sky object I would have to take a long exposure and that wouldn't be a realistic representation of what I am seeing through the eyepiece.
@@tsulasbigadventures Didn't mean it to be confusing. As you said. "camera attached to the telescope". Do you mean a DSLR camera with some type of adapter connecting camera to the eyepiece on telescope? And then you can just press record on DSLR camera to video record?
@@ednak I see. Yes, you get a t-adapter for whatever brand of DSLR camera you have. Take off whatever lens you have on the camera and attach the t-adapter instead. Then if you have a barlow lens they usually come with a 1.25 adapter and you put the 1.25 adapter on the end of your camera's t-adapter (it screws on the end of the t-adapter). And then you can slip that into the 2x barlow or 3x barlow which you will put in the focuser of your telescope and then you have to focus the camera and once focuses just press record. But the object will quickly move out of the field of view on a Dobsonian. So you can only take a few seconds maybe 30 seconds at most. I am pretty sure I made a video about this. Let me see.
Back in the 1970's Richard and I were in SF and a guy had a Dobsonian telescope and talked us into looking at Saturn. Must have been him. I have an 8" Dob and about to get a 12" Dob. rather have aperture and accessories than a high cost lol We live in N. Cal as well. Lake County... not a whole lot of extraneous lighting......yet.
Oh that's neat you met John Dobson without even realizing it. I never met him but my second telescope was an 8" Dob that I just loved. Where I am in this video is still pretty dark but it's growing so fast and getting brighter all the time. But I try to enjoy it while I can and I hope you can too in Lake County.
Astronomy of my youth with sketching at the eyepiece... most young astronomers just don't know how to star hop... great night time adventures...thanks.
Nice vid Tsula! Very explanatory and clear. I love the drawings of different astronomical objects you made. I'm very interested on Dobsons and astronomical drawings. I'd like to buy a 8-inch Dobson but I have some doubts: 1. What is the Bortle level of the sky in your video? 2. What's your opinion the use of a 8-inch Dobson for Bortle 4 skies? Is it possible to see many dark objects? 3. Have you tried to see planets using this telescope? If yes, what is the maximum magnification you use to see them? Thanks a lot!
Thanks! The only thing I did to mine was add a dual finder holder so I could add a right angle finder scope and a red dot finder but I also think I could have just added a telrad and put the right angle on the finder dovetail. If you are bothered by the coma you can get a coma corrector. Other than that I left mine how it came. I think a good eyepiece for the Dobsonian is one that will give you about 50X magnification. My telescope is 1200 mm focal length. So, I like to use an Explore Scientific 24mm eyepiece to start. To get high magnification for planets and blowing up star clusters is a little harder. I have a 6mm or if the seeing isn't good enough to magnify that much maybe a 10mm plossl. I have an Explore Scientific 10mm that gives me 120X magnification. But it depends on the focal length of your telescope. Is yours 1200mm also? I hope that helps.
@tsulasbigadventures Thanks for your response. Honestly I've been reading and watching a tone of RUclips videos I've done all but actually ordered one. Trying to decide if I want to roll with the 10" or 12" max so doesn't hurt to ask QUESTIONS so thank you so much for your response.
Over the past several months I have seen the changes in Venus where now its going from a quarter to a crescent. I checked out Rasalgethi. I was not familiar with that one so I checked it out. I found an easy way to find it in a (non goto) GEM mount. Cool star!
I love Rasalgethi. Did it look red and green to you? There's a break in the clouds right now. So, I'm going to go check on Venus. I love seeing the crescen phase. Also the last time it was clear I finally got to see the supernova in M101. I showed it to my brother and he was not impressed. I thought it was cool. Were you ever able to see it?
@@tsulasbigadventures Rasalgethi looked blue and red to me. Does albireo look green and red to you? I think I did see the supernova. It was dim and I saw it in my 10 inch dob. In my light polluted city I can't even see the galaxy but saw a star that should not be there. Very faint. I think that was it. Right now I am looking at the Dumbbell nebula. Seems much dimmer than it did two years ago. My city is growing too much too fast.
@@lornaz1975 To me Albireo looks yellow and blue. I looked at M101 with my 12" SCT and the supernova was very obvious. I have the same problem as you. Where I live in Montana is growing fast and the glow coming from the direction of downtown is very obvious and getting worse. I wrote to the city council about placing some light restrictions like they have in Tucson but they ignored me.
@@tsulasbigadventures I know its sad. I am about I am 6.3 miles from the downtown part of a city of 1 million and the light pollution is horrible. I used Stellarium and found what I think to be HD 122601 and HD 122865 (the two stars under M101) to locate the galaxy and saw a star in between the two forming a triangle. My assumption is that is the supernova unless I am confused. I heard it was magnitude 12 so it should be really faint. I don't like my skies!!
@@lornaz1975 I could have sworn you told me a long time ago that you lived in a Bortle 3 area. 6.3 miles from a city of 1 million would probably put you at Bortle 6or worse. It is almost impossible to see galaxies and stars of magnitude 12 under those skies. I was not able to see the galaxy at all from my home in the Bay Area which is a Bortle 6. I have to drive for two hours to get to a Bortle 3 in order to see something like M101. I saw M101 from here in Montana with my 12" telescope and that way I was able to find the spiral arm that contains the super nova. It would be tough from your location and I don't blame you for not liking your skies. Light pollution is reversible but no one does anything about it.
Well, the good news is that it is highly unlikely you would need to return it and these telescopes will last forever if you take care of them. Congratulations!
It’s coming along well … the telescope itself is done, optics all work, I just have to build the base now. I should get one of those lens caps for alignment you had.
@@steveschritz1823 That sounds exciting to build you own telescope. That collimation cap came with my Dobsonian and everyone keeps telling me to get a laser collimater but I haven't gotten around to it. Good luck with your telescope.
Absolutely loved the video, and hope that one day I can acquire as much knowledge as you have!! I was wondering what the book that you were using to locate objects is called? I just purchased a Sky-Watcher virtuoso 150 and waiting for clear skies to give it a try!
First night in a couple weeks I have a clear night. I missed all the fun with the northern lights. I had a clear moon yesterday for about 30 minutes last night and said well I guess that's it for now and putting away my scope I bumped it and I know I have to collimate it but I'll do it on the fly. I have a Newtonian 127 Bird Jones but I really want to move up in the world, so I asked YT What can I expect to see from a 8" Dob? And you popped up again, Hi Tsula. I love your videos, you tell it like it is! I know you are showing your 10" Question, Does a scope get dew even though it is stored in a shed? Which is ambulant temperature?
I store my telescopes in the garage and they are fine but I do cover them with telescope covers to keep dust off. I have never had a telescope get dew on it while stored in the garage.
Hi Tsula! I’ve been watching your channel for about a year now. I’m trying to understand if it’s worth buying a large Dobsonian? It seems like it doesn’t give you more magnification? Is a 12 inch Dob really worth the money versus an 8 inch Dobsonian? Thanks Riley
@@95rman Hi Riley: That’s a good question. You can achieve the same magnification with both of those telescopes by using different focal length eyepieces. The magnification is just the focal length of the telescope divided by the focal length of the eyepiece. However, the image will be much brighter in the 12” telescope than an 8” or even a 10” and the reason is that the larger the aperture the more light gathering capability the telescope will have allowing you to have higher resolution and to see fainter objects, and more detail on planets and split close double stars. So, if you can afford the bigger aperture and you can lift a bigger heavier telescope then it is well worth the bigger aperture. But keep in mind that light pollution will limit what you can see in the night sky no matter how big your aperture. I hope that helps and I’m happy to answer any other questions you might have. Thanks for watching my channel!
The Andromeda Galaxy is fantastic from a Bortle 3. It's naked eye. I think I made some sketches of it in my video on What Can I Expect to See Through My Telescope. Here is the link: ruclips.net/video/uKOlrC_FB-g/видео.html
For planets you want the highest useful magnification possible for your telescope. For a telescope like yours with 1200mm focal length your maximum magnification is probably 200x. So a 6mm eyepiece would be the as high as you could go and that's what you would want to use for planets but it would need to be a calm steady night with good seeing. You could use a 2x Barlow to increase magnification for any eyepiece you have to double the magnification. That's just for planets. Go as high as you can for planets. For nebulae start with your lowest magnification just so you can find the object. Then you will probably find you won't be able to go beyond the 9mm eyepiece it came with and that will be plenty for nebulae. Nebulae can be big like NGC 7000 is huge and you would want a low magnification for it. Some nebulae are small though and for those start low and then experiment because at some point it's just too dark as you increase the magnification. I hope that helps.
@@Stephen-gp8yimaximum is actually 400x, a 3mm eyepiece or 6mm in 2x barlow. But you need to have steady skies in order to use that much power. 300x is a more practical maximum to shoot for, but having a barlow and eyepiece combo that can hit 400x is not a bad idea, I just wouldn't invest too much in an actual 3mm eyepiece. However there are affordable 3.2mm planetary series eyepieces available as little as $30-40 for generic versions (a lot of rebranding in the industry, where the same eyepiece can vary greatly in cost depending on what brand is on it and who is selling it. It is not a bad idea to spend more money on a good ultra wide eyepiece in the 6-7mm range, as well as in the 12-16mm range. A 2" 28mm 82 deg which is available under several names, and can be found as low as $199, is the ultimate low power eyepiece, offering close to the maximum field of view the scope can deliver. A more modestly priced 38-42mm superwide 2" eyepiece will also give the maximum field and maximum usable brightness if your eye can dilate to close to 7mm and you have dark skies, or want to use a nebula filter on objects like the veil nebula. Note that the modest super wide eyepieces will not be sharp to the edge in an f6 scope. The 28mm 82 degree will be. If you want a 40mm superwide that is sharp to the edge you need to spring for the expensive explore scientific 68deg 40mm, or the more expensive 41mm panoptic. Note that the 40mm 68deg was also previously available as the meade series5000 SWA, and also as Maxvision 40mm, so they will be less expensive on the used market. But don't spend the big bucks on a 40mm unless you are well under 50, since our pupil size starts to shrink at that age. The 28mm is under 5mm exit pupil in that scope so you can't age out of it.
Hi Tsula! I can't believe how cold it was for 2/3 of the way through June! Is that typical for Montana hills in the summer? At least you didn't have to fight off bugs. 😄Well, as usual, thanks for braving the cold and the lateness of the hour to bring us some big adventures in 'real' astronomy!
Hi Greg: I like that last sentence! About three years ago it snowed on the summer solstice. I'm at 6200 feet and at that elevation the weather is highly erratic and unpredictable. So, it can be cold and even snow in June and sometimes as early as September. It has been an incredibly wet spring/summer so far. I haven't seen any bugs so far but the wildflowers are extremely happy with all this rain. I know we need rain but I sure would like to have a couple of clear nights interspersed. Take care.
@@tsulasbigadventures Yes, Tsula, our weather has been very wet as well, except for a day or two here and there. And, of course, right after they did our hardscaping for the new fire pit (a.k.a. telescope site - shhhh!) and put all new dirt down, it rained like hell and all the dirt shifted! (Hopefully, the plantings they put in this past week will stabilize things since it's supposed to rain for about a week. Ugh...) As much of a pain as it is, though, we need the rain as well. After a couple of days of being inside, though, I start getting VERY antsy not being able to get out under the stars! 🥴
@@gregerianne3880 Seems like it always happens that way and I know what you mean about getting antsy. I start feeling bad if I can't get outside. I think it's in my genes.
Do you have "progressive" lenses with a focal length that changes from top to bottom? Do you prefer to observe with you glasses ? It seems you are myopic thank you paul
No. I don't wear progressives. I have two sets of glasses. One set is bifocals that I refuse to use because I can still just barely read with no glasses. The other glasses are the ones I'm wearing in the video and they are for distance only. I cannot see the stars without my distance glasses. But I can't stand wearing the glasses to look through the eyepiece. However, I read an article that said if you have significant astigmatism, which I do have, that you should leave your glasses on for viewing through the eyepiece. But I tried and I could not see that wearing the glasses made any difference whereas not wearing the glasses means no annoying fog on the glasses and easier to position my eye in the proper place.
@@tsulasbigadventures thank you for your testimony Indeed, if you are nearsighted or farsighted which are focal faults of the eye, you just need to correct the focus of the viewfinder and the eyepiece (but you need glasses for the red dot or the telrad). Whereas astigmatism is a defect in the surface of the corneal lens which is not corrected by varying the focal length of the eyepiece. but it all depends on the importance of the astigmatism
That telescope has the same focal length as my 10" Dobsonian. I use a 32mm to start and for magnifying I use a 9 or 10mm. You should have one in the range of 24-32mm to start with locating and another eyepiece for increasing magnification in the range of about 8mm to 10mm. I like the Televue 32mm Plossl or the Televue 24mm Panoptic. They are somewhat pricey. I think the Explore Scientific are comparable but a little cheaper than the Televue. They make a line of 82 degree FOV eyepieces that are nice. YOu can get much cheaper eyepieces that are decent from other manufacturers but the size you want is one in the 24-32mm range and another at 8-10mm. Or you can get a 2x Barlow for magnifying just the one eyepiece of 24-32mm. I hope that helps.
Hello Tsula, what should i get for suburban Bortle 4 - 5? I have settled on 2 options 10 inch dobsonian or 6 inch Mak. Iscthere a big difference between them when we are talking planets and moon? Someone told me it's hard to track planets with the dobsonian and even the moon at high magnifications, is it true?
Excellent question. It's such a personal choice and both are good options for Bortle 4-5. The Mak will give you sharper images of the planets and moon; that is what Maks excel at and with the long focal length you will be able to achiever higher magnification which is necessary for observing planets. The optics on a good 6" Mak are outstanding but you will gather much more light with the 10" Dob and be able to split double stars and see fainter deep sky objects with it. It is true that you will constantly be moving the Dob to keep the object in the field of view. That' just how it is with Dobs or any manual telescope but I wouldn't say it's "hard." If you are trying to sketch the object, it can be difficult keeping it in the field of view while sketching but just sitting there observing it's no problem. Personally I would go with the 10" Dob because you will just be able to see more with it but that's just my personal opinion. I own a 6" Goto Mak and a 10" Dob and I get out my 10" Dob far more often than my 6" Mak. That's just my personal opinion and I have the Dob on a dolly so that it is very easy to get out and set up on the driveway. One huge consideration for any potential telescope buyer is easy of use and weight of the telescope. I hope that helps.
@@tsulasbigadventures Thank you for answering, it does help! It's gonna be my first telescope and i'm literally split between these two, unable to make a decide and the summer runs away :) My big problem with the dob is the space and more than that the size... i live in an apartment building and i have a "vacation house" where a 10" dob won't be a problem at all. However the distance between them is quite large and i spend 90% of my time at the apartment ... the damn problem is that the dob won't fit in my balcony, because it's a reflector and you have to look from one side, i would have to stay outside my balcony in order to look through it. Just way too big for it. (even the 8" inch variant won't do because it's about the same size, only slightly smaller diameter) So because of that it would cut at least 50% of times where i can use the telescope, add to that the fact that because of the size every time i would go to the vacation house it would have to be well planned in advance plus the weather and all those and i would only use the scope 10 times / year :)) I was thinking mack because it's compact and you can literally put it in a backpack and go if you need to, no planning and stuff plus it would fit in my balcony. Being my first scope i don't want to regret doing anything stupid so that's why i ask experienced people like yourself. Until now every single one of them tells me to get the 10" dob so i will probably end up doing that.
I also don't wanna put all my points into mobility and end up with a scope that can't see anything. Another problem i have is that because i'm new to this i have no idea what i will like to see.. will i be a planet and moon addict..will i love them DSOs.. no idea exactly. With my binoculars i love everything i can see but i really have no idea. I also start to understand why experienced people have multiple telescopes... you just can't have one scope that does both very well it seems.
@@predattak Well, that is so true. I think many people give up on the hobby because they buy a small telescope and can't see anything in it from a suburban setting. And you really do need two telescopes. Some of the objects just won't fit in a big scope. For example, NGC 7000, the North America Nebula is so big it won't fit in a 10" telescope and there are others too.
@@predattak I just read this one. I think you will find yourself not taking the Dob out if it is that much trouble. It happens all the time. People get a big scope and then it sits in a closet because it's so much trouble to get it out.
I also took offense to the mistaken time reference to parsecs. Later on, I decided for my own peace of mind to get over it. In the far far far away time and worlds of Star Wars, parsec can mean anything that George Lucas wants it to mean.
You said that Dobs are not ideal for viewing planets but rather DSO. Im in the market and want to view Saturn specifically as detailed as possible. What should I get?
Technically, you'd want a cassegrain style telescope, although refractors are the "traditional" choice for solar system viewing the cassegrain has some improvements. In practice, I can easily resolve the rings of Saturn as well as both the cloud bands and storms on Jupiter in my 6" dob with a 750mm focal length and a 10mm eye piece - so it really doesn't matter all that much provided you have both the focal length and aperture to get the magnification and resolution you need. Another tip, you'll want to look up when Saturn is at opposition - this is when Saturn is as close to Earth as it is going to get during the year, thus you will need less magnification to view it at this time of year.
Well, it's not that Dobs are bad on planets; it's just that they are best suited for deep sky objects. For planets you want the biggest aperture possible, within reason. As Alexander said Schmidt-Cassegrains perform well on planets. The reason is that with their long focal lengths you are able to achieve high magnifications. For planets you want big aperture and high magnification (and good seeing which has nothing to do with the telescope). Maksutov-Cassegrains are great for planets also because of their sharp optics and long focal lengths. All the planets are best viewed when at opposition when they are closest to earth and are much bigger in the eyepiece than other times when they are not close to earth and this is especially true of Mars which is very difficult to see well except when it is at opposition.
I have seen many videos, and this one is very honest. People, especially children, need to know and understand that they will not see much and not these view, like from professional telescopes and especially after hours of editing. Buying the telescope for the hobby when you can enjoy seeing the moon only is the vasting of money.
No. I leave it on the daisy wheel at all times and wheel the whole thing out onto the driveway with a hand truck. I don't have to wheel it very far and the driveway is mostly level. That has been a real back saver!
I'm probably gonna get Criticize for my opinion you have a 10 inch dopsonion telescope, I don't know if you're recording this on a cellular phone wondering if you gonna adapt your phone to take pictures through your telescope there are mounts that can attach to the eyepiece. I'm more interested in the optical quality of the image that you can actually see rather than sketch it in out.
She’s not going to get good images with a camera using a dobsonian without a tracking mount, I have the same scope as hers minus the crazy expensive televue eyepieces but I assure you these telescope are absolutely spectacular.
Dear Tsula, i think youtube blocked my last comment from our conversation, it does that from time to time. You asked me about what telescope model i'm considering. Here is my answer again, hoping youtube doesn't ruin it again. For Mak i'm thinking of Skywatcher Skymax 150/1800. In my country there are only Bressers and Skywatcher telescopes when it comes to Maks. Buying from outside like USA would be suicide because of the absolute crazy import taxes EU has. Sadly the package is like this: The telescope plus one NEQ3 german eq mount (or EQ5 if you pay ~150$ more), a 2" diagonal, an 1.25" adapter and a 26mm eyepiece (shitty in most cases as others have told me). For the 10" Dob i was looking at Skywatcher Skyliner 254/1200 Flextube. It saves space because of the flextube design but the damn thing is just too big for me ... not sure what i'm gonna do to be honest.
OK. Thanks for your persistence. I have looked at that Skywatcher 150 before and it looks very similar to the Orion 150 Mak that I own (probably made in the same factory). I think that is a good choice. I think the 26mm eyepiece is probably like the 26mm eyepiece my Orion came with which was also not very high quality. I think you should just keep the diagonal it comes with and use your 1.25 adapter for 1.25 eyepieces. It should work fine and just upgrade the eyepiece instead to something a little better and also either get a Barlow or a second eyepiece of about 8 or 9mm. You don't need anything too fancy but something a little better than a Kellner. I think you will be very happy with it. It will excel at planets and be just fine on deep sky. I think you will be very happy with it.
Most insects emerge in the summer and fall, so you're not out of the woods yet, and wood ash contains potassium hydroxide (the "potash" which Granny Clampett used to make her "lye" soap), a substance almost as corrosive as true lye (sodium hydroxide). This potash reacts quickly with carbon dioxide in the air, but I imagine the resulting product, potassium carbonate, isn't much fun to breathe, either. They say on RUclips that the STAR WARS franchise has been on the wrong track for several light-years, but I wouldn't know much about that... 🙂 I didn't at all mind this video's length - the longer, the better, as far as I'm concerned - but I was frustrated by your shots of the sky as seen with the naked eye. Very often, my 60" smart TV was completely black, and even when a few stars were visible here and there, they weren't helpful in seeing the familiar constellations "shine in their myriad majesty and move like an army dressed in silver mail, marching from unknown victories to conquer in distant wars..." (Lord Dunsany) Also, isn't it true that no camera can take a truly accurate picture of the sky - that the blue stars will always appear brighter than they should, and the red ones will always appear dimmer, much like blue markings on a manuscript, when it's photocopied, will always appear dimmer than red ones because the blue ones give off more energetic light? For this conundrum, I'm afraid there's no easy solution - probably the best compromises are Stellarium images with all but the most relevant details removed. But about the simulated views which I keep asking for - here's a link to a very old (in internet terms) website of the Messier objects, with any number of amateur photographs which you could Photoshop to your heart's content. I'd like to see that sort of thing much more than I like seeing drawings - which, no matter how accurate in detail, can't possibly give a true impression of an object's brightness or glamor. web.archive.org/web/20150905235042/messier.seds.org/more/m013_m2.html PS: Keep your eye on Betelgeuse when it comes around again - at least some professional astronomers are back to claiming it's down to fusing carbon. 🤩
Walter: I haven't seen any wood ash lately. I assume you are referring to people burning wood in their fireplaces. So, I'm not worried about breathing potassium carbonate. A bigger threat would be potentially drinking poisoned water because of all the poison used here to control noxious weeds that most surely gets into the ground water but I don't drink my well water because it has sulfur eating bacteria in it. Now insects that's a different story. You are correct that those vicious little biting black flies will be attacking me any day now if and when it ever stops raining. That's interesting that you couldn't see the stars on your 60" TV because before uploading this video to RUclips I watched it on a 60" TV to make sure the stars showed up and I could see all of them. I will check the web link you gave me for simulated views but I don't like people who show you simlations from Stellarium on their channel. I can look on Stellarium myself as can anyone with a computer because it's free. Personally I prefer sketches because they are more representational of what you might see through your telescope. Simulations are too much like astrophotos which give a false impression but I will take a look at what you referred me to look at. I heard about Betelguese potentially going supernova sooner than previousyly thought but I prefer to not think about winter right now. Thanks for your input. Now I will look at that website.
@@tsulasbigadventures You must be doing something right - congratulations on a thousand views for this latest video of yours! 🙂 (And thanks for never following the RUclips custom of posting click-bait thumbnails showing yourself with a fake expression of shock and a gaping mouth - I avoid that sort of creator like the plague.) I meant the smoke and ash from forest fires. Here in New York City, during the recent (spectacular) darkening, I experienced nothing but the pleasant smell of an ordinary campfire - but I can see how, in higher concentrations, nearer to the fires themselves, people found it unpleasant. "Buffalo gnats, won't you bite me tonight, bite me tonight, bite me tonight..." 🙂 I've never seen, under a microscope, the mouth parts of any biting fly except the remarkable ones of the "little fly" - the common mosquito, which is as usual becoming all too common here, with summer's onset. But fortunately I've discovered eco-friendly insecticides, which are made of nothing but grain alcohol and oil of rosemary (with carbon dioxide as the propellant, in the case of those brands which come in a can). A few spritzes around my apartment and I'm mosquito-free for weeks. Here's a better example, from the BBC, of what I'm driving at with regard to representative astronomical images. Just scroll down to the section entitled "Star Clusters" and, immediately following that, the one entitled "Galaxies" - you'll see what the author claims are accurate simulations. www.skyatnightmagazine.com/advice/what-see-through-telescope/
@@waltergold3457 Thanks. I don't like those fake expression thumbnails either. OK. I read that entire article from Sky at Night and at no point in the article does it explain how the simulated views they show were made. However, I watched a video about how to sketch deep sky objects a while ago and I can tell you that each simulation probably takes an hour. You have to sketch the object carefully at the eyepiece and then you have to process the image in Photoshop to make a reverse color image with a black background and white points of light. I have never tried this. I could try it for some future video but for this particular one I had 12 objects and it would have taken me too long to sketch and then process that many objects. Maybe if I am just highlighting one object like the M51 video I made recently, I can use something like what you are talking about for a simulated view. I'm not sure how that simulated image of M13, in the article was made but it might just be a real image that was dimmed somehow. I would have to experiment with this technique and see if it is within my capabilities. I think I will make a video about this and just use one object. I think it will be clear tomorrow night and I will try it out. Another separate issue is the inherent difficulty of showing yourself star gazing while using a camera light that ruins your night vision. A red light helps but still impacts your night vision as well.
@@tsulasbigadventures In one of my earliest comments to you, I suggested using an image-editing program to tweak a suitable image using the program's brightness, contrast, saturation and sharpness features. (You can of course find these features in any reasonably good image editor, including my modest FastStone.) A long time ago, an acquaintance of mine bought a kit to make enameled jewelry from metal discs and ground glass of various colors. The idea was to create a piece by carefully sprinkling the glass on the metal and baking everything together. I got pretty good at creating images of the planets and other objects.
You can see the butthole on a fruit fly from one end of Texas to the other, good Lord! I had no idea telescopes could get this complicated!!! That's neat though. I just ordered one that only has a 114mm aperture with starsense to help us find things because I've never had a telescope before but my son wants to see what's out there. This will be interesting 😁
Funny but no I cannot resolve a fruit fly's butt with my telescope. You'll have a lot of fun with that 114mm telescope but do take the time to learn the night sky so you will appreciate more. Also those goto telescopes sometimes off a bit and the object might not be in the field of view and that's another reason to learn where things are in the sky. I have made a lot of videos for beginners that you might find helpful. Good luck and enjoy the night sky!
You cannot do astrophotography with a Dobsonian telescope. They are meant to engage you and spark your sense of awe in real time. They provide a more intimate appreciation of the sky above us and you can hear that when she describes the objects she found. The drawings and charts are there to give you an idea of where the objects are and what they look like and you would appreciate the effort if you ever try one of these telescopes.
Of course, if you live in a high light pollution area, you're not going to see more than half the things she did. Even if you have a 10" Dob. More aperture, more light pollution in the telescope. Know your bortle before shopping.
![Blox Fruits Dragon Rework Update [Full Stream]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/EqDAp8udhm0/mqdefault.jpg)
Interesting and well done video. Thank you. I'm an old guy now , 82, living West of Phoenix and don't get around much these days...lol. However a few years back I was fortunate enough to have a 10" Orion Dob and use to lead star parties out into the Arizona desert well past city lights. Seeing was generally good except in the summer when the heat was intense and the ground heated up unequally. Imagine observing when it's 110 degrees outside...lol. I managed to see every Messier object. You could just make out the spiral arms on the Whirlpool Galaxy, M51 in Canes. I think that 10" is a decent size for an experienced amateur to do any serious observing and still be reasonably portable. Telescopes any larger become very heavy and ungainly to move around. It's all a tradeoff...lol. An electronic locater really helps and frees you from a lot of "star hopping."
Thank you. I agree on the size of the 10" Dob being a good balance between decent aperture and not too big for taking around. I hope I am still observing at 82 and beyond! I take trips to the desert in Utah every year and I have been out there when it was well over 100 degrees but usually it cools down once the sun sets. In Montana I drag out the computerized mount when it gets really cold and I cannot be out there star hopping for a long time. Thank you again.
I just got a Newtonian 10" with a 7' focal length. It was handmade (including the mirror) in 1930 in Canada by an amateur. I haven't got a clear sky to look at it yet.
Thank you Tsula for your honest review of what we can see with direct sight.
Love from Montréal
Hey Tsula, I just got this video recommended to me, and I got a 152/1200 Dobsonian for beginning with visual astronomy. I was able to see many Messier objects like M81 and M82 really greatly. I love the video and how you explained that people should not have high expectations... a lot of people tend to have that when starting. I am in Bortle 3 and the scope is just great for me.
Thank you. I'm glad you found it helpful. You will be able to see a lot in a Bortle 3 with that telescope. After you finish with the Messier objects then you can move on to some more difficult objects. Have fun!
I just love your honest and pure reviews!
Great content. :)
Thank you!
You shouldn't feel compelled to use broadband light while filming. If you're doing astronomy videos, you should feel free to cover the light source with some sort of red cellophane to keep your dark adapted vision. I've always been confused while people on RUclips always destroy their night vision with bright broadband light just for the sake of filming. I think us viewers understand why you'd want to maintain your night vision.
Either way, very cool video. Thank you for sharing!
Thank you. I have a red light that I normally use but I couldn't find it and I needed to take advantage of the one clear night. I'm going to buy another red light and use it next time. Thanks for the suggestion.
You don't have many friends do you?
@@TheTimeDetective42 what does that have to with anything? do you wanna be my friend?
Great vid, you really put heart into how you explain things thoroughly
Just found your channel Tsula and just wanted to let you know that it's great to find an intelligent lady who has a genuine love for astronomy. I'm pleased to have found you and now subscribed.
Thank you so much. I hope that more women will become interested in astronomy.
Tsula I'm shivering watching you go through the lecture...BUT your video is excellent ...
Thank you. It can get very cold in Montana but I still try to get out there.
So this is my first time watching your RUclips channel. I'm delighted to have found this!
I can only dream of such a telescope, but becouse of You really I belive that I can have this one someday! Thank you so much for your passion!
I just stumbled across this channel and Tsula, you are very intelligent!! Keep up the amazing work.
Thank you! I plan to keep going as long as I can. Thank you.
Wow!! Great video. I liked the use of now almost forgotten star hopping and drawing what you see, I enjoy also doing that, in that way you really learn the night sky. Thanks for you videos!!!
Thank you so much!
I love this lady
very enjoyable video, delightful and love your enthusiasm
Thank you!
Well done Tsula.. great vlog. Thanks for sharing.
Thank you.
Tsula, bravo, girl. Weathering those cold Montana nights calls for fortitude. Been there. Done that. Clear skies🔭
Thanks. Sometimes I put an outdoor heater out on the driveway and run and huddle by it when I feel I'm not going to make it.
Bought an 8” dob 2 years ago and have loved every minute of it!
I love my Dob too.
Awesome video...I liked your use of live view then charts to show us the location of targets.
Keep them coming...
Thank you! I sure hope it warms up soon.
@michellebrodie I'm up in Kamloops BC...between the smoke and the rain/clouds...it's been awhile since I seen the night sky.
@@mikehicks4411 I don't have any smoke because it won't stop raining. I'm not very far from Canada but I sure am happy that smoke didn't come down here. One year the whole state of Montana was on fire and it was awful.
First time that i see you use an dobsonian scope ! These scope are amazing 🎉
I love my Dobsonian. I am thinking about buying another one to keep in the Bay Area. I would love a 12" Dob but I think it will be too big and heavy for me.
Wonderful ❤ Thoroughly enjoyed this, I'm tucked up in bed warm which makes it all the more enjoyable. 😊
Thank you. I am thinking about buying one of those heated full body suits to wear outside when winter sets in.
I absolutely love your videos Tsula's. Thank you for all wisdom with enthusiasm.
Thank you so much!
Loved it, Tsula! This felt just like my nights under the stars- "nope, can't find that one... the seeing is poor tonight.... is that dew forming on the secondary? (blower for a minute through the focusser)... oh, the battery has died on the RDF (or microphone for you)".... but enjoying it under the stars regardless 😄 Thank you and subscribed.
That's funny. Thank you so much!
Thanks Tsula, love your enthusiasm, expertise and presentations! 21:15 re M13… have never viewed it as I’m in Australia-however, two grand southern sky globulars, Omega Centauri and 47 Tucanae, are the brightest globulars in the heavens. Omega Centauri, the Milky Way’s largest globular, is now thought to be a nucleus of a dwarf galaxy that interacted with the Milky Way and was stripped of all but its core.
I have viewed omega centauri many times, but it never gets high in the sky here. I can only imagine what it looks like higher up. M22 gets higher, but m13, m15, m3, m5 ,.m2, m92 etc get pretty high, some all the way to zenith here.
@@k.h.1587 Thank you… you’ve made the case for exploring the more northerly globulars-iconic M13 sadly reaches only 20 deg of elevation here!
@Michael.Chapman where I am omega centauri doesn't even come close to 20 degrees, 10, maybe a tad more at best. Possibly less than 10
Hi Tsula I don't have a Dob but I use one a lot and love it. I have an SCT a 9.25 Edge HD Celestron absolutely love it. I do tell anyone interested in Astronomy that the Dob is the best Beginner Telescope.
Hi Walter. I think some good advice for beginners is to go to their local astronomy club and borrow a telescope. My club allows that. Dobsonians are great because you get a lot of aperture for a fraction of the cost of a SCT or a refractor. A 9.25 SCT is a fantastic telescope but it costs about $3000 and you also need a hefty mount to hold it. I think that telescope weighs 21 pounds. Whereas someone could get a 10" Dob for $900 that usually comes with at least one eyepiece, and therefore, that would be the entire cost and it would be ready for use out of the box. Thanks for your comments. Take care.
@@tsulasbigadventures
How does one video record the night sky without using smartphones? Is there a telescope with built-in memory card slot for auto-recording?
@@ednak Hi Ed: I'm not quite sure I understand your question. I never use a smartphone while star gazing. But since you asked I wish that people knew how incredibly hard it is to make a video like this. You should never use a bright light while star gazing but it is essential in order to have a well lit scene unless I use WDavis's suggestion and only use a red light. Also it take incredible patience for me to find each object and record myself doing so. It takes hours for me to make a video like this but I do it using a quality Sony camera on a tripod to record everything I am doing. I can't show you what i am seeing through my telescope; it's just not possible. I have tried but it doesn't work except for planets. Instead I opted for these videos to provide accurate sketches of what I see. I make the sketches off screen with the lights out. With a Dob you can only make short videos with the camera attached to the telescope. And that's not long enough to capture enough light for a deep sky object to show up on the video. I can capture double stars and planets but that's about it. For any other deep sky object I would have to take a long exposure and that wouldn't be a realistic representation of what I am seeing through the eyepiece.
@@tsulasbigadventures
Didn't mean it to be confusing. As you said. "camera attached to the telescope". Do you mean a DSLR camera with some type of adapter connecting camera to the eyepiece on telescope? And then you can just press record on DSLR camera to video record?
@@ednak I see. Yes, you get a t-adapter for whatever brand of DSLR camera you have. Take off whatever lens you have on the camera and attach the t-adapter instead. Then if you have a barlow lens they usually come with a 1.25 adapter and you put the 1.25 adapter on the end of your camera's t-adapter (it screws on the end of the t-adapter). And then you can slip that into the 2x barlow or 3x barlow which you will put in the focuser of your telescope and then you have to focus the camera and once focuses just press record. But the object will quickly move out of the field of view on a Dobsonian. So you can only take a few seconds maybe 30 seconds at most. I am pretty sure I made a video about this. Let me see.
Back in the 1970's Richard and I were in SF and a guy had a Dobsonian telescope and talked us into looking at Saturn. Must have been him. I have an 8" Dob and about to get a 12" Dob. rather have aperture and accessories than a high cost lol We live in N. Cal as well. Lake County... not a whole lot of extraneous lighting......yet.
Oh that's neat you met John Dobson without even realizing it. I never met him but my second telescope was an 8" Dob that I just loved. Where I am in this video is still pretty dark but it's growing so fast and getting brighter all the time. But I try to enjoy it while I can and I hope you can too in Lake County.
Astronomy of my youth with sketching at the eyepiece... most young astronomers just don't know how to star hop... great night time adventures...thanks.
Thank you. It takes a lot of patience for sure.
Nice vid Tsula!
Very explanatory and clear.
I love the drawings of different astronomical objects you made.
I'm very interested on Dobsons and astronomical drawings. I'd like to buy a 8-inch Dobson but I have some doubts:
1. What is the Bortle level of the sky in your video?
2. What's your opinion the use of a 8-inch Dobson for Bortle 4 skies? Is it possible to see many dark objects?
3. Have you tried to see planets using this telescope? If yes, what is the maximum magnification you use to see them?
Thanks a lot!
Tsula wonderful presentation. Are there any upgrades to the Dobsonian that you would recommend❓ what about eye peices ❓thanks.. 😊👍
Thanks! The only thing I did to mine was add a dual finder holder so I could add a right angle finder scope and a red dot finder but I also think I could have just added a telrad and put the right angle on the finder dovetail. If you are bothered by the coma you can get a coma corrector. Other than that I left mine how it came. I think a good eyepiece for the Dobsonian is one that will give you about 50X magnification. My telescope is 1200 mm focal length. So, I like to use an Explore Scientific 24mm eyepiece to start. To get high magnification for planets and blowing up star clusters is a little harder. I have a 6mm or if the seeing isn't good enough to magnify that much maybe a 10mm plossl. I have an Explore Scientific 10mm that gives me 120X magnification. But it depends on the focal length of your telescope. Is yours 1200mm also? I hope that helps.
@tsulasbigadventures
Thanks for your response. Honestly I've been reading and watching a tone of RUclips videos I've done all but actually ordered one. Trying to decide if I want to roll with the 10" or 12" max so doesn't hurt to ask QUESTIONS so thank you so much for your response.
Gonna pick me up an 8” dob in November hopefully. Looking forward to a 12” in the future if all goes well!
Excellent! You will have a great time with that telescope.
Over the past several months I have seen the changes in Venus where now its going from a quarter to a crescent. I checked out Rasalgethi. I was not familiar with that one so I checked it out. I found an easy way to find it in a (non goto) GEM mount. Cool star!
I love Rasalgethi. Did it look red and green to you? There's a break in the clouds right now. So, I'm going to go check on Venus. I love seeing the crescen phase. Also the last time it was clear I finally got to see the supernova in M101. I showed it to my brother and he was not impressed. I thought it was cool. Were you ever able to see it?
@@tsulasbigadventures Rasalgethi looked blue and red to me. Does albireo look green and red to you? I think I did see the supernova. It was dim and I saw it in my 10 inch dob. In my light polluted city I can't even see the galaxy but saw a star that should not be there. Very faint. I think that was it. Right now I am looking at the Dumbbell nebula. Seems much dimmer than it did two years ago. My city is growing too much too fast.
@@lornaz1975 To me Albireo looks yellow and blue. I looked at M101 with my 12" SCT and the supernova was very obvious. I have the same problem as you. Where I live in Montana is growing fast and the glow coming from the direction of downtown is very obvious and getting worse. I wrote to the city council about placing some light restrictions like they have in Tucson but they ignored me.
@@tsulasbigadventures I know its sad. I am about I am 6.3 miles from the downtown part of a city of 1 million and the light pollution is horrible. I used Stellarium and found what I think to be HD 122601 and HD 122865 (the two stars under M101) to locate the galaxy and saw a star in between the two forming a triangle. My assumption is that is the supernova unless I am confused. I heard it was magnitude 12 so it should be really faint. I don't like my skies!!
@@lornaz1975 I could have sworn you told me a long time ago that you lived in a Bortle 3 area. 6.3 miles from a city of 1 million would probably put you at Bortle 6or worse. It is almost impossible to see galaxies and stars of magnitude 12 under those skies. I was not able to see the galaxy at all from my home in the Bay Area which is a Bortle 6. I have to drive for two hours to get to a Bortle 3 in order to see something like M101. I saw M101 from here in Montana with my 12" telescope and that way I was able to find the spiral arm that contains the super nova. It would be tough from your location and I don't blame you for not liking your skies. Light pollution is reversible but no one does anything about it.
Im about to buy a skywatcher skyliner 250p dobson,very nice video 👍🏻
Thank you. Congratulations on your Skyline 250p. You will have a blast with that thing. So much light gathering capability for not much cost.
These scopes are amazing! Im getting one in a few weeks, its an orion xt8 and 2 days after i ordered it orion declared bankrupcy lol
Well, the good news is that it is highly unlikely you would need to return it and these telescopes will last forever if you take care of them. Congratulations!
@@tsulasbigadventures Thanks, it is still on backorder though so it hasnt actually charged me so i am thinking of getting an apatura ad8 scope
@@strandedkerbal update??
@@SteveZ919 I never got the xt8, however, i got a starsense explorer 8" dob
Great fun. Thank you.
Thank you!
I found his video when I decided to make one, cardboard tube and all. I got the mirrors and lenses off Amazon they weren’t terribly expensive.
How did it turn out?
It’s coming along well … the telescope itself is done, optics all work, I just have to build the base now. I should get one of those lens caps for alignment you had.
@@steveschritz1823 That sounds exciting to build you own telescope. That collimation cap came with my Dobsonian and everyone keeps telling me to get a laser collimater but I haven't gotten around to it. Good luck with your telescope.
Absolutely loved the video, and hope that one day I can acquire as much knowledge as you have!! I was wondering what the book that you were using to locate objects is called? I just purchased a Sky-Watcher virtuoso 150 and waiting for clear skies to give it a try!
I use the Orion Moon Map but I also recently bought a nice book by Charles Wood.
@@tsulasbigadventures awesome!! The book you were using in this video seemed to be more of a star chart and deep sky object chart, looked very helpful
@@gavinrobinson6908 Yes. I love the Sky & Telescope Jumbo Star chart. It's the best one in my opinion.
@@tsulasbigadventures I will have to look into getting one myself, thank you for the replies!
@@gavinrobinson6908 You're welcome and good luck.
First night in a couple weeks I have a clear night. I missed all the fun with the northern lights. I had a clear moon yesterday for about 30 minutes last night and said well I guess that's it for now and putting away my scope I bumped it and I know I have to collimate it but I'll do it on the fly. I have a Newtonian 127 Bird Jones but I really want to move up in the world, so I asked YT What can I expect to see from a 8" Dob? And you popped up again, Hi Tsula. I love your videos, you tell it like it is! I know you are showing your 10" Question, Does a scope get dew even though it is stored in a shed? Which is ambulant temperature?
I store my telescopes in the garage and they are fine but I do cover them with telescope covers to keep dust off. I have never had a telescope get dew on it while stored in the garage.
Hi Tsula! I’ve been watching your channel for about a year now. I’m trying to understand if it’s worth buying a large Dobsonian? It seems like it doesn’t give you more magnification? Is a 12 inch Dob really worth the money versus an 8 inch Dobsonian? Thanks Riley
@@95rman Hi Riley: That’s a good question. You can achieve the same magnification with both of those telescopes by using different focal length eyepieces. The magnification is just the focal length of the telescope divided by the focal length of the eyepiece. However, the image will be much brighter in the 12” telescope than an 8” or even a 10” and the reason is that the larger the aperture the more light gathering capability the telescope will have allowing you to have higher resolution and to see fainter objects, and more detail on planets and split close double stars. So, if you can afford the bigger aperture and you can lift a bigger heavier telescope then it is well worth the bigger aperture. But keep in mind that light pollution will limit what you can see in the night sky no matter how big your aperture. I hope that helps and I’m happy to answer any other questions you might have. Thanks for watching my channel!
Thanks for the advice!
@@95rman You're welcome.
How’s the andromeda galaxy from a bortle 3?
The Andromeda Galaxy is fantastic from a Bortle 3. It's naked eye. I think I made some sketches of it in my video on What Can I Expect to See Through My Telescope. Here is the link: ruclips.net/video/uKOlrC_FB-g/видео.html
Great video!
Thank you. I'm glad you liked it.
Hello I’ve just bought a stellalyra 8 inch dob. Was wondering what’s the best size eyepieces to use for planets and nebulae?thanks✌️
For planets you want the highest useful magnification possible for your telescope. For a telescope like yours with 1200mm focal length your maximum magnification is probably 200x. So a 6mm eyepiece would be the as high as you could go and that's what you would want to use for planets but it would need to be a calm steady night with good seeing. You could use a 2x Barlow to increase magnification for any eyepiece you have to double the magnification. That's just for planets. Go as high as you can for planets. For nebulae start with your lowest magnification just so you can find the object. Then you will probably find you won't be able to go beyond the 9mm eyepiece it came with and that will be plenty for nebulae. Nebulae can be big like NGC 7000 is huge and you would want a low magnification for it. Some nebulae are small though and for those start low and then experiment because at some point it's just too dark as you increase the magnification. I hope that helps.
@@tsulasbigadventuresok thanks much appreciated!
@@Stephen-gp8yimaximum is actually 400x, a 3mm eyepiece or 6mm in 2x barlow. But you need to have steady skies in order to use that much power. 300x is a more practical maximum to shoot for, but having a barlow and eyepiece combo that can hit 400x is not a bad idea, I just wouldn't invest too much in an actual 3mm eyepiece. However there are affordable 3.2mm planetary series eyepieces available as little as $30-40 for generic versions (a lot of rebranding in the industry, where the same eyepiece can vary greatly in cost depending on what brand is on it and who is selling it.
It is not a bad idea to spend more money on a good ultra wide eyepiece in the 6-7mm range, as well as in the 12-16mm range.
A 2" 28mm 82 deg which is available under several names, and can be found as low as $199, is the ultimate low power eyepiece, offering close to the maximum field of view the scope can deliver. A more modestly priced 38-42mm superwide 2" eyepiece will also give the maximum field and maximum usable brightness if your eye can dilate to close to 7mm and you have dark skies, or want to use a nebula filter on objects like the veil nebula. Note that the modest super wide eyepieces will not be sharp to the edge in an f6 scope. The 28mm 82 degree will be.
If you want a 40mm superwide that is sharp to the edge you need to spring for the expensive explore scientific 68deg 40mm, or the more expensive 41mm panoptic.
Note that the 40mm 68deg was also previously available as the meade series5000 SWA, and also as Maxvision 40mm, so they will be less expensive on the used market.
But don't spend the big bucks on a 40mm unless you are well under 50, since our pupil size starts to shrink at that age.
The 28mm is under 5mm exit pupil in that scope so you can't age out of it.
Hi Tsula! I can't believe how cold it was for 2/3 of the way through June! Is that typical for Montana hills in the summer? At least you didn't have to fight off bugs. 😄Well, as usual, thanks for braving the cold and the lateness of the hour to bring us some big adventures in 'real' astronomy!
Hi Greg: I like that last sentence! About three years ago it snowed on the summer solstice. I'm at 6200 feet and at that elevation the weather is highly erratic and unpredictable. So, it can be cold and even snow in June and sometimes as early as September. It has been an incredibly wet spring/summer so far. I haven't seen any bugs so far but the wildflowers are extremely happy with all this rain. I know we need rain but I sure would like to have a couple of clear nights interspersed. Take care.
@@tsulasbigadventures Yes, Tsula, our weather has been very wet as well, except for a day or two here and there. And, of course, right after they did our hardscaping for the new fire pit (a.k.a. telescope site - shhhh!) and put all new dirt down, it rained like hell and all the dirt shifted! (Hopefully, the plantings they put in this past week will stabilize things since it's supposed to rain for about a week. Ugh...) As much of a pain as it is, though, we need the rain as well. After a couple of days of being inside, though, I start getting VERY antsy not being able to get out under the stars! 🥴
@@gregerianne3880 Seems like it always happens that way and I know what you mean about getting antsy. I start feeling bad if I can't get outside. I think it's in my genes.
Just stumbled across her channel and thought she might be in Colorado with the weather they've been having.
@@theoptimisticskeptic Sometimes my videos are from California but in this one I am in Montana at 6200 feet.
Do you have "progressive" lenses with a focal length that changes from top to bottom?
Do you prefer to observe with you glasses ?
It seems you are myopic
thank you paul
No. I don't wear progressives. I have two sets of glasses. One set is bifocals that I refuse to use because I can still just barely read with no glasses. The other glasses are the ones I'm wearing in the video and they are for distance only. I cannot see the stars without my distance glasses. But I can't stand wearing the glasses to look through the eyepiece. However, I read an article that said if you have significant astigmatism, which I do have, that you should leave your glasses on for viewing through the eyepiece. But I tried and I could not see that wearing the glasses made any difference whereas not wearing the glasses means no annoying fog on the glasses and easier to position my eye in the proper place.
@@tsulasbigadventures thank you for your testimony
Indeed, if you are nearsighted or farsighted which are focal faults of the eye, you just need to correct the focus of the viewfinder and the eyepiece (but you need glasses for the red dot or the telrad). Whereas astigmatism is a defect in the surface of the corneal lens which is not corrected by varying the focal length of the eyepiece.
but it all depends on the importance of the astigmatism
@@jackfrost4033 Good point. I also need my glasses for the red dot finder or telrad.
What eye piece is the best for an 8" dobsonian skyquest? Also would these be visible with an 8" dob?
That telescope has the same focal length as my 10" Dobsonian. I use a 32mm to start and for magnifying I use a 9 or 10mm. You should have one in the range of 24-32mm to start with locating and another eyepiece for increasing magnification in the range of about 8mm to 10mm. I like the Televue 32mm Plossl or the Televue 24mm Panoptic. They are somewhat pricey. I think the Explore Scientific are comparable but a little cheaper than the Televue. They make a line of 82 degree FOV eyepieces that are nice. YOu can get much cheaper eyepieces that are decent from other manufacturers but the size you want is one in the 24-32mm range and another at 8-10mm. Or you can get a 2x Barlow for magnifying just the one eyepiece of 24-32mm. I hope that helps.
Thank you so much! It does really help!!!
@@TicTacEnjoyer You're welcome.
I have a 10" Dobsonian. It is mightily heavy.
Hello Tsula, what should i get for suburban Bortle 4 - 5? I have settled on 2 options 10 inch dobsonian or 6 inch Mak.
Iscthere a big difference between them when we are talking planets and moon?
Someone told me it's hard to track planets with the dobsonian and even the moon at high magnifications, is it true?
Excellent question. It's such a personal choice and both are good options for Bortle 4-5. The Mak will give you sharper images of the planets and moon; that is what Maks excel at and with the long focal length you will be able to achiever higher magnification which is necessary for observing planets. The optics on a good 6" Mak are outstanding but you will gather much more light with the 10" Dob and be able to split double stars and see fainter deep sky objects with it. It is true that you will constantly be moving the Dob to keep the object in the field of view. That' just how it is with Dobs or any manual telescope but I wouldn't say it's "hard." If you are trying to sketch the object, it can be difficult keeping it in the field of view while sketching but just sitting there observing it's no problem. Personally I would go with the 10" Dob because you will just be able to see more with it but that's just my personal opinion. I own a 6" Goto Mak and a 10" Dob and I get out my 10" Dob far more often than my 6" Mak. That's just my personal opinion and I have the Dob on a dolly so that it is very easy to get out and set up on the driveway. One huge consideration for any potential telescope buyer is easy of use and weight of the telescope. I hope that helps.
@@tsulasbigadventures Thank you for answering, it does help! It's gonna be my first telescope and i'm literally split between these two, unable to make a decide and the summer runs away :)
My big problem with the dob is the space and more than that the size... i live in an apartment building and i have a "vacation house" where a 10" dob won't be a problem at all.
However the distance between them is quite large and i spend 90% of my time at the apartment ... the damn problem is that the dob won't fit in my balcony, because it's a reflector and you have to look from one side, i would have to stay outside my balcony in order to look through it. Just way too big for it. (even the 8" inch variant won't do because it's about the same size, only slightly smaller diameter)
So because of that it would cut at least 50% of times where i can use the telescope, add to that the fact that because of the size every time i would go to the vacation house it would have to be well planned in advance plus the weather and all those and i would only use the scope 10 times / year :))
I was thinking mack because it's compact and you can literally put it in a backpack and go if you need to, no planning and stuff plus it would fit in my balcony.
Being my first scope i don't want to regret doing anything stupid so that's why i ask experienced people like yourself.
Until now every single one of them tells me to get the 10" dob so i will probably end up doing that.
I also don't wanna put all my points into mobility and end up with a scope that can't see anything.
Another problem i have is that because i'm new to this i have no idea what i will like to see.. will i be a planet and moon addict..will i love them DSOs.. no idea exactly. With my binoculars i love everything i can see but i really have no idea.
I also start to understand why experienced people have multiple telescopes... you just can't have one scope that does both very well it seems.
@@predattak Well, that is so true. I think many people give up on the hobby because they buy a small telescope and can't see anything in it from a suburban setting. And you really do need two telescopes. Some of the objects just won't fit in a big scope. For example, NGC 7000, the North America Nebula is so big it won't fit in a 10" telescope and there are others too.
@@predattak I just read this one. I think you will find yourself not taking the Dob out if it is that much trouble. It happens all the time. People get a big scope and then it sits in a closet because it's so much trouble to get it out.
I can do the Kessel run in 3 parsecs (which is not a unit of time)👍🏻
I had to look that up. I guess it's been a long time since I watched Star Wars.
I also took offense to the mistaken time reference to parsecs. Later on, I decided for my own peace of mind to get over it. In the far far far away time and worlds of Star Wars, parsec can mean anything that George Lucas wants it to mean.
@@wstevebro Maybe George Lucas thought parsecs sounded cool regardless of the fact that the character was misusing it.
Or, Han Solo was saying he knew a short cut others didn't know ( being a smuggler) and was able to do a Kessel run in a total distance of 3 parsecs!!
One explanation was that hyperdrive course plotting was an art, and plotting the shortest distance to complete the Kessel run was what wins the race
You said that Dobs are not ideal for viewing planets but rather DSO. Im in the market and want to view Saturn specifically as detailed as possible. What should I get?
Technically, you'd want a cassegrain style telescope, although refractors are the "traditional" choice for solar system viewing the cassegrain has some improvements.
In practice, I can easily resolve the rings of Saturn as well as both the cloud bands and storms on Jupiter in my 6" dob with a 750mm focal length and a 10mm eye piece - so it really doesn't matter all that much provided you have both the focal length and aperture to get the magnification and resolution you need.
Another tip, you'll want to look up when Saturn is at opposition - this is when Saturn is as close to Earth as it is going to get during the year, thus you will need less magnification to view it at this time of year.
Well, it's not that Dobs are bad on planets; it's just that they are best suited for deep sky objects. For planets you want the biggest aperture possible, within reason. As Alexander said Schmidt-Cassegrains perform well on planets. The reason is that with their long focal lengths you are able to achieve high magnifications. For planets you want big aperture and high magnification (and good seeing which has nothing to do with the telescope). Maksutov-Cassegrains are great for planets also because of their sharp optics and long focal lengths. All the planets are best viewed when at opposition when they are closest to earth and are much bigger in the eyepiece than other times when they are not close to earth and this is especially true of Mars which is very difficult to see well except when it is at opposition.
@@AlexanderNecheff ty so much for the information I cant get this type of expertise from a simple google search so ty
@@tsulasbigadventures ty so much! Gonna look into used Mak Telescopes. Probably start small as man do they jump in price quickly!
@@PadroPadro22 OK. Maks are excellent for the planets. Good luck!
Hello is your Dobson a goto ?
Hello. No, it is manual. I found everything on my own.
I have seen many videos, and this one is very honest. People, especially children, need to know and understand that they will not see much and not these view, like from professional telescopes and especially after hours of editing. Buying the telescope for the hobby when you can enjoy seeing the moon only is the vasting of money.
That is not true. You can vote a lot of things
Do you carry the ota you alone ?
With handle straps ?
Bravo
I can’t
No. I leave it on the daisy wheel at all times and wheel the whole thing out onto the driveway with a hand truck. I don't have to wheel it very far and the driveway is mostly level. That has been a real back saver!
I'm probably gonna get Criticize for my opinion you have a 10 inch dopsonion telescope, I don't know if you're recording this on a cellular phone wondering if you gonna adapt your phone to take pictures through your telescope there are mounts that can attach to the eyepiece. I'm more interested in the optical quality of the image that you can actually see rather than sketch it in out.
She’s not going to get good images with a camera using a dobsonian without a tracking mount, I have the same scope as hers minus the crazy expensive televue eyepieces but I assure you these telescope are absolutely spectacular.
Dear Tsula, i think youtube blocked my last comment from our conversation, it does that from time to time.
You asked me about what telescope model i'm considering. Here is my answer again, hoping youtube doesn't ruin it again.
For Mak i'm thinking of Skywatcher Skymax 150/1800. In my country there are only Bressers and Skywatcher telescopes when it comes to Maks. Buying from outside like USA would be suicide because of the absolute crazy import taxes EU has.
Sadly the package is like this: The telescope plus one NEQ3 german eq mount (or EQ5 if you pay ~150$ more), a 2" diagonal, an 1.25" adapter and a 26mm eyepiece (shitty in most cases as others have told me).
For the 10" Dob i was looking at Skywatcher Skyliner 254/1200 Flextube. It saves space because of the flextube design but the damn thing is just too big for me ... not sure what i'm gonna do to be honest.
OK. Thanks for your persistence. I have looked at that Skywatcher 150 before and it looks very similar to the Orion 150 Mak that I own (probably made in the same factory). I think that is a good choice. I think the 26mm eyepiece is probably like the 26mm eyepiece my Orion came with which was also not very high quality. I think you should just keep the diagonal it comes with and use your 1.25 adapter for 1.25 eyepieces. It should work fine and just upgrade the eyepiece instead to something a little better and also either get a Barlow or a second eyepiece of about 8 or 9mm. You don't need anything too fancy but something a little better than a Kellner. I think you will be very happy with it. It will excel at planets and be just fine on deep sky. I think you will be very happy with it.
I want to one maybe a 6 inch
A 6 inch Dobsonian is a classic and would be a great choice.
Most insects emerge in the summer and fall, so you're not out of the woods yet, and wood ash contains potassium hydroxide (the "potash" which Granny Clampett used to make her "lye" soap), a substance almost as corrosive as true lye (sodium hydroxide). This potash reacts quickly with carbon dioxide in the air, but I imagine the resulting product, potassium carbonate, isn't much fun to breathe, either.
They say on RUclips that the STAR WARS franchise has been on the wrong track for several light-years, but I wouldn't know much about that... 🙂
I didn't at all mind this video's length - the longer, the better, as far as I'm concerned - but I was frustrated by your shots of the sky as seen with the naked eye. Very often, my 60" smart TV was completely black, and even when a few stars were visible here and there, they weren't helpful in seeing the familiar constellations "shine in their myriad majesty and move like an army dressed in silver mail, marching from unknown victories to conquer in distant wars..." (Lord Dunsany)
Also, isn't it true that no camera can take a truly accurate picture of the sky - that the blue stars will always appear brighter than they should, and the red ones will always appear dimmer, much like blue markings on a manuscript, when it's photocopied, will always appear dimmer than red ones because the blue ones give off more energetic light? For this conundrum, I'm afraid there's no easy solution - probably the best compromises are Stellarium images with all but the most relevant details removed.
But about the simulated views which I keep asking for - here's a link to a very old (in internet terms) website of the Messier objects, with any number of amateur photographs which you could Photoshop to your heart's content. I'd like to see that sort of thing much more than I like seeing drawings - which, no matter how accurate in detail, can't possibly give a true impression of an object's brightness or glamor.
web.archive.org/web/20150905235042/messier.seds.org/more/m013_m2.html
PS: Keep your eye on Betelgeuse when it comes around again - at least some professional astronomers are back to claiming it's down to fusing carbon. 🤩
Walter: I haven't seen any wood ash lately. I assume you are referring to people burning wood in their fireplaces. So, I'm not worried about breathing potassium carbonate. A bigger threat would be potentially drinking poisoned water because of all the poison used here to control noxious weeds that most surely gets into the ground water but I don't drink my well water because it has sulfur eating bacteria in it. Now insects that's a different story. You are correct that those vicious little biting black flies will be attacking me any day now if and when it ever stops raining. That's interesting that you couldn't see the stars on your 60" TV because before uploading this video to RUclips I watched it on a 60" TV to make sure the stars showed up and I could see all of them. I will check the web link you gave me for simulated views but I don't like people who show you simlations from Stellarium on their channel. I can look on Stellarium myself as can anyone with a computer because it's free. Personally I prefer sketches because they are more representational of what you might see through your telescope. Simulations are too much like astrophotos which give a false impression but I will take a look at what you referred me to look at. I heard about Betelguese potentially going supernova sooner than previousyly thought but I prefer to not think about winter right now. Thanks for your input. Now I will look at that website.
Walter! Those are photos! Moreover, M13 does not look anything like that through a telescope, even through my 12" SCT!
@@tsulasbigadventures You must be doing something right - congratulations on a thousand views for this latest video of yours! 🙂 (And thanks for never following the RUclips custom of posting click-bait thumbnails showing yourself with a fake expression of shock and a gaping mouth - I avoid that sort of creator like the plague.)
I meant the smoke and ash from forest fires. Here in New York City, during the recent (spectacular) darkening, I experienced nothing but the pleasant smell of an ordinary campfire - but I can see how, in higher concentrations, nearer to the fires themselves, people found it unpleasant.
"Buffalo gnats, won't you bite me tonight, bite me tonight, bite me tonight..." 🙂
I've never seen, under a microscope, the mouth parts of any biting fly except the remarkable ones of the "little fly" - the common mosquito, which is as usual becoming all too common here, with summer's onset. But fortunately I've discovered eco-friendly insecticides, which are made of nothing but grain alcohol and oil of rosemary (with carbon dioxide as the propellant, in the case of those brands which come in a can). A few spritzes around my apartment and I'm mosquito-free for weeks.
Here's a better example, from the BBC, of what I'm driving at with regard to representative astronomical images. Just scroll down to the section entitled "Star Clusters" and, immediately following that, the one entitled "Galaxies" - you'll see what the author claims are accurate simulations.
www.skyatnightmagazine.com/advice/what-see-through-telescope/
@@waltergold3457 Thanks. I don't like those fake expression thumbnails either. OK. I read that entire article from Sky at Night and at no point in the article does it explain how the simulated views they show were made. However, I watched a video about how to sketch deep sky objects a while ago and I can tell you that each simulation probably takes an hour. You have to sketch the object carefully at the eyepiece and then you have to process the image in Photoshop to make a reverse color image with a black background and white points of light. I have never tried this. I could try it for some future video but for this particular one I had 12 objects and it would have taken me too long to sketch and then process that many objects. Maybe if I am just highlighting one object like the M51 video I made recently, I can use something like what you are talking about for a simulated view. I'm not sure how that simulated image of M13, in the article was made but it might just be a real image that was dimmed somehow. I would have to experiment with this technique and see if it is within my capabilities. I think I will make a video about this and just use one object. I think it will be clear tomorrow night and I will try it out. Another separate issue is the inherent difficulty of showing yourself star gazing while using a camera light that ruins your night vision. A red light helps but still impacts your night vision as well.
@@tsulasbigadventures In one of my earliest comments to you, I suggested using an image-editing program to tweak a suitable image using the program's brightness, contrast, saturation and sharpness features. (You can of course find these features in any reasonably good image editor, including my modest FastStone.)
A long time ago, an acquaintance of mine bought a kit to make enameled jewelry from metal discs and ground glass of various colors. The idea was to create a piece by carefully sprinkling the glass on the metal and baking everything together. I got pretty good at creating images of the planets and other objects.
The only things I can see in my telescope are spiders.
You can see the butthole on a fruit fly from one end of Texas to the other, good Lord! I had no idea telescopes could get this complicated!!! That's neat though. I just ordered one that only has a 114mm aperture with starsense to help us find things because I've never had a telescope before but my son wants to see what's out there. This will be interesting 😁
Funny but no I cannot resolve a fruit fly's butt with my telescope. You'll have a lot of fun with that 114mm telescope but do take the time to learn the night sky so you will appreciate more. Also those goto telescopes sometimes off a bit and the object might not be in the field of view and that's another reason to learn where things are in the sky. I have made a lot of videos for beginners that you might find helpful. Good luck and enjoy the night sky!
@@tsulasbigadventures Yes Ma'am!
I always viewed astrophotography as art. It ticks me off how most of these images are passed off as visible light imaging.
You cannot do astrophotography with a Dobsonian telescope. They are meant to engage you and spark your sense of awe in real time. They provide a more intimate appreciation of the sky above us and you can hear that when she describes the objects she found.
The drawings and charts are there to give you an idea of where the objects are and what they look like and you would appreciate the effort if you ever try one of these telescopes.
Astrophotography is a rabbit hole/money pit.
Dobson didn't invent the mount, he just popularized it
Then who invented it?
Of course, if you live in a high light pollution area, you're not going to see more than half the things she did. Even if you have a 10" Dob. More aperture, more light pollution in the telescope. Know your bortle before shopping.
Get a RED LIGHT .Your night vision is
destroyed for an hr each time.Nice reviews thanks.
Thank you. I know. I have one but it doesn't look good on the video. I have been using it in later videos.
too much talking and so much less "space-ing"
Sorry it did not meet your approval. What about the other episodes in this series? There are four more.