Author Topic: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution  (Read 468 times)

Bobby Cruz

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 125
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« on: December 28, 2017, 09:31:17 PM »
condtions?

Hi, new member here. I have enjoyed reading a lot of your posts already before joining. I live in Gwacheon, South Korea which I doubt any of you know but who knows...Anyway, it's 10 miles outside of Seoul, which is probably one of the most light polluted areas on earth.

I would say the air pollution is actually worse than the light pollution overall, but thankfully in the fall and winter siberian air clears that out for the most part. I'm okay with just observing for half the year, but I'm mainly interested in seeing deep sky objects like galaxies and nebulae. The planets and the moon are cool, but it seems everytime I go to an observatory that's what I see, so if I'm going to be limited to Jupiter, Saturn and the moon, I think I might hold off till I move to the countryside (won't be happening anytime soon unfortunately...)

If you guys could take a look at this link and help me to tell me whether I'd be able to see galaxies in a fairly defined way in my light pollution conditions that would be great. This will be another thread, but I'm considering probably an 8" 9.25, or 11" celestron or possibly a 12" dobsonian. Weight is a consideration so I may end up on the low end of that, but certainly no lower.

So here's the link http://astroscanenth...-pollution-w...

(It shows various sky conditions you might encounter in the city, suburbs etc.)

When I look at the sattelite, basically I'm in a huge white spot, but we're blocked off from seoul by a mountain so I don't think it's quite that bad.

I would say we're between a 5 and a 7 in the best conditions, but that said I'd be observing a lot in 7 conditions.

Would I be wasting my money? I'm not expecting hubble telescope stuff, but I'd like to see spiral arms possibly, stuff like that....



niososerso

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2017, 10:14:07 PM »
I just showed the chart to my wife, she disagrees with me and thinks we're a 5, definitely no better than that though.

Rob Stevens

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 104
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2017, 03:53:50 AM »
My recommendation would be to get a small telescope now and a larger one when you move. Enjoy what you can and get an idea of what is even visible from your area before you spend a lot of money.obin

David Lipson

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 116
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #3 on: December 29, 2017, 01:09:59 PM »
I won't be moving for years probably. What size scope would you recommend to have an idea of what galaxies I would be able to see? Money isn't a huge issue, I'm okay with spending a few bucks...

Chuck Klem

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #4 on: December 30, 2017, 03:09:37 AM »
Quote
I won't be moving for years probably. What size scope would you recommend to have an idea of what galaxies I would be able to see? Money isn't a huge issue, I'm okay with spending a few bucks...

I think C11 is better because its F10 that you can enjoy look at Juipter, Saturn, Mars, Moon , etc in light pollution. C11 get more light that you might see faint galaxies and nebula. I used 10 inch dobsonian and I can see all 3 galaxies (M31, M32 and M110)so near Chicago. Chicago is terrible light pollution. (White zone) I think C11 F10 is great for many years to use and if you don't mind that C11 is heavy. C11 at low power for galaxies, nebula and open cluster while use medium and high power for planets and Moon, etc. That's me to pick C11! Good luck!

Travis Vega

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #5 on: December 30, 2017, 06:49:44 PM »
galaxy's arms is very hard to see even in my 16 inch Dobsonian in yellow zone light pollution! Keep your eyes stay in dark and look at galaxy for a few minutes. look up, down and around then you might catch a faint arm but not easy! I can see faint arms in M51 and M101 in my 16 inch!

Pablo Abreu

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #6 on: January 01, 2018, 03:02:12 AM »
I live about 20 miles south of Houston which is terribly light polluted as well. I do 90% of my viewing with an ST-80 telescope and a 20mm or 32mm eyepiece. I can see star clusters, double stars, satellites, planets (but not in high detail), and the centers of galaxies like andromeda.When I bring out the 6" or 10" telescopes I can see a few more stars but I also see a lot more light pollution. In the 80mm f/5 the sky is a dark blueish color. With the 10" f/4.5 the sky is almost light grey when looking at the exact same stars at the exact same time.The big telescopes scoop up more light pollution. They do grab a bit more detail in nebula but it's not like they exclude light pollution either. I would vote for a smaller refractor like an 80mm-100mm or so and when you get a big 10"+ reflector in the future you can still use the refractor as a grab-and-go.If money isn't an issue I'd go for an apochromatic refractor. I was surprised at the amount of double stars and galaxies I could see with my ED80. I am going to send you an IM to my online archive. You will get an idea of what I can see in the red/white zone with small telescopes.obin

Jay Garcia

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 139
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #7 on: January 01, 2018, 08:37:33 AM »
Thanks Illinois, I will think about the C11. That's disappointing about the arms, I doubt I'll ever get a scope as sizeable as yours. I have some family about 1 1/2 hours south of Chicago in a rural town, and I have to say the conditions aren't much better than they are here. A bit, but when you consider how much further they are from a metro area than I am, it's pretty disappointing. It seems once you get out of the immediate inner city things improve a lot, but you really need to get far from even the medium cities to get conditions significantly better. Some kind of light pollution law of diminishing returns or something...

Tye Paez

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #8 on: January 08, 2018, 01:58:16 AM »
Thanks a lot obin, I'm going to do some serious research on the scopes you're recommending. Hopefully they're available on ebay as it's hard to get things shipped here.. I didn't think of the fact that a bigger scope would get more light pollution. If you have your telescope looking straight up, is this still an issue? I can see hundreds of stars straight up, it's the stars near the horizon that really suffer from being close to the city.

James Scaturro

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 124
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #9 on: January 09, 2018, 04:17:02 AM »
How's a scope like this?

http://www.ebay.com/...REFLECTING-A...

It doesn't look like my favorite even for a cheap scope, but is available in Korea, would this compare favorably to what you have?

imasatex

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #10 on: January 09, 2018, 07:15:25 AM »
I have basically the same optics as that Meade EQ in the planetary camera I am building. Here's what Jupiter looks like on a good day. This is a stack of a CCD capture but you get the idea.



You'll be able to see a lot with it. I think you will be satisfied until you can get to the country and buy a larger telescope. I know mine got lots of usage before I rebuilt it.

obin

specconcheckre

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 114
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #11 on: January 10, 2018, 05:03:48 AM »
Wow that's a lot better than I expected. Didn't look that much better at the observatory here which has a 20 incher. The moons did look a good bit larger though.

Scott Bentley

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 148
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #12 on: January 10, 2018, 09:53:34 AM »
That's a very nice image of what size it would look like in the scope. What would you say the approximate power that gave you this size of Jupiter?  To me it looks about 15x?

Matthew Danielson

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 118
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #13 on: January 10, 2018, 01:57:58 PM »
Thanks! It's an f/7.9 114mm and the image seemed to be about the same size as when I put a ~7.5mm eyepiece in the focuser. I could be wrong though but that seemed about right from what I can recall.obin

Ray Gibas

  • Active Astronomer
  • ***
  • Posts: 131
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Reputation: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Should I get a telescope for these light pollution
« Reply #14 on: January 12, 2018, 03:39:52 AM »
Quote
Wow that's a lot better than I expected. Didn't look that much better at the observatory here which has a 20 incher. The moons did look a good bit larger though.

Visual and photography can't be compared. What you'll see in such a small scope will be MUCH less detailed.