Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

Discussion of optical systems and their characteristics.
User avatar
notFritzArgelander
Universal Ambassador
Articles: 0
Posts: 8728
Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 4:13 pm
1
Location: Idaho US

TSS Awards Badges

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#21

Post by notFritzArgelander »

For AP larger aperture helps with exposure time and S/N of course. You can find sites where the microclimates favor good seeing. Site surveys to assess seeing are SOP for the big guys.
Scopes: Refs: Orion ST80, SV 80EDA f7, TS 102ED f11 Newts: Z12 f5; Cats: VMC110L, Intes MK66,VMC200L f9.75 EPs: KK Fujiyama Orthoscopics, 2x Vixen NPLs (40-6mm) and BCOs, Baader Mark IV zooms, TV Panoptics, Delos, Plossl 32-8mm. Mixed brand Masuyama/Astroplans Binoculars: Nikon Aculon 10x50, Celestron 15x70, Baader Maxbright. Mounts: Star Seeker III, Vixen Porta II, Celestron CG5, Orion Sirius EQG
User avatar
Star Dad
Orion Spur Ambassador
Articles: 0
Posts: 592
Joined: Sat Aug 10, 2019 8:05 pm
1
Location: Norwich CT
Contact:

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#22

Post by Star Dad »

Interesting topic. I too have contemplated getting a 10" f4 Newt.

I just realized that all the observatories in my area (near sea level) max out at 14" apertures. I guess it's pretty obvious why large telescopes are placed way up in the mountains - to get rid of as much of the pesky atmosphere as possible. Unless I move to that mountain in Arizona(???) I guess I'll stick with my 8" Newt. In another thread I posted on my first use of my club's Mak-Cassy. The relevant line that in hind sight I find amusingly relevant to this thread is the fact that after waiting 5 minutes I had NO moment of clarity due to atmospherics and gave up (I had more AP images to take).

Thanks nFA for your insight.
"To be good is not enough when you dream of being great"

Orion 203mm/f4.9/1000mm, converted TASCO 114mm/f9/1000mm to steam punk, Meade 114mm/f9/1000, Coronado PST, Orion EQ-G, Ioptron Mini-Tower and iEQ30, Canon 70D, ASI120MM,ASI294MC
User avatar
SkyHiker
Orion Spur Ambassador
Articles: 0
Posts: 828
Joined: Sat May 11, 2019 8:40 pm
1
Location: Santa Barbara, CA

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#23

Post by SkyHiker »

notFritzArgelander wrote: Thu Oct 01, 2020 4:01 pm For AP larger aperture helps with exposure time and S/N of course.
That is true. For a second I was thinking for example, a 12" F/4 image would lead to the same result as a 8" F/4 cropped to that same section of the sky by a factor 8/12. The resolution of those images is the same indeed, but the total illumination of that sky section is not. Assuming even illumination and everything else being equal, the 8" will only have received (8/12)^2=4/9 of the photons on the section of the sensor depicting that section of the sky than the 12" did. The same per-object argument holds for visual so that's why a big aperture (for the same F ratio) is still better.

So there's still a good reason to go big - you won't gain resolution but you will gain illumination (per object, not over all) so the SNR of the image is better and you can go deeper. Many galaxies are small so you would want to crop images taken by a smaller aperture scope, and cropping to a given object will work much better for larger apertures. And of course on those rare nights of good seeing if you could pick them and be at the right place, you will indeed gain resolution. Let me know if I mistook.

So I may have to pull the trigger for a 12". Newts are so cheap compared to other scopes, and work really well with a good CC (see Kathy's results for instance). I have a 127 mm F/7.5 Apo but my favorite scope is the 6" F/4.8 Mak-Newt by far. Having to expose 2.5 times longer is rather significant. Aside from that I can't tell difference in the views, the Mak-Newt in fact seems more crisp but of course the illumination is also better. I prefer the Mak-Newt for visual and AP so maybe it's time to get a 12" Newt and dispose of a bunch of scopes including my Z12.
... Henk. :D Telescopes: 6" Mak-Newt (Comet Hunter), ES ED127CF, ES ED80, Zhumell Z12, AT6RC, Venture RX-7, Celestron Skymaster 20x80, Mounts and tripod: Losmandy G11S with DIY OnStep, AVX, LXD55, Tiltall, Cameras: Fuji X-a1, Canon SX40, Xt, XSi, T6, ELPH 100HS, DIY: OnStep controller, Barndoor trackers for 10" Dob and camera, Afocal adapter, Foldable Dob base, Az/Alt Dob setting circles, Accessories: TV Paracorr 2, Baader MPCC Mk III, ES FF, SSAG, Plossls, Barlows, Telrad, Laser collimators (Seben LK1, Z12, Howie Glatter), Cheshire, 2 Orion RACIs 8x50, Software: KStars-Ekos, DSS, PHD2, Nebulosity, Photo Gallery, Gimp, CHDK
User avatar
notFritzArgelander
Universal Ambassador
Articles: 0
Posts: 8728
Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 4:13 pm
1
Location: Idaho US

TSS Awards Badges

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#24

Post by notFritzArgelander »

SkyHiker wrote: Thu Oct 01, 2020 6:37 pm
notFritzArgelander wrote: Thu Oct 01, 2020 4:01 pm For AP larger aperture helps with exposure time and S/N of course.
That is true. For a second I was thinking for example, a 12" F/4 image would lead to the same result as a 8" F/4 cropped to that same section of the sky by a factor 8/12. The resolution of those images is the same indeed, but the total illumination of that sky section is not. Assuming even illumination and everything else being equal, the 8" will only have received (8/12)^2=4/9 of the photons on the section of the sensor depicting that section of the sky than the 12" did. The same per-object argument holds for visual so that's why a big aperture (for the same F ratio) is still better.

So there's still a good reason to go big - you won't gain resolution but you will gain illumination (per object, not over all) so the SNR of the image is better and you can go deeper. Many galaxies are small so you would want to crop images taken by a smaller aperture scope, and cropping to a given object will work much better for larger apertures. And of course on those rare nights of good seeing if you could pick them and be at the right place, you will indeed gain resolution. Let me know if I mistook.

So I may have to pull the trigger for a 12". Newts are so cheap compared to other scopes, and work really well with a good CC (see Kathy's results for instance). I have a 127 mm F/7.5 Apo but my favorite scope is the 6" F/4.8 Mak-Newt by far. Having to expose 2.5 times longer is rather significant. Aside from that I can't tell difference in the views, the Mak-Newt in fact seems more crisp but of course the illumination is also better. I prefer the Mak-Newt for visual and AP so maybe it's time to get a 12" Newt and dispose of a bunch of scopes including my Z12.
I used to have the same Mak-Newt that you have. It's a very fine performer indeed! I haven't used my Z12 since moving. It was damaged in the move and is repaired, but I can't seem to manage it as well as I did. I've got a brand new hernia. :)
Scopes: Refs: Orion ST80, SV 80EDA f7, TS 102ED f11 Newts: Z12 f5; Cats: VMC110L, Intes MK66,VMC200L f9.75 EPs: KK Fujiyama Orthoscopics, 2x Vixen NPLs (40-6mm) and BCOs, Baader Mark IV zooms, TV Panoptics, Delos, Plossl 32-8mm. Mixed brand Masuyama/Astroplans Binoculars: Nikon Aculon 10x50, Celestron 15x70, Baader Maxbright. Mounts: Star Seeker III, Vixen Porta II, Celestron CG5, Orion Sirius EQG
User avatar
Piet Le Roux
Jupiter Ambassador
Articles: 0
Posts: 202
Joined: Mon May 13, 2019 6:33 pm
1
Location: Bloemfontein, South Africa

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#25

Post by Piet Le Roux »

It is interesting how a bit of truth and a bit of logic can be moulded into folklore….you just need the right number of people with big enough “halos” to repeat it and then it becomes a “undisputed fact”.....at least a respectable publication like “Sky and Telescope” gave us some objective information. Their article have given me a better understanding of what exactly “seeing” is, without overcomplicating the subject.
Enjoy : https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-e ... he-seeing/
Main Equipment : 15" Obsession F4.5 Classic, Tele Vue 7&13mm Nagler, Tele Vue 2" 27mm Panoptic, Tele Vue Big Barlow, Tele Vue Paracorr II : 8" Meade LX90ACF with Meade 2.0" Enhanced Diagonal, Baarder Hyperion MK III 24-8mm zoom : Camera Fuji XT100 : Into my third year and its just getting more interesting!
User avatar
notFritzArgelander
Universal Ambassador
Articles: 0
Posts: 8728
Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 4:13 pm
1
Location: Idaho US

TSS Awards Badges

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#26

Post by notFritzArgelander »

Piet Le Roux wrote: Fri Oct 02, 2020 8:18 am It is interesting how a bit of truth and a bit of logic can be moulded into folklore….you just need the right number of people with big enough “halos” to repeat it and then it becomes a “undisputed fact”.....at least a respectable publication like “Sky and Telescope” gave us some objective information. Their article have given me a better understanding of what exactly “seeing” is, without overcomplicating the subject.
Enjoy : https://skyandtelescope.org/astronomy-e ... he-seeing/
This link is thorough and correct enough and is in complete agreement with everything I have been saying in this thread. In particular I like the distinction between slow and fast seeing that the author discusses. There are two pieces of "folklore" that need to be cast out because of bad logic.

One is "small telescopes are not more affected by seeing than large telescopes". The other is "small telescopes are better at resolving features than large telescopes in poor seeing. As stated both bits of folklore are oversimplified to the point of being false.

When the atmosphere is slow seeing bad extra aperture provides zero improvement. The atmosphere is the limiting factor. Thanks for an excellent link that is fully acceptable.
Scopes: Refs: Orion ST80, SV 80EDA f7, TS 102ED f11 Newts: Z12 f5; Cats: VMC110L, Intes MK66,VMC200L f9.75 EPs: KK Fujiyama Orthoscopics, 2x Vixen NPLs (40-6mm) and BCOs, Baader Mark IV zooms, TV Panoptics, Delos, Plossl 32-8mm. Mixed brand Masuyama/Astroplans Binoculars: Nikon Aculon 10x50, Celestron 15x70, Baader Maxbright. Mounts: Star Seeker III, Vixen Porta II, Celestron CG5, Orion Sirius EQG
User avatar
turboscrew
Orion Spur Ambassador
Articles: 0
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2020 9:22 am
Location: Nokia, Finland

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#27

Post by turboscrew »

Very often those "folkloristic factoids" are just oversimplified rules of thumb to beginners, that probably couldn't (yet) understand a further elaboration. They are often meant as quick pieces of advice for some first timers trying to choose their first telescope.
Senior Embedded SW Designer
Telescope: OrionOptics XV12, dobsonian, all manual.
LAT 61° 28' 10.9" N, Bortle 5

Image
User avatar
notFritzArgelander
Universal Ambassador
Articles: 0
Posts: 8728
Joined: Fri May 10, 2019 4:13 pm
1
Location: Idaho US

TSS Awards Badges

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#28

Post by notFritzArgelander »

turboscrew wrote: Fri Oct 02, 2020 6:16 pm Very often those "folkloristic factoids" are just oversimplified rules of thumb to beginners, that probably couldn't (yet) understand a further elaboration. They are often meant as quick pieces of advice for some first timers trying to choose their first telescope.
Exactly. Often the facts that 1) results depend on the object you are observing and 2) the purpose of observation matter too! Resolution is only one of a telescope's functions. For low power DSO viewing seeing and resolution are often irrelevant.
Scopes: Refs: Orion ST80, SV 80EDA f7, TS 102ED f11 Newts: Z12 f5; Cats: VMC110L, Intes MK66,VMC200L f9.75 EPs: KK Fujiyama Orthoscopics, 2x Vixen NPLs (40-6mm) and BCOs, Baader Mark IV zooms, TV Panoptics, Delos, Plossl 32-8mm. Mixed brand Masuyama/Astroplans Binoculars: Nikon Aculon 10x50, Celestron 15x70, Baader Maxbright. Mounts: Star Seeker III, Vixen Porta II, Celestron CG5, Orion Sirius EQG
User avatar
Gordon
Site Admin
Articles: 359
Posts: 3831
Joined: Wed Apr 24, 2019 10:52 pm
1
Location: Cottonwood, AZ
Contact:

TSS Awards Badges

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#29

Post by Gordon »

*** Moved topic to new subforum.****
Gordon
Scopes: Explore Scientific ED80CF, Skywatcher 254N, Orion ST80, Orion Atlas EQ-g mount, Orion SSAG guider. Baader MPCC MkIII coma corrector, Vixen 70mm refractor. Lunt LS35THa solar scope. Skywatcher EQ5pro mount. Imagers: ZWO ASI1600 MM Cool, ZWO ASI174mm-C (for use with my Quark chromosphere), ZWO ASI120MC Filters: LRGB, Ha 7nm, O-III 7nm, S-II 7nm Eyepieces: a few, Primary software: Cartes du Ciel, EQMOD, SGP, Nebulosity, Photoshop, StarTools V1.4
Blog: http://ghswen.blogspot.com/
Image
User avatar
Makuser
Moderator
Articles: 0
Posts: 2502
Joined: Mon May 06, 2019 12:53 am
1
Location: Rockledge, FL.

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#30

Post by Makuser »

Hi Piet, nFA and all. A very interesting thread here. I wanted to add a couple of items on the affects of atmospheric spherules (cells) on the aperture size and magnification.
The first explanation is an excerpt from The Night Sky Through Your Telescope (2006) by Robin Scagell:
Scagell1.jpg
Next, is an article from Sky & Telescope (March, 2015) by Thomas Dobbins. I was going to cut and paste parts of this, but the entire writing, although it repeats some of what has already been said on here, still includes a lot of interesting information:
ST Page1.jpg
ST Page2.jpg
ST Page3.jpg
I hope this is also useful to all of you.
- Marshall
Sky-Watcher 90mm f/13.9 Maksutov-Cassegrain on motorized Multimount
Orion Astroview 120ST f/5 Refractor on EQ3 mount
Celestron Omni XLT150R f/5 Refractor on CG4 mount with dual axis drives.
Orion 180mm f/15 Maksutov-Cassegrain on CG5-GT Goto mount.
Orion XT12i 12" f/4.9 Dobsonian Intelliscope.
Celestron SkyMaster 15x70 Binoculars. ZWO ASI120MC camera.
>)))))*>
User avatar
John Donne
Moon Ambassador
Articles: 0
Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2020 5:34 am
Location: US

TSS Photo of the Day

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#31

Post by John Donne »

I have apreciated this fine discussion.
I generally choose the scope/aperture I will deploy based on my evaluation of "sky conditions".
For me it is a matter of efficiency.
User avatar
turboscrew
Orion Spur Ambassador
Articles: 0
Posts: 872
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2020 9:22 am
Location: Nokia, Finland

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#32

Post by turboscrew »

Makuser wrote: Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:27 pm Hi Piet, nFA and all. A very interesting thread here. I wanted to add a couple of items on the affects of atmospheric spherules (cells) on the aperture size and magnification.
The first explanation is an excerpt from The Night Sky Through Your Telescope (2006) by Robin Scagell:
Image
Next, is an article from Sky & Telescope (March, 2015) by Thomas Dobbins. I was going to cut and paste parts of this, but the entire writing, although it repeats some of what has already been said on here, still includes a lot of interesting information:
Image
Image
Image
I hope this is also useful to all of you.
Very good reading to me! Thanks!
Senior Embedded SW Designer
Telescope: OrionOptics XV12, dobsonian, all manual.
LAT 61° 28' 10.9" N, Bortle 5

Image
User avatar
Lady Fraktor
Co-Administrator
Articles: 0
Posts: 5125
Joined: Mon Apr 29, 2019 9:14 pm
1
Location: Slovakia

Re: Aperture size and "seeing" conditions

#33

Post by Lady Fraktor »

From Telescope Optics.

FIGURE 77: Illustration of a point source (stellar) image degradation caused by atmospheric turbulence (linear pattern size, identical f-ratio). Left column shows best possible average seeing error in 2 arc seconds seeing (r0~70mm @ 550nm) for four aperture sizes. The errors are generated from Eq. 53-54, with 2" aperture having only the roughness component (Eq. 54), and larger apertures having tilt component added at a rate of 20% for every next level of the aperture size, as a rough approximation of its increasing contribution to the total visual error (the way it is handled by the human eye is pretty much uncharted territory). Columns to the right show the possible range of error fluctuation, between half and double the average error. Best possible average RMS error is approximately 0.05, 0.1, 0.2 and 0.4 wave, from top to bottom (the effect would be identical if the aperture was kept constant, and r0 reduced). The 2" aperture is little affected most of the time;  4" is already mainly below "diffraction-limited", while 8" has very little chance of ever reaching it, even for briefly. The 16" is, evidently, affected the most; D/ro ratio for its x2 error level is over 10, resulting in clearly developed speckle structure (magnification shown is over 1000x per inch of aperture, or roughly 10 to 50 times over the practical limits for 2"-16" aperture range, respectively. Also, since the angular blur size is inverse to the aperture size, the x2 blur in the 16" and 2" aperture are roughly of similar size angularly).

aturb.png
aturb.png (38.51 KiB) Viewed 302 times
Proper Telescopes: Antares 105 f/15, Bresser 102 f/13.2, Celestron 150 f/8, Stellarvue NHNGDX 80 f/6.9, TAL 100RS f/10, TS 102 f/11, UR 70 f/10, Vixen ED115s f/7.7
Mounts: Berlebach Planet w/ 410mm pier, Celestron AS-GT, Celestron CG-5 w/ Argo Navis & tracking motor, SLT w/ 250mm pier & tripod mods, Manfrotto 028b w/ SV M2C, Mantrotto 055Pro w/ 128RC, Skywatcher EQ-5 w/ dual drives, TAL MT1C w/ wood tripod, Vixen SXP w/ HAL-130 & 200mm half pier
Diagonal: 2" A-P Maxbright, 2" Baader Herschel Wedge (P), 2" Zeiss/ Baader Amici Prism (DX2), 2" Long Perng Amici Prism, 2" Stellarvue DX, 2" TeleVue EverBrite
Eyepieces: Antares to Zeiss
Image
Post Reply

Return to “General Optics”