I'm looking for opinions on the refractor size sweet spot. I've got a TV 85 that I really like but am feeling a little under equipped on aperture at 3.5". But obviously increases in aperture size start to seriously add weight and one loses portability and thus usability. What are experienced users' opinions about the sweet spot to preserve portability but open things up a bit? Is a 5" too big?
Aperture size sweet spot?
Started by paulbjohnson, 09/02/2004 05:51PM
Posted 09/02/2004 05:51PM
Opening Post
Posted 09/03/2004 01:58PM
#2
Hi Paul,
I have owned several excellent 4" refractors and have found that the increase in detail- I am mostly a lunar and planetary observer- when you move up to a 5" is dramatic, even more so if you step up again to a 6". The 5" APO seems to be the best balance of reasonable size and performance. The Takahashi FC 100 I owned was a fabulous scope. Problem was, by the time I set it and the EM10 mount up, I could just as easily have hauled out the G-11 and TEC 140. The TEC's aperture and performance advantage has made it the scope of choice. My opinion, get at least a 5".
I have owned several excellent 4" refractors and have found that the increase in detail- I am mostly a lunar and planetary observer- when you move up to a 5" is dramatic, even more so if you step up again to a 6". The 5" APO seems to be the best balance of reasonable size and performance. The Takahashi FC 100 I owned was a fabulous scope. Problem was, by the time I set it and the EM10 mount up, I could just as easily have hauled out the G-11 and TEC 140. The TEC's aperture and performance advantage has made it the scope of choice. My opinion, get at least a 5".
Funding Member
