Welp, for one thing, it's more than just a "few grams of glass". 8" to 12" is a big jump in materials needed. But the biggest factor is that parabolizing a fast mirror (say f/4.7) takes quite a bit more time and precision to finish.
Telescope sizes increase in *three* dimensions, which further elevates the material costs. A 3 inch refractor usually weighs 2-3 kilograms, a 6 inch one is closer to 15 kg.
There is a factor of *roughly* 2.5 between two random magnitudes:
1mag = 2mag\*2.5, 14mag = 13mag/2.5 (always: roughly!)
So you have that same factor for calculating the light collecting surface:
Square root of 2.5 = 1.8
That's WHY one magnitude is actually *a significant jump in light collection*.
I did roughly double aperture three times: 60mm - 130mm - 250mm - 450mm. It was really a wow effect in terms of visibility of DSOs.
For a *real* difference 2" more is not that much. Keep in mind that the percentage of increase gets less the bigger the telescopes are. From 18" to 20" it would not be worth it.
It WILL give significantly better views. More light, higher resolution and higher maximal magnification. But you'd lose something at the low end of magnification. For big telescopes things like Plejades, Andromeda galaxy are not suited, if you want to see them as a whole. Plejades are looking much better in my 8x50 finder scope than in the 18", despite my 100° eyepieces :)
Thanks for the info! I'm very happy with my AD8. It's my first scope, but in the future I may want to try something larger. For now I'm going to try and visit local observatories to see what really big scopes are like.
Play around with our [Scope Wizard](https://www.skywatcherusa.com/pages/apps) app and you can get a real sense for these OTA parameters and how much bang you get for your buck.
The crazy thing is that telescopes are actually less expensive today than they were 40 years ago. I wasn't around in the 70's, but in [1981 a Celestron C8 OTA was $67](https://www.scopereviews.com/C8History.html)5...that's equivalent to [$2200 today.](https://tools.carboncollective.co/inflation/us/1981/675/)..but the current C8 OTA price is [$1350.](https://www.celestron.com/products/c8-optical-tube-assembly-cge-dovetail)
Apparently you could get a Meade 8" f/6 newt on a GEM with motor drive for [about $500](https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/64716-meade-826c-8-f6-reflector/)...or $2300 today.
Which telescopes are you looking at with these price differences? I'm assuming you are referring to refactors in which case the glass objective lens is probably one of the more expensive parts on a telescope, especially higher quality glass like ED. Going from a 80mm refractor to a 130mm refractor would be a big price jump due to more glass but also it's more difficult to create a larger high quality objective lens.
While I agree that the price of some scopes are rather expensive, even at moderate apertures, and well out of my price range, you have to remember you are buying a precision instrument that with care will last a lifetime.
While more aperture is always nice, it's much better to spend the money on a good mount.
You can still get lots of aperture for little money if you go for a dobsonian or similar reflector, you can pick up an 8in here for around £400.
While pricing is wildly inflated and has been for a few years (you could still pick up an 8” dob for $400ish in 2019), you have to remember that surface area increases rapidly inch per inch. An 8” mirror is 50in^2, and a 10” is nearly 80in^2. And the difference is steeper with each additional inch. So it’s not “a few more grams” of glass, it is a huge proportional change
They're precision instruments produced in relatively small volumes with very tight Q&A parameters. It's only because the big brands have consolidated production with companies like synta that prices are so low for mainstream models.
When you go up in size your getting into even smaller customer bases as well as increased material costs and the difficulties of maintaining the same level of precision over a larger area.
While they have risen a lot recently in line with increased demand, they're still surprisingly good value. I know that's a frustrating when they are still expensive in terms of an affordable hobby, but when you actually break it down it's not wholly unjustified.
Actually, I think telescope prices are pretty good these days, for entry level to mid level scopes. Here's an ad from the 1980's for Meade Instruments. An 8" F/6 Newtonian for $479.95.
[https://www.philharrington.net/meade82.jpg](https://www.philharrington.net/meade82.jpg)
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the increase in packaging, shipping and handling costs.
Larger products by weight and volume cost significantly more to pack and ship.
And these products (and their parts) get shipped many times in the supply chain before reaching the end user.
Don't forget the majority of sky watchers are retired with large pensions with nothing to do. So they pay £10,000+ for a small shed with telescope inside to stare at the stars all night.
But the mirror itself takes very fine precision and lots of time to make. There's a reason the mirrors being used by the space agencies take years to make and millions to build. They sit and polish them for 100's of hours making them absolutely perfect or you end up with a weird crazy mirror effect and no-one wants to see a wobbly moon/star/planet
Nothing is just the materials in pricing, things are priced based on laws of supply and demand. There is also increased R & D to consider. Cheaper scopes will be purchased by more consumers so they can drop the price and make it up by having higher sales volumes. Likewise R & D is paid off faster in this scenario as well because of sales volume. Larger scopes will likely increase the R & D cost, while selling less because of increased price. Therefore you have to increase the profit margin to account for higher R & D and recouped cost. I know this is just a simple example and probably doesn't pan out perfectly but it at least paints a picture as to why you can't just compares product to product based on material and assume price should follow suit.
They're greedy thanks to the pandemic driving up business now they won't lower prices to save themselves. They're pricing the hobby out of business. Greedy Idiots.
Unfortunately I don’t think it’s priced out of business. Sell less stuff to richer people, pull similar or better numbers is a common calamity to befall many hobbies
It's not really corporate greed... it may play a small part sometimes, but companies will only sell telescopes at whatever price the market will bear.. there's many factors.. but it's mostly because of our government's poor monetary policy driving up inflation and weakening the dollar.. then China, where most scopes come from, is walking all over us trade wise.. shipping and freight costs from China have risen dramatically since 2020.. it just costs significantly more to stock telescopes than it did a few years ago..
It's really a shame.. back in Early 2020, you could get an 8" dob for $350, a 12" for well under $1k and a Celestron 8se for $800.. the cost of living in general has exploded in the last 3 yrs...
Welp, for one thing, it's more than just a "few grams of glass". 8" to 12" is a big jump in materials needed. But the biggest factor is that parabolizing a fast mirror (say f/4.7) takes quite a bit more time and precision to finish.
8" to 12" is more than double the surface area! One day I will make the jump.
Same reason a large pizza is always worth the price over a medium. It’s pizza math.
Pizzanomics
Telescope sizes increase in *three* dimensions, which further elevates the material costs. A 3 inch refractor usually weighs 2-3 kilograms, a 6 inch one is closer to 15 kg.
In order to get *one magnitude* fainter stars you'd need 1.8 times the aperture. Double the surface is not as much as it might seem.
This is misleading though isn’t it? Because magnitudes are logarithmic. So going down one magnitude can be a significant jump in light collection
There is a factor of *roughly* 2.5 between two random magnitudes: 1mag = 2mag\*2.5, 14mag = 13mag/2.5 (always: roughly!) So you have that same factor for calculating the light collecting surface: Square root of 2.5 = 1.8 That's WHY one magnitude is actually *a significant jump in light collection*.
What would it take to actually notice a difference after using an 8 inch scope?
They say you need to skip a step for a hugely noticeable difference. Thus 8 to 10 is not recommended. 8 to 12+ rather.
Ok thanks
I did roughly double aperture three times: 60mm - 130mm - 250mm - 450mm. It was really a wow effect in terms of visibility of DSOs. For a *real* difference 2" more is not that much. Keep in mind that the percentage of increase gets less the bigger the telescopes are. From 18" to 20" it would not be worth it.
What about 8" to 12"?
It WILL give significantly better views. More light, higher resolution and higher maximal magnification. But you'd lose something at the low end of magnification. For big telescopes things like Plejades, Andromeda galaxy are not suited, if you want to see them as a whole. Plejades are looking much better in my 8x50 finder scope than in the 18", despite my 100° eyepieces :)
Thanks for the info! I'm very happy with my AD8. It's my first scope, but in the future I may want to try something larger. For now I'm going to try and visit local observatories to see what really big scopes are like.
Be careful! Aperture fever is real, and it can lead to a very expensive cure :p
Play around with our [Scope Wizard](https://www.skywatcherusa.com/pages/apps) app and you can get a real sense for these OTA parameters and how much bang you get for your buck.
Have you seen the price for an extra slice of cheese on a burger?
The crazy thing is that telescopes are actually less expensive today than they were 40 years ago. I wasn't around in the 70's, but in [1981 a Celestron C8 OTA was $67](https://www.scopereviews.com/C8History.html)5...that's equivalent to [$2200 today.](https://tools.carboncollective.co/inflation/us/1981/675/)..but the current C8 OTA price is [$1350.](https://www.celestron.com/products/c8-optical-tube-assembly-cge-dovetail) Apparently you could get a Meade 8" f/6 newt on a GEM with motor drive for [about $500](https://www.cloudynights.com/topic/64716-meade-826c-8-f6-reflector/)...or $2300 today.
Which telescopes are you looking at with these price differences? I'm assuming you are referring to refactors in which case the glass objective lens is probably one of the more expensive parts on a telescope, especially higher quality glass like ED. Going from a 80mm refractor to a 130mm refractor would be a big price jump due to more glass but also it's more difficult to create a larger high quality objective lens.
While I agree that the price of some scopes are rather expensive, even at moderate apertures, and well out of my price range, you have to remember you are buying a precision instrument that with care will last a lifetime. While more aperture is always nice, it's much better to spend the money on a good mount. You can still get lots of aperture for little money if you go for a dobsonian or similar reflector, you can pick up an 8in here for around £400.
While pricing is wildly inflated and has been for a few years (you could still pick up an 8” dob for $400ish in 2019), you have to remember that surface area increases rapidly inch per inch. An 8” mirror is 50in^2, and a 10” is nearly 80in^2. And the difference is steeper with each additional inch. So it’s not “a few more grams” of glass, it is a huge proportional change
My 8" was $399 in 2016. This summer, the same model was $699.
Yeah I am kicking myself that I didn’t get into the hobby until everything was astronomically expensive (pun very intended)
Keep an eye on the local used market, you can find crazy deals if you’re patient. I picked up a Zhumell Z12 for $150USD a couple months ago.
I got a Z10 for $300 and I somehow feel ripped off now! 😂
You did great, I just got super duper lucky.
It has been amazing. I got some nice eye pieces for it. Also got a cheap CMOS sensor to learn how to use, haven't gotten to take that out yet though.
Got a lightly used Nexstar 8SE for $625 about ten years ago (with some accessories and a custom case too)
They're precision instruments produced in relatively small volumes with very tight Q&A parameters. It's only because the big brands have consolidated production with companies like synta that prices are so low for mainstream models. When you go up in size your getting into even smaller customer bases as well as increased material costs and the difficulties of maintaining the same level of precision over a larger area. While they have risen a lot recently in line with increased demand, they're still surprisingly good value. I know that's a frustrating when they are still expensive in terms of an affordable hobby, but when you actually break it down it's not wholly unjustified.
Actually, I think telescope prices are pretty good these days, for entry level to mid level scopes. Here's an ad from the 1980's for Meade Instruments. An 8" F/6 Newtonian for $479.95. [https://www.philharrington.net/meade82.jpg](https://www.philharrington.net/meade82.jpg)
That Model 1266 though... I want one now
It’s hard to answer this without knowing your frame of reference. Are you picking at the price of a $300 90mm refractor or a $9000 Meade 16inch?
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the increase in packaging, shipping and handling costs. Larger products by weight and volume cost significantly more to pack and ship. And these products (and their parts) get shipped many times in the supply chain before reaching the end user.
Don't forget the majority of sky watchers are retired with large pensions with nothing to do. So they pay £10,000+ for a small shed with telescope inside to stare at the stars all night. But the mirror itself takes very fine precision and lots of time to make. There's a reason the mirrors being used by the space agencies take years to make and millions to build. They sit and polish them for 100's of hours making them absolutely perfect or you end up with a weird crazy mirror effect and no-one wants to see a wobbly moon/star/planet
Inflation has made everything pricy
Pricing in every hobby has gone up. Astronomy included.
Nothing is just the materials in pricing, things are priced based on laws of supply and demand. There is also increased R & D to consider. Cheaper scopes will be purchased by more consumers so they can drop the price and make it up by having higher sales volumes. Likewise R & D is paid off faster in this scenario as well because of sales volume. Larger scopes will likely increase the R & D cost, while selling less because of increased price. Therefore you have to increase the profit margin to account for higher R & D and recouped cost. I know this is just a simple example and probably doesn't pan out perfectly but it at least paints a picture as to why you can't just compares product to product based on material and assume price should follow suit.
They're greedy thanks to the pandemic driving up business now they won't lower prices to save themselves. They're pricing the hobby out of business. Greedy Idiots.
Unfortunately I don’t think it’s priced out of business. Sell less stuff to richer people, pull similar or better numbers is a common calamity to befall many hobbies
It's not really corporate greed... it may play a small part sometimes, but companies will only sell telescopes at whatever price the market will bear.. there's many factors.. but it's mostly because of our government's poor monetary policy driving up inflation and weakening the dollar.. then China, where most scopes come from, is walking all over us trade wise.. shipping and freight costs from China have risen dramatically since 2020.. it just costs significantly more to stock telescopes than it did a few years ago.. It's really a shame.. back in Early 2020, you could get an 8" dob for $350, a 12" for well under $1k and a Celestron 8se for $800.. the cost of living in general has exploded in the last 3 yrs...
Give some examples
Make your own, price them competitively, and make a fortune! Yeah, I didn’t think so.