Hubble can image Charon. The bottom image is a HST image. I don't know what the blob in the top image is.

# Zibit Says:
October 30th, 2008 at 3:01 pm

How much money for a 14 inch telescope?
# Zibit Says:
October 30th, 2008 at 3:12 pm

Found my answer, anywhere from $6000-$10,000.

Actually, a ~14 inch instrument or similar can be found in a much wider price range than that – the price all depends on the ultimate quality and capability of the instrument. For example, a 12.5 inch scope from a premium manufacturer such as RCOS, optical assembly only, will set you back more than US$20,000. A 16 inch Meade Lightbridge can be had for under US$2000… Mind you, you won't be imaging Charon with the ligthbridge. If you did, you'd be quite the hero…

>and @ Steven C Says:
October 30th, 2008 at 1:02 pm

I would agree with you largely about the equipment being similar in some cases – there is some overlap between lower end professinal setups and very high end amateur setups. Certainly you can find pro's using RCOS scopes and even some of the higher end Meades, etc. But what separates a professional astronomer from an amateur? A pro astronomer gets paid to do what they love, whereas an amateur does not. Simple really, when it comes down to it…

Most major observatories have at least a few C14's that are used routinely for astronomical observations. That is the SCT that we are talking about here.

There is no such thing as AMATEUR EQUIPMENT or PROFESSIONAL EQUIPMENT. Amateurs use the same equipment that Professionals use and visa versa. … it is really about who pays the bills and that person or corporation or gov't that does pay the bills determines the goals and priorities for the equipment.

Some of these so called "amateurs" must have VERY DEEP POCKETS to be able to afford such equipment and a permanent observatory from which to use that equipment and the time to wait for the right conditions and such to attain images. What is the real difference between a professional and an amateur? A degree – hogwash – the discoverer of Pluto had no degree. A funding source – yes but some of todays so called amateurs have much higher budgets than many professionals and these amateurs have no need to make a case for the acquisition, use, or priorty for the equpment.

In many cases … so called amateur equipment is superior to professional equipment of just a couple years ago because professional observatories have limited resources as well. In many cases, amateurs and professionals use the same equipment … exactly.

It really is all about $$$$. Almost any group of amateurs with enough $$$ can achieve the same results as professionals. In past times, so called "amateurs" built many of the great observatories that "professionals" use every day.

But … are they really amateurs anymore. Do they really work 40 hours a week in non-astronomy professions or do they have a magnifient pile of money or an endownment so they can focus on astronomy without worrying about the day-to-day issues of ekeing out a living. Who can afford such equipment and time without an outside benefactor (or an inheritance) to pay some or all the bills and expenses.

It really comes down to $$$. Those of us who don't have large budgets to commit to astronomy still make achievements as amateurs. Those with large budgets … well they really are professionals.

For these so-called "professional amateurs", astronomy is an Avocation if not a vocation.

Many of us with significant investments just can't manage the $$$ to become a "professional amateur"

Another interesting situation is that amateur astronomers take some images of extrasolar planets !!! How long will it take them to do that? Any guess?

With this kind of capability, a motivated amateur can do real science. And no doubt there are many simple and beautiful things left to discover… even with a modest telescope.

Great article!