![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Alan W. Craft wrote in message . ..
I'm considering a Parks classic Newtonian, and to mount on a Vixen GP-DX equatorial mount. While their 8" f3.5 seems to be just a wee bit too fast, and their 8" f6 a tad too slow for DSO's and the like(not to mention the tube length), I've looked into the possibility of an 8" f5 custom-made by Parks and sold via Scope City... "Thank you for contacting Scope City. I have reviewed your request for information on the Parks Optical tube for telescopes. Based on the information provided ( 8 inch - f/5 - F=1000, Newtonian) you would need a 9 3/8th ID 9 3/4 OD diameter tube, all we need to know from you is the length you would like to purchase. You can see a complete listing of all the tubes Parks offers. We have many in stock, custom order usually take a few months." "...the length I would like to purchase."? Wouldn't the focal ratio determine that, or am I missing something? Substantially, yes, but I suppose you might want a bit longer tube to cut down on stray light or drop the primary down a bit for some close-to-the-tube focuser/smaller diagonal combination. Also, please comment on the focal ratio I've indicated...advantages... disadvantages? All opinions, good or bad, are most welcome. Alan Like some others have said, there's nothing really wrong with an f/6 for most DSOs, IMO. FWIW. Regards, Russell |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I'm considering a Parks classic Newtonian,
and to mount on a Vixen GP-DX equatorial mount. While their 8" f3.5 seems to be just a wee bit too fast, and their 8" f6 a tad too Hi: Well...Parks has made some nice optics over the years--if sometimes not as good as you'd expect--but...you know, lots of Synta and Guan Sheng 8 inch f/5s are testing out at 1/8 wave...and you can get a whole OTA for a song. Just a thought... Peace, Rod Mollise Author of _Choosing and Using a Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope_ Like SCTs and MCTs? Check-out sct-user, the mailing list for CAT fanciers! Goto http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index.html |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Alan W. Craft wrote:
I have this "brain cramp" that keeps telling me that you need low, and even very low, magnification to see most DSO's, but that's not necessarily true, is it? No, indeed it's not. For very small DSOs, you will often want to use higher magnification. Of course, you wouldn't want to use a 5mm on a galaxy. I think there is no "of course" about it. I often want to use a 5 mm on a galaxy in my 70 mm Ranger. That kind of an eyepiece would only give me about 96x, typically yielding about a 1/2-degree true field of view, and nicely framing many DSOs. Brian Tung The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/ Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/ The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/ My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.txt |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Minimum Number of Rocket Designs | Charles Talleyrand | Space Science Misc | 47 | July 14th 04 10:40 PM |
"Lack of Opportunity to Express Minority Opinions" | Stuf4 | Space Shuttle | 1 | November 25th 03 04:29 PM |
"Lack of Opportunity to Express Minority Opinions" | Stuf4 | History | 1 | November 25th 03 04:29 PM |
Burnt Barbecue (Texas-Style) | John Maxson | Space Shuttle | 16 | September 11th 03 08:27 PM |
Opinions: Would Shuttlecam have detected the damage? | Jorge R. Frank | Space Shuttle | 11 | July 10th 03 07:12 PM |