the refractor craze??

Now getting back into the astro hobby after a few years recess, I've noticed
a trend towards refractors. I visited a local SP a few weeks ago and I'll
bet close to 70% of the scopes there were refractors. I'm curious as to
what's caused this trend or shift as when I was active in the past, close to
15 years ago, the "light bucket" Dobsonian seemed to be the favorite at star
parties. How does a refractor, which I seldom see in apertures greater
than 100mm due to expense, compare with a light bucket Dob or reflector? It
certainly can't be DSO's as an 18" Dob would win that battle hands down. I
would also think that the larger reflector would be the winner for planets
too, especially if it has a good mirror. So, what is the appeal?
Portability, but what else? There must be something I'm missing regarding
their appeal especially when you compare the cost per aperture differences
between refractors and other scopes.

Thanks,
Juan

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 16:31:08 GMT, "Juan Calculus" wrote:

Now getting back into the astro hobby after a few years recess, I've noticed
a trend towards refractors. I visited a local SP a few weeks ago and I'll
bet close to 70% of the scopes there were refractors. I'm curious as to
what's caused this trend or shift as when I was active in the past, close to
15 years ago, the "light bucket" Dobsonian seemed to be the favorite at star
parties. How does a refractor, which I seldom see in apertures greater
than 100mm due to expense, compare with a light bucket Dob or reflector? It
certainly can't be DSO's as an 18" Dob would win that battle hands down. I
would also think that the larger reflector would be the winner for planets
too, especially if it has a good mirror. So, what is the appeal?
Portability, but what else? There must be something I'm missing regarding
their appeal especially when you compare the cost per aperture differences
between refractors and other scopes.

I don't know if there is a real craze, a marketing craze, or no craze at all.
But I do know that if you go to a star party, not one telescope in 20 is a
refractor. People who actually use telescopes visually know what makes sense.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

I don't know if there is a real craze, a marketing craze, or no craze at all.
But I do know that if you go to a star party, not one telescope in 20 is a
refractor. People who actually use telescopes visually know what makes sense.

A lot of people use them for imaging, which you are not going to see at star
parties. It is hard to do with normal Dobs. People who buy high end apos know
exactly why they do so.

Roland Christen

On 20 Nov 2004 19:11:00 GMT, (Chris1011) wrote:

I don't know if there is a real craze, a marketing craze, or no craze at all.
But I do know that if you go to a star party, not one telescope in 20 is a
refractor. People who actually use telescopes visually know what makes sense.

A lot of people use them for imaging, which you are not going to see at star
parties. It is hard to do with normal Dobs. People who buy high end apos know
exactly why they do so.

Yup. That's why I used the term "visually", and referred to star parties. In my
book, a refractor has two primary uses- imaging, and visual for travel or rapid
setup (typically, casual use).

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

In article ,
Chris L Peterson wrote:

On 20 Nov 2004 19:11:00 GMT, (Chris1011) wrote:

I don't know if there is a real craze, a marketing craze, or no craze at
all.
But I do know that if you go to a star party, not one telescope in 20 is a
refractor. People who actually use telescopes visually know what makes
sense.

A lot of people use them for imaging, which you are not going to see at star
parties. It is hard to do with normal Dobs. People who buy high end apos
know
exactly why they do so.

Yup. That's why I used the term "visually", and referred to star parties. In
my
book, a refractor has two primary uses- imaging, and visual for travel or
rapid
setup (typically, casual use).

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Roland's right, you're wrong.

Refractors are a better instrument for their size than newts or dobs.
they're better for photography, deployment, contrast, and ease of use.

Big dobs/newts are a drag to move around, the tracking is cumbersome,
and they require ladders/stools/etc to have on hand to cover the zenith,
or anywhere near it.

Refractor images are excellent, they are portable, they are outstanding
visually AND photographically.

In a nutshell, the refractor is the perfect ALL around scope.

That ability to go deeper either visually or photographically is not up
for debate, everybody on SAA agrees (or should) that big newts and dobs
go deeper(in less time photograpically, and all the time visually)

But that doesn't make them (for most users) appropriate, considering all
of their downsides.

The refractor is the perfect telescope, and people who buy expensive
ones usually have come to that observation on their own, with no
counseling from this group, or any other.

Nobody is going to spend three grand on a refractor (or not) based on
anything anybody in SAA has said, they're already way beyond that and
making up their own minds based on experience.

What happens at star parties indicates trends of a very, very small
percentage of star party attendees.

And you're wrong to boot.....the largest refractors, the newest
refractors, and the coolest refractors are always at big star parties,
so I don't know what you're talking about.
The fact that there is ten times as many scopes at a star party that
cost five times less than a big refractor isn't indicative of anything
beyond the fact that there's always less of the most expensive/desirable
item at any hobby gathering.

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 20:21:13 GMT, Simple Traveler
wrote:

Roland's right, you're wrong.

Roland's right about what, and I'm wrong about what? He and I said very nearly
the same thing.


In a nutshell, the refractor is the perfect ALL around scope.

That is a matter of opinion (yours apparently). I don't happen to agree. I don't
really think there is such a thing as a "perfect ALL around scope".


And you're wrong to boot.....the largest refractors, the newest
refractors, and the coolest refractors are always at big star parties...

All I said is that there are many more reflectors than refractors at all the
starparties I've been at. I figure that's because when people take a lot of
trouble and head for dark skies, they really want aperture- and that's something
you don't get with refractors.

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 20:21:13 GMT, Simple Traveler
wrote:

In article ,
Chris L Peterson wrote:

On 20 Nov 2004 19:11:00 GMT, (Chris1011) wrote:

I don't know if there is a real craze, a marketing craze, or no craze at
all.
But I do know that if you go to a star party, not one telescope in 20 is a
refractor. People who actually use telescopes visually know what makes
sense.

A lot of people use them for imaging, which you are not going to see at star
parties. It is hard to do with normal Dobs. People who buy high end apos
know
exactly why they do so.

Yup. That's why I used the term "visually", and referred to star parties. In
my
book, a refractor has two primary uses- imaging, and visual for travel or
rapid
setup (typically, casual use).

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Roland's right, you're wrong.

Refractors are a better instrument for their size than newts or dobs.
they're better for photography, deployment, contrast, and ease of use.

Big dobs/newts are a drag to move around, the tracking is cumbersome,
and they require ladders/stools/etc to have on hand to cover the zenith,
or anywhere near it.

Refractor images are excellent, they are portable, they are outstanding
visually AND photographically.

Portable.
Have any of you ever used a refractor over 6?"
-Rich

"Simple Traveler" wrote in message
Roland's right, you're wrong.

That's funny! They were talking about two different uses.

Refractors are a better instrument for their size than newts or dobs.
they're better for photography, deployment, contrast, and ease of use.

"for their size" ie, to simply say refractors are better instruments is
like saying a top fuel dragster is the best car because it goes the fastest.
(and some here would agree! vbg)

At the same time, I don't want to bring the groceries home (or haul a
telescope to a dark site) in a dragster. A pickup will haul a lot more than
a dragster, even if it isn't as fast. In the same way, scopes have different
advantages.

Big dobs/newts are a drag to move around, the tracking is cumbersome,
and they require ladders/stools/etc to have on hand to cover the zenith,
or anywhere near it.

Yes, but if you want to haul out to a dark site and hunt for the faintest
DSOs, nothing beats a big dob.

Refractor images are excellent, they are portable, they are outstanding
visually AND photographically.

True, providing you aren't chasing something that takes 14" of aperture to
see.

In a nutshell, the refractor is the perfect ALL around scope.

Ah, now I get it. You're just a TROLL!

Clear Skies

Chuck Taylor
Do you observe the moon?
Try http://groups.yahoo.com/group/lunar-observing/
And the Lunar Picture of the Day http://www.lpod.org/
************************************

That ability to go deeper either visually or photographically is not up
for debate, everybody on SAA agrees (or should) that big newts and dobs
go deeper(in less time photograpically, and all the time visually)

But that doesn't make them (for most users) appropriate, considering all
of their downsides.

The refractor is the perfect telescope, and people who buy expensive
ones usually have come to that observation on their own, with no
counseling from this group, or any other.

Nobody is going to spend three grand on a refractor (or not) based on
anything anybody in SAA has said, they're already way beyond that and
making up their own minds based on experience.

What happens at star parties indicates trends of a very, very small
percentage of star party attendees.

And you're wrong to boot.....the largest refractors, the newest
refractors, and the coolest refractors are always at big star parties,
so I don't know what you're talking about.
The fact that there is ten times as many scopes at a star party that
cost five times less than a big refractor isn't indicative of anything
beyond the fact that there's always less of the most expensive/desirable
item at any hobby gathering.

Simple Traveler wrote in message .. .
In article ,
Chris L Peterson wrote:

On 20 Nov 2004 19:11:00 GMT, (Chris1011) wrote:

I don't know if there is a real craze, a marketing craze, or no craze at
all.
But I do know that if you go to a star party, not one telescope in 20 is a
refractor. People who actually use telescopes visually know what makes
sense.

A lot of people use them for imaging, which you are not going to see at star
parties. It is hard to do with normal Dobs. People who buy high end apos
know
exactly why they do so.

Yup. That's why I used the term "visually", and referred to star parties. In
my
book, a refractor has two primary uses- imaging, and visual for travel or
rapid
setup (typically, casual use).

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

Roland's right, you're wrong.

Refractors are a better instrument for their size than newts or dobs.
they're better for photography, deployment, contrast, and ease of use.

Big dobs/newts are a drag to move around, the tracking is cumbersome,
and they require ladders/stools/etc to have on hand to cover the zenith,
or anywhere near it.

Refractor images are excellent, they are portable, they are outstanding
visually AND photographically.

In a nutshell, the refractor is the perfect ALL around scope.

That ability to go deeper either visually or photographically is not up
for debate, everybody on SAA agrees (or should) that big newts and dobs
go deeper(in less time photograpically, and all the time visually)

But that doesn't make them (for most users) appropriate, considering all
of their downsides.

The refractor is the perfect telescope, and people who buy expensive
ones usually have come to that observation on their own, with no
counseling from this group, or any other.

Nobody is going to spend three grand on a refractor (or not) based on
anything anybody in SAA has said, they're already way beyond that and
making up their own minds based on experience.

What happens at star parties indicates trends of a very, very small
percentage of star party attendees.

And you're wrong to boot.....the largest refractors, the newest
refractors, and the coolest refractors are always at big star parties,
so I don't know what you're talking about.
The fact that there is ten times as many scopes at a star party that
cost five times less than a big refractor isn't indicative of anything
beyond the fact that there's always less of the most expensive/desirable
item at any hobby gathering.

What baloney. Bottom line: you can see a lot less with a refractor
than with a "big dob". Maybe it's good for the lazy. I notice that
those folks also are not willing to travel to dark skies much. In
terms of $$ per the number and quality of image there's no contest
between refractors and "big dobs", the dobs win every time by a huge
margin.

Little telescope are fine for people whi o like to spend their
observing time splitting double stars. I think most of us want to go
way beyond that.

The exception? Imaging.

Clear skies,
Shneor Sherman

When is your "book" coming out? I would buy it, sight unseen!
Mark



Chris L Peterson wrote:

On 20 Nov 2004 19:11:00 GMT, (Chris1011) wrote:

I don't know if there is a real craze, a marketing craze, or no craze at all.
But I do know that if you go to a star party, not one telescope in 20 is a
refractor. People who actually use telescopes visually know what makes sense.

A lot of people use them for imaging, which you are not going to see at star
parties. It is hard to do with normal Dobs. People who buy high end apos know
exactly why they do so.

Yup. That's why I used the term "visually", and referred to star parties. In my
book, a refractor has two primary uses- imaging, and visual for travel or rapid
setup (typically, casual use).

_________________________________________________

Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com