6-Inch Jaegers Objective Lens on Ebay

"Mean Mr Mustard" wrote in message
oups.com...
David Sleeter wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=7573092651

... but I can get a 6" objective in cell from D&G optical for the same
price ... decisions, decisions ...

http://www.dgoptical.com/objective.htm

But it isn't a JAEGERS!

"David Sleeter" wrote in message
...

"Mean Mr Mustard" wrote in message
oups.com...
David Sleeter wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=7573092651

... but I can get a 6" objective in cell from D&G optical for the same
price ... decisions, decisions ...

http://www.dgoptical.com/objective.htm

But it isn't a JAEGERS!


Given the choice between a Jaegers objective and a D&G objective of the
same aperture, for the same price, most folks *I* know would choose a D&G
EVERY time...

Yes, the Jaegers has a certain nostalgic connotation, but when it comes
down to optical quality between a D&G and a Jaegers, well... D&G all the
way...

--
Jan Owen

To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address...
Latitude: 33.6
Longitude: -112.3

IAWTP.

"Jan Owen" wrote in message
news:Y5pof.4315$Gv.1668@fed1read06...
"David Sleeter" wrote in message
...

"Mean Mr Mustard" wrote in message
oups.com...
David Sleeter wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=7573092651

... but I can get a 6" objective in cell from D&G optical for the same
price ... decisions, decisions ...

http://www.dgoptical.com/objective.htm

But it isn't a JAEGERS!


Given the choice between a Jaegers objective and a D&G objective of the
same aperture, for the same price, most folks *I* know would choose a D&G
EVERY time...

Yes, the Jaegers has a certain nostalgic connotation, but when it comes
down to optical quality between a D&G and a Jaegers, well... D&G all the
way...

--
Jan Owen

To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address...
Latitude: 33.6
Longitude: -112.3

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:50:29 -0700, "Jan Owen"
wrote:

"David Sleeter" wrote in message
...

"Mean Mr Mustard" wrote in message
oups.com...
David Sleeter wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=7573092651

... but I can get a 6" objective in cell from D&G optical for the same
price ... decisions, decisions ...

http://www.dgoptical.com/objective.htm

But it isn't a JAEGERS!


Given the choice between a Jaegers objective and a D&G objective of the
same aperture, for the same price, most folks *I* know would choose a D&G
EVERY time...

Yes, the Jaegers has a certain nostalgic connotation, but when it comes
down to optical quality between a D&G and a Jaegers, well... D&G all the
way...

Oh, I don't know about that. D&G does make great optics but
historically they have been VERY reluctant to tackle good, moderate or
faster f/ratio achromatic lenses where Jaeger's has not.

I and a few others have certainly heard/known of a few mixed quality
reviews of the speedier Jaeger's objectives (in the 6" class
particularly) but what I've seen of each of several various examples
in all f/ratios was that quality was exceptional in each case!

So, ha ha ha! ;-)

"Pete Rasmussen" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:50:29 -0700, "Jan Owen"
wrote:

"David Sleeter" wrote in message
...

"Mean Mr Mustard" wrote in message
oups.com...
David Sleeter wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=7573092651

... but I can get a 6" objective in cell from D&G optical for the
same
price ... decisions, decisions ...

http://www.dgoptical.com/objective.htm

But it isn't a JAEGERS!


Given the choice between a Jaegers objective and a D&G objective of the
same aperture, for the same price, most folks *I* know would choose a
D&G
EVERY time...

Yes, the Jaegers has a certain nostalgic connotation, but when it comes
down to optical quality between a D&G and a Jaegers, well... D&G all
the
way...

Oh, I don't know about that. D&G does make great optics but
historically they have been VERY reluctant to tackle good, moderate or
faster f/ratio achromatic lenses where Jaeger's has not.

I and a few others have certainly heard/known of a few mixed quality
reviews of the speedier Jaeger's objectives (in the 6" class
particularly) but what I've seen of each of several various examples
in all f/ratios was that quality was exceptional in each case!

So, ha ha ha! ;-)

I've seen some very good (excellent, actually, though my personal tastes
in refractors are more toward apos than achros) Jaegers objectives in
telescopes. And I've seen some fair ones. I've never personally seen a
BAD one, so I refrained from commentary within that context, and left out
the stories that circulate OUTSIDE my personal experience.

I would still characterize the overall highest PERCENTAGE of excellent
achromatic objectives as likely to come from D&G, though I've certainly
seen excellent examples of Jaegers' objectives as well...

Perhaps the reason we don't see many D&G scopes with focal ratios below
f/12, is because they are committed to producing uniformly high quality
objectives consistent with their reputation, and realize that it's not
easy to consistently deliver the quality they're committed to at shorter
focal ratios, especially in the price range they work within...

Regardless, I sure wouldn't buy ANY telescope, or objective, on E-Bay...

--
Jan Owen

To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address...
Latitude: 33.6
Longitude: -112.3

"Jan Owen" wrote in message
news:z1Lof.35$_L5.8@fed1read06...
"Pete Rasmussen" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 18:50:29 -0700, "Jan Owen"
wrote:

"David Sleeter" wrote in message
...

"Mean Mr Mustard" wrote in message
oups.com...
David Sleeter wrote:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...tem=7573092651

... but I can get a 6" objective in cell from D&G optical for the
same
price ... decisions, decisions ...

http://www.dgoptical.com/objective.htm

But it isn't a JAEGERS!


Given the choice between a Jaegers objective and a D&G objective of
the
same aperture, for the same price, most folks *I* know would choose a
D&G
EVERY time...

Yes, the Jaegers has a certain nostalgic connotation, but when it
comes
down to optical quality between a D&G and a Jaegers, well... D&G all
the
way...

Oh, I don't know about that. D&G does make great optics but
historically they have been VERY reluctant to tackle good, moderate or
faster f/ratio achromatic lenses where Jaeger's has not.

I and a few others have certainly heard/known of a few mixed quality
reviews of the speedier Jaeger's objectives (in the 6" class
particularly) but what I've seen of each of several various examples
in all f/ratios was that quality was exceptional in each case!

So, ha ha ha! ;-)

I've seen some very good (excellent, actually, though my personal tastes
in refractors are more toward apos than achros) Jaegers objectives in
telescopes. And I've seen some fair ones. I've never personally seen a
BAD one, so I refrained from commentary within that context, and left
out
the stories that circulate OUTSIDE my personal experience.

I would still characterize the overall highest PERCENTAGE of excellent
achromatic objectives as likely to come from D&G, though I've certainly
seen excellent examples of Jaegers' objectives as well...

Perhaps the reason we don't see many D&G scopes with focal ratios below
f/12, is because they are committed to producing uniformly high quality
objectives consistent with their reputation, and realize that it's not
easy to consistently deliver the quality they're committed to at shorter
focal ratios, especially in the price range they work within...

Regardless, I sure wouldn't buy ANY telescope, or objective, on E-Bay...

--
Jan Owen

To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail
address...
Latitude: 33.6
Longitude: -112.3


Some further clarification; an achromatic objective in the 5" aperture
range and up, even with EXQUISITE optics, is going to show color at f/12,
and the further you go below f/12, no matter if the optics are essentially
PERFECT, there will be progressively more and more color, the shorter the
focal ratio...

If one's expectation is for high performance lunar/planetary images at
short focal ratios, that's an unrealistic expectation for an achromat.
With those expectations, one must be prepared to move into the apochromat
class...

Or be happy with what a quality achromat CAN deliver... Which is plenty,
given one's expectations are realistic. And what they DO deliver is why
D&G remains in business...

--
Jan Owen

To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address...
Latitude: 33.6
Longitude: -112.3

Jan

You hit the Nail dead on with each point:


Some further clarification; an achromatic objective in the 5" aperture
range and up, even with EXQUISITE optics, is going to show color at f/12,
and the further you go below f/12, no matter if the optics are essentially
PERFECT, there will be progressively more and more color, the shorter the
focal ratio...

If one's expectation is for high performance lunar/planetary images at
short focal ratios, that's an unrealistic expectation for an achromat.
With those expectations, one must be prepared to move into the apochromat
class...

Or be happy with what a quality achromat CAN deliver... Which is plenty,
given one's expectations are realistic. And what they DO deliver is why
D&G remains in business...

Refractor Acro's can and will for a long time to come be enjoyable
Scopes when one knows and acknowledges their limits. Darn shame some wish to
make something into something it isn't as it generally results in
disappointment..........

Crazy Ed

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 20:05:22 -0700, "Jan Owen"
wrote:

Some further clarification; an achromatic objective in the 5" aperture
range and up, even with EXQUISITE optics, is going to show color at f/12,
and the further you go below f/12, no matter if the optics are essentially
PERFECT, there will be progressively more and more color, the shorter the
focal ratio...

Of course but that certainly doesn't exclude them from being very good
scopes to choose to own.

If one's expectation is for high performance lunar/planetary images at
short focal ratios, that's an unrealistic expectation for an achromat.
With those expectations, one must be prepared to move into the apochromat
class...

A long focus moderate sized achromat is a specialty instrument and
does only certain things very well. It does not offer the option of
wide field viewing nor is it easy or economical to mount or transport
like a short tube model.

Or be happy with what a quality achromat CAN deliver... Which is plenty,
given one's expectations are realistic. And what they DO deliver is why
D&G remains in business...

Exactly, and is one reason why the common 6" f/8 achro scopes today
are far more popular and remain so in PERCENTAGE than the D&G long
tubes. Believe it or not I've found I personally prefer an f/5
moderate sized achro as my second instrument since is kind of a niche
scope that offers great portability, bright contrasty images (wide or
narrow), is binoviewer friendly (with SA corrector), and is also,
within reason, surprisingly quite decent on the planets. My 6" has a
great lens and does 240x quite nicely on Jupiter and that is w/o an MV
filter! With one is of course more desireable. Can also be
conveniently apertured down though has really not proven itself
essential. More serious planetary is simply done with a much bigger
scope.

If you were wondering what MY original point was it is that Jaeger's
handily demonstrated good to excellent USA craftsmanship in a wider
range of lens f/ratios than D&G wishes to and therefore was a more
versatile and capable lens making company. Seems to me that that
alone would have them remembered notably well in the history books.
Their lenses certainly do hold their value.

Pete

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 19:47:33 -0700, "Jan Owen"
wrote:

I would still characterize the overall highest PERCENTAGE of excellent
achromatic objectives as likely to come from D&G, though I've certainly
seen excellent examples of Jaegers' objectives as well...

Wasn't my point.

Perhaps the reason we don't see many D&G scopes with focal ratios below
f/12, is because they are committed to producing uniformly high quality
objectives consistent with their reputation, and realize that it's not
easy to consistently deliver the quality they're committed to at shorter
focal ratios, especially in the price range they work within...

Certainly could be one reason but the other would be the difficulty in
making a good short f/ratio lens in moderate size. Is easier to say
no thanks I'll stick with the easier ones to make.

Regardless, I sure wouldn't buy ANY telescope, or objective, on E-Bay...

To each his own. I've bought several nice ones there before and
cheap.

Pete

Odd I have had better dealings with Ebay than I have had with
Astromart. At least on Ebay they know that an OTI Quantum-4 is NOT a
cheap Russian/Chinese SCT