|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
'Objective' specifications for similar scopes?
Hi all,
Q: Are there any sites that have done 'objective' scope comparisons? I mean like the ones the old camera mags did for different lenses, they used standard ways to compare resolution, colour balance etc. so punters could look up reviews and compare specs. I expect one would compare actual resolution, light gathering, focusing, stability, build quality, mount specs, 'handling' issues, motors. use for photography etc. Also I am a bit surprised by how 'subjective' most of the comments I have read about scopes are - it seems almost a touchy - feely - emotional - thing! Reddog. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Reddog" wrote in message ... Hi all, Q: Are there any sites that have done 'objective' scope comparisons? I mean like the ones the old camera mags did for different lenses, they used standard ways to compare resolution, colour balance etc. so punters could look up reviews and compare specs. I expect one would compare actual resolution, light gathering, focusing, stability, build quality, mount specs, 'handling' issues, motors. use for photography etc. Also I am a bit surprised by how 'subjective' most of the comments I have read about scopes are - it seems almost a touchy - feely - emotional - thing! Reddog. I can't guarantee that the scope brands listed there are the ones you want to consider, being in the UK, but www.cloudynights.com may be of some help, Their are many reviews, and many comparisons, that you may find hepful, even if only in a general sort of way. Yours, Bill. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Two problems:
1) Cloudy Nights reviews are posted by the owner of the item in question. This must almost inevitably result in some bias towards the object. Since to criticise an item too heavily is suggesting that the owner has bad taste or poor judgement. 2) The very few magazines that exist within the astro field are heavily reliant on the hand that feeds them. (i.e., Astro retailers and manufacturers) Camera magazines are thick on the ground and supported by thousands of ads. They can afford to carry our objective reviews. The same cannot be said of astro magazines. 3) The physical description of a telescope and its mounting might be useful to potential purchasers. But telescopes suffer from "seeing conditions" in use. Few magazines could afford the test equipment (Zygo laser interferometer) to accurately assess an objective. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com... Two problems: 1) Cloudy Nights reviews are posted by the owner of the item in question. This must almost inevitably result in some bias towards the object. Since to criticise an item too heavily is suggesting that the owner has bad taste or poor judgement. There are some excellent reviews on Cloudy Nights which compare 2, 3 or even 4 scopes (or other equipment such as eyepieces), side by side in a comprehensive set of tests. They compare things such as build quality, optical performance, ease of use, etc, all done on the same nights with the same seeing conditions, etc. I found a group test including the "Synta" 80ED with 3 other 80mm Apos, very revealing, and as a result I am now a proud owner of a Skywatcher 80ED. Very best wishes and clear, dark skies. -- /Paul B, York, UK. http://homepages.tesco.net/paul.buglass/astrohome.htm York Astronomical Society www.yorkastro.co.uk |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Mirror Cell LATERAL Support Large Research Scopes | matt | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | December 20th 04 08:19 PM |
The Cooke Triplet: Answering Another of My Own Silly Apochromat Questions | Chris1011 | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | December 5th 04 06:47 AM |
Tasco objective | Ioannis | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | August 3rd 04 09:08 PM |
Converting spotting scopes to binoculars | Bill Tschumy | Amateur Astronomy | 30 | July 30th 04 10:21 PM |