To Refract or to SC

Hello Chaps

My little TAL recently met an untimley end, i am looking to buy another
scope.
I already have a Eurpoa 250 so a reflector is not required.

I understand that refractors are very good for planetary / binary / cluster
observations from experience(The little tal eats the Europa for brekkie
when it comes to that kind of observing).

The omly thing im not sure of now is the performance of SC's and other
Schmidt type. I have looked throug a couple of SC/SN's but didnt really
like what i saw that much.

Going to have a budget of about a grand by Jan/Feb next year which gives
me time to decide and i need only the OTA.

My current / ex-current setup seems great compared to any SC's. The
combination of big light bucket and small refrator gives the best of both
worlds. If i opt for a Schmitt type it will without a doubt be an OMC 200.

My quandry is this, i cant seem to find any decent refractors above 4"
without
going for meade or celestron. I dont want to line the pockets of a huge firm
like
meade by going for an LXD (people say they are rediculously heavy anyway)
and the same goes for Celestron. I wonder, is there a uk based company that
would build a 6" APO refractor for me?

I know beacon hill do doubleets and triplets but they are a bit pricey and a
review
is impossible to find.

Any info / suggestions you can give will be recieved with an open mind..

Rob

On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 09:06:44 +0000 (UTC), "Robert Geake"
wrote:


Going to have a budget of about a grand by Jan/Feb next year which gives
me time to decide and i need only the OTA.

snip
My quandry is this, i cant seem to find any decent refractors above 4"
without going for meade or celestron. I dont want to line the pockets of a huge firm
like meade by going for an LXD (people say they are rediculously heavy anyway)
and the same goes for Celestron. I wonder, is there a uk based company that
would build a 6" APO refractor for me?

A 6" APO for a grand?! If you find a source Rob, keep us informed ;-)

--
Pete
Homepage at http://www.pbl33.co.uk
CCD/digicam astronomy

"Robert Geake" wrote:


I understand that refractors are very good for planetary / binary / cluster
observations from experience

Going to have a budget of about a grand by Jan/Feb next year which gives
me time to decide and i need only the OTA.

If i opt for a Schmitt type it will without a doubt be an OMC 200.

I wonder, is there a uk based company that
would build a 6" APO refractor for me?

Much snipped

A report (published by Orion...) paints a very glowing picture of the
OMC200 - but it doesn't fit your budget by quite a long street.

I doubt that a 6 inch APO can ever fit your budget - even the rumoured
ones from China. 6 inch refractors tend to be big beasts, especially
planetary (f8 or longer) and your mount may be quite tested by it,
even if it can cope with a 10 inch Newt.

I begin to think that there is little point in having a fabulous
objective if the rest of the system isn't at the very least, pretty
damn good, particulary lens cell, focusser and tube baffling.
Refractors don't lose their collimation easily, but they are not
necessarily well collimated when you first get or assemble them.

Ian King gets fabulous results with much smaller high quality
refractors (a 3 inch Pentax and a 4inch Tak). I saw the Transit of
Mercury through his Tak - easily as good as or better than my 5 inch
Chinese achro, but the Sun is not the most demanding target.

Does anyone know the URL of Ian's website? I have so many urls in my
favourites I can't find anything any more.

Cheers

Martin

--------------
Martin Frey
N 51 02 E 0 47
--------------

"Pete Lawrence" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 09:06:44 +0000 (UTC), "Robert Geake"
wrote:


Going to have a budget of about a grand by Jan/Feb next year which gives
me time to decide and i need only the OTA.

snip
My quandry is this, i cant seem to find any decent refractors above 4"
without going for meade or celestron. I dont want to line the pockets of
a huge firm
like meade by going for an LXD (people say they are rediculously heavy
anyway)
and the same goes for Celestron. I wonder, is there a uk based company
that
would build a 6" APO refractor for me?

A 6" APO for a grand?! If you find a source Rob, keep us informed ;-)

--
Pete
Homepage at http://www.pbl33.co.uk
CCD/digicam astronomy

Just got the price back for an OMC22 OTA, OUCH!
Not much change from £1500, guess i will have to adjust
my goal posts by a few hundred meters.

R

On Mon, 6 Oct 2003 09:06:44 +0000 (UTC), "Robert Geake"
inscribed in blood upon a
parchment:

Hello Chaps

My little TAL recently met an untimley end, i am looking to buy another
scope.
I already have a Eurpoa 250 so a reflector is not required.

I understand that refractors are very good for planetary / binary / cluster
observations from experience(The little tal eats the Europa for brekkie
when it comes to that kind of observing).

The omly thing im not sure of now is the performance of SC's and other
Schmidt type. I have looked throug a couple of SC/SN's but didnt really
like what i saw that much.

Going to have a budget of about a grand by Jan/Feb next year which gives
me time to decide and i need only the OTA.

My current / ex-current setup seems great compared to any SC's. The
combination of big light bucket and small refrator gives the best of both
worlds. If i opt for a Schmitt type it will without a doubt be an OMC 200.

My quandry is this, i cant seem to find any decent refractors above 4"
without
going for meade or celestron. I dont want to line the pockets of a huge firm
like
meade by going for an LXD (people say they are rediculously heavy anyway)
and the same goes for Celestron. I wonder, is there a uk based company that
would build a 6" APO refractor for me?

I know beacon hill do doubleets and triplets but they are a bit pricey and a
review
is impossible to find.

Any info / suggestions you can give will be recieved with an open mind..

Rob


SCTs are, IMHO must better than refractors if you intend to *use* them
and not just sit and admire them as penis substitutes.

They are *easier* to use and you get more aperature for the price.

Best,
Dave


Author of the TalkOrigins Supernovae and Supernova Remnants FAQ
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/
Visions of Light, Visions of Darkness - Photography of Wessex
http://www.valinor.freeserve.co.uk/visions.html
Conception 2004 - the South Coast Gaming Convention
http://www.wessexgaming.org
Musings from Thangorodrim - A livejournal
http://www.livejournal.com/users/mrmorgoth

You might want to consider a Maksutov Newtonian as well. The Intes Micro
MN66 is slightly over a grand for the OTA, but look at some of the
favourable reviews on the net. It's very good for planetary, and for deep
sky as well. I have an MN56, and am upgrading in the near future.

John Moore

Morgoth wrote:

SCTs are, IMHO must better than refractors if you intend to *use* them
and not just sit and admire them as penis substitutes.

That's fighting talk for a *humble* opinion.

Cheers

Martin

--------------
Martin Frey
N 51 02 E 0 47
--------------

On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 14:20:30 +0100, Martin Frey
wrote:

Morgoth wrote:

SCTs are, IMHO must better than refractors if you intend to *use* them
and not just sit and admire them as penis substitutes.

That's fighting talk for a *humble* opinion.

Certainly is!
--
Pete
Homepage at http://www.pbl33.co.uk
CCD/digicam astronomy

"John Moore" wrote in message
...

You might want to consider a Maksutov Newtonian as well. The Intes Micro
MN66 is slightly over a grand for the OTA, but look at some of the
favourable reviews on the net. It's very good for planetary, and for deep
sky as well. I have an MN56, and am upgrading in the near future.

John Moore



Doesnt old Andrea (Mars man) use one of those MN ones?
Judging by the prices of all refractors i may well just go for
another tal. Twas a good scope....

R

On Mon, 06 Oct 2003 14:20:30 +0100, Martin Frey
inscribed in blood upon a parchment:

Morgoth wrote:

SCTs are, IMHO must better than refractors if you intend to *use* them
and not just sit and admire them as penis substitutes.

That's fighting talk for a *humble* opinion.


Yep.

I've used a apo-flourite-kitchen-sink-refractor. It was nice, and it
was usable, but for a refractor to be usable it needs to be of small
aperature (large aperature refractors are all but unusuable, IMHO). At
the end of the day, what's most important in a telescope is aperture,
followed closely by usability, and a 5" to 8" SCT blows away an
equivalent refractor easily, in terms of performance.

Sure a doohickey-spiggot-widget refractor might look good on a couple
of planets, but there's 30000-odd deep sky objects out there upon
which it will perform like Helen Keller.

Best,
Dave


Author of the TalkOrigins Supernovae and Supernova Remnants FAQ
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/supernova/
Visions of Light, Visions of Darkness - Photography of Wessex
http://www.valinor.freeserve.co.uk/visions.html
Conception 2004 - the South Coast Gaming Convention
http://www.wessexgaming.org
Musings from Thangorodrim - A livejournal
http://www.livejournal.com/users/mrmorgoth